# Unions Challenge Bill C-39 Labour Provisions in Committee Testimony Labour leaders argue federal intervention in collective bargaining undermines workers' rights and negotiation processes. - **Source:** [National Post - RSS Feed](https://nationalpost.com/) - **Published:** 2026-10-20 - **Topic:** [Business](https://brifing.si/c/business) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/c3b6bf05-0a40-4abe-ae69-0a4548c264b3 ## Opposition to Section 107 Unions are demanding the repeal of Section 107 from the Canada Labour Code during recent committee hearings. Mark Hancock of CUPE argues that government intervention in bargaining disrupts the process. He maintains that collective agreements should only be reached at the bargaining table between employers and employees, without external ministerial interference. ## Bill C-39 Regulatory Scope Bill C-39 aims to accelerate regulatory approvals for major projects by establishing regions of national interest. This legislation allows construction to commence before impact assessments are finalized. It grants the labour minister significant discretion to override project conditions, which unions fear will weaken their leverage during critical contract negotiations and disputes. ## Ministerial Guardrails and Mediation Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu claims the bill introduces guardrails for using Section 107, including special mediator reports. She argues these public reports will shame employers acting in bad faith. However, critics note the minister is not bound by these findings, leaving the final decision on strike intervention in the hands of one individual. ## Impact on Collective Bargaining Labour leaders warn that the expectation of ministerial intervention encourages employers to negotiate in bad faith. Tim Perry of the Air Line Pilots Association suggests this creates an environment where labour relations deteriorate. Unions believe this dynamic harms business reputations more than the issues the government claims the bill intends to resolve. ## Historical Context of Misuse The federal government has frequently utilized Section 107 to end strikes at airlines, ports, and railways. A notable incident occurred last August when an order to force 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants back to work backfired. Workers defied the Canada Industrial Relations Board, eventually securing a deal through direct negotiations with the employer. ## Legal and Constitutional Concerns There are currently four active court challenges regarding the government's alleged misuse of Section 107. Unions argue that Bill C-39 is designed primarily to shield the government from these ongoing legal battles. Despite the bill passing the House of Commons, the government has not yet released a formal Charter statement regarding its potential effects. ## Unrealistic Legislative Timelines The legislative committee has set a deadline of November 16 to hear from expert witnesses before clause-by-clause consideration. Academic experts like Arlene Kwasniak have criticized this timeframe as completely unrealistic and unfeasible. She recommended that senators either extend the review period or reject the bill entirely to allow for a proper study. ## Future of Labour Rights While the Conservative Party supported the bill in the House, leader Pierre Poilievre indicated plans to propose amendments protecting worker rights. Unions remain steadfast in their opposition, asserting that no amount of legislative guardrails will force them to surrender their fundamental right to strike during contract disputes with their respective employers. ## Sources covering this story - https://nationalpost.com/news/unions-blast-bill-c-39s-labour-provisions-during-committee-testimony — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._