SecondSession - Thirty-FifthLegislature

of the

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba

STANDING COMMITTEE

on

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

40 Elizabeth II

Chairman Mr. Marcel Laurendeau Constituencyof St. Norbert

VOL. XL No.3· 8 p.m., WEDNESDAY, JULY 10, 1991

MG-8048 ISSN 0713-9608 Printed by the Office of the 0,_,., Printer, Province of Manitoba MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature

LIB - Liberal ; NO - New Democrat; PC - Progressive Conservative

NAME CONSTITUENCY PARTY ALCOCK, Reg Osborne LIB ASHTON, Steve Thompson NO BARRETT,Becky Wellington NO CARR, James Crescentwood LIB CARSTAIRS, Sharon River Heights LIB CERILLI, Marianne Radisson NO CHEEMA, Guizar The Maples LIB CHOMIAK, Dave Kildonan NO CONNERY, Edward Portage Ia Prairie PC CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. Ste. Rose PC DACQUAY, Louise Seine River PC DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. Roblin-Russell PC DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk NO DOER, Gary Concordia NO DOWNEY, James, Hon. Arthur-Virden PC DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. Steinbach PC DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. Riel PC EDWARDS, Paul St. James LIB ENNS, Harry, Hon. Lakeside PC ERNST, Jim, Hon. Charleswood PC EVANS, Clif Interlake NO EVANS, Leonard S. Brandon East NO FILMON, Gary, Hon. Tuxedo PC FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. Springfield PC FRIESEN, Jean Wolseley NO GAUDRY, Neil St. Boniface LIB GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. Minnedosa PC HARPER, Elijah Rupertsland NO HELWER, Edward R. Gimli PC HICKES, George Point Douglas NO LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster LIB LATHLIN, Oscar The Pas NO LAURENDEAU, Marcel St. Norbert PC MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NO MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. Morris PC MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows NO McALPINE, Gerry Sturgeon Creek PC McCRAE, James, Hon. Brandon West PC MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. Assiniboia PC MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. River East PC NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. Rossmere PC ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. Pembina PC PENNER, Jack Emerson PC PLOHMAN, John Dauphin NO PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. Lac du Bonnet PC REID, Daryl Transcona ND REIMER, Jack Niakwa PC RENDER, Shirley St. Vital PC ROCAN, Denis, Hon. Gladstone PC ROSE, Bob Turtle Mountain PC SANTOS, Conrad Broadway ND STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. Kirkfield Park PC STORIE, Jerry Flin Flon NO SVEINSON, Ben La Verendrye PC VODREY, Rosemary FortGarry PC WASYLYCIA-LEIS, Judy St. Johns ND WOWCHUK, Rosann Swan River NO 63

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS We dne sday, July 10, 1991

TIME-Sp.m. Nancy Webster Cole, Telecommunications LOCATION- Winnipeg, Manitoba Employees CHAIRMAN - Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Elaine Zadorozny, Private Citizen Norbert) ATTENDANCE- 11 -QUORUM- 6 Written Presentations Submitted:

Members of the committee present: AI Pitt, Private Citizen Hon.Messrs. Derkach, Manness, Stefanson MATTERSUNDER DISCUSSION: Mrs. Dacquay, Messrs. Evans (Brandon East), Bill 70-The Public Sector Compensation Evans (Interlake), Hickes, Lamoureux, Management Act Laurendeau, Rose, Mrs. Voclrey * * * •substitutions: Mr. Ashton for Mr.Evans Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Will the Standing (Brandon East) at (0140) Committee on Industrial Relations please come to Mr. Evans (Brandon East) for Mr. Ashton at order. This evening the standing committee will be (0457) considering Bill 70, The Public Sector WITNESSES: Compensation Management Act (Loi sur Ia gestion des salaires du secteur public). Judy Bradley, The Manitoba Teachers' Society * (2005) George Bergen, Private Citizen I would like to point out that this committee will Blair Hamilton, Canadian Union of Public also be considering Bill 70 tomorrow, July 11 at 1 0 Employees, Local 3551 a.m. and at 7 p.m.; Friday, July 12 at 1 p.m.; and Clyde Huff, Private Citizen Saturday, July 13 at 10 a.m. and continuing all day. Harry Mesman, Private Citizen I would like to inform the committeethat one card RobertOlien, Private Citizen and one letter have been received by the committee clerk with regard to Bill 70. The card is from Verna Doug Shattuck, PrivateCitizen Ziprick of Russell, Manitoba, who indicates her Joan Lyons, Private Citizen opposition to Bill 70. The letteris from M. Robinson Bruce Mackay, Private Citizen of Winnipeg who also expresses opposition to the bill. These items are onfil e with the committeeclerk Hugh Connelly, Private Citizen and are available for the perusal of the committee Ken Guilford, Private Citizen members. A written brief from Mr. AI Pitt of Annette Maloney, Private Citizen Winnipeg has been received and will be circulated to the members of the committee. Bruce Buckley, Private Citizen Is it the will of the committee that written Anne Gregory, Private Citizen submissions received be printed in the committee Shirley Lord, Private Citizen Hansard? Paul Moist, Private Citizen Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Richard Lennon, Private Citizen Mr. Chairman: Agreed. I would also like to remind Shirley Denesiuk, Canadian Union of Public the public that the process that will be followed by Employees, Local 998 this committee is that out-of-town presenters will be asked to identify themselves to thecommittee clerk Martin J. Stadler, Private Citizen and the committeewill endeavour to hear from these Marie Clow, Private Citizen persons first. Once the out-of-town presenters 64 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

have been heard from, the names will be called from causes problems with the Hansard when there are the list in numerical order. Is it still the wish of the a lot of interruptions, and we do lose a lot of the committee that we consider the out-of-town reporting stages of this bill. So I would appreciate if presenters? you would all hold it, and I am sure my committee Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Chairperson, members will adhere to that this evening. We will we had also indicated yesterday those individuals now start. unable to attend at subsequent committeehearings We will ask at this time if there are any out-of-town would also have the opportunity to ensure they presenters in attendance to please identify made a presentation. themselves to the clerk. I would also ask, Mr. Chairperson, if we, as a I am going proceed to call the next number on the committee, could perhaps give some indication to bill. We now call on No. 2, Judy Bradley, Manitoba the members of the public how late we will be sitting, Teachers' Society. Have you got a written or at least when we will assess the time that we will presentation? be sitting in this particular committee? We noted, yesterday I believe, at about midnight we had Ms. Judy Bradley (The Manitoba Teachers' assessed that. I think it is only fair that we give Society) : Yes, I have. some indication tonight as well, regardless of what Mr. Chairman: The clerk will just get it from you adjournment time we do select. and pass it around to the committee members. If * (2010) you will just give me a minute to get it around. Go Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): ahead. Mr. Chairman, the governmentis prepared to do an Ms.Bradley: Good evening, committee Chairman assessment in and around midnight. Certainly, to and committee members. I thank you for the the extent that presentersare here, we are wanting opportunity to be before you on this wonderful to sit again late tonight into tomorrow morning, but summer evening regardingBill 70. If my papers do let us do an assessmentagain around midnight. not fly away I will be just fine here. Mr. Chairman: So it is agreed by the committee The Manitoba Teachers' Society makes this then we will reassessat 12 midnight? presentation to voice its opposition to the passage Some Honourable Members: Agreed. of Bill 70, The Public Sector Compensation Mr. Chairman: If a presenter is not here the first Management Act, an act that would suspend the time his or her name is called, that name will be collective bargaining rights of selected public sector dropped to the bottom of the list. If the presenter is workers. not here when his or her name is called a second While the act does not include teachers it would, time, that name will be dropped from the list. by regulation, enable the governmentto include any Howeve r, the committee will attempt to groups not specifically mentioned in the legislation. accommodate those persons who indicate that they Teachers could thus be included as some future are unable to present on certaindays but can attend date. There is, however, a more important issue: on others. the right of an employee group to bargain At this point, I would also like to indicate to the collectively with its employer for wages, benefits, members of the public that under the rules of and working conditions. decorum, the general public watching should not interfere or impede the proceedings of the The press release announced this proposed committee. This includes applauding, cheering, legislation quotes Mr. Manness as asking those heckling and booing. These meetings are held to groups employed by the people of Manitoba to put ensure that the public has the opportunity to make aside their wage demands for one year. The presentations on the legislation; however, this does passage of this act will not result in asking, but not mean that the public is permitted to disrupt the imposing a unilateral suspension of collective proceedings. This is a serious issue that people bargaining rights. The right of employees to bargain feel emotional about; however, decorum and collectively has evolved over a long history. To courtesy must be adhered to. We sincerely hope remove this right for whatever period of time, for any that this will happen here this evening. It also employee group, is regressive and wrong. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 65

The society is very concerned about the broad by the provincial budgets of '88 and '89 is now and ongoing authority which the provincial appearing in the form of Bill70. government is seeking under the terms of Bill 70. The proposed legislation is not the appropriate Certain sections of the proposed legislation are way for government to solve economic problems. extremely open-ended and subject to varied Freezing wages is a guaranteed way to create interpretations. confrontation, low morale and low productivity. For example, Section2(1 ) defining the application High volumes of energy are wasted in time line, includes the phrase, "or any later date that nonproductive work as workers fight the imposition may be prescribed by the Lieutenant Governor in and effects of wage freeze and the government Council". In addition, Section 9(1) authorizes attempts to enforce an unnecessary and unjust provincial cabinet to invoke provincial regulations in measure. order to determine a series of matters. Apparently, There is another way, a way to achieve higher Bill 70 would permit the Manitoba government to productivity and higher quality work. Germany is a control and manipulate public sector collective good example. Germany has one of the highest agreements by means of provincial cabinet fiat. wage rates, one of the shortestworking weeks, one While we strongly oppose this legislation, at a of the highest quality work forces in the world. This very minimum the society recommends that Bill 70 achievement has come through teamwork, the team be amended by including a sunset clause which of government, business and labour all working would hold the statute to be of no force and effect together to creatively solve problems. as at the conclusion of the government fiscal year This government stepping in to impose a wage March 31, 1992. The inclusion of such a sunset freeze destroys any chance of a co-operative effort clause would demonstrate good faith on the part of for years to come in this province. Bill 70 is the the government that this is indeed a temporary wrong solution for Manitoba and is in no one's best measure. interest. It leads to greater distrust and anger .

• (2015) So, in conclusion, the society ber.evesstrongly in The government of Manitoba has been indicating free collective bargaining and believes that it is a to the citizens of our province that the blunt and serious violation of the fundamental right of harsh action of Bill 70 is necessary because the employees in Canada to bargain with their provincial government has no other choice. The employers. We oppose any external interferencein Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) repeatedly draws the bargaining process and therefore strongly attention to the depleted flow of revenue to the oppose the passage of Bill 70, and urge the provincial treasury in recent months. The society government to uphold free collective bargaining for recognizes the weakening of revenue flows to the all employees in the public sector. Manitoba treasury. The society is also fully aware Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Bradley. I believe that in two consecutiveprovincial budgets, 1988 and there will be a couple of questions. 1989, the provincial government introducedtaxatio n Mr. Manness: Thank you, Ms. Bradley, to you and adjustments which sharply curtailed the flow of the society for making the presentation you have on revenue to the Manitoba treasury. Bill 70. A couple of questions-firstly, you talk The society believes it is the responsibility of any about the sunset clause as provided under Bill 70 Manitoba government to maintain a taxation policy and you would like to see a narrower sunset period which is adequate to sustain necessary public of time. I will be bringing in an amendment which sector services. Manitobans are prepared to will give even greater definition to who may be contribute towards their province by means of a fair impacted and over what period of time. and equitable tax structure in return for quality We have allowed ourselves to make regulations services in health, education, child care services, until the end of 1992, only so that under the powers family services, environmental protection and so on. of the act, indeed if there is any group, either By its actions of 1988 and '89 to deplete the designated or to be designated by Order-in-Council, provincial treasury, the Manitoba government has that group will only come under the influence of this placed the delivery of public sector services in act for a period of 12 months. There will be no group jeopardy. The impact of the taxation policy enacted that will go beyond that, and yet we require the 66 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

extension to the end of '92 to ensure that we have far, 80 percent to 90 percent of the tax benefits that the right indeed to treat everybody fairly. Does that I provided in the last budget-is the MTS asking me make any difference to you, that explanation? to reinstate that?

Ms. Bradley: Well, in response, we have Ms. Bradley: We are asking that you reflect on suggested that the sunset clause be the fiscal year. your fiscal policies which very clearly outlined a list We see that the government should have sufficient of tax cuts that went to the corporate sector in this time between now and the end of their fiscal year to particular province. In the '88-89 budgets, there make appropriate changes that are necessary to were very significant cuts that were direct tax relief infuse and encourage that dollars be added to the for corporations and businesses in this province. provincial Treasury as a result of previous decisions That translates into a very significant number in real that were made. We do not see that you need to go dollars in 1991 in terms of a Joss in this province. To to December of 1992 with this piece of legislation, give you an example, the health and education tax, and that it would be in better faith if it was concluded with the cuts that were made then, we now have70 at the end of the fiscal year of the government. percent of the businesses in this province relieved of that tax and the government has not put anything * (2020) in its place in order to make up for that lost revenue. Mr. Manness: Flowing out of that answer, Mr. That is equivalent to the mayor of this city turning Chairman, I would then ask Ms. Bradley, given that the taps off the water supply to the city without I, for one, was surprised that the Manitoba Teachers' deciding where the next source of the water supply Society would call on me to increase taxation, is that is going to be. the general view of your membership? Have you Mr. Manness: Ms. Bradley, as the Minister of canvassed them and is that what they want this Finance, the value of offsettingthe payroll tax had a government to do, is to increase the tax levy? value roughly of $20 million over those moves. The offset to individuals and households over the Ms. Bradley: In response, we are not asking that you increase the tax level in this province. What we budgetary moves I have announced over the last are asking is that you reflect back on the decisions three budgets is $90 million. Are you asking me to that were made in the minority budgets of 1988 and reinstate the $90 million, the $20 million or both? '89 where there were very significant tax cuts. We Ms. Bradley: We are asking that you review the are not suggesting that you increase, but we are fiscal policy decisions and yes, we do recognize that saying that with the decisions that were made at that the government does have the right to make those particular time that you have added greatly to the decisions. But, when the decisions are made and problem of the recession that is in the province now, they result in a Joss of revenue, and then as a result and the very least we would see is a return of that of that, the fallout we are seeing today, legislation taxation base which has resulted in the loss of the such as Bill70 comes in as a correcting measure, revenue dollars to this province. we have to come before you and ask you to rethink what it is you are doing because Bill70 will not be a Mr.Man ness: Mr. Chairman, this is very important. correcting measure and is not going to solve the I would remind Ms. Bradley that by far, of all the four problem. budgets I brought down, the greatest significant reductions were the $30 million as a result of not Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Bradley. Any cascading on provincial sales tax on the federal further questions? sales tax. Secondly, a $60 million reduction in Mr. George Hlckes (Point Douglas): I find this personal income tax is reflected in a 54 percent presentation very interesting because as far as I dropped to 52 percent of basic federal, plus an understand teachers are excluded from Bill70, and increase in deductions for those who are receiving I am wondering from your presentation why the tax credits. That has been almost three-quarters to Manitoba Teachers' Society is bringing a 80 percent of the total benefits that we have presentation to Bill70. What do your members feel provided by way of tax relief. The individual has about this? been the recipient of that, and the individual family. Is MTS then of the view that I should reinstate that * (2025) and impose yet another $100 million of taxes on Ms. Bradley: I think our position really is individuals and families because that is where, by summarized and fairly clearly stated in the last July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 67

paragraph on page 4, which is the reason why we a copy of the written statement, and I hope I am not are here. The teachers in this province do bargain being redundant. under free collective bargaining process. They do I would gather, Mr. Chairman, that the Manitoba believe in that process and they oppose any Teachers' Society is concerned that if the interference with bargaining. Therefore, we are government could move to freeze wages in a broad here showing support to other members who are spectrum of the public sector as it has done, then it having their bargaining processinterfered with. would be very easy, very sim pie, for the government Mr. Hlckes: I would just like to read you a brief to extend this to the teachers ofManitoba. Are you campaign promise. It says: Any further significant telling us this evening, and I would presume you are, changes to Manitoba labour laws or The Civil but I want to hear it from you, that the Manitoba Service Act would only be undertaken after Teachers' Society is quite concerned not only with consultation with the public, business and labour. the principle of interfering with free collective That was quoted from our Premier (Mr. Filmon). bargaining which we treasure in a free society, but How would you describe this quote to Bill70 that we that it could indeed be levied on the hundreds and are dealing with tonight? hundreds of teachers in this province.

Ms. Bradley: I am sorry, how would I describe Ms. Bradley: We are here because we are very what? concerned with this legislation as it is set out in Bill 70, that any government would bring in such a piece Mr.Hlckes: That quote compared to Bill70 that we of legislation. are dealing with tonight. To furtheremphasize our concern, when we look Ms. Bradley: We view Bill 70 as being a clear at Sections 2(1) and 9(1 ), we have a great deal of violation of the right to bargain .freely and we oppose concern for a piece of legislation, and especially any interference in bargaining. when you look at Section 9( 1) which is allowing the government a free hand to make any decisions at Mr. Hlckes: I would just like to ask you a little any time they choose, to make that in response to further aboutsome of the questions that the minister any kind of lobbying, any kind of concern that comes was referring to. You mentioned that the forward. To think that legislation is to be brought government has depleted the treasury and taxation forward and dealt with on such an ad hoc basis is measures. I was just wondering, in your opinion or very, very disturbing indeed. your assessment, or even on behalf of Manitoba teachers, in what ways could the government * (2030) strengthen its revenues for Manitoba? Mr. Leonard Evans: Would the delegate suggest Ms. Bradley: In what ways could it strengthen its that this piece of legislation was anti-democratic, not revenues? in the interests of the freedom that we appreciate in this province? Mr. Hlckes: Yes. Ms. Bradley: We would probably agree with your Ms. Bradley: Well, in terms of the kinds of words. decisions that have been made since 1988, if you Mr. Chairman: Are there any furtherquestions? If are going to make decisions that are going to cut the not, thank you very much, Ms. Bradley. revenue dollars in this province, then I would think that it would only be incumbent for that same We will now move on to No. 3, Maggie Hadfield, government to also come up with some kind of a C.W.C., Communications and Electrical Workers of proposal that is going to offset that and is going to Canada. Maggie Hadfield. Number 4, George infuse revenue dollars into the province. We have Bergen. Have you got a written presentation, Mr. seen the cuts but we have not seen the proposals, Bergen? Okay, just go ahead, Mr. Bergen. the encouragement, the building to infuse dollars Mr. George Bergen (Private Citizen): Thank you into the provincial coffers in this province. for giving me the opportunity to appear before you as a private citizen. Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East) : I am sorry we are late. We were attending another committee In my view, Bill 70 is malicious, vindictive and meeting, which is now concluded. I am afraid I grossly unfair. It punishes innocent Manitobans missed most of the presentation, although I do have who do not deserve to be punished. Even worse, I 68 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

believe, Bill70 is one more initiative of a much larger and balance business and labour interests in scenario feverishly followed by the Brian Mulroneys, determining the value of work in Canada. This is the Grant Devines and the Gary Filmons of this why Bill 70 frightens me. With one stroke of a pen, world. it wipes out our labour laws that determine how wages are set. Thecollective bargaining arbitration Bill70, along with the selling out of Canada to the process may not be perfect, but it is still by far the U. S. corporations under the Free Trade Agreement, best process in the world for determining wages in which Mr. Filmon still applauds, the massive sale a democratic country. and divestiture of public sector property in Canada, the vindictive and random ruralization of public Ask yourself the question: How else should employees are all massive attacks to destroy what wages and benefits be arrived at? Should we follow has historically made Canada a differentand unique the South American model, the Mexican model, the nation in the new world. Russian model? What model should we follow? Should we follow Gary Rlmon's model that just These attackson the public sector, I believe, are wipes out everything in one shot? made by politicians who either (1) naively do not understand Canada's economic and political history When I worked for the Hudson Bay Mining and and reason for being, or (2) do not really care Smelting Company and the Atomic Energy of whether Canada hangs together as a nation. Canada in Pinawa from 1953 to '73, I pretty much took collective bargaining for granted. I never You see, I do not see this massive attack on the dreamed that in 1991, a vindictive and public sector in Canada as being separate and apart mean-spirited Premier (Mr. Filmon) would come from our current economic and constitutional crisis. along and take us back 30 years in history. Canada's economy has always been a two-engine east-west system. Now, suddenly, we are to The Manitoba government employs many, many convert to a one-engine north-south continental different types of occupations, classifications andso economic system. The public sector is at stake on. One classification that I can think of is the here, as we have known the public sector for the last journeyman automotive mechanic, fully qualified. 125-some years. Given our current constitutional The maximum pay for a journeyman automotive crisis, along with other economic issues at stake, mechanic working for the Manitoba this man-made crisis makes Canada's survivalas a government-this is the maximum pay up to five nation a toss-up. years or thirty years-$14.93. My grandfather, under very difficult I would like any one of you people here at this circumstances, came to Canada from Russia in committee to name me one large employer in this 197 4 to escape religious persecution, as well as province or in Canada that pays less than $14. 93 an arbitrary economic andsocial laws. As a young boy hour, a large employer -(interjection)- I have the growing up in northern Saskatchewan, I can floor. I have the floor here. Agriculture is not an remember my father placing great value in the employer. I am talking large employers. British justice system and the fairness between How many people here at this committee have business and labour. In particular, he valued visited Manitoba' s health institutions over the past attempts by all political partiesto balance the roles five years? I would like to know how many. In those between business and labour. I can recall at many institutions, you have approximately 380 psychiatric supper tables we would discuss and compare the nursing assistants. They do most of the work in brutal poverty-ridden business enterprises of South those hospitals with the patients. They get paid American countries with that of our British legacy from $9 an hour to $11. 50 an hour, something like which attempted to balance the laws that regulate that. the determination of wages. Their job is one of the most difficult jobs in this (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Acting Chairman, in the province. Go to those institutions and see. Go to Chair) PortageIa Prairie and find out. It is one of the most Even today, at age 87 , my father insists that the damn difficult jobs in this province, to be a primary single thing that separates us from South psychiatric nursing assistant. Believe me it is, and America, Mexico, Mississippi, Alabama are our you are freezing their wages. Many of them have labour laws which attempt to thoroughly regulate their own children, are single parents and have a July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 69

child to lookafter. They are paid below the poverty of excluded people that are not covered by a level wage. bargaining unit whom nobody really keeps track of. Some three weeks ago, probably more than that, They hire a lot more staff, numbers increase, and five or six weeks ago, the Minister of Finance (Mr. the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is not talking Manness) in what I thought was a desperate and about wage increases, he is talking about overall dishonest way attempted to justify the public sector payroll. Nevertheless employees believe that he wage freeze. He stood up in theHouse and stated, was talking about wage increases. in the minds of government employees, he stated, Mr. Chalrman: Excuse me, sir, could I just ask you your wages have gone up 62 percent from 1982 to to speak into the mike a littlebit more. Hansard will 1990. not pick you up all the way. It will make it a little difficult for them. * (2040) (Mr. Chairman in the Chair) Mr. Bergen: Okay, sorry. Government employees thought that the minister Mr. Chairman: Go ahead. told them their wages had increased by 62 percent. Mr. Bergen: Or there were massive numbers of Of course in that time frame, the consumer price reclassifications in the senior government index went up approximately 42 percent. I think bureaucracy, senior officers and a number of other everyone was agreed to that. I have here some classifications. That could have happened and I am statistics that I want to hand out that cover wage not aware of that. increases, cost of living, gross domestic product and I am aware that in the senior categories in the so on and so forth. Maybe I will make some Departmentof Justice, the minister, on average over comments on them, and you can ask me questions the last two years, signs approximately two later on. reclassifications or promotions a week. It is just a On the first page, Manitoba gross domestic massive number of those that come through. It is product and market prices since 1984 increased virtually impossible to keep track of them. 45.2 percent. You can check these figures I also know that the Civil Service Commission afterwards. Manitoba government revenues, 1984 asked for an additional 400 exclusions, senior to 1990, increased 64 percent; Manitoba management level exclusions, at negotiations. government expenditures, 1984 to 1990, 49 That may be where some of these high numbers are percent; Civil Service wage settlements, 1984 to coming from, but the average government 1990, 21.1 percent; Winnipeg consumer price index employee did not receive anywhere near a 62 over the same period, 34 percent. Check them out. percent wage increase, let me tell you that. On the next page, the deputy minister's salary In conclusion, I want to emphasize that Bill 70 is from 1982 at the maximum to 1990 at the maximum, much more than just freezing public sector wages, 69.1 percent; auto equipment mechanic at the unfairly as it is. It is part of and exacerbates the maximum from 1982 to 1990, 36.3 percent. Go all crisis we are facing in Canada and is attempting, in the way down, labour assistant work supervisor, one full swoop, to go from a two-engine east-west heavy duty mechanic, equipment operator, economy to the one-system, north-south psychiatric nursing assistant, in the neighbourhood continental system which would be, and will be, of 36 percent, 35 percent increase. In most dominated by the United States. government classifications, approximately 65 percent to 70 percent of the employees are at the It is one more attackto knock out the public sector, maximum of their pay range and anybodywho tells to knock it to its knees, and to hell with Canada as me that these people received 62 percent is lying. we have known it with the public and private sector The consumer price index from 1982 to 1990, 42.7 co-operating and sharing in its economy. percent-check them out. I am asking this committee to put aside political The next table is just included in there for ideology. Look where Canada came from. We had information because I tried to come up with where a public sector and a private sector. We worked does the government come up with 62 percent? together for 125 years. We do not have to follow the Where do they come up with it? Theonly place they Americans now. We can believe in the private can come up with the extra money is they hire a lot sector. We can believe in the public sector at the 70 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

