QUESTION PERIOD — Treasury Board Secretariat
Contract Negotiations
May 2, 2023
My question is for the Government Representative in the Senate. The government reached an agreement that put an end to the strike by 120,000 federal public servants that began on April 19.
I would tell you that after dragging its feet in these negotiations, the government is now giving public servants an 11.5% salary increase compared to the 12.6% they asked for and deserved.
As a former union leader, I’ll forever be surprised to see governments drag things out rather than negotiating seriously with unions. Financial considerations aside, this 20-day strike is now causing delays in issuing passports, visas abroad and processing immigration files, as though the situation weren’t devastating enough for people waiting for these services.
Can you explain why the government, which has never shown restraint in public expenditures, delayed for such a long time before giving public servants what they were asking for? Now, it’s congratulating itself on arriving at a fair settlement, but it only did so after a 20-day strike. This delay has had an impact on the lives of Canadians that could have been avoided. Between you and me, what was the logic behind these negotiations?
Thank you for the question, colleague.
The government placed its trust in the collective bargaining process because it is the best way to protect the workers’ interests as well as Canada’s social fabric.
As you know, negotiations take time. There were more than just financial issues at play. There was also the important issue of telework. It took some time for the government to come to a responsible, fiscally prudent position and eventual final offer to avoid a domino effect on the provinces and other talks. It also took some time for the union to realize that the government’s offer was fair. I don’t think it took 20 days, but the process took time.
In the end, we reached a conclusion that is good for Canadians and good for public service workers. The result is also good for Canada, because it gives us a period of stability that I hope will last at least four years.
The government is pleased with the outcome, but also recognizes that strikes are always inconvenient for Canadians.
You talked about telework. As a former union leader, I’d like you to inform the President of the Treasury Board that a letter of understanding on working from home is an integral part of a collective agreement.
This collective agreement represents a $1.3-billion annual wage increase. I’m not opposed to home-based work. However, I’d like to know whether your government knows the real cost of the letter of understanding on working from home. As we’ve come to expect over the past few years, this government continues to sign agreements without considering what it will cost Canadians.
Thank you for the question. I don’t have the numbers here, and the details aren’t all public, because it’s an agreement in principle, as you know, Senator Dagenais. As soon as the details are clearer and the government has an idea of the cost of telework and that information is made public, I will share it.
My understanding is that the process to address telework issues hasn’t been finalized. There will be a committee to look at the matter, and requests will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Having said that, I’ll do my best to get the numbers and provide them to the chamber as soon as possible.