same time. We have always done it. We do not Mr. Bergen: In talking to many, many government have to flip one way or the other, left or right. Be employees over the last several months or even practical. Do not support these laws that going back longer, the demoralization-well, the discriminate against some and not others. I am general apathy in the government services and asking you to put aside your party line, put aside demoralization, it is getting worse. I think it is your ideology and be practical about this thing. already impacting on efficiencyin some areas. It is Thank you very much. very, very difficultto identify that, but I think it already Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Bergen. I believe is having an impact. there are a number of questions. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Bergen referred to Mr. Leonard Evans: I thank the delegate, Mr. psychiatric nurses as one category that was Bergen, for his well thought-out- probably very badly hit by this in terms of having relatively low salaries already, but could he Mr. Chairman: Mr. Evans, could I ask you to bring elaborate? What groups in the public sector does the mike up. We are not picking you up at all. he believe are most vulnerable and would be most Mr. Leonard Evans: We are trying to do that. I hurt by this legislation? thank Mr. Bergen for a very well thought-out Mr. Bergen: The most vulnerable public sector presentation expressing his concernswith this very employees work in the Departments of Highways bad piece of legislation. I asked the previous and Natural Resources. Equipment mechanics, the delegate, but I would again ask Mr. Bergen, in so highway equipment operators, fire rangers who many words, this, sir, you would certainlyclassify as work around the province, those classifications are anti-democratic legislation, would you? very, very low paid, and they will be hit the hardest Mr. Bergen: Yes, I would. by this legislation. Mr.Leonard Evans: Yes. In effect, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Leonard Evans: I wonder if I could ask Mr. it seems like we like to talk about free enterprise in Bergen sortof a general question. It may be rather the private sector, but there is such a thing as having unfair, but the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) free collective bargaining as a parallel to the free keeps on talking about the lack of revenue and he enterprise system that a lot of people continue to talk had no options and so on, but does Mr. Bergen have about. any suggestions for other courses of action that the I wonder if Mr. Bergen can indicate whether he government could have taken at this time? can see certain groups, particularly those that are Mr. Bergen: Well, it has already been suggested, badly hurt by this legislation, whether there would for example, that the pretty massive tax cuts in be some negative response in terms of labour 1988-89 and so on is one thing that maybe should unrest, work stoppages, work slowdowns or have been looked at in a different light, should have whatever that could be a result of this legislation. been looked at perhaps in what the future might hold Mr. Bergen: I see a buildup against the wage at that time. freeze. I have seen it over the last month. I think I think also that the government should take a there will be a time when those people at the low second look at the senior bureaucracy, to tell you end of the pay scale are going to do something. the truth, where it is going in terms of wages and so I do not think that they will sit quietly and Jet this on and so forth, and what is happening there. go over a period of a year. I think that we will see Mr. Leonard Evans: There has been some talk in labour unrest over the next 12 months. reference to a so-called sunset clause whereby the Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Bergen legislation would not continue beyond the one year, then saying that the fairly high efficient level that we ending, say, December 1992, or perhaps a little later now enjoy in the public sector in Manitoba, in the or whatever. Do you have any confidence in that public service of Manitoba which I believe is type of approach? probably second to none anywhere among the Mr. Bergen: No, I do not. I think the legislation is provincial governments and indeed federal so wide open that the government could make government staff, that this, in effect, could lead to amendments to it, or they could do a lot of things inefficiency through demoralization or whatever? through regulations and so on. I really do not have * (2050) any confidence in this bill whatsoever in terms of July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 71

suggestions as to how it perhaps could be changed Point of Order and so on and so forth. It should be thrown out. Mr. Hlckes: If we do not realize that we have our Mr. Leonard Evans; The best course of actionMr. questions answered and if we paraphrase to get a Bergen is telling us is that simply the bill should be clearer understanding, I do not think that is going withdrawn. It should be scrapped entirely. beyond our rules. We have talked about the rights of collective Mr. Chairman: Mr. Hickes, I would like to clarify to bargaining in a democracy. I have expressed you one point. I am clarifying that Mr. Evans was concerns, but how do you see collective bargaining clearly relating back to the committee the response fitting in with Bill 70? What is it doing? You seem or trying to clarify for the member, and I believe we to have a Jot of information on the history of have the responsibility to listen. collective bargaining and wage settlements in the I am listening myself and I do not need Mr. Evans province. How do you see Bill70 fitting in with this telling me what I am hearing. I am asking him to ask pattern that we have developed of free collective for his points of clarification and that is it. If you want bargaining in the province of Manitoba? to challenge the Chair, Mr. Hickes, that is your opportunity. Mr. Bergen: I see it having a particularlynegative effect in Manitoba and I will tell you why. Since Mr.Leonard Evans; Mr. Chairman, I think we are 1984, when the previous administration negotiated getting along very nicely, and I do not see why you wage settlements, they negotiated a certain level of have to be dictatorial about this because it is a job security, but there was a price for that job matter of interpretation. security at lower wage settlements. Our wage Mr. Chairman; Mr. Evans, if you will continue with settlements were considerably lower than other your line of questioning, please. provinces or the private sector from 1984 to 1990, Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, we have had considerably lower. Now with the suspension of one setback with democracy with this legislation, let collective bargaining, it is just an additional hammer alone the rulings of this Chair. blow to the whole impact of determining wages. Mr.Chairma n: Are you challenging the Chair, Mr. Mr. Leonard Evans: In effect, Mr. Chairman. the Evans? delegate is saying we are certainlyturning the clock Mr. Leonard Evans: Yes, we challenge the Chair. back. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Evans. Hold on Mr.Chairm an: Order, please. Mr. Evans, I do not one moment. The ruling of the Chair is that Mr. think it is necessary that you answer the question Evans will not be answering back for the presenters. for the member each time that he has answered the Mr. Evans, I think you and I are getting off to a bad question. We have heard the answer and I think if start, so I think we are going to start again. If you you just ask your questions and be relevant to what are not understanding the answer, ifyou want to ask we are debating here, I think we will be a lot further for relevancy on the way your question was asked, ahead. you go right ahead.

Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, I just want to *** put on the record what I understand the delegate to be telling this committee. I think I have the right to Mr. Leonard Evans: I knew we had a reasonable respond by explaining to the committee and to the chairman. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. delegate what I understand that person to say. If Bergen about the question of bargaining with the they do not think I have it right, then maybe they wish MGEA, which is one of the largest unions affected to repeat their answer. by this. Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Mr. Evans, I would In your opinion, do you believe that the like to remind you, this is a time to be asking government bargained in good faith or attemptedto questions of the presenter, and I believe that is what bargain in good faith with the MGEA over the wage you are here to do, and ask for some points of settlements and over wages and other working clarification of what he has brought forward. I conditions in this past year? believe that is what I am asking you to do at this time. * (2100) 72 LEGISLATIVEASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 1 0, 1991

Mr. Bergen: I have worked for the MGEA 18 years are normally at the top of their pay range, so those now. This is the first time around that the others, the 35 percent, most of them would normally government has not negotiated, period. There was receive what they call a pay increment, 3.5 percent no collective bargaining whatsoever. The Civil on average, but that is the extent of it. Service Commission never received a mandate Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Bergen, because you from cabinet. Basically, there was no bargaining, have done a lot of research and you have some idea period. That really is alii can say. of the current rate of inflation, do you have any Some other speakers may elaborate more on this, estimates in mind as to the extent that real wages, but basically there was a zero and two position put that the real standard of living or the real income of forward at one point in time and we separated again. the public sector affected by this legislation will be The Civil Service Commission came back to us reduced in the next year? To what extent will it be again with roughly about the same thing. There reduced in the next year? were no negotiations this time around. It is the first Mr. Bergen: Over a 12-month period time in 18 years that I have seen this happen. approximately between 5 percent and 6 percent Mr.Leonard Evans: Do you think there is concern over any particular 12-month period that you want in the labour movement that the lead shown by this to look at, anywhere between 5 percent and 6 government, this very dictatorial, authoritarian percent. I am thinking now of an average consumer approach might be infectious and that other price index, not the month over month. I am thinking governmental jurisdictions such as municipalities just in general of the average consumer price index might follow suit. over a period of any 12 months. So that is the Mr.Bergen: I think that will tend to happen, yes. I range, 5 percent to 6 percent. cannot predict exactly how that will be done, but I Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, does Mr. think that the actions of the government will stiffen Bergen mean that the real income level will be the backs betweenlabour and management. There reduced by that amount, or are you referring to what will be less co-operation all the way down the line, your estimate of inflation would be in the nextyear? and it is going to impact negatively on labour and Mr. Bergen: I am basing my estimate on inflation management relations in this province. rate. As I understand your question, if an employee Mr. Leonard Evans: Okay, just another question receives the consumer price index, then his/her relating to the statistics that Mr. Bergen has wages will basically stay in line with real income. presented us, because he did refer to these. You That is how I interpret your question. elaborated on them, but it was rather quick and there Mr.Leonard Evans: So what this legislation does is a lot to digest. What do these figures tell us? Do is reduce the standard of living of a large component they tell us, or were you explaining to us, that in of the work force of this province. In effect, what you effect wages of the public sector in Manitoba have are telling us-is this correct?-that this legislation notkept pace with inflation in this province? in effect is substantially reducing the standard of Mr. Bergen: No, they have not kept pace. In the living of tens of thousands of public servants in this last two lines there you can see the differential there province? on the right-hand side, 34 percent versus 21.2 Mr. Bergen: Oh, yes. It certainly will reduce the percent. That is the differential over the last six standard of living of those employees that are years, seven years. affected by it. Mr. Leonard Evans: So, Mr. Chairman, if that is Mr. Hlckes: I just have one question here. You happening, what does this mean to the real wages have done a lot of work researching the figures and of public servants in Manitoba, or their real numbers, and I would just like to thank you for that. incomes? I am just curious, you are presenting as a private Mr. Bergen: They have gone down by about 12 citizen, and I was just following your research for percent, 13 percent, in terms of their purchasing numbers and category on page-well, you do not power and so on in terms of what they can buy, and have it numbered-it is from provincial government their standard of living has dropped. One point I employees 1981-1990, and it follows through where would like to make here is that, like I said before, 65 it shows regular employees, and then it shows the percent to70 percent of all government employees term employees. All of a sudden in 1988 they are July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 73

lumped into one. As a private citizen, what would I would like to take a few moments to elaborate your understanding be of this. if there is any, or how on each of these points. would you interpret this change? (a) Anti-democracy: Bill 70 proposes to extend Mr. Bergen: How I interpret the change is that the existing collective agreements for a period of time. government is hiring a lot more term employees and Yet, within the text of the bill, it is clear that the it does not want to show them on the annual report. government will not commit to which agreements to As a matterof fact, I requested that information from freeze or for how long. If the bill were passed in its the Civil Service Commission and they refused to present form any collective agreement not currently give it to me. They refused to give me a breakdown included could be affected simply by making a of regular employees versus term employees. I regulation pursuant to Section 9(1 ). A regulation applied to the Ombudsman and it is now in the may also furtherextend the agreement for a second handsof the Ombudsman. The commission turned year. As we all know, regulations are not needed to down my request. I appealed to the Ombudsman be debated or passed in the Legislature. For such fundamental issues as duration and inclusion to be through the Access to Information, Freedom of determined by such a process is not democratic, but Information, andthat is where it sits right now. They rather government by fiat. will not provide information as to the number of terms employees that work in the Manitoba While the government may claim that forming government service. They will not do that. such regulations, passing Bill 70 and rolling back arbitration awards are within its legal right, it cannot Mr. Chairman: No further questions? Thank you suggest that it is within its mandate. This very much, Mr. Bergen. No. 5, Blair Hamilton. Mr. government did not express its plans to dismantle Hamilton, you have a written presentation? collective bargaining prior to the last election. To Mr. Blair Hamilton (Canadian Union of Public attempt to do so without giving the general Employees, Local3551): Yes, I do. electorate a voice in the matter is profoundly anti-democratic. Mr.Chairman: If you could present it to the clerk, she will distribute it, and if you will just give us one • (2110) minute to receive it we will carry on after that. Go (b) The right to collectively bargain: The right to ahead, Mr. Hamilton. collectively bargain has been fought for by the Mr. Hamilton: Good evening. I represent Local labour movement for decades. In Study No. 22 of 3551 of the Canadian Union of Public Employees. the Task Force on Labour Relations by Stuart We welcome the opportunity to address this Jamieson, 1968, the Winnipeg General Strike was committee tonight in regard to Bill 70. Local3551 described as •a concerted struggle by organized represents 15 public sector workers at the labour in Winnipeg to secure the basic rights of Community Education & Development Association. recognition and collective bargaining. " That comes from page 182 of that work. (Mrs. Rosemary Vodrey, Acting Chairman, in the Chair) This same study states that as a result of the effortsof the National War Labour Board, a statutory I would like to startby indicating that the Canadian instrument was passed in January of 1944. The Union of Public Employees, Manitoba Division has statute included • ... protection of workers' right to made a submission already which Local 3551 organize, certification of bargaining units and supports fully. We would like to offer some compulsory collective bargaining." That comes additional comments towards this legislation that is from page 294. being proposed. So we can see the right to collectively bargain in Although we are not yet included under Bill 70, Canada has been law for 47 years. More recently, our local wishes to register opposition to Bill 70 on the postal worker and mail carrier strike of 1965 was a number of grounds: (a) this bill is anti-democratic, responsible for bringing forward what Jamieson (b) this bill undermines a long-standing right to calls "path-breaking new legislation" that bargain collectively,(c) this bill violates fundamental established the right to collective bargaining in the principles of fairness and (d) this bill and its impact federal Civil Service, and that is page 423 of are being misrepresented to the public. Jamieson. 74 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

For the present government of Manitoba to down wage costs, it is, in fact, an attack on the arbitrarily suspend these long-standing and process of collective bargaining. hard-won rights is Draconian and ill-advised. It is The general public is not being made aware of the the law of the land that collective bargaioing be done wide discretionary powers contained in the in good faith. To circumvent that law is a violation regulations, nor is the general public necessarily of natural justice and long-established precedent. aware of the bad faith bargaining this government (c) Fundamental unfairness: Bill 70 is unfair in a has engaged in. These are misrepresentations by number of ways. Firstly, the extension of a commission and omission. It is clear that despite collective agreement without the consent of both Mr. Filmon's assurances, this government has little parties is not an agreement. It becomes both a interest in reaching agreements founded on mutual contradiction in terms and a violation of basic tenets bargaining and arbitration. of the common law regarding contracts. The largest misrepresentation regarding Bill 70 is that it is a measure designed to cure the deficit by Bill 70 is also unfair in that it targets the lowest dealing with public sector workers. It is being paid public sector workers, housekeeping aides, represented as a temporary solution to the problem clerical workers, and others, many of whom are of reduced revenues. However, we are aware that women and many of whom already live below the this attack on collective bargaining is more that poverty line. simple knee-jerk offloading and reaction to federal Bill 70 is unjust and unfair primarily because it policy. suggests that public sector employees are Bill 70 is clearly a piece of legislation closely somehow responsible for this recession. It harmonized with the Free Trade Agreement which suggests that public sector workers should do their has cost Manitobans lost jobs already. Bill 70 is share in economic recovery. aimed at hospitals, personal care homes and In matter of fact, workers are doing more than their affiliated social agencies, such as AFM and Child share. MGEA has seen devastating layoffs and Family Services. This is part of a long-term affecting its members. Workers in this province all strategy to reduce services to the lowest common pay the regressive GST imposedby the Progressive denominator, a campaign of Americanization. In the near future this may become a campaign to Latin Conservative Party. The vast majority of workers Americanize our economy. have not received increments equal to the cost of inflation. I would suggest to you that someone The free trade agenda is a corporate multinational should ask Xerox to do their share. A few years agenda. The Rlmon agenda is a Mulroney agenda. back, they made $96 million in profit, yet paid no This favours international corporate interests over corporate income tax. I would further suggest that the interests of those who live and work in Manitoba. the province of Manitoba could help out by doing its These corporate power brokers that set the Tory shopping in Manitoba instead of North Dakota. Mr. agenda are what Steinbeck referred to as the "great owners." Film on, who I believe is still a Tory, despite his last disassociation campaign, should look to his federal In closing, I would like to leave with some words leader for an answer as to who is responsible for this from Mr. Steinbeck's work, The Grapes of Wrath: recession. To scapegoat public sector workers for The great owners with access to history, with this recession is deeply unfair. eyes to read history and to know the great fact: (d) Misrepresentation of the bill: The government when property accumulates in too few hands it is attempting to publicize Bill 70 as a wage freeze. is taken away. And that companion fact: when a majority of the people are hungry and The legislation, however, is much more cold they will take by force what they need. far-reaching. The legislation proposes to freeze all And the little screaming fact that sounds contractlanguage. This means that workers will not through all history: repression works only to be able to negotiate job security, protection against strengthen and knit the repressed. sexual harassment, workplace health and safety issues, benefits, vacations, new job classifications Thank you. or a host of nonmonetary issues. While the Mr.Leonard Evans: Madam Acting Chairperson, government suggests this bill is designed to hold I thank the delegate, Mr. Hamilton, for a very well July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 75

thought-out and very well-presented brief, the economic impacton the province of Manitoba of this contents of which I can readily agree with. legislation? I would like to ask Mr. Hamilton-he represents a Mr. Hamilton: Well, I think it is a small piece of a relatively small local, Local 3551 with 15 workers, I larger puzzle. We have seen an economythat is in believe, at the Community Education & a tailspin andwhat is needed is not only the infusion Development Association. I was just wondering if of dollars to make this economy go, but we need Mr. Hamilton could tell us, what is the function of those dollars to be spent wisely. I think particularly your association? of The Pines as an example where money is being misspent and misguided. Mr. Hamilton: Our organization works with the inner city community. Our job title is, for most of us, The subsidization of schools for the elite such as community school co-ordinator. We also have an Ravenscourt and Balmoral Hall are not wise economic development co-ordinator. We are choices. The budget has to be thought out with jobs responsible for going out and helping people access and long-term employment that is going to benefit different forms of government assistance or working people and inner city people, and not nongovernment assistance in order to improve their necessarily just those who are well off. lives or their situations. It is basically our job to talk Mr. Leonard Evans: So are you telling the to people. committee that this squeeze on wages, in addition to all the other negative impacts that can come out Mr. Leonard Evans: As such, is this financed by of this legislation, that will come out of this the province or the city or whatever? legislation, that one problem we will be having is that Mr. Hamilton: We are currently financed by wages effectively will be reduced in the provincial Winnipeg School Division No. 1 andthe United Way. economy and could possibly have a negative effect The school division budget, obviously, has had on market demand? In other words, are you telling some severe problems from the last provincial us that by reduction of wages or the freezing of budget. wages, that the provincial economy is going to be hurt rather than helped? Mr. Leonard Evans: So what your local is doing is objecting to this bill on principle, not that it directly Mr. Hamilton: People cannot spend money they affects the organization, but it could. What you are do not have. It comes down to that. One of the concerned about is that it could be extended, things that we are trying to do with the inner city through regulation, to affect you. Is that correct? community is look at the principles of economic development, and you have to have money and Mr. Hamilton: Yes, itcertainly could affect us and, recycle that money in order to develop a community. moreover, we are concerned just on the general I think those principles would apply to a city or a principle that it is not fair andit is anti-democratic. I province, and I think the goal would be to keep mean, those are principles that we at CEDA believe money in Manitoba rather than to let it leave. I think in strongly and those of us in Local 3551 believe in that is, in fact, we are doing. strongly. Whether or not it affects us directly is secondary to the unfairness of it. Mr. Leonard Evans: Just for clarification then, have you any direct knowledge of unions whose Mr. Leonard Evans: Just to clarify then, Madam contracts have been wiped out or will be wiped out Acting Chairperson, is Mr. Hamilton saying that his by this legislation? reading of the legislation is such that regulations could be passed that would directly impact on your (Mr. Chairman in the Chair) local? Mr. Hamilton: I personally do not know of any unions that will have a contractobliterat ed, but I do Mr. Hamilton: My reading of the legislation is that know that there are a number of awards that have those regulations could be passed to cover any been made that are going to be rolled back. I worker in Manitoba under a collective agreement, believe the engineers at Health Sciences are among private or public. So it certainly could apply to us. those. I know the Crown attorneys are among Mr.Leonard Evans: So you have dealt with this in those, as well, people who went through a process terms of principles. I would like to ask you then, in and received an award and now the rules have terms of the economic impact, what do you see the changed. 76 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

* (2120) Mr. Huff: Mr. Chairman, honourable committee Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, in your brief, members, first of all, I would like to say I represent you said that there was misrepresentation of the bill, no organization. I am here on my own accord, that the government was publicizing it as a wage although I am a member of the IBEW. freeze but it really went beyond that and involved I stand before you tonight as a taxpayer and as itself in other areas of negotiation including job an employee of the Manitoba Telephone System. security, protection against sexual harassment, and As a taxpayer, I understand the dilemma of the workplace health and safety. In your mind, how government. How do you reduce the burden on important are these other issues, vis-a-vis the wage Manitoba taxpayers? This burden has been freeze, so-called or wage-- increasing at a rapid pace, and I applaud the Mr. Hamilton: I think it is critical. In a number of government for recognizing it. bargaining units over the last number of years you In agreeing with the objective, I disagree with the have seen a movement towards nonmonetary method of attaining it. I do not see how Bill 70 fits issues and to negotiate those things. People into this solution exceptto cause labour unrestin the realize that times are tough. They are not province. Good government learns how to work necessarily asking for wage increases that have with the work force it employs. It does not seek to happened in the past. I think the ability to affect destroy the morale of its employees or to cause where you work and how you work and protection distrust. You have and will accomplish that if you from certain kinds of perils on the job are vital, and pass Bill 70. people are interested in securing those kind of As an employee of MTS, I do not understand how benefits. There is a lot of roomto negotiate on those freezing MTS wages saves the government money. things, things that would not add to the deficit. I was always led to believe that our revenue was Mr. Leonard Evans: Just in conclusion then, Mr. generated by users, not taxpayers. The effectof Bill Chairman, basically Mr. Hamilton is telling us, or his 70 on MTS can only prove negative for the advice, am I correct in this interpretation?-his company, its employees and the users. advice to the government is withdraw a very bad I would like to expand on why I make this piece of legislation and go back and try to bargain statement tonight. First, I see that with Bill 70 the in goodfaith with the public sector unions. government shows no confidence in the MTS board Mr.Hamilton : I think clearly that there is no callfor or its chief executive officer. It has virtuallytied the this legislation, and it serves no purpose other than hands of the company to attain a fair collective to undermine labour relations in this province. agreement. Withdrawal is certainly the best course of action We at MTS have prided ourselves on how we and, quickly, I would think. have had no major labour disagreements. This is Mr. Leonard Evans: So you would not be satisfied achieved with both the unions and the company with a sunset clause amendment that has been sittingdown and working out a fair agreement for its referred to in the past. employees. If the government would have stayed out of our affairs, it would have been reached again. Mr. Hamilton: The sun should never rise on this legislation. We at MTS know times are hard and in the past have taken minor pay increases. In the past three Mr. Chairman: There are no further questions? years, MTS has made $90 million in profits. In Thank you very much, Mr. Hamilton. making this amount, we only had increases of 3 Mr. Hamilton: Thanks very much. percent, 3 percent, and 3.8 percent. How can you Mr. Chairman: Number six, Clyde Huff. Have you justify to your employees that you have worked hard got a written presentation, Mr. Huff? for your company? The balance sheet shows this, but you will only get zero percent. Try working a Mr. Clyde Huff(Private Citizen): Yes, I do, Sir. little harder next year, and maybe if you are lucky, Mr.Chairman: If you could just supply itto the clerk you may get 2 percent. so she could present it to the committee, and then We at MTS are, as Quebec would say, distinct just give us a minute until we receive it. compared to other government associations. We Go ahead, Mr. Huff. have entered into the competitive markets. We July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 77

must nowlearn to survive in the business world. If Mr. Manness: I thank Mr. Huff for his thoughtful we cannot, jobs will be lost. That is how business presentation. I agree with the quote ofthe chairman operates. I believe that the employees of MTS will in the last paragraph. Let me say that. surviveand are ready for the competition. We have Mr. Chairman, I have to ask one question though. been expecting it and are educated to deal with the It comes as a result of the last paragraph, page one, competition. Morale of the employees was at an when Mr. Huff says, and I quote: "If the government all-time high. This morale took time to build would have stayed out of our affairs, it would have because it was not long ago we at MTS had to deal been reached again." I think he is talking about a with the MTX fiasco. settlement. The employees' pride in MTS was low, its morale Mr.Huff: A settlement, yes. lower. When people asked you what MTS stood for, Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, I do not know if Mr. it was the Manitoba Teachers' Society. We now Huff wasin the audience last night or not, but I have knew where Saudi Arabia was, but Reg Bird and his to ask how it is that the government which in vice-presidents began what seemed a large, essence is the trustee of the people of the province insurmountable task. They gave back our pride and who own Manitoba Telephone System-the built our beliefs in what our objectives for the shareholders are the people of the province and we company should be. They made us believe that if are the trustee-how is it that government which is you go out, do good work, you will build a strong the owner on one-half, in other words the people are company that no competitioncan destroy. Fairness the owner on one-half, and the people are was what we believed the company stood for. The responsible for funding those services of government has another definition of fairness. government which do not have a bottom line position to them, how it is that in the essence of Good business cannot have the interference of fairnes!r-Bnd of course, a lot of people would say political decisions. We cannot survive as a that this bill is not fair in the first place-but beyond company with political decisions. Good business is that, given that the government, sinceit has no other giving the CEO more money if it will attract a higher option to bring this in, how could anybody be calibre person. It also is good businessto keep the expected to treat Crown corporation employees morale of my company high. Archie McGill, a high differently than those who work for government, calibre manager for AT & T said: "When a company because, remember, those Crown corporations in goes into competition, its work force morale must be essence are owned by government, i.e., the people high or the battle is lost before it begins." I believe of the province? this, my fellow employees believe this and the • (21 30) government should believe this. If you cannot keep Mr. Huff: I am aware that a long-term debt-we your political decisions out of our business, privatize owe a long-term debt to the Manitoba government, MTS. That way you can have enough money to pay but I am also aware that we are paying interest on the public sector. that debt. You say that we are owned by the people I leave you with a quote from Tom Stefanson, of Manitoba. Well, I can see that in some ways but Chairman of MTS: how long can that last? Right now, everything is pointing toward privatization, although I am not The shape of MTS future will be formed by its going to get you to commit to that. Does that mean most important resource-its skilled and if the company is sold, let us say hypothetically, that dedicated employees. For this reason, special each person in Manitoba will get a cheque for what efforts have been made to attract and retain is- qualified staff and to improve training. These are critical investments that will yield benefits Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, I am not going to far into the future. hypothesize on privatization, but you ask a very good question, not with respect to privatization, but I do not see zero percent as a special effort. will everybody get a cheque. Are you aware that Thank you for your time. every Manitoban has a debt? Do you realize that Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Huff. There will be out of the new capital program brought in by the new some questions. CEO, Mr. Bird, agreed to by this government, an 78 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

$800 million program, the large share of that, I think Mr. Huff: I can only speak on behalf of the upwards of $500 million to $600 million we are company, but from what I see, if the government borrowing, and either my signature or my deputy's wants to cause, like I said, labour unrest-it is bad signature is going on that borrowing. government to cause labour unrest. As for the When you talk about privatizing and giving Manitoba Telephone System, we are affected even everybodytheir share, right now everybody's share more because we have to go out now and compete, is indebtedness to the tune of around $1 ,500 a and it is good business not to have a bad morale. person. That is why the government, not to muck It has been brought up in the last year in our around the affairs of the board room of Manitoba company that our morale has to be at a peak, and Telephone System, but in this very important issue competition has not even come. We have to wait is trying to provide fairness across all of the public until it really starts in the long distance, and to have sector, including in this case employees, since it had this perception by the employees can only make it no alternative. Is that an argument you can accept worse. in any part? Mr. Leonard Evans: This leads me to my next Mr.Huff: I can accept it. What you have said is all question. Just to what extent has the morale been the truth, but are we also aware that our adversely affected by this piece of legislation? Can telecommunications property, building plant and you elaborate on this? It has not been good, but just equipment is worth $1 .6 billion? I think we are doing how bad has it been? okay if it is worth 1.6 and we only owe, what did you say, $700 million in debt? Is that where we are? If Mr. Huff: Well, it has been bad because I think that we sold it right now, we would be at an $BOO-million when you look at the balance sheet of MTS and you surplus, correct? see that we made $90 million profit in the last three years-we were not expecting a lot. I can say that Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, right now I believe we were expecting a fair settlement. That is all we the indebtedness is about 1.5. We are entering in wanted. We are not asking for anything more. the course over the next number of years of this new plant to a commitment of $800 million. The people would have been happy with 3 percent, maybe 4 percent-! cannot speak for The only point I am trying to make is that this is why the provincial government senses it has some everybody, butfrom the people that I have talked to. responsibility in this case to influence-and I readily I do know that morale has suffered, and it is almost acknowledge the government did influence the as close to where it was with MTX, when MTX came management and the board room of Manitoba up. That was low and I would not want to live Telephone System. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. through that again. It was hard for it to build, and I feel sorry for our upper management having to, if it Mr. Leonard Evans: I thank Mr. Huff for a does go that low, build it up again because basically thoughtful presentation. I have some specific we do not know who is running the ship. Is it the questions of Mr. Huff. Perhaps I should know the Manitoba government? Is it the chair? Is it the answer but I would like to ask him, how many board of directors or is it our CEO? Does he always employees are affected by this at the Manitoba have to look over before he makes a decision and Telephone System? come to the Manitoba government? If that is the Mr. Huff: As far as I know, we have between 5,500 case, I see our business not lasting too long in the and 5,700 employees, not including Oz Pedde. competitive market. Mr. Leonard Evans: Fifty-seven hundred, did you Mr. Leonard Evans: Are you telling us then that say? because of the lowering of morale that could result Mr. Huff: Yes. or will result from this legislation that MTS will be less efficient in the near future? Mr. Leonard Evans: It is a substantial work force. Is it your opinion, your view, or is this your basic Mr. Huff: It is only human nature. If you can take recommendation that the government withdraw this any business book, they say in order for you to attain legislation, period, and go to the bargaining table a good working unit, your morale has to be there. and try to bargain in good faith? Is this what you are Your morale has to be high, and really right now I basically recommending? see it very low. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 79

I do not know, I feel sorry for the employees. I feel nonwage items. I am just wondering to what extent sorry for myself. I feel sorry for everybody who is are the nonwage items relevant and important in this affected by Bill 70, something that we will have to year and therefore would be nullified by this live with if it passes, but I think the ripples of Bill 70 legislation? will last a longer time than, let us say, a year. No * (2140) one will trust the government. How can you plan things when you know that the government might Mr.Huff: I think that nonwage benefits are always come in, cut it and say, no more? That is it, you as beneficial. MTS has always been good about cannot have any more wage. How do you negotiate that. It was always assumed that we knew that we in good faith? were going to get 3 percent over the past three years or close to it, so there was never any haggling over Mr. Leonard Evans: You referred to competition. the wages. You referred to other telephone companies, I believe. I can honestly say that MTS has been a great company. I can truly say that. I am happy to work Could you tell the committee how the average for MTS and I am proud to work for it, but if this wages, I guess I could use the term average wages, continues, I am sure that-maybe ask me in two or the wage pattern of Manitoba Telephone System years if I am still proud to work for Manitoba compares with some of the other leading telephone Telephone System and it may be not as much. I companies or organizations in the country? cannot say what it is going to be like, but if this Mr. Huff: I can say that I did talk to somebody at continues, obviously it can only get worse. AGT today or yesterday, sorry, and they told me that Mr.Leonard Evans: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. since privatization, they did get 5 percent and 5.4 percent overthe last two years. The people of Bell Mr. Chairman: No furtherquestions? also have gotten increases. I do not have facts for Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Huff, I do you. Ali i can say is that I have never heard of any have just a couple of questions. I noticed when you other telephone company-especiallyat this time, it responded to the number of employees, you had is not good business sense for you to say zero made mention of around 5,000, 5,500or whatever percent, but that is the government's decision andif the number was, and there was a kind of off-the-cuff they want to do that, that is up to them. Maybe remark that somewhat intrigued me when you said, someone has stocks in Unital, I do not know. excluding Mr. Oz Pedde. Mr.Leonard Evans: My question was not so much I am wondering or I am curious as to what the as to what increases were occurringin other utilities, morale is like with your fellow workers. Is that but rather, how did the average wage level in MTS well-known? Are there a lot of unhappy people compare with the average wage level at some of the because they see this particular individual receive other telephone companies? the type of increase that they are receiving this year, Mr. Huff: It is slightly lower. I have to say that we while at the same time the same government is are doing all right. I cannot give you facts because telling the employees that they are getting zero I did not-like,to talk to a person over the phone, he percent? Is it something that is widely known is not going to tell you exactly how much. I would among your coworkers? What impact do you feel say we are in the bottom four, but do not quote me that this has had on the morale? on that. Mr. Huff: Definitely, we are aware of the increase Mr. Leonard Evans: The one previous delegate that Oz Pedde did get andthat it was 15.4. I have referred to the nonwage aspects being affected by not heard anyone really totally condemn it, saying this legislation. In other words, this legislation, as I that, you know, it is bad. Obviously, in order to understand it, affects other matters such as attract high-calibre people-! am not sure if Oz workplace health and safety, harassment issues, et Pedde is a high-calibre person; obviously, the cetera, all these other issues. people that went looking for him think he is-inorder To what extent are these nonmonetary items to attract a person, you have to increase the important at MTS? I am not sure where your union salaries. was coming from in bargaining and to what extent I believe that most people in our company think wage settlement was more important that the that way and do not feel bad. I know when Reg Bird 80 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

came, his salary was also increased, and Reg was Mr. Chalrman: Okay, go ahead then, Mr. Mesman. worth the money for what he did. I am only hoping Mr. Mesman: Mr. Chairperson, members of the that Oz Pedde will, and I am sure a lot of our committee, I thank you for this opportunity. I am employees do, but again saying that in order to keep presenting here tonight as a private citizen, but I am good people, you pay good salaries, andthat it also also the health and safety representative for the pertainsto the work force out there. Manitoba Federation of Labour, and in that capacity, Mr. Lamoureux: Again to Mr. Huff, you know, on June 8, a Friday, I received late in the day Bill 59, when the government enters into the next contract not Bill 70, Bill 59-the workers compensation act agreement or negotiations, I should say, with the bill. MGEA, they are going to have to sit across the table I was leaving for a conference the next day in Ann from that particular union. When Manitoba Arbor for five days and studied that bill to some Telephone System goes to the union, they are going extent, as much as I could while I was at that to have to sit down and negotiate in good faith. conference, and not since 1914 has there been this There is a lot of concern from MGEA and people that much revision in workers compensation. I came I have talked to who are from the Civil Service union back on the 12th of June fully expecting this to be who have completely lost confidence in the the agenda for this session of the Legislature and government's ability to be able to negotiate in good the primary item for all our affiliates to be dealing faith. with and for the members of our office to be dealing In your opinion, do you feel that there is a lack of with. confidence at all within your own board, the MTS When I got home that evening, 10:30 at night, my board, or do you feel confident that, in fact, they spouse filled me in. Not surprisingly, in Ann Arbor, would have been able to negotiate? How do you Michigan, they do not report on Filmon's follies, and feel that this will impact future negotiations with when I got back, I had to get filled in by my spouse. MTS? My chin just progressively started dropping more Mr. Huff: I believe that we are confident in Mr. and more as she told me about this Bill 70 that had Stefanson and his board. I have to say that, come in, the freeze that it entails and the attackon obviously for-but what you are saying is that collective bargaining that it involves. obviously, the future for negotiations, it is going to be hard for anyone to trust anyone. Who is making My reaction, I am sure none of you certainly are surprised to hear, was extremely negative, partially the decisions? What you were saying about the question, would the board have been able to for a selfish reason because I saw, my God, a bill achieve a goodfair settlement, one that I think that like this is going to obscure what I think is the most the people of Manitoba could have lived with? Yes. important bill in the field that I am involved with, that has been since the beginning of workers I have all the confidence in the board. They have compensation, and a much deeper and more done it for so long, I do not see why they would serious concern, a less selfish concern, if you like, not-and it is getting better. The board is getting just the bill itself. more qualified people on it and yes, I think that we could have achieved a settlement that would have I could not comprehend what the thinking of this made us a happy work force, and our morale would government could be. What are these people have stayed high. That is ali i can say. There is not thinking? This bill threatens the collective much else. bargaining process in Manitoba. It is an assault on the men and women who deliver public services. It Mr. Chairman: No furtherquestions? Thank you unfairly puts the blame on workers' wages as the very much, Mr. Huff. cause of this government's fiscal problems. In fact, I will now deal with No. 7, Mr. John Doyle. Mr. the wage increases, as we know, have lagged Doyle will be here tomorrow morning. Number 8, behind inflation for many years. Workers should Rob Hillard. Number 9, Harry Mesman. Harry not, cannot be held responsible for the effect of Mesman, do you have a presentation for the unfair tax policies and tax holidays for big business. committee? Not only is Bill 70 a threat to every worker in Mr. Harry Mesman (Private Citizen): Not a written Manitoba, it is an unacceptable message to the one, no. employers also, that this government has nothing July 1 0, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 81

but contempt for peaceful labour relations and the approximately 50,000 working men and women, collective bargaining process. and is perceived by us as a severe threat to every worker in this province. Section 9(1 )(d) of this bill states that the lieutenant Governor in Council may make I would suggest to this government, regardless of regulations extending the application of all or any how they may feel in some way that this is a part of this act to any collective agreement on any worthwhileaction to take, that at the very least they terms that the Lieutenant Governor in Council be politically smart, because I am telling you that considers appropriate. more and more workers and more and more citizens of this province are coming to the conclusion-as This extremely sweeping power would enable the one of the signs of the rally that was held here government to freeze the terms and conditions of said-that the thing to do is to abolish Tories, not any collectiveagreement should the government so collective bargaining. I would suggest you withdraw choose to do. Again, as a long-time trade unionist, Bill 70. Thank you. this just strikes to the core of our being and has every single worker that has been paying any Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Mesman. There a�tention at all extremely upset, as by now, might be a number of questions. assumedly, all of you should know. Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, I would ask the

• (21 50) witness whether or not he is aware that the government is providing a 3 percent to 4 percent Any legislation that deprives workers of their right increase to roughly 40 percent of MGEA to collective bargaining deserves to be fought strictly membership as a result of merit increase, a total for that reason alone, but Bill 70 is a bad bill for a value which is to $8 or $9 million that the number of other reasons as well. It is aimed at the government had to provide, set aside in the pay lowest paid public workers, not the most highly paid. increase envelope in spite of the factthat there was It excludes, for example, judges and no increase in revenue this year to the province? government-paid doctors. It makes public sector So I would ask the delegate whether or not he is workers the scapegoat for the government's own aware of that fact. economic mismanagement. It freezes only public employees' pay while allowing pricesand unfair tax Mr. Mesman: I am aware of that but I am also practices to continue. It suspends only workers' aware that that does nothing in terms of this bill. contracts while allowing all government contracts This bill still exists despite that fact. If the with business firms to continue to their expiry date. government has a case to make for zero percent-1 It ignores the fact that the incomes of most public was going to call that an increase, obviously it is not employees have fallen behind the rate of inflation by an increase-make it at the bargaining table. Do 1 0 percent or more over the past decade. It will not make it by way of legislation. Yes, I am aware deprive workers of many millions of dollars of of that. income that otherwise would have been injected into Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. the economy benefiting many financially troubled Mesman for his well thought-out remarks. I would small businesses, and it will prolong or deepen the like to ask Mr. Mesman, considering his knowledge recession, not help to end it. and background in the labour movement and labour It has an effect also, as the previous speaker relations in the province, were you telling us or did pointed out, on the morale certainly of the public you refer to the fact that this may be the first time sector workers, but on the morale of all workers who that legislation such as this, abolishing collective are wondering what in the world can they expect bargaining for thousands of workers, has been next from this government? What sort of bludgeon brought in, in the province of Manitoba? are they going to take out to batter them with next. Mr. Mesman: I appreciate your comments, but I That morale, obviously in ways not easily am far from an historian on labour in Manitoba. measurable, has to have a negative effect on However, yes, I have been involved in the productivity and therefore a negative effect on this movement for some time, andto my knowledge it is economy, not a positive effect. Clearly, Bill 70 is the first time that anything this Draconian has been unfair. It is an unjustified bill and it is an anti-worker put forth by any government of any stripe in this bill. It wipes out the fundamental rights of some province. 82 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

Mr. Leonard Evans: Yes, this is my impression. and again having devoted almost all of my time and Even in the lyon years, we did not get anything as energy to the extensive bill that I referred to earlier, Draconian as this. I would not be able to detail all the groups of workers. Mr. Chairman, I would ask Mr. Mesman is he It is my understanding, and I have heard no dispute basically telling us that this legislation should be of the fact, that a large number of the workers who withdrawn forthwith? are hit by this are the lower paid workers, the ones that can least affordto be locked in this way. Mr. Mesman: That is the bottom line, absolutely. Mr. Leonard Evans: Just for clarification, Mr. Mr. Leonard Evans: There has been some Mesman is saying that his group, his union is not suggestion about sunset clauses? Do you have affected by this legislation directly? any comment on that? Mr. Mesman: I am with the federation again, so Mr. Mesman: The best comment was the retort of many of our members are affected by this the previous speaker that the sun should never rise legislation. I would certainlysuggest in terms of the on this bill. message that is being sent out by this bill that every Mr. Leonard Evans: In your judgment, do you worker in this province is affected by this legislation. think that this legislation will lead to labour unrest-1 They now know that what they may negotiate use that in a very broad sense and I know it means tomorrow, Section 9(1 )(d) will permit this a lot of things-but from your knowledge and government to decide, I am sorry that is just too rich understanding of labour and the labour movement for this province, that is not a proper agreement to in this province? come to and we are going to come down and roll Mr. Mesman: Again, that relates to the morale that back or declare it null and void. It is unclear. problem that was referred to by the previous It is very clear that the bill gives the government speaker also. When you create that sort of that ability. It is unclear as to how they might and resentment and antagonism on behalf of workers, against whom they might use it, but clearly every and disgruntlement, if you like, I do not see how that worker is feeling extremely vulnerable in this cannot help but lead to labour problems. They are province right now. certainlygoing to feel even more hard done by in the future and be very insistent at the bargaining table Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, I just have to ask Mr. to make up for the kind of losses that they perceive Mesman-and I accept the criticism on behalf of the to have suffered as a result of this bill. government-he, of course, dwells on the principle of the bill and he said he would be critical of others. So, yes, I would suggest that it certainly is not I would ask whether he would be as critical of a going to do anything positive for labour relations. government that did not bring in a bill to impose a Mr. Leonard Evans: Could you elaborate further wage freeze on the public sector. on the fact that some workers in particular may be I am thinking particularly of the date, January 14, very adverselyaffected by this, that there are groups 1975, when the Schreyer government, in in the public sector that are relatively low paid Order-in-Council, not by way of bill but within the workers and would particularly be hurt in terms of confines of the executive council chamber, continuing inflation, and, therefore, cutbacks in their application of the anti-inflation act and the real wages or their real incomes? guidelines established thereunder to the provincial Mr. Mesman: I am sorry. You are asking me to public sector-and Mr. Mesman, sometimes elaborate on the fact that a lot of low level income politicians tend to be holier than thou. In attendance workers are being hit by this in particular? that day, January 14, 1975, in the confines of the Mr. Leonard Evans: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would executive chamber was one Mr. Schreyer, Mr. ask Mr. Mesman, of the thousands of workers being Paulley, Mr. Green, Mr. Miller and Mr. Evans. So I affected, could he elaborate on which categories do would ask Mr. Mesman would he be as critical of Mr. we find the lowest paid workers, and who in Evans as he is indeed of myself as the particularwould be badly hurt by this legislation? representative and the host of the bill, under those conditions in the past? Mr. Mesman: It is my understanding that many of the hospital workers are among those lower paid Mr. Mesman: Not knowing all the circumstances ones. I would not, not coming from the public sector pertaining to that particular action, I have some July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 83

problem answering that question, but in a way, I Mr. Chairman: No furtherquestions? Thank you have no problem at all. If we are talking about a very much, Mr. Mesman. wage freeze arbitrarily imposed upon workers by We will now move on to No. 1 0, Charles Kereliuk. governments, yes, I would be equally critical Number 11, RobertOlien. Bob, you have a written regardless of the stripe of the politician. presentation, do you not?

* (2200) Mr. Robert Ollen (Private Citizen): No, I do not. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Mesman, I just had one Mr. Chairman: Then just carry on. question. I, too, like you, wish that the primary bill Mr. Oil en: If I was to write out a presentation, I think you would have been here for was in fact Bill 59, I would still be writing it, quite frankly. because it does merit, and I trust that in fact you will My name is Bob Olien. I am with the MGEA, in be making presentation on that particularbill-and case some people may be surprised by that. It we did not have Bill 70 taking up so much of your reminds me of a funny story. I was playing baseball time. My question is to you, and it is primarily with a team out in the country the other day. It was because of what the Minister of Finance (Mr. made up of a lot of country people, and most people Manness) say�ike you, we oppose the wage out in the country are pretty damn good baseball freeze. We oppose the manner in which the players. It turned out this particular day we were government is doing it. I am curious, because of kicking their ass, hittinghome runs, getting on base, your involvement within the union movement, what doing everything right. They could not scorea run. would offendyou more so, the lesser of the two evils Umpire Clayton Manness says, no, you are wrong. if you will, the fact that it is the free bargaining I just ruled the game ineligible. You ran to first. You process that has been slighted here or the wage should have run to third. Just a little humour, I hope. freeze? I hold the position of director of negotiating Mr. Mesman: If I have to pick one, I mean, if you servicesfor the MGEA, and I have held that position are going to bake a pie and its ingredients are crap since about 1979. Part of my responsibility is to and garbage, pardon me, you are not too much negotiate what is known as our master collective betteroff by removing one of those ingredients. I agreement. Part of the negotiations I have been still would not want to eat of the thing, but given a involved in since 1975 have involved a number of choice, it is definitely the attack on the collective components. One of them that I have negotiated bargaining process that offends the most. since 1975 is the trades, operations and services component. Some of the members, their Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Mesman, I do not know what classifications that Mr. George Bergen alluded to, your previous involvement was in the capacity as a are within that component: fire rangers, park negotiator, if you have been a negotiator before in attendants, autoequipmen t mechanicsand the like. the past, but how do you feel that would affectfuture negotiations for MGEA, for example, with the Since '75, the first year that the association and the government negotiated under a master government on future contracts? component agreement system, I am proud to say Mr.Mesma n: Well, the effecthas to be-hopefully, that all agreements were negotiated, ratified, signed they will be negotiating with a differentgove rnment and were honoured by both the association and the but if not, the effect has to be negative. Clearly, in government. During this period, all these years order for bargaining to really be successful, in order since 1975, both the association and the for win-win situations to take place, there has to be government had the right to utilize binding trust. When this sortof weapon is hauled out, I think arbitration under the provisions of The Civil Service that trust is knocked offthe table,and there is going Act. That provision had existed prior to my joining to be an undercurrent of acrimony to those the MGEA in 1974. It has existed for many years. negotiations, I would assume. Again, I certainly Both parties recognize the desirability of bargaining have not negotiated on behalf of the MGEA and I do in good faith and making every reasonable effortto not want to prejudge their conduct or their thinking, negotiate a collective agreement. but I think they are going to have an awful hard time That is basically enshrined in The Labour trusting the people they are sitting across the table Relations Act and in most jurisdictions in Canada, from after the introduction of Bi11 70. the desirability of bargaining in good faith and 84 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

making every reasonable effort to negotiate a Neville Chamberlain-remember Prime Minister collective agreement. Neville Chamberlain?-move over. The piece of paper with Adolf Hitler's signature on it had as much We have negotiated since 1975 under both the value as the word of this present government. NDP and Progressive Conservative governments. Both in the past have been good,hard fought, tough Bill 70 is, in fact, an admission of abject failure on negotiations with give and take on both sides and the partof this government to negotiate a collective most importantly, a strong element ofintegrity, trust agreement. I believe that it is because this and respect. It played a major role in negotiating. government either has no respect for labour Why in 1991 has the government, and I stress this relations or is entirely ignorant of the collective particular government, been unable to negotiate a bargaining process. Perhaps both apply here. At collective agreement with its employees? Why has least under the Tory government of Sterling Lyon this particular government decided to impose the there was a Minister of Labour-his name was Ken heavy hand of the state upon its citizens, this MacMaster-who knew labour relations. Sadly to regressive, backwardpiece of legislation entitled Bill say, working men in this province today do not have 70, The Public Sector Compensation Management the benefit of that labour relations experience. Act. Ironically, one of the few things I agreed with the Right Honourable Premier at the time was he was I believe the answer is quite simple. No sane opposed to gun control and so am I. So maybe on thinking person, quite frankly, believes this that point, we may have some agreement. government nor trusts this government nor respects this government. I know that I, for one, certainly So what do we have? We have a government have no belief, no respect and no trust in this that does what it wants, to whom it wants, whenever government. it wants and then calls it democracy. A government that said, we have to move services and jobs out to When I grew up in this province-! was born in rural Manitoba, decentralize, get out of the city and 1940 so you can have some idea that I am not as then we will even take this committee out of the city young as I look-1 was taught, and I learned this of Winnipeg to hear from citizens who reside out of from a farmer, by the way, out in Anoia, Manitoba, the city of Winnipeg. A government that lays off that you earned trust and you earned respect. I am conservation officers and then cries they do not saddened tosay that the conduct of this government have enough of them. A government where the since its election in 1988has quite frankly, been one Premier (Mr. Film on) appears in an ad for Manitoba of arrogance, vindictiveness, and total uncaring for Hydro saying that the money, selling the bonds, the ordinary citizens of this province. It really is not stays in Manitoba to benefit Manitobans-very surprising then, that when a group such as this true-and then sends mail through the United government cannot get its way, it resorts to States, purchases bags for the Liquor Commission changing the rules. in the United States and then sells Manitoba Data I find it amusing that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) of Servicesto a company owned by an individual from this province and the Minister of Natural Resources Macao, just outside of Hong Kong, Mr. Stanley Ho, (Mr. Enns) bemoan the fact that their federal cousin a multibillionaire. the Prime Minister has not lived up to his word to A government that talks about employment, jobs, provide millions of dollars in assistance to the helping rural Manitoba and then Jays off its province when Manitoba incurred large employees throughout rural Manitoba by doing expenditures in fighting forest fires. You hear that away with beach patrols, park attendants, on the news. We were promised. These two engineering aides, by contracting out the work from gentlemen are upset, and, rightly so, because they companies outside the province, such as in Alberta, were promised aid from the Prime Minister. I to paint our highways, as a few examples. Another, imagine they too believe that if someone made a to sell the Manitoba Semen Centre to Western promise, it would be kept. I share that belief as well. Breeders Services based in Balzac, Alberta, to We in the MGEA are also led to believe that reward its friends, I imagine. The Semen Centre did negotiations would take their normal course, that the not have a monopoly business. It was in government would allow free collective bargaining competition. No one had to purchase anything from to take place, that it would not interfere. Well, the Semen Centre run by the Department of July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 85

Agriculture, but people in this province did buy from merits of that particular case, no increase. Well, we this government operation and I guess the private have to live with that decision because we went to sector did not like that. Free competition is fine to final offer selection. You play the game, you win, them only when they can control it, dominate it and you lose. That may cause problems down the road, eliminate the competition. but so be it. So I think that there are some arguments that because you cannot convince some * (221 0) arbitrators to necessarily agree with the A government that says no money for wage presentations given to some arbitrators that they increases for its employees, and yet money appears were suddenly going to buy government edicts. to be no problem whenever the government wants Proposing amendments to this bill is not my to assist the farmers in this province, and some of them sure as hell need it; the developers in this objective, because the only thing that this bill province, notably the Rotary Pines project to name deserves is the shredder along with its author and one; the consultants in this province who seem to its ill-advised supporters. I keep hoping that there get jobs without competition and certain businesses possibly are some Tory members of the such as Portage Ia Prairie Vicon. That could have Legislature-and I believe there are, they are hard been a payoff, I guess, for losing a cabinet seat. I to find I guess-who have some integrity and some do not know. sense of really what is fair, because that really is what the issue is at hand, fairness, who will not The government made a determination to control support this legislation because of what it stands for. bargaining. It was not an accident to freeze Afterall, voting against this attackon the citizens of increases that couldbe achieved in other places, in this province would not be the wrong thing to do. other bargaining agents such as at Manitoba Hydro, Actually, the reverse is true in this case. I urge any Manitoba Telephone System, the Manitoba Public MLA who believes in fairness, honesty and integrity Insurance Corporation, hospitals, the Lotteries to do what Elijah Harper had the courage to do, to Foundation, to name but a few. The Lotteries stand up and be counted, and I urge you not to Foundation, I think, is a real good example of the support this bill. casino workers who generate revenue. You talk to a dealer who in the span of one half hour can take Throughout some of the discussions I have heard, off a customer, who wants to spend their money, there has been some talk about the MGEA and its $80,000 and makes 10 bucks an hour andbrings in bargaining. As I indicated, I have been bargaining $80,000-you name anybodyin the private sector since 1975 with various governments, and who is honestly bringing in that kind of money-and bargaining generally has been tough. There has they get 10 bucks an hour and no wage increase. always been some kind of a feeling that if you The government did not get its bullying way with bargain with the NDP you walk away with a bag full some arbitrators involving the dying days of the of money. Well, that is total BS. Two of the best existence of final offer selection, even though it was settlementswe got were under Sterling Lyon. successful in two cases, one, obviously being the I find it ironic that when served notice to professional engineers employed by the Provinceof commence bargaining and we entered into the Manitoba. The selector in that case took the negotiation, we started bargaining in about June of employer's position of no increase at all, nothing, no 1990. I think we anticipated that things were not change to the collective agreement. We had an exactly going to be rosy, per se-fair enough. They arbitrator who awarded the casino workers a 5 normally are not, but we began to commence percent wage increase. a princely sum of 5 percent. collective bargaining. We served our proposals. To some people that is 35 cents an hour. You We started on June 22, had some administrative cannot even buy a cup of coffee for that. The same things to discuss, met again on July 18, continuing arbitrator, in a most recent decision, took the to reviewing our proposals that we had made, and employer's-whichin this case is through the Liquor the assembly of the third session on the 20th of July, Commission but really the government-offer of a fourth session we agreed to subcommittee some zero, no increase. issues off, such as vision care, a proposal for that So it is kind of interesting that the same arbitrator and some issues. This was sort of normal who awarded five to one group decided on the bargaining at the time, nothing unusual at the 86 LEGISLATIVEASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

moment, and we were wondering when-we also I do not know, I have not totalled them up, but if tried to discuss what issue we found interesting. you take over 300 exclusions and add up everything in here, we are well over 400 proposals made by the One of the issues we had is, you know, the matter government, some of them for major rollbacks of the of parking has been a subject of an arbitration case collective agreement. Now it is very tough to get and some paybacks to employees, and that still is people to accept zeroes, it is also very tough to get continuing, but we wanted to discuss the issue of them to accept zeroes, plus rollback benefits they parking, at least to start and try and look at it in a have enjoyed prior to 197 4, such as the right if they reasonable logical way, which was never the case work overtimeto see if they got the pay or the time in the past. Anyway, the government refused to off, the right to roll back sick leave the employer negotiate parking. We were quite shocked by that wanted, to cut into the Workers Compensation because in dealing with this particular government issues. All at the same time they are saying, help negotiator, that we have dealt with since 1976, we us out, let us share the burden. It was not washing were quite taken back by the fact that the very well with our committees. government negotiator said he was not authorized So bargaining was really going nowhere. Then, to discuss the matter with us. Some of our of course, we find on December 14, we have the members on the bargaining committee have been very famous release by the minister Clayton partof committees for many years did find it hard to Manness to the honourable minister re the average believe that this particularnegotiator for the first time 3 percent increase, this pay envelope, and the in their memory and our memory could find that reference that some will get more--nurses-others somebody would refuse to discuss it. The situation will get less and some will have to accept no at that time was not normal. increase. I find it interesting that they established On or about August 7, 1990, the government the wage envelope by themselves, determined that announced there would be a provincial election to there was some money for pay increases and be held on Tuesday, September 11, 1990. We unilaterally decide who would get it irrespective of know what happened then. By a letter dated what anybody would think, if there was any September 4, 1990,I wrote to the chief negotiator justification in any other sector of their employees for the government. I still had not received any that would be warranting an increase. government proposals and was also inquiringabout We did not meet again until December20, and we the position of the government in regard to the issue tried to speed up bargaining, reduced the number of of parking. These are not private meetings. These our proposals off the table. The government are not one on ones and off-the-record meetings I reduced none, and we started to ask the am referring to. government, arewe one ofthe groups to get a zero? We could not get an answer, not prepared to answer By letter September 13, the government's chief that. What is the fixed pool of funds? No answer. negotiator stated it would be tendering proposals I do not have it anyway. Are you aware of any with regard to parking. I will respond once I get planned layoffs of civil servants? I do not make further direction. On Thursday, September 30, those decisions. Are you aware of, or of all the 1990, we were told that the government negotiator personnel people you have with you here, can they had full authority to discuss every issue. not tell us anything about a layoff? Silence was the On September 21, which was the expiry date of response. Eleven people from the our collective agreement, still at this moment, we government--<:ould not get a peep out of them. finally got the government's proposals hand Well, the response, the budget process is going delivered to us. Now we started meeting, and on, I do not know where it is at. Is the Civil Service partly,on the government's proposals, and we had one of the groups that is set for a zero? I do not about five to six meetings on government proposals have any instructions. Is the government's alone. We only had approximately 14, what you mandate still no unemployment security? I have would call, bargaining sessions. Not a lot for a received no new instructions on unemployment major collective agreement, but it is interesting we security. We started with job proposals, hear about the MGEA's proposals. Well, here is the government caucus, they say we are not taking it off government's. the table, we have got too many issues. Bearing in July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 87

mind that Christmas is around the corner, we to still the present government for a three-year adjourned about four in the afternoon, atmosphere contract providing for increases for three years. very, very, very, very poisoned. They sign it in good faith, and they go away and do their other work. The government gets on with its * (2220) business, find that the government introduces Bill Then finally on the 17th of January, 1991 , at a 160 which passed today. They do not have board meeting-we were meeting out at Hecla committees, so I thank God for Manitoba. At least Island. It is supporting a government hotel, and we we go through that process. also support it because we have members there. Even though it costsus more, we do not mind. We They rolled back an agreement, so how do you get a call from the chief negotiator for the have faith to say that when I put my name on a government. We have to meet tomorrow. You document, gentlemen, my word is my bond? My have to get your master committee meeting in signature means something. I, frankly, would not tomorrow. I said, we have got our board meeting trust an agreement signed by this government if on, our master committee is part of the board, every single cabinet minister's name was on it. cannot wait until Saturday. We will travel in and be Because of the experience we are seeing across there. No, it has got to be tomorrow. I said, well, I the country, this is no accident. It is unfortunate take it you are not calling on something of minor because I think, while if you are after to control the importance. No, I am not. We agreed to meet the Civil Service wages, yes, I guess there are other next morning. We abandoned our board meeting, ways to do it. I guess you could take the hardball cancelled itat that stage, headed in to Winnipeg and approach and say we do not trust arbitrators, no got our committeestogether for the morning. arbitrator can award you an increase. You do not In the morning, the government negotiator came affect people who work at casinos, who are trying in at 10:10 in the morning, started off and he went out there, who do not make big money. You do not into the whole route, and then we got the famous affect people working at corporations that are zero-two. We got into this very, I love this two making money. percent formula, the revenue-sharing process, Sure, I guess you want to be fair. Well, there is where you take 2 percentand you can split it in half, no fairness in this darn thing. Once you start but you have to be overtwo, split it in half and divide attacking, putting legislation in place that strips it up, but nothing on your wages. away hard fought rights, and in the spirit in which So, really, we had a formula that provided nothing this country was built on, that people went to war because the governments own predictions, they over, quite frankly, and probably some of your were not expecting any growth in revenue. So, fathers and uncles died fighting for what we call really, quite frankly, there were no negotiations, and democracy. This is no different than the '30s back the same day-here is what we like about this in Europe, is it? bargaini ng-the press release or the It is only the small first step to beginning, to get rid announcement is made to the public of Manitoba of public workers. Why? What did they do so about the government's offer to the MGEA, a once wrong to deserve this treatment? They go to work. again bargaining in the press. They try to do the best they can. They follow their So, what have we had over the years? orders, sometimes under difficult conditions, and Decentralization snuck up on you in the press. then to say, you are doing all right, quite, thank you. Other issues such as that. Layoffs in the press. I Well, all of them are not doing all right. have never negotiated that bad, or had that I reject the proposition put forward by the experience in all my years. I have always prided Honourable Mr. Manness about the number of myself that when I got a deal with a person across employees who are getting merit increments, the table from me that I can trust him . because that is what it is called-a merit increment. Unfortunately the experience that we are seeing Some classifications have ranges of pay, and you across this country, and it is unfortunate it has can recruit up the range. Interestingly enough, the immigrated to Manitoba, is you see in Nova Scotia government will not agree at negotiations to make where the Nova Scotia government employees sure that everybody starts at the minimum step of union execute an agreement with their government the pay range. So you have to progress through the 88 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

merit increment system. Oh, no, we need that for on arbitration. That was the subject of discussion. recruiting, we may get somebody. We cannot pay Over 1 2,000 members voted to go to arbitration, 500 them a minimum. We have to maybe hire up at the said no. Now that is democracy. maximum. So, what is it really? It is nothing but a When we had the meeting on May 9, which I glorified recruiting tool. believe was referred to last night, which I was in I would suggest most of our members are at or attendanceto, interestingly enough we have got the near the maximum currently today. We have some Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) who probably put people who do not get a merit increment. There is himself out of a job once he loses this one. He will only one rate of pay. That is wrong. What about the not have a courtreporter's job to go back, because people who do not get a merit increment who have he basically abolished them all, which is interesting. worked for this government long and well, who took I hope he does not come to his old union and ask pride in their jobs? I think the brother from the for help. Manitoba Telephone System is very proud of his Mr. Chairman: Order, please. company, I think that is pretty darn good. It is nice and refreshing to see because I do not really hear Mr. Otten: I know, I am sorry. that from government employees, quite frankly. Mr.Chairm an: Mr. Olien, I would like to remind you They are losing faith to say, what did we do to that we should be being a little bit more relevant to deserve this? towards the bill. I understand it is an emotional You know, we hear about the proposals the issue but let us- MGEA made, how expensive they are. I would Mr. Otten: What I think is also funny, the same day expect that if the government were to agree to every that Bill 70 was announced in the Legislature, really one our proposals-youwould be nothing but damn in effect terminating collective bargaining, June 3, fools. You never have, you never will, and we know 1991, we got a letter addressed to Peter Olfert, that. The proof in the pudding is what gets signed signed by the deputy minister of the Civil Service on the dotted line at the end of the negotiating Commission, which we are told is just a session. fluke-please be advised that the government I can tell you we stuck to zero in '84, then we got wishes to renegotiate this memorandum. It is on goodvacat ion. We took three in '85. We took a CPI vehicles, government vehicles. The same day, they in '86. We tooka three in '87, a three in '88 and a cancel bargaining, or they propose it, they say, CPI in 1989. We have not had an increase since could we get together and negotiate because our then, have we? Oh, we have got '90. Here we are vehicle costs have gone up and we would like to today. So it is not just a wage freeze that people like discuss some rate increases? Now is that not kind to believe, that it is an attack on the fat cat public of hypocrisy? sector employees. Nothing could be further from We are prepared to negotiate with the the truth. government. We met with them on July 4. We said, If you want to do something with this country, I yes, we recognize there have been cost increases think you are going to have to- to the government. There is no doubt about it because Treasury Board authorized a Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh. 3-cent-per-kilometre increase, October 1, 1990, Mr.Chairman: Order, please. signed out by Michael Bessey, and what they said Mr. Otten: Yes, order, please. It is getting warm in the missive to the departments was, it is because and the mosquitoes are funny. of rising fuel costs. We recognize that. You are I think we can all work together. I have known that darn right, and they are up again, but the government employees who are providing a vehicle when the people are honest with each other, but it is tough to deal with people that you cannot trust. to their employer are still locked at the rates they got back in April, '91 , or, '90, pardon me. No increase That is the unfortunate, that is the major problem in this particular pieceof legislation. It tears at the root for them unfortunately. What are they going to have of integrity, of when you sit across the table with to wait again? someone that you know that when they shake hands I believe in a nutshell, I really urge people not to on a deal, that it will be honoured. We have to out support this bill. Maybe there is another way, but to bat and talk to our members. We put out the vote this certainlyis not the way. It is too far reaching. It July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 89

goes beyond the bounds of saying, hey, we have mean, that is like waiting for the numbers to come got some deficits to control. This is a fundamental in. attack on democracy in this province. I am * (2230) surprised that the Manitoba Association of Rights and Liberties is not here today talking about that, Mr. Leonard Evans: Madam Chairperson, have and I thank you very much. I know I get a little you any idea to what extent the real wages or the heated, and I apologize, but I wish to honestly thank real incomes of MGEA employees will be reduced you all for your patience and indulgence in listening by this measure in the next year? to me. Thank you very much. Mr. Ollen: Well, there are estimates that go, like, Mr. Chairman: Thank you. I believe there will be $500 or $1 ,000. That will vary with individuals. It a couple of questions, Mr. Olien. may be higher. It may be lower. I mean, that is the interesting thing, that when you talk about what does Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you very much, Mr. a raise mean, we use the consumer price index as Olien, for your excellent presentation. I only have a a rough measurement. To some people that is not couple of questions, because you have really enough, to other people it is adequate andothers it answered many of the questions I might have put is maybe more than enough, because it is really forward, such as FOS being nullified with the casino some kind of a tool. The costs, I have not workers and also the extent to which you were determined, so I cannot point to anything. I know engaged in collective bargaining. that Statistics Canada finally said that the major Just generally speaking, what impact do you think cause of inflation in this country is the federal that this legislation is going to have on the provincial government and theirpolicies. Forty-fourpercent of economy of this province? that cost of living is directly attributed to the federal government policies, which impacts on us, you Mr. Ollen: What the impact on the economy is, know. I know that. I think it is tough when you there are different economic theories that go cannot get money out ofyour •relatives." around, depending on what school of theory of economics you want to listen to. Generally, they Mr. Leonard Evans: What you are saying though, always seem to be wrong in the end. It is whatever I gather, is that given the fact that we have got is the current fashionable mode to take. inflation running 4 percent to 5 percent likely in the next year, given the fact that this amounts to zero I think any time you reduce the expenditure of increase, therefore the entire membership of MGEA money throughout the economy, it is money that is in effect will takea reduction in Its standard of living. not spent in rural Manitoba, as an example. It is Is this what you are telling us? money that is not spent in businesses, industries throughout the province, because it gets such a Mr. Ollen: Yes. You do not have to be a rocket narrow interest and a lot of it may leave the country. scientist, I believe, to figure that out. Quite frankly, There always is downturn, because once you start if your costs are going up, and everybody agrees shrinking the spending, it has a negative effect of that in one form or another they are seeing causing inflation to either go. It causes higher increases in the cost of living, I mean with the employment which leads to more unemployment. increase on Unemployment Insurance premiums People cannot sell their goods and services. It is that affects business plus employees, there is almost like itbecomes cancerous. It is a tough one, obviously more money out of your pocket. City of because when you do that, you take money out of Winnipeg taxes, as an example, go up. There is the economy, obviously. more moneyout of your pocket. I mean, it goes on and on. The GST-God only knows. They even (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Acting Chairman, in the want to collect GST off the wage recovery we pay Chair) to the government when we have somebody come If you dry up the water-flnd I think it was the lady to the bargaining table and we want to reimburse the from the Manitoba Telephone System says, if you province for the wages paid that day. They want to turn off the tap without finding alternate sources of charge us GST on that for Christ's sake. I mean, water, you have done something wrong. I think this is getting ridiculous. It is bizarre. there is going to be a bad effect. To what great Mr. Leonard Evans: I wonder if you could tell us, extent, that is always hard to determine in reality. I in all of your studies involving negotiations and so 90 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

on over the years, what is your impression, how do are committed to their work, who take pride in their Manitoba public sector wages compare with those job. It is tough to get them to suddenly turn around in the other provinces? and not have that pride anymore. It is almost like it Mr. Ollen: Well, we are approximately in the takes a certain period of time; you almost have got middle, fourth, fifth. It varies. B.C. used to be miles to beat it out of them. ahead of us. They have slipped a bit. In my own experience when I worked at the post Saskatchewan slipped a bit. Ontario is going back office, I experienced that from when I joined there in ahead. Prince Edward Island has today just '61 . I had high morale when I worked there. It was apparently reached a tentative agreement, giving not long, about five years, that was sort of taken out $850 a year to their civil servants plus, back to of you. It takes a while for that to materialize. October 1990 and I believe 4.5 percent effective this If your employer has no respect for you, it will take July. Of course, then we have the other some time, but eventually you will get the message: experiences in Newfoundland and New Brunswick I do not think they care about me. They do not and other provinces where there is an attack on their respect me for the job I do. They do not seem to sector. So it is all over the lot. We are probably have any concernabout me. I am not a high-priced about in the middle there, but that varies with jobs. senior advisor to the Premier on French language Not everybody makes 40 grand a year, 30 grand at 60-some thousand dollars a year. You know, it a year. I mean, we have got tons of part-time might be somebody that is working for $9.29 an hour employees; even though they may get an hourly rate or $1 0.13 an hour, and that is what they get. But, to that might show $12-$1 3 an hour, let us have a look knockmorale out, that is a tough one, but I know that at the T-4 at the endof the year and find out what there are a lot of disgruntled employees who are you took home. I mean, we have got fire rangers tired of seeing the work being contracted out, thattheir work is being reduced, park attendants that privatized while they sit there and watch the work go used to work at the gate at St. Malo till they put an away. It is not because they are not willing to do automatic gate on there. So there are some rural anything. Community college instructors who jobs gone. That is just a couple of small examples. cannot sell programs because it is earmarked for the There used to be a natural, real, live living person private sector. So, although they can deliver the that actually came, when you came to the gate, who programs, no, cannot have the money. That is would help you. Now you can put your loonies in. going over there. Now, if you are a private If you do not have it, I guess you had bettergo back consultant, come and see us. We have got money to the store and get some change. Service to the for you. You hear reports of that. That has got to public-beautiful. have an effect on morale; of course, it does. Ask the court reporters of their morale. Almost half of Mr.Leonard Evans: Yes, thank you. Certainlythe morale of the MGEA employees, the public sector them have taken severance pay out of disgust. unions, all the personnel affected, will obviously be The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Dacquay): Thank loweredthrough this. But, in your judgment, to what you, Mr. Olien. Doug Shattuck. Mr. Shattuck, do extent do you think that the lowering of the morale you have a written copy of your brief? is going to affect the efficiencythroughout the public Mr. Doug Shattuck (Private Citizen): No, mine is service? a verbal presentation. Mr. Ollen: The efficiency may take a while to filter The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Dacquay): Thank through at times because I think there are a lot of you. Please proceed. people who are somewhat, I find, in a bit of shock at the moment. I do not think that they really believe Mr. Shattuck: I will not take long. I know that. In light of the fact that the settlements they everybody is getting tired. have taken over the last number of years, they It seems to me that Bill 70 is the final confirmation figured that they were playing their part and doing of this government's moral weakness. As with so their bit, and they felt that, geez, we cannot keep many other governments in Canada, the temptation taking these small increases all the time. The cost to use legislative power to abrogate their of living is escalating. I think that there is going to responsibility to treat their employees fairly has be an effect on morale. It is hard to measure. I think simply been too much for Mr. Film on, Mr. Manness, it is tough to change people who basically in general and others of their ilk to resist. July 10, 1991 LEGISlATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 91

Rather than bargain in good faith, this governments have been so fond of using during the government has chosen the path of the coward, the last decade. There is no evidence to support this bully. Now, I know collective bargaining. It is not argument either. Private sector/public sector wage easy. It is difficult at the best of times. The comparisons in the unionized work environment meetings are long, as Mr. Olien referred to. They show very clearly that workers in the public sector consume time, energy, resources, money. The do not make more than their private sector process is painstaking. It is tedious. It is equivalents. Certainly,when you talk to the people democratic. At the endof it all, with give and take, like the Chamber of Commerce, they love to you end up with an agreement. Public sector compare the wages of a unionized secretary with bargaining works and it works very well, and it has the wages of a nonunionized secretary. Certainly, worked in this country for many decades. That is we agree there are benefits to being members of only true when both parties want it to work. This unions and we are proud of it, and certainly there government is in effect saying that this is all too should be benefits because we work damn hard for inconvenient and unnecessary. There is no doubt our members. democracy is inconvenient but I believe it is In many cases, these people in the government necessary. make much less than private sector people. Trades Now let us turn for a moment to the public people in the government servicesare a very good arguments this governmenthas used to support the example. There is a mechanic at Landau Ford, an wage freeze. They are all specious. First of all, the auto mechanic, who makes $55,000 a year. That is government claims that revenues are down andwe almost as much as some of these political must all share in the burden of this recession. This appointees. So the overpaid, underworked is a double argument-revenues sharing the argument does, I believe, offer a very good clue as burden. On the revenue side, the government has to what is really goingon here. Ability to pay is not said and done nothing about the inequities in our tax a valid argument. Present wage levels: not valid. system. It is a scandal. The latest budget even Sharing the burden: does not work. So why, I ask enhanced corporate tax giveaways. While some of you, is Bill 70 and this wage freeze being these taxation issues are federally controlled,there implemented? has not been one peep, not from Mr. Manness not from Mr. Filmon, about the Reaganization of the I am sad to report that this wage freeze is nothing Canadian tax system. Perhaps they agree that the more than a cynical public relations exercise being poor should pay more while the rich pay less. propped up by this Tory bias against the Civil Service, against unions, against social programsin • (2240) general. That is why Bill 70, which effectivelytakes Now the other part of this argument is the sharing away people's rights to collectively bargain, to pay the burden. It is not supportedby any government equity, changes to nonmonetary provisions in actions in this province. There seems to be plenty contracts and the wage freeze is being sold to the of money for government-employed doctors, public solely on the basis of the wage freeze. Do professors, judges. There seems to be lots of we hear anything from the government about the money for Tory consultants, political appointees, loss of collective bargaining rights or the facts that party hacks. Money does not seem to be short for some of their benefits are frozen? Not a word. The Pines, Oak Hammock, the president of MTS. So obviously someone in the government has So this argument appears a little bit thin to me, read that book, that famous book about the nally. I do not know what you think. There is perso manipulation of public opinion. The book, entitled no sharing the pain with this government. It reminds The Sultans of Sleaze, clearly documents the selling me of Animal Farm by George Orwell. I do not know of free trade, the great Meech Lake debate and the if any of you read these books. Do you remember selling of the deficit. All of these issues were the phrase, some pigs are more equal than others? cynically sold to the public with the application of all Well, apparently the trick with this government is to of the resources which governments can muster, be one of the more equal pigs. and believe me they are considerable. They all Now the second argument mounted by this have a single commonality, these issues, and that government was the whole overpaid, underworked is the technique of the big lie. Bill 70 is just another civil servant argument, which right-wing example of the application of this technique. 92 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

If this government cared about the deficit, we Mr. Shattuck: This legislation is only another piece would have an equitable taxation system. If this in the whole puzzle of downgrading government government cared about education, our community services in my view. Just to take one example in the colleges would not have endured fiscal government service, I do not know if any ofyou ever disembowelment, and if this government cared had a mother who had a stroke and required home about the services its employees provide to the care. I was in that position, so I have some public, it would not be taking away their rights to free understanding of how that system works or is collective bargaining or forcing them to personally supposed to work. subsidize a government by and for the privileged in Recently, we have been getting a number of very this province. disturbing reports about a subtle, kind of For the future, I am afraid it looks grim. People quasi-privatization taking place where people being making wages at or near the poverty line will have released from hospital are encouraged to seek a harder and harder time making ends meet. private home care, where there are problems getting Labour relations in Manitoba will be more bitter, home care arranged and in frustration they will more fractious, more confrontational. You can maybe hire from Drake home care services. expect more demonstrations, more strikes, and There is a tremendous amount of pressure on the pushed hard enough, you can expect illegal strikes. people who provide home care services. These The recession brought on by the Mulroney people, largely women, although some men, work government will be lengthened by the Filmon for very poor wages under terribly difficult government. Servicesto people will continue to be circumstances, and to top it all off, now they are downgraded, while the rhetoric about the sanctity of touched with a wage freeze and the knowledge that these services continues unabated; more big lie in this government is trying to slowly eliminate their the context of continentalization. It is a sad state of service. That is only one example. So it is not just affairs for this province. this bill, Mr. Evans. There is one hopeful sign on the horizon. Mr. Leonard Evans: You also referred to Inevitably, the one thingabout our democracy that motivation for the legislation. Are you telling the this cynical government cannot avoid-take a look committee ultimately or basically that this legislation is based on ideology rather than on pragmatic in Saskatchewan if you want to see your future-is consideration? that sooner or later, it will have to face the people who elected it. This time, the labour movement will Mr. Shattuck: I do not think that it is based on be united as never before, and this time, the lie of either. I think it is based simply on the fact that they "what you see is what you ger will not be enough to have run a couple of arguments by their pollsters. I lull the voter into thinking that maybe the Filmon am sure they do polling on a regular basis. If the government is okay. This time, we will all know pollster told them that if they went after red-haired better. Thank you. people below five foot two, I am sure this government would be capable of mustering a Mr.Leonard Evans: Thank you, Mr. Shattuck,for campaign against those people. It has nothing to an excellent presentation with which I agree 1 00 do with anything except keeping and getting power. percent. Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you. I have asked I have a couple of questions. I have always had others this question, but I would like to put it to Mr. the view that Manitoba had a very excellent Civil Shattuck, and that is, what impact do you see this Service, an excellent public service and that legislation having on the provincial economy? Manitobans were generally well-served. You Mr. Shattuck: It has ·got to be negative. Those mentioned that with this legislation, it will have a millions of dollars that would have been put in for negative impact on morale and services could be people making low and medium wages, that money hurt. The quality of services could be hurt. will not be going into the economy. I do not know Could you elaborate on that? Could you give us why small business people support this kind of some more detail as to how you think services might legislation. They are the ones who are trying to sell be downgraded or will be downgraded through the their services. If people do not have six bucks for a impact of this legislation? movie, they are not going to go to that movie. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 93

I think one of these days-there was an Mr. Leonard Evans: I guess, basically, are you interesting example in Selkirk recently where the telling the committee that this is a bad piece of Selkirk Chamber of Commerce condemned the legislation? It should be withdrawn because it is recent government budget because they bad for the economy, but also it is anti-democratic understood that a million and a half dollars out of the and simply bad in terms of good Selkirk economy was going to be a major, major labour-management relations? problem for them. The Chamber of Commerce in Mr. Shattuck: Oh, it is horrendous. It takes us Selkirk seems to be alot more progressive than the back decades. Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, for example. Madam Chairman: Mr. Shattuck, may I ask you to • (2250) please pause. I am desperately trying to get in Mr. Leonard Evans: Others have referred to the before you start answering, but it is difficult for public sector being used as scapegoats. Are you Hansard. They are not able to distinguish between telling this committeethat, in your opinion, the public the voices. That is why we must identify each sector unions are being used as scapegoats, the speaker because there is simultaneous recording. public sector workers are being used as scapegoats Mr. Shattuck: Okay. I am sorry. for the incompetence that we are seeing in this administration? Madam Chairman: Thank you. Please proceed. Mr. Shattuck: Certainly. The government does Mr. Shattuck: I really do not have anything else to not want to talk about our grossly unfair taxation say except that the legislation cannot be amended. system. They do not want to talk about all of the It cannot be improved. The only solution is to defeat patronage they are involved in, the pork barreling, the legislation or drop the legislation and get back the political appointments. They want to talk about to the bargaining table. That is all we are asking. It what a bunch of fat cats civil servants are, and I think is very simple. that is grossly unfair and I think it is cruel. Mr.Leonard Evans: Thank you very much. Mr. Leonard Evans: From your knowledge of Madam Chairman: Louis Lapointe. Mr. Lapointe labour movement and labour relations in the is a rural presenter who indicated he would appear province, how does Manitoba compare with the on Saturday. Joan Lyons. Ms. Lyons, you may other provinces in Canada with respect to days lost proceed. through strikes, work stoppages, lockouts, et Ms. Joan Lyons {Private Citizen): Thank you. cetera? My name is Joan Lyons. As a private citizen, I am Mr.Shattuck: During the periodwhen FOS was in here to voice my concerns about Bill 70. I have force, I know Manitoba had one of the very, very best never appeared before a legislative committee rates in the country in terms of days lost to work before, but the very real fear I have about this stoppage. I do not think that is any longer going to regressive legislation has made this presentation be the case. I think we can look forward to a much necessary. more embittered atmosphere for labour relations, Bill 70 is antiunion, anti labour. It is an including in the private sector, because of the bad unconscionable attackon the collective bargaining signals that this government is sending out. rights of workers in Manitoba. I am one of those For the future, again, take a quick look at workers. I work in the health care field, not as a Saskatchewan. Those people have been battered nurse, as is the usual assumption. I am a carpenter. and beaten by the Devine regime for some years I work in the maintenance department at the Health now, and I can tell you, I do not think that one person Sciences Centre. I belong to a union, the is left. I was in Regina recently. I do not think there International Union of Operating Engineers, Local is one person left in that city who would vote 827. Conservative. In 1988, I was one of the 1 06 workers who went These people better be careful because there are on strike for seven weeks. Strikes are not always a lot of people involved in the public service in this just about money increases. They are a sometimes province, more than 10 percent. They all have necessary part of the collective bargaining process. relatives. They all have friends. When you beat There are other basic rights and principles involved, them up, they do not forget. clauses that ensure job security, promote benefits, 94 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

and others to stop the erosion of workers' rights. management at the Health Sciences Centre During my time on the picket line, I resolved to received a 3 percent increase this year. become more involved in the bargaining process Bill 70 is antiunion, it is antilabour, and what we during the next contract negotiations. In March of need is antifreeze. Thank you. last year, I signed up for a course at the labour education weekend sponsored by the Winnipeg The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Dacquay): Are there Labour Council. I plan to add my name to the list of any questions? nominees for the negotiating committee. The Mr. Hlckes: I just would like to thank you for your course is called: Collective Bargaining Tactics. presentation here. As you stated, you have not ever I found it very interesting and very informative, presented before a committee before, and I would especially the video presentation, "The hypothetical just like to commend you for your presentation. I bargaining scenario," the management team, with really enjoyed it, andit is nice to see a woman in a their proposals, meeting the union team with their different field than what has been accepted by the proposals, and the exchange of those proposals. public or recognized by the public. The union and management proposals were just I just wanted to ask you, when you were preparing that, proposals, offers, a starting point for the for your presentation, did you have any consultation give-and-take, and the compromise approach that with your other co-workers? is collective bargaining. Ms. Lyons: Not with this, my speech. I think that Our committee started last June gathering was the feeling that I felt and the negotiating information from our members, what they wanted, committee's frustration knowing that our agreement their hopes, fears, ideas, such as improved parental is nothing, but I think that what I can go on is by talk leave, safety allowance. We eventually drafted the at coffee time and stuff like that, that it is a very Health Sciences Centre maintenance unit proposal. low-morale situation. It is frustrating and it is All of the units in our union, the Misericordia disheartening, after all this time, to have a Hospital, Grace Hospital, et cetera, and the units in noncontract. the Health Sciences Centre, including the Mr. Hlckes: I just have one more question. I would biomedical, energy centre and occupational just like to, with your coffee-shop talk and stuff, therapy, were at a central table with the MHO. Our being employed at the Health Sciences Centre and unit was to bargain locally, our unit by itself with the also being exposed to other bargaining units, is Health Science Centre management, or so we there any coffee-shop talk of any fear extending to thought. The government stepped in to say their other units? offerwould be zero and two. Ms. Lyons: I think the other unions are very much In January 1991 , the central table units voted to concerned. I know CUPE made a presentation go on strike for a more equitable offer. The yesterday, and I think it is something that has spread maintenance unit has a strike mandate, and we across the whole health care field. It is something choose to pull overtime and standby. We are in a if they have an agreement already or if they are legal strike position but want to continue the talks. having one that is coming up in the near future. After 60 days, we are eligible to apply final offer selection, an option that Premier Filmon has (Mr. Chairman in the Chair) extended to March 1991 , our only option and a Mr. Hlckes: I would just like to thank you for your viable option that we believe in. To be so presentation. wrong-all the hard work, the long hours that the Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Ms. Lyons, I, too, appreciate negotiating committee members, myself as an you coming forward, this being the first time. My alternate, the time spent away from your family-all question is in regard to the Minister of Rnance (Mr. for nothing. Manness) where, in particular, the government has I just do not mean the zero percent. It is the said that the public sector compared to the private principle. You do not change the rules in the middle sector is in fact overpaid. I would ask you, in terms of the game. We have won the final selection of your profession, that you are with the government award, but Bill 70 negates it. It is all the more as a carpenter, do you feel that you make frustrating to win and have a loss legislated, but it is considerably more than what your counterparts even more frustrating to know that the nonunion would in the private sector? July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 95

Ms. Lyons: No, not at this moment. The last be devastating for many thousands of workers in the contract, we were trying to get wage parity with the province of Manitoba, small business and, in university, and I know that is something we are not general, the economy by removing disposable close on. income. Mr. Chairman: No further questions. Thank you In my case, I have specific concerns. I am a very much, Ms. Lyons. At this time, we will move on member of Office Professional Employees to No. 15, David Densmore, No. 16, Bruce Mackay. International Union. In my bargaining group we Do you have a writtenpresentat ion, Mr. Mackay? In have two members in Manitoba. As we have that case, if you could present it to the clerk, she will members in six provinces across Canada, we are distribute it to the committee, and when the voluntarily certified in Ontario. We are presently committee has it in their hands, we will start. negotiating with the employer. In reading Clause Go ahead, Mr. Mackay. 9(1 )(b) which states, and I quote: "extending the * (2300) application of all or any part of this Act to any Mr.Bruce Mackay (Private Citizen): I wish to say collective agreement on any terms and conditions thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. My that the Lieutenant Governor in Council considers name is Bruce Mackay, and I am appearing as a appropriate;" private citizen. I will bespeaking in opposition to Bill This gives the government of Manitoba the right 70. if they want to roll back our gains, which will be My basic premise is that wage restraints do not higher than the legislation defines, and makes us work. They only provide additional hardship in the who are workers in Manitoba second class citizens. form of loss of wages, spending power and A person doing exactly the same job in another disposable income to those groups affected, in this province will not be rolled back, nor is he in any case, initially to public sector workers. Before danger of being rolled back. taking my current position in the private sector, I was employed by the federal government, so I well What will the governmentdo to my employer if the remember the days of six and five and the employer refuses to roll back my wages? The anti-inflation board. This policy was a disaster for employer is in Ontario. Will the government send a public sector workers. Federal workers have not team of goons to Ontario to drag the employer back caught up since those days, andmany were driven to Manitoba to be somehow disciplined? Whoever under the poverty line. Prices were not controlled, was responsible for drafting this legislation should and the fat cats got fatter. admit it was a mistake. Throw it in the garbage and Not only is this government intending to freeze apologize to the people of Manitoba for the many wages, but it is asking public sector workers initially millions of dollars wasted in an attemptto deny one and all workers eventually to pay double tax. The small segment of the provincial work force's free government is placing the burden of paying for collective bargaining rights. This is what it is all public services squarely on the shoulders of those about. The Rlmon government is admitting that who provide the services. they are not competent to go to the bargaining table On Sunday evening I watched on Newsworld the and negotiate a contract, so they must say, if I TVprogr am, Workweek, during which Bill 70 and the cannot win, I will sulk like a spoiled child and take whole issue of public sector wage restraint by baseball and go home. legislation was discussed. It is interesting to note This is not a child's game. It affects many that this government did not have the courage to people's lives, aspirations for both themselves and send a representative. Be that what it may, it should be noted that even the economist representing the their children. It is a vengeful, sadistic piece of Chamber of Commerce had difficulty with this legislation that has the potential of affecting every legislation. It was stated that public sectorworkers worker and/or driving employers who have offices are not responsible for the recession. In fact, wages in other provinces to shut down their offices in among provincial and/or federal workers represent Manitoba rather than be dragged back to the a very small percentage of government spending. province of Manitoba for not implementing 9(1 )(b), This is more of a PR campaign which in the end will if required soby the Lieutenant Governor in Council. 96 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

The provincial Progressive Conservativesshould disgruntled employees in Manitoba. The question be ashamed, ashamed, ashamed of themselves for that I have for the government of the day is, what this Draconian legislation. are you going to do if the employer says, screw you, Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Mackay. There I am not going to roll backmy workers wages? This might be a number of questions. 9(1 )(b) is not enforceable. Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you , Mr. Mackay, for Mr. Leonard Evans: So, what you are suggesting your interesting presentation, and I certainly agree is the solution is to withdraw the bill. with your comments. Just to get you to elaborate Mr. Mackay: Yes, throw it in the garbage and start on some points, though, are you telling us in your over again--or not start over again. Just throw it in brief that really you do not see this legislation being the garbage and ignore it. Sorry. compatible with the so-called free market that we are always talking about in our province and in the Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, I would like to country? We talk about freedom of enterprise, ask Mr. Mackay, how important-we talked about freedom of people to enter intocontrac ts, freedom nonmonetary items as opposed to wage items, of people to do their own thing in the economic wage settlement-how important are the sector. Are you telling us that, in effect, this type of nonmonetary items, because all of those are frozen legislation totally goes against the grain, is totally or are affected by this legislation as well, to your contradictory to that so-called free market members? approach? Mr. Mackay: To our members, on the last two Mr. Mackay: It is certainly contradictory to the rounds of bargaining that we have been involved in, approach of free collective bargaining, which those we have not opted for wages in particular. We have of us who have been unionized, or involved with opted for benefits, and we have concentrated our unions most of our lives, believe to be a fundamental efforts on increased benefits. Certainly, if that is pillar. frozen it will certainly take away people's rights to We have the right tosit down across the table from negotiate dental plans, eye care plans, audio plans. our employer to try to work out the best deal possible You know, all these are important because we are in an atmosphere where we are equals. This is quickly becoming an aging work force. giving one side a sledge hammer and removing that Nonmonetary items in those areas are certainly whole principle of free collective bargaining. important to everybody. Mr. Leonard Evans: How large is your particular Mr.Leonard Evans: Again, I would like to ask you union? the question that I have asked some of the other delegations, and thatis, in your opinion, how doyou Mr. Mackay: In my bargaining group we have 38 think this legislation will affect the provincial members scattered across Canada: 17 in Ottawa and the rest scattered across the country. economy? Mr. Leonard Evans: I would imagine then, what Mr. Mackay: I think in the CUPE brief last night the consequence of this bill would be-l am asking they had specific figures about how much income or Mr. Mackay: Would the consequence of this bill be disposable income it is going to remove from the to cause the workers in Manitoba to decline in terms provincial economy. As somebody said before me, of wage levels vis-a-vis their counterparts in your small business should be up in arms about this union in the other provinces? legislation, especially in areas where there is a large provincial government presence. That income is Mr. Mackay: Certainly. We are at the bargaining going to be taken out of that economy and certainly table now. If we negotiate a 6 percent increase, and people will not be able to go to shows, or to go to the government of the day, in their wisdom, decide restaurants as often, or to buy luxury items. It will to implement 9(1 )(b) against Office Professional be devastating to some of those communities. Employees International Union 225, and rolls back the two members in Manitoba, my counterpartwho Mr. Leonard Evans: There has been some does the same job in Edmonton will, in essence, be reference to a sunset clause, but I gather that is not making more wages and we will feel li ke satisfactory, that what you are saying is, second-class citizens. I do not think that is good for categorically, get rid of the legislation. Is that what our employer. The employer does not want you are saying? July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 97

Mr. Mackay: Yes, I think we are all becoming very wage freeze has never solved anything. It has only cynical of this government, and any government that been a detrimental effect on those affected. It also purports to try to negotiate with their workers, and is a licence, in my opinion here, to print money for then turns around and slugs them over the head with unscrupulous businessmen's companies and Bill 70. I mean, can you trust anything? governments to make political hay. Mr. Leonard Evans: Thanks very much. There is another point that I would like to see, and

• (231 0) that is government not having any credibility with the people I know. Howcan a government propose this Mr. Chairman: Any further questions? If not, type of legislation, and also make changes to the thank you very much, Mr. Mackay. We will now social services through the child care workers that move on to No. 17, Darrell MacKenzie. Darrell are very lowly paid, by eliminating the salary MacKenzie? We will put him back on. No. 18, enhancement grants and allowing the centres or Hugh Connelly-Mr. Connelly is coming forward. directors of that centre to use the money as they see Do you have a written brief, Mr. Connelly? fit? In my employ, I work at the Health Sciences Mr. Hugh Connelly, Private Citizen: No, Mr. Centre as a plumber. I have been in private and Chairman, I just got the callat six o'clock tonight, public sector, working in it. I find it very hard to go and I just had some notes. If that is okay, can I read to work and work with middle management who can from them? turn around and say they have 3 percent wage Mr.Chairman: No problem, just go ahead and we increase without any negotiations, and they are not wiii- rolled back. Mr. Connelly: Thank you. My name is Hugh The other thing is that the government'sargument Connelly. I am a private citizen and I would like to going in-and one of their main arguments was that voice my opposition against Bi11 70. the arbitrators were toolenient with the unions. The One of the main reasons I am here Is that I am arbitrators were supposed to be neutral going into also a taxpayer. Bill 70 here is infringing on my the arbitration process. If the arbitrators have been rights to gain a reasonable standard of living by judged to be settled more on the labour side, hampering my union to negotiate through the obviously it shows that the government's case must process of free collective bargaining. As a be very weak. That is ali i can say. taxpayer, this government has raised taxes every Thank you very much. chance it can and with its policy of trying to Mr. Chairman: We will have questions, if you do implement a policy of restricting the wages, how can not mind. a taxpayer bear the cost of these things? You are restricting my chances of earning and exercising a Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you for presentation, reasonable standard of living. Mr. Connelly. You made some referenceto binding I would also like to say, if this government is arbitration. Do you think that would be a superior serious about its fiscal management policy, it should approach? Are you saying that this would be a impose similar types of sanctions on all sections of superior approach to this particular legislation? society: the business section, the industrial section, Mr. Connelly: I would think binding the professional section and the political section of arbitration-we have been through that process society. This government should be seen, or tried within the Health Sciences Centre before. Binding to be seen, as to be fair to all sections of society, not arbitration is the lesser of two evils, as I see it. At just some of the political and favoured. There is this present time, binding arbitration is certainly a lot Rotary Pines which is one, as a taxpayer, that I find better than what we are getting here. This bill is quite obnoxious. Draconian. If this bill was only a wage freeze, but it The infringement on my rights as a union-how is certainlynot any wage freeze. Everything else is can a union bargain in good faith when the under the table. Nobody can see what this bill is, government stated before the commencement of and nobodycan trust this government here just now bargaining sessions that there will be no raises for to follow through with just saying what it says on top any government union and then proceed to of the table. This government has got clauses in negotiate through the media? In my opinion, a there that they can say, okay, we can do anything 98 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

we want after this, and God knows how long it is Mr. Chairman: Ken Guilford, Mr. Ken Guilford. going to go on. Have you got a written presentation, Ken? Mr. Leonard Evans: I would take it that at the Mr. Ken Guilford (Private Citizen) : Yes I do. Health Sciences Centre that your fellow workers, Mr. Chairman: If you could just present it to the your union, is notdirectly affectedby this atthis time. clerk, and we will distribute it. Mr. Connelly: It certainly is. One of the past Mr. Guilford: I will do that. speakers is also within the local I am in, and we went to final offerselection and were awarded 4.5, which Mr. Chairman: I am glad to see you do not need a in this present climate I do not think if unfair. I would mike. not say it was great, but we can live with it. We were Mr. Guilford: You are right. not asking for any more than that at the present time, * (2320) but we were certainly in the rollback, so we have been affected. Mr. Chairman: One thing I will explain, Ken. I should have explained this earlier for the Mr.Leonard Evans: What about the nonmonetary presenters. The reason I am calling the names side of it? We are talking about wages, but how back and forth, it is for Hansard to be able to cut into important for you is the fact that the nonmonetary and know where the splice lines are when the side is also impacted by the legislation? presenters are coming forward. Mr.Connelly: I think the nonmonetary side of it has Mr. Guilford: So this is being recorded? a bigger part fora lot of people because the way the tax system just now is, if you can negotiate benefits, Mr. Chairman: That is correct, Ken. better dentalcare, eyeglasses, footwear, protective Mr. Guilford: Oh good, good. clothing, it certainly is a lot better. It makes your Mr. Chairman: Go ahead. work safer; it is a better environment. They have a big impact on working people's lives, Mr.Guilf ord: Too bad we do not have a camera. and I think that the nonmonetary aspects are of as Can I get a camera sometime? great importance as the money. Mr.Chairman: No, not tonight, Ken. Mr. Leonard Evans: As a matter of interest, Mr. Mr. Guilford: Members of the Legislative Chairman, I wonder if Mr. Connelly could tell us how Assembly dealing with Biii ?O, Iadies and gentlemen long was his union bargaining before this legislation in the audience, I would like to say that I am was brought in? speaking to you, not only as a private citizen, but Mr. Connelly: I would say about six months from also as a concerned and angry person who dislikes the start. Bill 70. I am a working person who could be affected by this government action. Mr. Leonard Evans: At any rate, six and a half months- We, the people, want an honest government and one who believes in working people, not one who Mr.Connelly: No, six months. gives large increases in salary to the upper class Mr.Leonard Evans: Six months. Mr. Chairman, I while choosing to ignore the middle and lower would ask Mr. Connelly, I gather therefore that classes. Think about the Pines project, the money generally your fellow workers are very disillusioned to provincial judges, the money paid in salaries to and upset with what is being proposed here? the upper class jobs, not only federally but also Mr. Connelly: Certainly, very disillusioned. I provincially and on municipal positions, as well. would say disillusioned, upset, to what extent I We must find ways to not erode things anymore, cannot really say. There is an awful lot of but how can we improve them? Do yourselves a resentment within the work force just now. favour and help us-the middle and lower class Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you very much. people. We are not asking for a large amount of money. We only want to feel important and have Mr. Connelly: Thank you. enough money to survive on. It would be great if we Mr. Chairman: Any further questions? If not, could all be millionaires, but this country could not thank you very much, Mr. Connelly. survive this way. We want the ability to bargain with Mr. Connelly: Thank you. the province as well as in private industries. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 99

Workers are being blamed for an economic Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ken. I believe there situation created by Conservative governments might be a number of questions for you, Ken. both provincially and federally. This has been done Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you, Mr. Guilford, for through legislation like the GST, free trade and large the presentation and making your position very clear tax breaks for corporations. This is not a working in opposition to the legislation. So there are a lot of people's agenda but a Liberal and Conservative questions I would not have to ask because I know government's agenda. I am glad my MLA from exactly where he stands. But I was wanting to know Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) is laughing-! am sitting on from Mr. Guilford, do you see this as a threat to the Conservative side, that is good. In Manitoba, private sector unions as well? It is the public sector the Filmon Conservatives are now attacking the that is obviously directly affectedby this, but can you public sector workers in Bill 70 and reservethe right see a spillover into the private sector? to expand the legislation to other workers in the province if they deem that wage settlements get out Mr. Guilford: Yes, I can. Definitely. My city of hand. councillor, Chris Lorenc, is on recordas supporting the MGEA, the Manitoba Government Employees' It is ironic that workers who have the least control Association, and he also wants to do the same thing over the crisis that the country is in are the group with CUPE, Canadian Union of Public Employees. who is called on the most to turn it around. Where I work, I am a member of Canadian Auto Is anybodylistening? Everybody is talking, I was Workers, and I can see that same thing happening just wondering. That is good because I like to be with us. Thank you. listened to. Mr. Chairman: I would like to ask Mr. Guilford, is Conservative governments continually there a lot of discussion among your fellow workers implement their agenda and find that it does not about this legislation and what it means to the labour work, blame the workers for the problem, then move movement? to take away their rights. Mr, Guilford: They do not like it and they want it Manitoba has had, over the years, progressive stopped. I speak as a private person here now, labour legislation that has helped out the working understand now. people and the economy, social development and Mr. Leonard Evans: Yes, just to clarify, you said environment protection of our province. I am very you were with the automobile workers union, and disappointed that such a bill as Bill 70 has come to you are talking about people and your fellow this Legislative Assembly. It is a very regressive bill workers and yourself being in the private sector, not and I would hopethat the Progressive Conservative in the public sector. government would withdraw this bill and help out everyone, their friends included. Mr. Guilford: That is correct, andI speak more of the ones I am dealing with in Tyndall Park, but I am As the old saying goes, you can fool some of the setting up this Tyndall Park residence association. people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you have a very hard time fooling all of the Mr. Leonard Evans: I will ask Mr. Guilford the people all of the time. Another popular saying is, we question that I have asked some of the others. shall remember. This statement is a very good What do you think the impact of this legislation will statement that carries a very important significance have on the provincial economy? to me, as it should to all people. Mr. Guilford: I have stated clearly in my remarks Remember, an election is not that far away. beforehand, I think this Bill 70 is the worst thing that People will remember and they will not be fooled has ever come to this Legislative Assembly. I again as they were last September. They will not remember the strike in 1919. vote for a government that takes away their rights. Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you very much. That Remember. is ali i have. Thank you very much for your time. I would Mr. Lamoureux: I would like, first of all. to thank suggest that the present government do some Mr. Guilford, a constituent of mine, for taking the serious thinking on all of my statements and time coming forward this evening to talk on such a reconsider their position on Bill 70 and withdraw it. very important bill. But, in his remarks, I do have a Thank you. question regarding something with regard to the 100 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

Liberal Party. He talks about, that this is not a Mr. Guilford: That is very good, Kevin. I working people's agenda, but a appreciate that because when I committed to the Liberal-Conservative government agenda. I am producer of Video Channel 11 and we had a town wondering why he is of the opinion that it is a Liberal hall meeting on June 26-it is going to be broadcast Partyagenda, or part of a Liberal Party agenda? on July 27, Saturday morning at 10:30. Coming from you, sir, a man who quotes Stanley Knowles, Mr. Guilford: I am wondering, Kevin-Mr. and I can see a little bit-I am wondering, I am foggy, Lamoureux, I am sorry. The question coming from you who is sitting with your buddies, the I am confused, where are you? Where are the rest Conservatives. Now, we had a Canada Day of the Liberal Party? I see you are alone. That is why you are with the Conservatives. I can celebration and this program-! was raking along understand that. That is okay. with you-and this red program that came out, red I should say, nice colour but not for Canada Day, Mr. Lamoureux: We only have one on the and your wire was on the back of you- committee. Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Mr. Guilford, I Mr. Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Guilford. would like to remindyou that we are dealing with Bill Mr. Guilford: Thank you. 70, and I hope that the questions will be relevant Mr. Chairman: At this time we will now call No. 20, toward Bill 70 as well as the answers. Don Yurechuk; 21 , AnnetteMaloney. Ms. Maloney, Mr. Guilford: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. do you have a written presentation.

Mr.Lamoureu x: Mr. Chairperson, I am wondering * (2330} if Mr. Guilford is aware of what in fact the Liberal Ms.Annette Maloney (Private Citizen): No, I do Party'sposition is on Bill 70? not. Mr. Guilford: Not 100 percent, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Chairman: Then just carry on. Can you elaborate please? Ms.Maloney: I have come before you this evening Mr.Chairman: This is not a time for questions, Mr. as a former government employee-! actually was Guilford. He has asked you a question, and if you employed with the government for 20 years want to answer it, that is fine. If you do not, just state plus-and also as a citizen of this province. what you want. The purpose of my being here is to go on record Mr. Guilford: I can see where Mr. Lamoureux is as being opposed to Bill 70. In my view, this bill is sitting, so I am supposing and I am thinking it must without merit to freezing wages of employees, and be part of the Conservative agenda. They must it also suspends all bargaining, and that includes all agree with that in terms of where he is sitting. contract provisions as well, not to mention the erosion of some of the benefits that the employees Mr.Lamoureu x: Mr. Chairperson, I do not want to work so hard for. get into any type of lengthy debate, but I can assure the member that I am not a Conservative when I sit Further, it is a method of discredit of the public beside the Conservatives during the committee enterprise and public service and the role that they meeting, just like I am not a New Democratic when have played in the economy. I personally have I sit during Question Period alongside the New found this approach by submittinga bill such as Bill Democrats. 70, using such terminology which was used in the press release which, I think, is misleading. What it The Liberal Party'sposition opposes-we oppose actually says is that, although it is talking about Bill 70. We oppose it on two reasons. One is the everyone must share in that goal, that it is asking whole collective bargaining issue, and the other is the groups to participate. I hardly call this asking the freeze. when you are putting this bill before them. By doing I would suggest to you that the party can this, I believe you have removed a fundamental right represent the working-class people just as well as of collective bargaining and any other avenues that any other political party. I would offer that just more are open by Jaw. In my view, you will be well on your so as a comment to you, and I would be interested, way to removing any recognition of self-esteem or maybe not at this point, but in the future to hear from self-worth for any of the employees, of your own you on it. employees. Also, I honestly believe that you have July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 101

endorsed a misconception that civil servants are coming back to the House, but by actual changes of overpaid, underworked, and secure in life and the Order-in-Council, I think that has fairly great contemptuous of the public. impact. In my view, I think you have worn thin any trust. I have found this attitude, difficulty as an employee, when I was an employee, because it was I really do not have a lot more to say. I believe going on then as well, and continue to find this that you should not take lightly the fact that there difficult when I know how littlecredit is received and may be a lot of silence amongst government how insulting that is to put this when you care about employees at this moment, but rest assured that that what you do. does not mean that there is not a lot of unrest and a lot of undercurrents. Thisbill must be defeated, and No one ever mentions the expertise and the I would ask you to reconsider the approach and quality of delivery of the public functions. No one allow that democracy proceed. Thankyou for your also mentions the expectations of the delivery of attention. quality that is now expected with a lot less staff. Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you for the These employees are the employees who carry out presentation, Ms. Maloney. I was not quite clear. the government policies for you. They take the flak You said you were formerly with the provincial for the decisions that they did not call, and accept government, you no longer-are you with any public the abuse of decisions that are made by elected sector union at the present time? officials, and also are quite loyal to you even when theydo not agree. Ms. Maloney: Now I am working for the Manitoba Government Employees Association. Public sectors work and they pay taxes like anyone else and should not apologize for wanting Mr.Leonard Evans: I see. I was just wonderingif to work for a decent wage. As government you could comment on the morale of employees employees, past and present, they have accepted from your knowledge and understanding of public the approach of collective bargaining, but you have sector workers, provincial civil servants in the also hit them with a lot of extra in the past year, with province. Have you run into much conversation the decentralization, contracting out and also the where people are expressing concern, and have mass layoffs, not to mention some of the erosion of you detected that morale is being negatively some of the legislation such as child care and now affected? also with the centralization of Family Services Ms. Maloney: Well, there is no question that there Agencies. is a lot of unrest at this point. I think at the beginning I would have looked at it as a parallel to perhaps To impose a major responsibility on public sector what happened after the election of the workers about deficit being out of control implies an Conservatives under Sterling lyon when there was indifference in the attitude of these employees. To some layoffs, but I think this has gone much greater expect that they should sit back and accept a than that. I mean, there were some long memories legislation such as this also implies an indifference from that and rest assured I expect that will be one on what they think. I have not seen you or any other of the implications from what is occurring at this previous government in Manitoba put up with a lot point, because it is not just Bill 70. I mean, this is of strikes from these people. sort of the final stroke because there have been the I also believe that it is hypocritical to have the layoffs, there has been the decentralization and, leader of the government at this point and his quite frankly, there is no guarantee that there will not cabinet ministers to go to greater lengths to use be more of that coming. So this bill, I think, has just campaign footage, which has been done in the past, been the final insult. and statements that they will not interfere with Mr. Leonard Evans: In effect, you are saying that collective bargaining, and also that they happen to workers in the provincial Civil Serviceare upset with care what happens to workers. Instead, let us make the layoffs, the extensive layoffs thathave occurred it clear that we have a leader and, I believe, the and that now this is coming down the line, that it is government of the day that change the rules midway almost like the final straw, the proverbial straw. in the game with no respect to democracy. When you look at the list ofthe effectsand the implications • (2340) of this legislation that can be changed, not by Ms. Maloney: That is correct. 102 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, I would like to Mr. Chairman: No further questions? Thank you ask if Ms. Maloney has any comment on how very much, Ms. Maloney. We will now carry on to Manitobawage levels in the public service compare No. 22, Mr. John Lang. Wade Cudmore, number with those outside of Manitoba? 23; 24, Rick Panciera; 25, Bonnie Korzeniewski; 26, Ms.Maloney: Well, the comparisons obviously are Jan Marie Graham; 27, Bruce Buckley? He is here. done and of course when they are at the collective Do you have a written presentation, Mr. Buckley? bargaining sessions, they are advised as to what is Mr.Bruce Buckley (Private Citizen): Sorry, I do going on across the provinces but I think, at this not, Mr. Chairperson. point, what is the more disconcertingpoint is the fact Mr. Chairman: Then just carry on, Mr. Buckley. that they have not been allowed to proceed through bargaining. So I guess you have to say that they Mr. Buckley: Mr. Chairperson and members of the have been told that what you are worth is zero committee, I would like to thank you for this percent. So it is not a matter at this point of even opportunityto come and speak on Bill 70. I am here saying well, look, let us continue bargaining and let to oppose the bill in principle, and I would urge the us see what we can do at this point, and also government to reconsider its course of action which continue to compare ourselves across from other this bill sets upon the province of Manitoba and provinces. That decision has been taken out of their withdraw it. hands along with this bill. I am here tonight, not because I work for a union, Mr. Leonard Evans: Do you think that this bill, if it which is the MGEA, or because I belong to a union. goes through, would lead to lower efficiency in the I am here because I feel this is bad legislation, and public sector, generally? I feel that it is important as a citizen to speak out Ms.Maloney: Well, I would think, having been an against it, to basically defend the principles of employee myself in government, that you are really democracy which I hold fairly dearly, which I feel this always going to be trying to maintain that level that bill treads on. you have set of your own standards, but it Is very I think this legislation strays from the norm in our difficultto do that when you have also had a cut of democracy and is a dangerous precedent. This bill staff at the same time. So when you are becoming takes power from the Legislature to be used by demoralized, I think it is unreasonable to expect cabinet for the government of the day to have its way them to maintain that same quality or same with the people who have placed their trust in this efficiency. I mean, it is bound to go at one point, but government at election time without the checks and to say that they would take this defeatist attitudeand balances of the Legislature. I speak specifically of that we would see an immediate downhill, I would Section 8, sub 2, 3 and 4 and Section 9 of the bill. I not say that, but I think it would be unreasonable for believe these sections breach the fundamental trust us to expect that quality will not change. that the electorate has put in the Legislature to carry Mr. Leonard Evans: There has been reference on the affairs of the province, and I think it crosses earlier to the sunset-clause approach limiting the the line of what is acceptable in our democracy and legislation to a specific one year. Do you have any needlessly takes away the rights of people to comment on this? bargain collectively in a free and fair manner. I think it is fundamentally unfair to the workers that the bill Ms. Maloney: I do not see it as being limited, is directed at. simply because I know the changes can occur. I quite frankly do not see that as any comfort at all. Others in their presentations last night and this That is the way that I would say the workers are evening have dwelt on this aspect of the bill. I would seeing it as well. like to spend my time before the committee tonight kind of talking to you about some of the people Mr.Leonard Evans: So what you are saying is you are reflecting what the workers are saying, and that whose wages you have frozen, what they do for is the bill should be dropped and the government these wages, and how much they are paid for their efforts. This bill specifically writes in the St. Amant should return to the bargaining table. Centre for example, I assume because it gets the Ms. Maloney: Let them go back to the bargaining bulk of its funding through the Department of Family table. Servicesapart from the money that is raised by the Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you very much. community which supports the work of the centre. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 103

For those of you who do not know the centre, it is themselves due to their handicap. She makes a very special facility in Manitoba with very special $12,000 a year and has the same expenses as you, workers who look after some very special children Mr. Chairman, as have I. Yet her wages are frozen. who are severely handicapped and require constant Sue is a part-time nurses' aide. She makes care. The workers who work at St. Amant are not $1 7,000 a year, works four days a week, and her what I would call high-priced civil servants. In my goal is to try and get more hours to make up for the view, they are not overpaidfor the work that they do, lost wages because her children, who are going to and they are certainly not underworked. university, could not get a job this summer, so she Unfortunately, they are lumped in with the general will be trying to put extra effort to get those kids view of the people who are directed at this bill as through. kind of overpaid and lazy. This is clearly not the case. Bertha is in the daycare. She makes $21 ,000 a year, and she is ready to retire. She told me that These people have dedicated their working life to she will have to work for another year in order that the special care and the nurturing of children who she can best provide for her retirement. are under their care, and I would like you to meet some of them tonight through me. I have taken the Generally, when I approached the people at St. time to talk to some of the workers who are there, Amant, I thought their main concern would be the and I would like to kind of introduce you to a few of fact that their wages were frozen and that they would them. be trying to make ends meet with less money, no increase for inflation, GST, et cetera. I was For example, Maria is a personal care attendant surprised actually to learn that was not their main at St. Amant. Her job is to look after the clothing concern. Their main concern was, what impact is needs of the children under her care. She washes this going to have on their ability to negotiate job the clothes, irons them, takes the children shopping security in the future, to protect themselves from to make sure that they have proper clothes, for those contracting out so that they will have a job, and other who do not have parents to look after them. She issues which are not what I would call monetary and has been there for twenty years. She makes basically notself-centr ed. Their main concernwas $20,000 a year, and her wages are frozen. Her the attackthat this bill has on their ability to bargain mortgagehas gone up just like yours or mine. It has collectively and to negotiate with their employer for to be renewed. Her Hydro bills go up; the Autopac the future. goes up, and she is paying GST like everyone else. She is carrying her share of the burden. * (2350) Kathy is a nurse's aide. She has been working at Basically, these people are frightened. They do St. Amant Centre with the children for 10 years. not know what the government's intention is. The Kathy's job is to work with the children, to wash bill is very wide-reaching, and it is not clear what the them, to dress them, to motivate them, to feed them, intent is and where it ends, and how long it is going to care for them. To look after children who are to be for. Those are some of the concerns that I found at St. Amant. severely handicapped is very demanding, both emotionally and physically, for Kathy. She makes I have taken some time to let you know some of $20,867 a year for her efforts. Kathy is pregnant the people that I have worked with at St. Amant or with twins, and her husband has been laid off from that I know from St. Amant, and I ask the committee his factory job due to free trade. After her mat leave, and the government to consider the impact these Kathy will be supporting her family on her frozen workers and their families are now faced with Bi11 70 wages. Yet she is still there providing the as they try and keep their households together,their continuing care to the special family at St. Amant. families fed and clothed, and carry on to provide the Sandra is a feeding assistant. She has been care, the high level of care, to our society's special working at St. Amant for the last four years. She is children. a sole support, an older woman who was I got a call from another person who I am abandoned by her husband a few years ago and is acquainted with in another facility across town at the putting her life back together. Her job at St. Amant Sharon Home. Ted is an activity worker, and he is to help the nurses and the nurses' aides feed the works with the Alzheimer's victims at the home children and the infants who cannot feed trying to bring some dignity to their lives and work 104 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

with them so that they could help deal with the election time: We said we would not increase taxes. position that they find themselves in. It is a very And my observation is, Mr. Buckley, that when special job that Ted has and requires an inordinate increases go forward, it is always the very same amount of skill and patience. Ted makes $20,000 people whom you are talking about who always get a year as well, from which he feeds andclothes his hurtthe most on the tax side. As a matter of fact, spouse and his four children. Ted asked me to ask my predecessor, you may know him, Mr. Kostyra, the committee to reconsider the freeze so at least brought in the tax on net income, and that attacked his family can get some protection from the cost of those very same people you were talking about. I living. He is not asking for the moonand neither are do not make that as a political statement; the reality the people at St. Amant. They are asking to be able is it seems to be the way it is. to negotiate basically a fair wage to combatthe cost So we had a judgment call and that was, do we of living which we are all faced with. honour our commitment to the people not to Basically, why I am here tonight is to ask the increase taxes? Ofcourse, to increase the deficit is committee and ask the Legislature to consider the nothing more than an increase in taxes. If it is not burden and the jobs that the people that are working today, it is in the future. in the health care facility and the Civil Service,and So I ask you, what does a government do when it other things-they are not highly paid people; they are doing very important jobs; they are essential has no revenue, and it has made a commitment not to increase taxes? Inevitably, the increase in those jobs-and basically let you know the impact that this taxes, whether they are corporate or otherwise, bill is having on those people or potentially will have attacksthe very same people you addressed in your on these people. I think it is incumbent on presentation, and, believe me, I believe every one Legislatures when they are passing laws to be of your comments around those people to be true. aware of the impact of these laws on the people that What does a government do when it has absolutely are being affected by then, and on the community no revenue growth, when it does not want to lay as a whole. additional people off, when it wants to try and I feel that this legislation betrays the trust that the provide the services that people want? What people have put in the Legislature, andI would urge choice does it have but to ask everybody to share? you to reconsider this legislation. It is bad If you have another alternative, given that we had legislation; it is unnecessarily heavy-handed; and it promised the people that we would not increase gives power to Cabinet which is unprecedented and taxes, I would ask you to share it with me. a dangerous practice for Legislatures to engage in. Mr. Buckley: Mr. Chairman, through you to my It is beyonda simple wage freeze. You are rolling honourable friend the minister. Rrst of all, I would back arbitrated settlements, and you are taking like to address the comment about the away rights which have been hard won. I would Order-in-Council which, I assume, was brought in urge you to withdraw the bill. Thank you for your by the Schreyer government-it was before my time time. in Manitoba, I cannot comment on that specific bill. Mr.Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Buckley. There are However, I would be equally outraged if a a number of questions, I believe. government did that as well, and to be fair to the government of the day at the time, I am not aware Mr. Manness: Mr. Buckley, I do not discount any of the circumstances. portion of your presentation. I say, though, you would be terribly outraged then if we had passed an However, I would like to point out to you that I was Order-in-Council without even bringing forward a in the work force in the AlB years; and, while it was bill. Indeed, it occurred under Mr. Schreyer in 1975; not a pleasant process, there was an appeal then you would be completely outraged. mechanism. The union I worked for at the time did go to Ottawa, and there was an appeal mechanism But, beyond that, a number of presenters tonight where we could put our case to the AlB, the have made the point, and you did also, that we have Anti-Inflation Board; and, if the cases merited, the broken faith with the people, that we did not honour board did allow some things. our commitments. Other presenters particularly have said that during election time we did not say The other thing I would point out with that whole certainthings. We did say one thing, though, during anti-inflation exercise that the Liberal government July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 105

brought in and forced on the people of Canada, was tried, by the way, because I know the previous that there was some element, although it was a very government did, as well. There are no magic shabby one, of price controls as well. This formulas. I do not have an easy answer for you. bill-there is no appeal process to it, there is no I guess the one comment I would make is that the attempt to control the prices or, for that matter, the government is asking its workers and the people increase in hydro costs or others that are being who are paid from the public purse to share the forced onto people. burden, and I do not want to get into the political With respect to the problem the government gutter. Be astute when you are making your faces, and I am not unsympathetic to the problem decisions. Is it necessary to spend the money on that you do have, you claim your revenues are flat The Pines project? Is it necessary to bring in the and that the revenue is not growing. Where is the appointments that you are bringing in? All given in the system? I would suggest to you that the governments do it. Is it necessary? You have flat tax, if you like, that was brought in by the some control over that. previous government, did go some way to address • (0000) the revenue problems that the province did have. Portionsofthattax, l do believe, have been repealed Basically, your approach is to be fiscally or thence given back. responsible. I see the Minister of Education (Mr. Derkach) sittinghere tonight. Bi11 49 is a licence to Mr. Manness: I have not repealed any partof it. go in debt for community colleges. I cannot believe Mr.Buckley: Okay. The other suggestion I would that a government that is that concerned about have to you then has basically been raised by a expenditures would be letting go of control of the number of other speakers-when you are looking at community college system like that bill doesfor you. the tax system, or the revenue side of your budget, I cannot believe it. Some bureaucrat has done a to make it fair, to make sure that everyone is paying real job on you guys. It is nuts. their fair share. To do that, I think you will find that Mr. Leonard Evans: I thank Mr. Buckley for his there are leakages in your system where people are interesting presentation. I would gather from your not paying their way that could be tightened up. remarks then, you are saying that while you have I think your own department, with the sales tax, many complaints with this legislation, basically you the fuel tax, could be probably more diligent to make are telling the government that it is really not fair, it sure that people are paying their way, and just is not equitable because it is hurting, it is generally when you are looking at your tax side of discriminating against one particular group in the equation, in conjunction with your federal society, namely the public sector workers that you counterparts-! know you do not have the powers described in your comments, some of those that the federal government does have when it individuals who are going to be negatively affected. comes to taxation-that you fight using the So basically what you see, there are different resources of the province and your provincial reasons for opposing this legislation, but one of counterparts to try and get a better deal on the them-is this correct?-one of the basic reasons revenue sharing formula. why we should oppose it in the legislature is Your federal cousin got himself a fairly big tax hit because it is basically inequitable? with the GST, a new revenue source, I would say. I Mr. Buckley: Through you to the honourable do not know whether we are getting any revenue member, that is correct. Basically you are asking sharing from that or whether there is any inclination people who are making $20,000 a year to take no to assist the provinces that have been cut back on increase, yet like the government-employed doctors the transfer payments over the past two years, who have already negotiated their settlement, that whether there is any inclination at the is okay. There are other people who have not been federal-provincial level to renegotiate or to review frozen. It is not equal and, unfortunately, not that additional revenue that the federal government everybody makes $35,000 to $40,000 a year. I has got. I am notsure. I do not know. mean, there are people who are working in the I would suggest that there may be an opportunity health care facilities and in your own Civil Service to relook at some of the federal-provincial formulas who are making less than $20,000 a year. It is very that we have got. I am not saying that you have not difficult to freeze those wages when the input costs, 106 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 1 0, 1991

if you like, that people have to deal with are the same I guess what you would say is go back to the for the same people that are making bargaining table and see what happens. $35,000-$40,000 a year. Mr. Buckley: Mr. Chairperson, that is right. I There is no line. It might be one thing to take a mean, there was no collective bargaining this time look at the higher earning people in the public sector around really. It was a sham. The government is and negotiate maybe varying raises with people, saying to the people and to the union through its zero for some and some for those at the lesser public press releases and through this bill, we have scale. Maybe that is the way to go. Unfortunately, got a problem. Well, then come to the bargaining this bill prevents that from happening. It stops table and let us talk about your problem and see collective bargaining. There is no way to equalize what we can do to deal with it. That is the way a it� and this hits people making $50,000 a year the private sector employer would deal with it; that is the same way it does people making $20,000. That is way the government should deal with it. not fair. I do not believe over the years that the MGEA and Mr. Leonard Evans: Nevertheless, I guess you other unions have been unreasonable, and I also do would make the point, but I will ask you, that not believe governments, be it an NDP government primarily you are concerned that it takes away the or a Conservative government, have given away the collective bargaining process which could have led store. I mean, by and large, people are not possibly to a zero increase or very modest increase, irresponsible. I think in that spirit, in the spirit that and something that happened a few years ago we have had in the past in this province, collective where the MGEA took a zero increase but got job bargaining should have been allowed to work. This security in return for it. So there was something bill is not necessary and goes well beyond a wage meaningful, but nevertheless did not put an upward freeze. pressure on government spending. Mr. Leonard Evans: In your discussions with Mr. Buckley: Mr. Chairman, through you to the specific employees or specific members of the Honourable Mr. Evans, that is quite correct. I mean, union, specific public sector workers, do you get the unfortunately, Mr. Olien was here tonight and I impression that they are fully aware of what this guess, basically, kind of described the way legislation does, and have you detected any impact collective bargaining went with this round with the on the level of morale? I have asked these Civil Service master agreement. There was no questions of others, but I would like to get your collective bargaining. The union-and I am not feelings on this. here speaking for the union-but in the past, the Mr. Buckley: Mr. Chairperson, through you to Mr. union has taken the government's fiscal situation Evans, to answer your question to the best of my into concern, has negotiated a zero, but in tradeoff ability. the people that I deal with, both in the health for an additional week of holidays which could be care sector and in the Civil Service, the reaction handled from within or, for example, traded a zero ranges from confusion to anger to fear to a lack of for job security. Unfortunately, and I do not know understanding of what they have done wrong, and whether it was deliberate or what, but the why is this happening to me? government's last offer was job security after the layoffsfor a year. So it was kind of a nonoffer really. As for morale, the reason why I guess I chose to speak to the committee about some of the people I I mean, that is the good thing about collective work with at the St. Amant Centre and in the health bargaining. People come to the table and the care field, is that the employees who are delivering government puts its position forward, the union puts the services for the government and looking after its position forward, and bargaining takes place, and our vulnerable adults and vulnerable children are they saw off at something we can live with. That is very dedicated people. They do not make a lot of not going to happen here. money. They come to work. They work in some Mr. Leonard Evans: So ultimately I guess what I very, very difficult circumstances, both emotionally can take from what you have said is that Mr. and physically. Is it affectingthe morale? I think, to Manness or the government really does not face the be fair, the people I represent and the people I work dilemma that he has posed. He posed a dilemma with in these places are very professional and they to you, but what should the government be doing? will soldier on, but the fear of the unknown, the fear July 1 0, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 107

of the future-this bill is very wide open. It gives because it was after 12, and he did not think it was cabinet an incredible amount of power to interfere, that reasonable to go beyond. to extend the freeze, if you like, or to extend the I think it is a matter of being fairto people of the mandate of the bill. People do not know where it is public who want to present, and I do not think we going to end. should necessarily keep people here to the small People want to be able to know that if it is going hours of the morning. I think it is reasonable to say to be frozen for a year, I want to be able to go back to the people here, anyone who cannot come again to the bargaining table and strengthen my collective tomorrow morning or whatever and wish to present agreement to prevent contracting out of the food tonight, that we should hear those and then just services, for example, at St. Amant Centre, so that freeze the list that we have andcarry on from there. I know I am going to have a job in the kitchen making I think it is a reasonable way to go, and I think we my $20,000 a year. That is what they want to know. will be just as expeditious as if we sat here until four They want to know what the future is going to be. Is or five in the morning. this going to be just a one-year effort and things are • (0010) going to go back to normal so we can have our rights Mr. Chairman: First, I would like to thank Mr. back, or is cabinet going to take it upon itself to, if it Buckley for his presentation. What is the will of the looks like they are going to get an arbitrated committee? settlementfor 5 percent, extend the freeze? That is what people want to know. Mr.Manness: Mr. Chairman, I would like to call out the list. Everybody who is not here will have an As far as the morale goes, people who I represent opportunity again to present. A number of people, and spoke about tonight will soldier on. They may I believe, well in excess of 400 or 500,were asked not be happy, but they will soldier on. to be in attendance either last night ortonight, and Mr. Leonard Evans: I guess you have perhaps in the processthat we have developed, the rules we answered my next question which would have have developed for our committee, I would like to reference to the sunset clause. You are saying that call out the list, in the event that any of those is a possibility but that is not acceptable, and the real individuals are here. And, furthermore, these solution is to withdraw this bill and for the committees quite often sit until late in the night; as government to go back in goodfaith to the collective a matter of fact the mental health bill, I believe, the bargaining table. other night sat until 3:30 in the morning. That is the tradition ofthese committees quite often. We have Mr. Buckley: Mr. Chairperson, my understanding had a goodhearing thus far; I think we can still have of the sunset clause only refers to the ability of more productivity yet tonight in the sense of giving cabinet to regulate. It says nothing about how long people an opportunity to make presentations. I the bill is for. I do not believe that there is an end would like to continue. date to this bill. I could be wrong. Mr. Chairman: Is it the will of the committee then Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you very much, Mr. that we continue along with the presentations? Buckley. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, on this point of Mr. Chairman: Any other questions for Mr. order, I guess. Buckley? Mr.Chairma n: It is not a point of order, Mr. Evans. Point of Order We are not debating at this time, just a discussion. Mr. Leonard Evans: While it is fine for members Mr. Leonard Evans: We have been here a of this committee to, if they wish, sit here until three considerable time. It is after midnight, and I think it or four in the morning, or whatever, that is fine, but is reasonable for the committee to cease I do not believe we should-! do not care which bill deliberations for tonight afterwe have heard anyone it is, which piece of legislation it is, I do not think it is here who wishes to present and cannot come back fair to the public of Manitoba to ask them to come tomorrow night, or tomorrow morning rather. I am here in the middle of the night. It is just not fair. I reminded of the Minister of Finance's (Mr. Manness) mean, by God, if you want to give good government position which he made very strongly a couple of to people, you have to be reasonable with people, years ago, having walked out on a committee whether you are acting as an MLA or as a minister, 108 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

and I suggest that we hear anyone here who wants Mr. Leonard Evans: Well, you made the to present tonight. If they cannot come back statement at twelve o'clock- tomorrow morning, they can be heard tonight, but if Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Mr. Evans has the they can come tomorrow morning, then fine, why not floor at this time. hear them tomorrow morning? That is reasonable. Mr. Leonard Evans : I had quite a bit of sympathy I know we have a lot of names on this, and I think for his position because I have been a member here we will be diligent and we will eventually get through for 22 years, and I know we have done insane them as a committee. I am not being unreasonable; things. We have sat around 24 hours, if you can in fact, I am asking the minister to be reasonable believe it, way back when. I never thought that this about this, and the members of the committee. was the way to operate, and it is just inefficient and Look, we can be here for many, many weeks if we unreasonable. So I just want to be fair to the public, want, but I think we are going along very reasonably, and I want to be fair to the people here. I do not think so let us get the message. we should keep them here to the middle of the night, Mr. Manness: That is why I want to sit. We and those who want to present tonight, ask them brought forwardrules yesterday, Mr. Evans, I do not and let them come forward, but if they can come know if you were here, at which time we said we tomorrow, okay, but freeze the list so that nobody would not set a limitation on any of the loses their place on the list. presentations. Mr. Chairman, nothing can be fairer Mr. Manness: That is exactly what we are going to than that. When you are looking at 600 do. We are going to give everyone opportunity and presentations-indeed, under a constitutional the people who are not here will not be frozen out. representation , there were 15-minute time They then will have an opportunity to come back. limit�we have imposed no time limits. Nobody loses their right by not being here tonight, and that is why I would suggest that we call the list. Furthermore, the member says we have made Assoon as we come to those who are here and have good progress. Yes, we have. We have heard 14 not presented, we will gladly entertain their presentations tonight. At that rate this committee representation. will need to sit 30 days to hear the 600, and it is on that basis, and being fairer to the public, and not Mr. Leonard Evans: The list as such, however, bringing in closure, and in the name of democracy, remains and the people can continue in the order and in keeping with the traditions of this committee, that they are on this list. Is that correct? which is sittingquite often beyond twelveo'clock, I Mr. Manness: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Naturally they insist that we continuethe calling the roll in the event will fall to the bottom of the list, and their names will there are other presenters here. And, indeed, if they come again in the same order that they stand now . are not, those same people, by the rules we set Mr. Lamoureux: Just for clarification, those who yesterday, will have an opportunity to make a are here this evening who would like to be able to presentation tomorrow if they are not here tonight. speak would be given the opportunity to speak. Floor Comments: Oh, oh. Otherwise, you will be reading through the list. No one will be dropped from sequence. In fact, we will Mr. Chairman: Just one moment, Mr. Evans. read off 627 names. I would like to remind the members of the public In order to try and save time of the Chairperson in attendance that the rules of decorum shall be from reading each and every name, would it maybe carried forward tonight, please. There might be a be more reasonable to ask if there is anyone else little bit of debate going on at the table here and I who would like to make their presentation this know it is going to get emotional, but please try and evening? allow the members here to carry on their debate in a fashion that is acceptable. Mr. Manness: As long as this committee understands that by the rules that it adopted Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, when the yesterday, by the rules it set for itself in the hearings Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) walked out of the on Bill 70, as long as it decides not to call those committee a couple of years ago at twelve o'clock- names, those names will have been deemed to Mr. Manness: No, 3:30 in the morning. have been called once-as long as that is fully July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 109

understood by members of the committee. That • (0020) was the rule that it put into placefor itself last night. Mr. Chairman: Number 28, Anne Gregory. Do Mr.Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, my concern is you have a written presentation? that anyone of the public who wishes to be heard Ms. Anne Gregory (Private Citizen): No, I do not. shall be heard, but also that we do not expect them Mr. Chairman: Just carry on, Ms. Gregory. to be here until three and four in the morning, and that we go along expeditiously and reasonably. I Ms. Gregory: Good evening, or good morning was concerned that some of the people here may rather, to the Chair and members of the committee. be getting tired, and they may wish to return I am appearing before you tonight as a private tomorrow. Why is that unreasonable? citizen to voice my opposition to Bill 70 because of what it does to collective bargaining . • (0020) As you know, my name if Anne Gregory, and I got Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, members, any my first job when I was 14 years old in this province. individual who wants to come back tomorrow has When I was 17, I got my first job in a unionized every right to do so. All they have to do is exit this workplace. Now if that change had not taught me room. If their name is called once, that is fine. They how important it is to be protected by a collective will not lose their right. They will have the agreement, I have just had a crash refresher course. opportunityto come back up through the bottom of I just spent 14months looking for a job aftermoving the list and be heard, indeed, when their name is back to my home province. called again. Those are the rules that the committee set for itself last night. It is amazing what working conditions employers are willing to impose on people, and I do not think it Mr.Leonard Evans: Just to expedite things then, is just because the economy is bad and jobs are I believe it was Mr. Lamoureux who suggested scarce. Fortunately, I now have secured a job in a rather than reading all of these names, would it not unionized environment and I am very relieved. I be more expeditious to ask those who are here who know that with a collective agreement, any collective wish to present now instead of tomorrow or agreement, I am better off than I would be working whenever-wouldthat not be more efficient than to without one. Sure, there are labour standards and reacl-1 think that was what Kevin was suggesting. there are labour Jaws, but they are bare minimums Mr. Manness: If we started calling names five and in the 1990s they fall short ofaddre ssingwhat minutes ago when we startedthis debate, we would people really need. have been through to the next presenter by now, In fact, it is the inadequacy of these Jaws that and that is ali i ask this committeeto do, indeed, as brought unions in to existence in the first place and it said itself that it wanted to do last night when it that Is why they still exist. When people needrights, struck the rules. they organize and they negotiate for them. Over Mrs. Louise Dacquay(Seine River): I just think in time, we have even seen people get basic rights the interest of time, we are wasting an awful lot of through their collective agreements before those time. We have got a Jot of people out there who, I rights became part of the Jaw. am sure, some of them would like to have the I am opposed to Bill 70 because it halts the steady opportunity to present. I would like to suggest that progress that we have made protecting workers we proceed and we follow the rules that we from abuse in the workplace, and it does this by established earlier. blocking collective bargaining. For example, even I think it only fair that the guidelines were in this century it was perfectly acceptable to employ established-it is public knowledge-and that we child labourers. People worked six or seven days a not deviate from those rules and we continue to call week. They got less than subsistence wages. the names and Jet those who are willing to present, Often people worked in hazardous conditions. present. They had inadequate light or air and losing a limb was just part ofa job. Then somewhere along the Mr.Chairman: Is it the will of the committee then line people said, hey, this is dangerous, it is not that I continue to read the names and those who worth it, in fact, it is downright unacceptable, and want to present, present? they stood up for their poor downtrodden collective Some Honourable Members: Agreed. selves and by gar, collective bargaining was born. 110 LEGISlATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

(Mrs. Rosemary Vodrey, Acting Chairman, in the number of groups affected and the length of time Chair) they are affected, no questions asked. As a society, way back then, people started to Bill 70 means that the century-old evolution of agree that workers had to have certain basic rights, working people's basic human rights and working and then laws reflecting this were passed. Of rights can be stopped dead for years in Manitoba, course, back then not everyone agreed that workers and even once Bill 70 has run its course we are needed better working conditions. At the time, the never going to make up for the lost time. people who employed the workers wailed at the thought of providing better working conditions-it So this will become the province that everybody would be the end of them, the cost would force them points to and says, smugly: Oh, can you believe in Manitoba they still do such and such? That is the out of business, it would bethe end of the economy, way we all felt about Vander Zalm and we will not it would be the end of the world as we knew it. Yet despite their dire predictions, we all survived. In be doing what everybody else is. Do you know what fact, we survived to look back at that time as the dark that is? I mean, you might think that, with the list ages of commerce. that I just gave you, Manitoba workers already have everything they need. They do not need to bargain How could people have forced other people to for anything else. Well, I suggest to you that things work that way, we say? Oh, that could never still are not perfect. happen now, we say, oh so very smugly. Actually, we are only half right. It is unlikely that we will If Bi11 70 becomes law, we can be the last province regress to the point where we send children into coal on the block where new rights are recognized. mines with canaries for pennies a year, but Bill 70 These are things like leave with pay for family does stop the steady progress that workers have responsibilities, job sharing, no discrimination on made since labour got organized, when they stood the basis of sexual orientation, workplace day care, up and demanded what were, at the time, procedures for safe passage home for workers with extraordinary rights. shifts that begin or end after dark, recruitment procedures that eliminate patronage appointments I would like everybody to pause right now and and hiring, improved severance rates, think about the many things that we now assume employer-supportedRASPs and portable pensions. workers should have, things like a 40-hour work How about entitlement to the federally legislated week and humane scheduling of the shifts; a living UIC parental leave, even when there is an wage; overtime; vacation and sick leave; protection employer-paid subplan? from capricious firing and layoff or discipline; protection from sexual harassment-! am not These are just some ofthe things that Manitoba's don4r-protection from working one day and being public sector employees cannot bargain for if Bill 70 replaced by a machine the next; maternity leave, is passed, things that I think will be so accepted in paternity leave; seniority rights; compassionate the next few years that the next generation is going leave; access to employee assistance programs; to scratch their heads and say, they fought battles medical and dental plans; long-term disability; over that? As for our generation, in the short term, employer-supported pensions. Just recently we it will not take long to fall behind, and we are not have come to accept the notion that people need going to catch up. You can also be sure that, if the protection from the hazards of video display government is setting this kind of example, the terminals. These are things that are now private sector is going to follow. If this becomes the considered pretty basic rights. place where workers are denied basic rights, you can be pretty sure, at some point, they are going to So where did the idea first come from that these stand up again, and they are going to take their were basic rights? You can bet they did not come education and skills and move somewhere where voluntarily from employers, and many of these the authorities are more enlightened. things still are not covered fully by the law. People get protection of their rights from their collective In other words, collective bargaining, the process agreements, and yet Bill 70 stops collective is more than money; it is also about the right to bargaining for tens of thousands of public sector reasonable working positions. You cannot justify employees, and if that was not enough, the bill as it this bill in terms of money because it leaves too stands, allows the government to increase the many other issues unaddressed. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 111

Finally, when you suspend collective bargaining, Ms. Gregory: By way of example, in a unionized you are guilty of contract violation. As the employer workplace, there is the mechanism of grievances. of public sector workers, you have broken your side When the system breaks down and the collective of all the contracts. You signed contracts of a agreement breaks down, either because one party certain duration saying that you would meet again or the other is not Jiving up to their side of the to bargain when the agreement ended. By stopping agreement, you can try and resolve that through a the efforts to improve the work environment in grievance. It is a mechanism, and what you find Manitoba, you have also broken the social contract when you have a mechanism-if I may continue, where we all work for the common wheel. That was Madam Chair? Thomas Hobbes' idea, and if Thomas Hobbes were here, I think even he would comment about your The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Vodrey): Please go government being nasty, brutish and express his ahead, Ms. Gregory. own hopes that it would be short. Thank you for Ms. Gregory: Thank you. You use the grievance your time. process to resolve conflict and to resolve problems, and the role that the grievance process plays is that The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Vodrey) : Thank you, Ms. Gregory. We will go to questions now. when you come around time to bargain, you know where the problems fie with your collective Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you very much for the agreement. You use bargaining to address those. interesting presentation. You made some That is one of the reasons that collective comment about other matters besides wages, such agreements have time limits on them, so that you as sexual harassment in the workplace and other work through it, and nothing is perfect, you find out nonmonetary questions that often are, well, always where some of the flaws are, you find out what works are or should be in today's world discussed in and what does not for both parties,and you sit down collective bargaining, all thesevarious nonmonetary and try to resolve it. issues. How important do you think your fellow workers deem these to be as compared with the I have been in workplaces where the manager wage settlement side of it? has said to me, I want to do it this way. I have had to say to the manager, that is unfortunate because Ms. Gregory: My comments to Mr. Evans through you do not have that latitude in the collective the Chair would be that, when people sit down and agreement. The manager has said to me, well, then think about their day-to-day life, they do not think how do I do it? I have said to the manager, take it about money necessarily. Money is important to the table. I have got experience with managers when you sit down to pay the bills, money is who want to bargain too, and legislation like this puts important when you get your taxes, but day to day, them in a difficult position too because they cannot you have to feel like you are going to work andbeing achieve what they need to achieve to get their job treated like a human being, that you are safe, you done, because the rules do not work for them for are secure andthat you are contributing. If you go whatever reason. If you blow collective bargaining in and your boss slaps your ass, you do not feel appreciated. out of the process, you cannot improve. * (0030) If you do not have a collective agreement, it is a really hard row to hoe to get protection and to get Mr. Leonard Evans: Ms. Gregory, in discussions redress. As I said, there are labour laws that with people in the public sector, has there been address some of the issues that I listed, and I willing much talk about simply quitting, leaving the acknowledge that, but I also acknowledge, from my government service because of this legislation, or own experience in a nonunionized workplace, that consideration of leaving the government service it is a heck of a lot easier to go afteryour rights when because of this legislation? you are not doing it by yourself. Ms. Gregory: In a word, yes. People who are just Mr. Leonard Evans: In effect,what you are saying, deciding it is not worth it anymore. I talked to my a lot of your fellow workers are concerned with this friends and they have spent the fast three years as legislation because it infringes on the nonmonetary a term employee, a temporary this and a casual that benefits, or nonmonetary issues that you have waiting for some kind of assurance from the addressed or that you have made reference to. employer that they are going to get a real job. 112 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

They get flak in the public because they are employees and said, we have to get people working overpaid and underworked, supposedly, and they harder; we have to get people producing more for just think: Okay, I am not getting paid; I am not less. Well, it is pretty hard to go to somebody who going to get any back pay now because of Bill 70; I has just been told, forget it, you cannot bargain; you get abuse, no one recognizes what I do and I cannot cannot improve your lot in life, but come in anyway get any commitment from my employer that I am and do a good job. If you go to them and say, okay, going to have a job next fiscal year; and I just watch you work on the ground floor; from everything you the guy next door to me get laid off and gosh, I am do day to day, where can we cut corners, where are one up from him in seniority. They are saying, we wasting time, where are we wasting resources? maybe I should go startmy own company. Maybe You are going to say, well, what is in it for me? They I should take my skills and go somewhere else. will take that knowledge, and they will keep it to Maybe I should go back to school. Maybe I should themselves. You are not going to be able to get go to Europe. They are looking at all sorts of them to give you anything extra. alternatives because going to work does not seem In the economic times that we face, I think the worth it anymore. Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) would dearly love Mr. Leonard Evans: What about morale? I people to come forwardand give him some choices, gather, I mean the ultimate is to just leave, but then give him some tips on how to save money and there is another element, and that is lower morale resources, and do all the things that he says he where people have lost their enthusiasm. wants to do, but he is not creating an environment where people are going to come forwardand share Earlier this evening we heard from a presenter their knowledge and their experience with him who is with, I believe, the Manitoba Telephone because he is not doing anything for them. If System, and he talked about the importance of good anything, he is making it worse for them. morale to have good efficiency, to have good productivity. I know the public sector is very broad, Mr.Bob Rose (Turtle Mountain): Madam Acting and there are so many categories and so many Chairman, very quickly, I want to go back to types of occupationsand so many components, but something you were saying a few moments ago, nevertheless, I do not care which side, I would and perhaps- suggest, and I should ask you the question. This Ms. Gregory: I am sorry, Madam Acting Chair, I would likely lead to more to the lowering of efficiency am having difficulty hearing the member. in that particularsection. Mr. Rose: Is my mike on? Madam Acting Ms. Gregory: I find it difficult to disagree with Chairman, I want to go back to what you were saying anything that you have proposed just now or a few moments ago. Perhaps I am not anything that was said by any of the earlier understanding this correctly. What in Bill 70, for presenters. It follows. Everything that I just stated example, denies you the right to grieve? and everything that I have outlined in my comments Ms. Gregory: That was not the thrust of my all point to a bottom line of being content at work. comments, if the member will allow. What I was I am sorry to introduce this, but there is the old saying is that, through the grievance process in a expression: the happy worker is a productive unionized workplace, you find out where the worker. If there is no incentive to work because it is problems are with an existing collective agreement. not going to get you anywhere--you can work as The grievance procedure allows you a limited hard as you want, you are not going to get a merit mechanism for dealing with those things on a increase, you are not going to get a raise, you are day-to-day basis, but through the grievance not going to get any more vacation, you are not process, you find out where the problems are for going to get a promotion-what is the point? You both parties. Then, when you have an opportunity go in at one minute to, and leave on the dot. You to bargain, if you have an opportunity to bargain, you will take every minute of your coffee break. You will can take those problems and resolve them with take every minute of your lunch, and you are not better language. going to do anything extra. Mr. Rose: Is that process not still there? That is my question. You seem to be suggesting- I am sure that, in committeesand meeting rooms, this government has sat down with all levels of its Ms. Gregory: No, I am not suggesting- July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 113

The Acting Chairman {Mrs. Vodrey): Excuse me, Mr. Rose: Grievance, as it leads to the bargaining Ms. Gregory. procedure.

Mr. Rose: You seem to be suggesting it by Ms. Gregory: If you are not allowed to bargain, you understanding it that Bill 70 is doing away with all of cannot resolve problems that may be identified by these things, and as I understand Bill 70, it does the grievance procedure. I am not suggesting, none of that, that you still have the right to grieve, unless you are in a workplace where you are not you still have the right to negotiate these types of allowed to launch a grievance, that you cannot things. Am I misunderstanding the bill, or am I grieve. I am suggesting that having grieved and misunderstanding you? identified problems you cannot resolve those Ms. Gregory: You are misunderstanding problems at bargaining because Bill 70 prevents something. I did not represent to this committee you from bargaining. I am sorry if I am seeming that the right to grieve is in any way compromised, disrespectful, but I am becoming frustrated. unless you are in a unionized workplace where there Mr. Leonard Evans: I was just wondering, in your is no grievance, because then you cannot go area of work, how do the wages compare, say, forward and negotiate the right to have a grievance with-it may be difficult for you to answer this procedure. What I said was, and I will repeat, and question. How do they compare, say, with some of please question me if you do not follow me, you use the other provinces or some other areas? the grievance procedure to find out where the Ms. Gregory: I have lived in Manitoba, Nova problems are. What you do with that information is Scotia, the Northwest Territories and Ontario. In take it to bargaining so that both sides can avoid the each of those areas I have worked in a unionized grievance procedure, which can be very disruptive workplace. In two of them, Manitoba and Nova in a workplace, very upsettingto managers and very Scotia, I have worked in a nonunionized workplace upsetting to employees. as well. I can say categorically that, when I was You can take the benefit of that experience and covered by a collective agreement, not only did I then resolve where the problem came up, because have higher wages, I also had other benefits: you have vague language in a collective agreement vacation, et cetera, sometimes dental, that sort of or something in the workplace has changed and the thing, and professional development opportunities, language no longer meets the needs of the training, education. workplace for the workers or the management I can say that in the Northwest Territories Then you bargain, andyou come up with language unionized workers, in the main, received higher that is more appropriate so that you no longer have wages and also had entrenched rights to things like to use the grievance procedure, because the residence allowances, paid vacation leave where problem has been resolved. I hope that clears it up they got to go south if they were hired from the for you. South, once or twice a year. They had their medical Mr. Rose: Thank you. I do not disagree with expenses covered if they had to be medivacked to anything you have said, but I still do not know what the South for care if anyone in their family had to be. is in Bill 70 to prevent that procedure from taking There was coverage for escorts, someone in their place. family to attend if someone had to be taken The Acting Chairman {Mrs. Vodrey): Ms. down-justto give you a sense. Gregory -(interjection)- I beg your pardon. Mr. * (0040) Rose, to finish your question. I feel when I started working in Manitoba we were Mr. Rose: Sorry, Madam Acting Chairman. We doing quite well in our minimum wage and indeed are talking about Bill 70 tonight. That is the purpose our unionized wages which reflected a step or two of this committee meeting and all the presentations. or three or sometimes more above the minimum. Ms. Gregory: I do not think I have deviated from We were doing quite well. I am not sure that is still that, Madam Acting Chair. I am not sure which the case. I certainlyfeel with legislation like this we procedure it was that the member was referring to are very likely to fall behind. Although that was not when he asked me about procedure in his last the thrust of my comments, the thrust of my question. Are you referring to the grievance comments was collective bargaining, and I procedure or the bargaining procedure, please? deliberately stayed away from the wage issue, 114 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

because I feel that others are addressing that and I process, although I feel that it is really important to wanted to address my particularprimary concern. come and say my piece and tell you how I feel, that when the day of reckoning comes, everyone will go I feel basically what I said for collective the House and they will sit in the chair that is bargaining, that we are going to all behind can also be said to apply for wages, just because if everyone assigned to them, and the pressures that are tantamount will prevail. The people who sit on one else moves ahead and we do not-it is math. side of the House will feel compelled to vote one Mr. Leonard Evans: I have asked others about the way, and people who sit on the other side of the sunset clause. Are you familiar with that House will feel compelled to vote the other way. So suggestion, that the legislation be limited to, say, a no matter what we come and say at committee, no one-year time frame, because there is some matter what minds we actually sway, when it comes concern that couldgo on for years? time to vote, some people may not be able to vote Ms.Gregory: No disrespect to the committee, but with their hearts and their conscience. I feel that I attemptedto cover that in my comments. Mr. Leonard Evans: At any rate, you are trying to I feel quite strongly that it is an ongoing process that persuade the members of this committee, all parties, has been continual for a number of years. Any and you are hoping the message gets through, but break in that is a concern, whether that be six you are not very hopeful that will be the case. months, a year, two years, three years, four years. Ms. Gregory: I think that is fair. My message is My reading of the bill says that, yes, this particular that I would strongly encourage anyone who has got legislation does have a sunset clause. However, the heart-because I have devoted a lot of my time my reading of the government is, there is no reason in the workplace and outside of the workplace. they would not bring in 8111 70, the sequel, in a future session, which would simply renew, carry through I have served on the executives as an officer of without amendment or whatever, the provisions of every bargaining unit I have ever been a member of. this bill, just as they have asked the public sector I feel that it is very important to make unions work. employees to do with their collective I say that because I find that when they work, both agreements--no change, boom, it is rolled overfor sides sit down at the table, both sides have a another year. dialogue, and management is able to accomplish what they need a heck of a lot more easily, andthe Mr.Leonard Evans: At any rate, you are obviously workers are able to get what they want a heck of a saying and you are appealing to the committee,you lot more easily. are appealing to the government, that this legislation, because it is so negative on the work If you make that sort of dialogue illegal, the whole force and has other negative implications that it thing breaks down. I have fought for those rights should be withdrawnand the government should go that I have listed here for you tonight, and I will back to the bargaining table and bargain in good continue to fight for the ones that were on the faith with the public sector. second list, because I think that they are really important. Ms.Gregory: Madam Acting Chair, you could put it that way. I think to sortof follow through with your I do not want to be the one who, I do not know, summation of my feelings on this, I do think it is very when the class of 2025 sits down and reads their important that people participate in the committee history textbooksand goes, oh God, I cannot believe process honestly. It is difficult,given that Canadian they did that. I would really like to be the one in there democracy has evolved to such a point where its who says, gee, they finally got that, good for them, people are very compelled, no matter what their you know? Can you imagine that it took till 1992 to intentions are, to follow their party line, and it is very get that? Gee, job sharing, they should have difficult for an individual member of a caucus to take figured that out a long time ago that that works. a stand against caucus, no matter how strongly they Mr. Leonard Evans: Thank you very much. feel about an issue. (Mr. Chairman in the Chair) We do live in a province where the government, Mr. Chairman: Any further questions of the which has put forward this bill, has a majority, if committee? If not, thank you very much. everyone shows up andeveryone votes. I have to admit a sense of frustration coming to the committee Ms. Gregory: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 115

Mr. Chairman: Number 29, Grant Rodgers; 30, number of people I know at the back on the list have Harold Thwaites. indicated they wish to make their presentations tonight. I would suggest we find out how many Point of Order people there are, deal with those presentations and adjourn for the night, rather than go through what I Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, yesterday we began believe is becoming something of a farce in terms the committee proceedings. After some discussion of the process, and was not the process we followed on the process, with some disagreement but with yesterday. consensus on some items, we had I thought come to a method of practice with notice from the Mr. Chairman: Mr. Ashton, just to bring you up to government that we might be sitting late . speed, we have already dealt with this issue at Yesterday, we went through the list and at close to approximately 12 midnight, and you were not here midnight, which one might normally consider a at the time when we dealt with it. normal adjournment hour in this Legislature, we had Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, I am raising it again asked individuals wishing to make presentations to at quarter to one, because if people who did not identify themselves, which we did. We then sat to realize how ridiculous this is at quarter to one in the 1 :25 and heard all those who had waited throughout morning to expect 61 0 Manitobans, whatever the night and wished to make presentations, who number remaining on the list, to still be sitting there did not wish to come back other evenings. and risk losing their right to speak because of the I would, on a point of order, Mr. Chairperson, say motion introduced yesterday by the government that I do not feel that we are following that practice which only gives them one more opportunityif it is tonight, and I feel that is unreasonable on the part called- of the government in the sense that, to my mind, Mr. Manness: Only one more. anyone who is further down the list would have logically, after yesterday when we completed I Mr.Ashton: Well, the minister says only one more. The other opportunity might be when-three in the believe about 1 0 presentations, have concluded morning, I that If they had not spoken tonight-in fact, there some other evening? do notthink that is reasonable, Mr. Chairperson. If the government were people here earlier who sat through the proceedings and logically would have concluded wishes to put limits on the ability of presenters to make presentations to this committee, let us have they would have been further down the line. that on the table, but let us not do it through this back Mr. Chairperson, I do not believe it is reasonable door method of going through the farce of calling to be going through this farce of a process at quarter names of working people at quarter to one in the to one running down, when you have many working morning and assuming that they should be sitting people making presentations, wishing to make here. presentations, running through this list as if we are seriously expecting that five hundredand-we ll, I do • (0050) not know how many it is now-625 people should I think it is only fair andlogic al that this committee, have to sit here. We had 10 presentations if it is going to sit any time after midnight,do so with yesterday. That would mean that there will be 62 those people who are present and willing to make committee hearings, and that would mean they presentations and thereby assure that the other would have to sit here through a full 62 committee people who are on the list get fair opportunity to hearings before possibly being called, if they were make that presentation, Mr. Chairperson. This is No. 620, including hearings that go until one, two, not a fair and proper process. three in the morning. The rule we attacked yesterday which limits the I think it is reasonable to expect members of the number of times the people will be called and then public will wait a considerable period of time, but I be dropped from the list is not the procedure we do not believe it is reasonable to run through the list, have followed with other committees. The minister as we are now, past midnight. The logical thing to knows that. It is a new provision that has been put do is what we did yesterday, Mr. Chairperson, which in place in this particularcase in an attemptto deal is to ask those who are present and wish to make with the fact there are 625 presenters. If the presentations to make those presentations. I government is so concerned about restricting believe we can accommodate them. There are a presentations, why do they not just tell people 116 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

instead of having this process of where they are on Mr. Manness: The committee has rules, and it is a list and having their name called at ten to one in going to follow them. the morning and then having one more opportunity Mr.Ashton: Thecommittee does not have rules. before they will be able to speak. It has a government majority, which is making a We can sit here all night, if necessary. I am sure mockery out of the public hearing process. the presenters who are here are willing to sit here Mr. Chairman: Order, please. all night. We are certainly willing to sit here all night, Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chair, as a member of Mr. Chairperson, in terms of questions. I do not feel this committee, I move that this committee adjourn this is a fair process for the people of Manitoba. I after hearing those persons who are present and will raise it at quarterto two, quarterto three, quarter wish to present and cannot return after tonight and to four in the morning. I am raising it now in the hope that the list of presenters be frozen. that there will be some sanity in the committee. Mr. Chairman: It has been moved by Mr. Evans I would suggest that those who are here tonight that the committee adjourn after hearing those willing to make presentations, be allowed to do so, persons who are present and cannot return after Mr. Chairperson, and that we not go through this tonight and that the list of presenters be frozen. This process of calling the list after midnight. That is not is a debatable motion. fair. Mr. Leonard Evans: I think the motion is Mr.Chalrman: Mr. Ashton, you do not have a point self-explanatory. It is a reasonable motion that of order, andthis issue has already been dealt with, those people who are here and wish to present as I had stated earlier. We will now continue on. tonight be given an opportunity but that we call it at that. We do not, as the member for Thompson very *** well explained, go through a farce of going through the entire list. I think that is a reasonable procedure. Mr.Asht on: Mr. Chairperson, I do have a point of We can be here for many weeks, for many procedure, and I will mov� months. I think people are trying to be reasonable Mr.Chairman: Order, please. Mr. Ashton, as you in the opposition. I think it is only fair to people, are aware, you are no longer a member of this particularlythose who have to work in the morning, committee this evening. You cannot move any who feel very strongly about this. They are not paid motions. to come here and make these representations, nevertheless,they are here. I think it is only fair that Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, believe you me, if we limit our proceedings in this way so they can you want to deal with things in this way to the come back in the morning, or whenever, and be government- fresh and the committee can be fresh and hear the Mr. Manness: Let us deal with the presenters. presentations at that time. Mr. Ashton: Well, Mr. Chairperson, the minister Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education says let us deal with the presenters. and Training): Mr. Chairman, I feel we have been Mr.Chairman: Order, please. around this several times now. The member for Brandon East, Mr. Evans, has raised this about an Mr.Ashton: Now let us not make a mockeryout of hour ago. I thought we had settled that we would the public hearing process in Manitoba, Mr. Chair. hear those who are here and we would go through Mr. Manness: We are doing it the way that this the names andallow those people to present. We committee decided it was going to do it. have wasted another 20 minutes through this process. I feel it is time we allowed the people who Mr. Ashton: This committee decided yesterday at are here to get on with their presentations so they twelve o'clock to freeze the list, so as not to go can be heard. This charade seems to be going too through the farce of calling the lis� far. I think we are not paying attention to our duties Mr. Manness: That was yesterday. and allowing those people to speak. Mr. Ashton: That was yesterday. This is today. Mr. Hlckes: I would like to agree with the Minister Godknows what is going to happen tomorrow, Mr. of Education and Training. He calls this a charade, Chairperson. because if you go through the list tonight each July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 117

individual has twochances to speak. If 201 is called We will now carry on with the list as previously and not here tonight, they have one more chance. agreed. No. 31 , Mr. David Fleury? No. 32, Shirley The majority of these presenters are working Lord? Do you have a written presentation, Ms. individuals. If they are at work during the day Lord? tomorrow when we have hearings from 1 0 to 12 Ms. Shirley Lord (Private Citizen): No. tomorrow morning, if they are called for the second Mr. Chairman: Just carry on then. time, they have lost their chance. That is why we are saying, if we hear the people here and freeze Ms. Lord: I do not know whether I should begin by the list, at least if their names are called tomorrow thanking you for the opportunityto speak tonight to morning they can come here tomorrow evening to this committee. I am a person who works for wages. give their presentation. If we allow them to lose that That means, I worked all day today and I have to first chance and if they are working they lose their work all day tomorrow. I have always believed that second chance, that is not democracy to me. my partof the collective bargaining contractwas that I gave a fair day's work for a fair day's wages. Mr. Leonard Evans: On a point of procedure or whatever, I wonder if the committee could take a I can be thankful that my employer respects the two-minute recess or a five-minute recess so that right to collective bargain and will respect the right the official House leader andthe government House that I chose to exercise tonight to stay to make this leader can discuss this further. presentation, because there is no question that if I had left and my name was called and then it was Mr. Chairman: We will take a recess till called again tomorrow at 10 while I was at work, I approximately five after one to give our House would not have had an opportunity to make this leaders an opportunity to discuss this issue. presentation.

*** I guess I should not be astounded at all about the majority decision made on this issue. It is The committee took recess at 12:57 a.m. consistent with the practices of the government of the day on every issue that exercise� After Recess Mr. Chairman: Order, please.

* (01 10) The committee resumed at 1 :05 a.m. Mr. Chairman: Order, please. It has been moved Point of Order by Mr. Evans that the committee adjourn after Mrs. Dacquay: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, hearing those persons who are present andcannot I would like to suggest that perhaps the presenter is return after tonight and that the list of presenters be not aware of the rules and procedures practised in frozen. committee and that her presentation should be Is the committee ready for the question? dealing exclusively with the bill and not the motion that we previously voted on. An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, we have a tradition Mr. Chairman: All those in favour of the motion, say yea. in these committees, and that is that we try and give members of the public full leeway to present on Some Honourable Members: Yea. aspects of the bill and the process. The process is Mr. Chairman: All those opposed to the motion, as much a part of the bill as the clauses and say nay. subsections of the bill. There have been many occasions when people have commented on that Some Honourable Members: Nay. process. Mr. Chairman: In my opinion, the Nays have it. I would suggest we hear the presenter, who I Mr. Leonard Evans: A recorded vote. believe is being quite to the point, quite relevant. A COUNTED VOTE was taken, the result being as Mr. Chairman: The honourable member Mrs. follows: Dacquay did have a point of order. I have been Yeas 4, Nays 6 allowing a fair bit of leeway throughout these Mr. Chairman: The motion is defeated. committee meetings as far as the presenters have 118 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

been going. I would ask, though, that we try and Gary Filmon and the Tory members of this keep it as short as possible when we are drifting committee and the rest of the Tory caucus have away from the bill and try and stay relevant if demonstrated that they have no feelings that prevail possible. between them and the working people or, for that

*** matter, the majority of Manitobans, unless you would consider absolute contempt for the people who you govern and the contempt that most Ms. Lord: I believe that my comments are Manitobans have cometo feel for you as some kind consistent with the bill. The bill deals with the of relationship that you or any government can be fundamental right of collective bargaining, and I was proud of. talking about my having to work for wages and This committee would better be called the having to be at work tomorrow and yet being forced committee to end Manitoba's industrial relations. to stay here tonight well past the hour of midnight. The motions last night to hold committee hearings I should indicate that when the clerk phoned me outside of Winnipeg and to provide for every and indicated that I was No. 57 on the list, they did opportunity for presentations to be made by not indicate that I had to be there the first night. individuals allowing all citizens the opportunity to They indicated that I probably would not get on for have input into decisions that affect their lives were a couple of evenings. If they indicated that to me, defeated by the Conservative members of this they probably indicated that to a number of people committee is not surprising to me. who have asked to make presentations. Again and again we have seen this government's Anyway, I will begin. I am a private citizen, but I total disregard for the wants and desires of have been actively involved for 20-plus years in all Manitobans. When several thousand people aspects of the political process. It began when I crowded into this Legislature on a minus-40-degree joined the City of Winnipeg as an employee and got winter day demanding fairer funding for the public involved in my union and then got involved in school system, the Filmon government increased municipal, provincial and federal politics and a funding to private schools significantly and gave number of nonpartisan political issues. I have over absolutely no increase to the largest public school the years made various presentations on a number division in this province. With the stroke of a pen of issues, but no presentation has been more this Tory government eliminated the decentralized difficult for me, andno issue has given me greater Child and Family Services that was created as a concern. result- Last night when I was driving down to the Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Ms. Lord, you are presentations, I heard on the news a story about drifting a little far away from Bill 70. I would those people-an issue that happened in El appreciate it if you would try to come back a little bit. Salvador that was attributedto the people in power Ms. Lord: I am trying to draw an analysis between where a human rights activist was murdered and his Blll 70 and every piece of legislation this government partner mutilated and raped. That is about all this has brought in or is bringing in. government has stopped shortof. Mr. Chairman: Ms. Lord, you are to be addressing I want to talk about Bill 70, but tonight I am not Bill 70 and not all the other legislations that are going to be speaking about the aspects of the wage before the House. I will ask you to please be freeze in Blll 70. Many speakers before me, many relevant to the bill. speakers after me will speak on that particular aspect of the issue. They will speak far more Point of Order eloquently than me, I am sure. I want to talk about Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Chairman, on a point of the fundamental principles in Bill 70. This order or point of observation- Committee on Industrial Relations is a myth. This government is committed to destroying industrial An Honourable Member: No, there is no such relations in the province of Manitoba. The Concise thing. Oxford Dictionary defines relations as, and I quote: Mr. Leonard Evans: Oh, well, a point of order. I kind of connection or correspondent or a contrast or have been listening very carefully to Ms. Lord. I can feeling that prevails between persons or things. see a direct parallel. She is making a case. If you July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 119

have been listening to her very carefully, you will see want to finish before the year and a half time period it is very relevant. What she is saying is extremely that you mentioned yesterday. I am just suggesting relevant. that perhaps we can proceed and, with your admonition, perhaps not overly worry about Mr. Chairman: Mr. Evans, you did not have a point relevancy at 1 :20 in the morning. I do not know if of order. Thank you, very much. That was a dispute over the facts, I guess. anything is quite relevant at 1 :20 in the morning, quite frankly.

*** * (0120) Mr. Chairman: Mr. Ashton, as you are aware, you Mr. Chairman: Ms. Lord, continue please. do not have a point of order. I have almost taken Ms. Lord: Just to clarify so that the Conservative this as reflecting on the Chair. I hope that is not members who seem to have some problem in what you are doing at this time of the evening, at understanding collective bargaining, I will draw the 1 :20 in the morning. analysis between citizens' input into decision I have heard different debates, Mr. Ashton. I making and Bill 70 by drawing an analysis between have been chairing a number of committeessince I the rest of the legislation this province has brought have gotten here. I can understand and decipher in. betweenwhat is relevant and what is not. With the stroke of a pen this Tory government eliminated the decentralized Child and Family *** Services that was created as a result of extensive public hearings in the early '80s- Mr.Chairman: I would ask the presenter to please be relevant- Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Ms. Lord, I think I have asked you a couple of times now. This has Mr. Ashton: You can also take advice about nothing to do with the Child and Family Services accusing members of challenging the Chair. agency or any of the rest of it. We are dealing with Ms. Lord: I will continue to try and draw the Bill 70 which is the free collective bargaining. The analysis betweencitizen input into decision making title of the bill is The Public Sector Compensation in Bill 70 and the attitude of this government to Management Act. If you could relate yourself to citizen input into decision making. that, I would appreciate it. Bill 68 that is before this Legislature now, the bill to reduce the size of City Council, is clearly designed Point of Order as an attack on a City Council that at one time was Mr.Asht on: Mr. Chairperson, relevance is in the dominated by many of the present government eye or, perhaps in this case, the ear of the beholder. caucus and has, over the past twoyears, been much I have sat through 1 0 years of these committees. I more receptive to the wants and desires of the know it is difficult at 1 :20 in the morning to perhaps citizens of Winnipeg. This bill is designed to ensure see relevancy in your own view of things. If it is that citizens in Winnipeg have less and less say relevant to the presenter, our tradition in this House about their city. It is going forward without regard has been that we listen to the presenter, and we for the fact- make our own judgments beyond that. Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Ms. Lord, I mean I am not challenging the Chair. I am just now you are dealing directly with Bill 68 at this time. suggesting if we were to listen to the presenters who You have to be passing near Bill 70 for me to say are here tonight-andI understand there are still five that it is relevant. I have been allowing an awful lot or six-and perhaps listen patiently, in fact, we of leeway, but I cannot allow you to be discussing might expedite the process rather than bog the other bills. I am sorry-if you couldplease bring ourselves down with points of order. it back to Bill 70, The Public Sector Compensation With 625 presenters, if we want to startdiscussing Act. what is relevant and what is not, we could be here Ms. Lord: I am drawing the analysis between Bill for a considerable period of time, something I have 68 and Bill 70. This bill is designed to ensure that no difficulty with, Mr. Chairperson, but there are the citizens in Winnipeg have less and less say some members of the committee who obviously about their city. It is going forward without regard 120 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

for the fact that during the Cherniack hearings, and gave you an opportunity to draft that position again during the recent Winnipeg Wards Review together, would that be fair for you? Committee hearings, presentation after Ms. Lord: My very, very serious concern about this presentation demanded increased citizen bill is the complete attack on people's right to participation and- participate in the decisions that affect their working Mr.Chairman: Order, please; order. please. Ms. life. That is the concern that bothers me about this Lord, I cannot allow you to be discussing the other bill, and I feel that I need to draw the analysis bills when we are dealing with Bill 70, and it is as between a variety of decisions that have been simple as that. I will ask you one final time to please foisted upon the citizens of the province of Manitoba deal with andbe relevant to Bill 70. Thank you very that is culminating in this blatant attack on workers' much. right to participate. I do not know that- Ms. Lord: I am trying to convey an analysis of the Point of Order decisions that are contained in the various bills with the decisions in Bill 70. I am trying to convey a Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, I cannot prejudge comparison betweenwhat I believe will happen with what it is the presenter is going to say, but nobody citizen participation in Bill 70. is afforded the opportunity when addressing a specific bill to enter, as what we would call, a budget May I continue? debate. I sense that is what Ms. Lord is attempting Mr. Chairman: You have got me, Ms. Lord, to do, at least by the indication that she is trying to because this has never happened to me where draw analogies along a whole host of areas taking someone has refused to deal with a bill. I really do into account other government decisions, to use her hope that you have come to make presentation on word. That is a budget debate, and that is certainly Bill 70 this evening. I can understand that you are out of order. I think your invitation to Ms. Lord was trying to draw analogies. I have seen this in the very fair. You were saying if you cannot bring the House a number of times, where certain members presentation to Bill 70, then you invite her to do so have tried to draw analogies and we have had to call at another date on her time and such that she will them to order in the House. not have to wait in line. Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, I just want to Yet I am having a hard time trying to get through reiterate again that relevance is very subjective. I that what we are dealing with here is The Public think the presenter is as relevant as half the Sector Compensation ManagementAct. If we were speeches we have had in the Legislative session. to deal with all the bills that were before us at one -(interjection)- Well, there were references time at one committee,it just would not work. There yesterday to Conservative economic policies has to be some decorum and that is one of the rules federally, Conservative economic policies that operates within this Legislature and within the provincially, decentralization, taxes. A lot of people parliamentary procedures of this Legislature. So I made presentations that draw on those contexts. will ask you one final time, to please be relevant to Bill 70 at this time. This presenter has had maybe five minutes and has been interrupted probably about five times in Ms.Lord: My whole presentation is contained in a terms of that, Mr. Chairperson. We have not given comparison of citizen participation and decision the presenter the chance to really even get beyond making, whether it is citizen participation in how the introductory comments here. I do not know why the City of Winnipeg operates, whether it is citizen minister and the Chair are quite so sensitive. Quite participation in the legislative process, or whether it frankly, I do not think any of this process is is citizen participation in working conditions. I am particularly productive at this hour in the morning not sure how I can change the presentation at this anyway. I do not know if any of us are being all that stage to convey my concerns about those aspects relevant. That is one of the problems you have of Bill 70. when you end up with committee hearings at 1 :30 Mr. Chairman: If I could make a small in the morning. I would just ask that we allow the recommendation, that ifyour name was not dropped presenter to continue. from the list, and if the committee said that you could Mr. Chairman: Neither member had a point of be one of the first presenters coming back, and that order. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 121

*** Mr. Ashton : Mr. Chairperson, I note once again that the presentation was very relevant. The * (0130) presenter made a number of-well, I think the most Mr. Chairman: Ms. Lord, I am going to take it upon relevant thing she said was, defeating this myself. I am going to give you five minutes to get government. I think that is relevant when it comes this thing going, and I am going to listen very to Bill 70, and I appreciate that one of the intensely, very intensely. Hopefully, I am going to Conservative members recognizes that. hear some relevancy within your presentation that I appreciate, by the way, the patience of the is coming forward. Let us carry on. Otherwise,we presenters. I understand that it is difficult for will be here awful late. You are right. You do have members of the committee,but I hope that members to get to work tomorrow. So if you could carry on, of the committee will understand how difficult it is for and I am going to listen intensely here for the next members of the public, such as the presenter, who, five minutes and see if I can catch it. I am sure, would have a lot betterthings to do at 1 :30 Ms. Lord: Thank you so much. Just to conclude in the morning and would have preferred to be able on Bill 68,this bill is going forward without regard for to make this presentation at another time, without the fact that during the Chernlack hearings and running this late and having perhaps a bit more again during the recent Winnipeg Wards Review opportunity. One thing I have noticed with Committee hearings, presentation after committee hearings, incidentally, Mr. Chairperson, presentation demanded increased citizen is that we do tend to get rushed toward the end, and participation and retention of the size of council. that is unfortunate. WhoeverIs here at eight o'clock Whatever decisions this government has made, and makes a presentation has the full attention of whether it is child care, social services, workers the committee, and by the time we get to 1 :30, it compensation, the wishes of the majority of does drift. Manitobans have been completely disregarded. I just wanted to ask one brief question to the Bill 70 is far more horrendous than a wage freeze. presenter in the context, particularly, in terms of the This is the most Draconian attack on free collective collective bargaining, and I have asked this question bargaining that has been perpetuated on the before of other people. What will be the impact on workers in this province during my lifetime. collective bargainingin Manitoba, in terms oflabour Collective bargaining is the only mechanism that relations, given the fact that we currently have one workers have to put forward their position about the of the best climates, the second lowest strike rate conditions of their daily lives. When I sell my labour traditionally, if 8111 70 is passed? How is that going to you, I want the opportunity to negotiate what I to impact on labour relations in the province? receive in return for my labour, whether it is the Ms. Lord: In the public sector, in those areas hours I work, the mechanisms of promotion, the where the bill now presently impacts on employees, opportunity to redress grievances, to achieve pay there is no question that workers are going to have equity, to be free of sexual harassment, and the list no faith in this government in having any respect for goes on and on. These are fundamental rights of a the job that they do. free and democratic country. Only a right-wing, fascist regime would impose any legislation that The other problem in the public sector where this would eliminate these rights. legislation is imposed on some boards and commissions who want to be fair employers, want I have no faith that this government will withdraw to sit down and negotiate fair terms and conditions this bill. The record of the Filmon government has of work, you are going to have not only very, very demonstrated that it cares nothing for the wishes of disgruntled employees, you are going to have very the people it has been elected to serve, but I know frustrated employers because they know that it is that I will do everything in my power to ensure the not just money that people join unions for and get defeat of this government, a commitment that many involved in the collective bargaining process. They Manitobans who in fact have voted for you in the want to sit down and negotiate and deal with past now share after only one short year. Thank concerns in the workplace, and this is the only you. mechanism that they have to ensure that everybody Mr. Chairman: Any questions? gets a fair opportunity in a democratic system. 122 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

In the private sector, with those employers who (Mr. Ashton) for the member for Brandon East (Mr. have respect and value their employees, it is going Leonard Evans). to make it very difficult for them to be competitive Motion presented. with employers who are going to take on the Conservative agenda and say, if it is good enough Mr. Chairman: It is agreed? Agreed. I would like for the provincial Civil Service, if it is good enough to inform the committee this has to be agreed to in for health care system, if it is good enough for the the House tomorrow, formally. health care workers, it is good enough for the workers in our workplaces. * * * I see that it will have very far-reaching effects. I see that, when it comes to people's ability to Mr.Chalrman: I will now call on 33, Paul Moist. Do purchase, it is going to have a great impact on small you have a written presentation, Mr. Moist? business particularly, that supposedly everybody is Mr. Paul Moist (Private Citizen): I do. so concerned about. It is going to have a great Mr. Chairman: If you could just supply it to the clerk impact on the ability of some people to survive in and give her just a minute to distribute it. this community because of the loss of purchasing power in this day andage with absolutely no way to Go ahead, Mr. Moist. contain the costs of living, many of those costs Mr. Moist: Mr. Chairman and members of clearly imposed, created as a result of the GST, as committee, just one opening, personal observation, well as thefact that we never did see an elimination I just recently completed my third Manitoba of the manufacturers' sales tax in many products Marathon and found it a lot less taxing on me and services. physically than sitting here this evening. In any Mr. Chairman: Any furtherquestions? Thank you event, that was for a good cause, and tonight's very much, Ms. Lord. hearings are for a good cause.

* (0140) Committee Sub stitution My only comment on process that I would make Mr. Hlckes: I do not have a question. Mr. Chair, I is, apart from not particularly wanting to stay here would just like to ask leave to make a committee tonight until 1 :30 in the morning, I very much change. appreciate the rules of the Manitoba Legislature Mr. Chairman: You cannot make a committee which allow for committeehearings and an unlimited change. amount or a number of Manitobans to come and speak. I am not one prone to personal remarks or Mr. Hlckes: I can if I have leave. attacks, and I will not make any of those. The only Mr. Chairman: Is there leave for the member to personal comment I would make to committee make a committee change? No? Leave has been members is, I respect very much people of all denied. political stripes who stand for political office. I Mr. Ashton: Just for the information of the respect you all sitting here tonight as caretakers of committee, we do have clear precedent, when we the rules of the Manitoba Legislature which allow us are sitting-usually the process is by leave-the to come and speak here. substitutions are made and they are confirmed later I would much, much preferred to have spoken to in the House by resolution. you tomorrow evening earlier on, but I have had to Mr. Chairman: I have just asked for leave, and it sit here-but so have you. I respecteach and every was denied. one of you for sitting here in a fairly quiet and businesslike manner. I once came to speak in this Is there leave for the member to make a room-this is my final digression before I get to my committee change? Is it agreed? Is there leave? brief-in 1984 on the French language services Agreed? Agreed. Make your committee change. hearings, and the acrimony amongst committee Mr. Hlckes: I move, seconded by the member for members was actually despicable. There were Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans), that the composition of the members of the then opposition, in my opinion, Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be impaired at the time, and nobody appreciated that. amended as follows: the member for Thompson I just want to say to this committee that, despite the July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 123

occasional skirmishes, you have conducted WHEREAS it is in the public interest of the yourself in a far betterfashion. Province of Manitoba to further harmonious relations between employers and employees Mr.Chairman: We appreciate that once in a while. by encouraging the practice and procedure of Mr. Moist: Just to begin with, mine is not a text of collective bargaining between employers and the normal type here. I have just included a few unions as freely designated representatives of documents which I want to touch on. employees; I appear before you tonight as a private citizen, a THEREFORE HER MAJESTY, by and with third-generation Winnipegger. I am a gardener for advice and consent of the Legislative the City of Winnipeg, and my job is in the Assembly of Manitoba, enacts as follows: conservatory in city park. I am a working person who is fortunateenough to belong to a union. I work I certainly will not go into the rest of it, but it enacts for that union now and I am employed by the the rules that we live by. They are housed in The Canadian Union of Public Employees. You heard Labour Relations Act, and that act is thrown into from our union last night and I will not reiterate what question and scrutiny by Bill 70; it is actuallythrown they said. into the garbage can. There are 8,000 of our 19,000 members in this Now I said a moment ago, we are the product of province touched by this legislation. This morning where we came from. This Labour Relations Act at 7:45 I have to meet with 350 of those members was not what was desired by the people who came who are touched by Bill 70. I want clarification from before me who represented workers in Manitoba 70 the committee,if I am speaking at 7:45 this morning years ago. They never, ever envisioned they would and I have to leave, do I have leave to come back have a Labour Relations Act which took away the and finish my speech? I am meeting shift workers rights, the fundamental rights, that this act takes at a hospital at 7:45 tomorrow morning, at noon and away, and I am not talking about Bill 70, I am talking at five o'clock to talk about Bill 70. I have to go to about the act as it exists right now. that meeting at 7:45; and if I am either still speaking or being questioned at that time, I want to know if I There was a lady talking earlier about grievance will be cut off then or can I come back. I would like procedures. Thisact outlines why andhow we have an answer to that before I begin. the right to file grievances and put those things in collective agreements. That was your choice as Mr. Chairman: Carry on with your presentation. I employers, not the choice of the working people of would like to advise the presenter that it is not your Manitoba. The most fundamental right we gave up chance to ask questions at this time, but I will peruse over 70 years ago was the right to withdraw our what you have asked me anyway and see what I labour when something went wrong in the can come up with. workplace. Now we have very narrow windows Mr. Moist: I am a great believer, Mr. Chairman and when we can do that, and this act prescribes those members of the committee, that we are a product of windows. Bill 70 takes away even the slightest where we came from. All of us in this room here are glitch and opening in that window, but make no caretakers of sort. You are caretakers of the bones about it, my forebears, the people who gave confidence of the people of Manitoba whether you me unions and I expect came before this Legislature are government members or opposition members. and lobbied for provisions of this Labour Relations I am a caretaker of the confidence of working people who decided to organize many, many years ago. Act, never, ever envisioned they would agree to something like a grievance procedure, because The productof those two relationships that brings when things went wrong in the workplace people sat us together is contained on the first page of my down and worked them out. presentation. I am only going to read the first paragraph of it, but it is a significant statement of That was considered to be no good, though, and public policy. In my opinion, Mr. Chairman, Bill 70 employers, you people, sought things like minimum is a significant statement of public policy of one type. wages and grievance procedures. I find it a joke It follows on the heels of this statement of public when I am honoured to be part of the MFL executive, policy, because The Labour Relations Act that we to go before Cabinet each year, be it an NDP own collectively starts out like this: government or a Conservative government, I am 124 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

honoured to go into the Cabinet room and ask for an head of the union and says to the union, you can increase in the minimum wage. have this proposal, buttake it to your members. Do People presume that the labour movement came not come back and talk to us about it. Do not let us up with the minimum wage. Nothing could be get together and try and work out some compromise further from the truth. Employers sought it and the of it. This offer is withdrawn if you do not take it to government of the day in the 1920s gave your members.

Manitobans the minimum wage, not because labour • (01 50) asked for it; there was a shortage of labour. They I want to tell you, I do not speak for that union that did not want labour moving from factory to factory, so they put a standardized wage in place, which spoke here tonight. I respect them very much, but employers would pay no matter where you went, I do not speak for them. I want to tell you on behalf unless you were organized. That was sought for by of the workers that I represent, no one goes to our employers. We now seek to increase it on occasion membership until the negotiating committee that the for those workers who are not organized, but make members elect decide to. Unions traditionally no bones about it, the rules that you are calling into resent and despise employers that try to do that. question in Bill 70 were rules that we reluctantly That does not foster what The Labour Relations Act agreed to many, many years ago. says you are supposed to do and that is further harmonious relations between employers and I will stop on the prelude to The Labour Relations employees. Act, but I want to remindyou, it is such a significant statement of public policy that no government has So it is my view that the Province of Manitoba has touched it since its inception to this extent, because committed an unfair labour practice. Why have you we are not talking about a wage freeze, we are not been charged with that? Why has the Manitoba talking aboutsetting aside collective bargaining. Labour Board not decreed that? Because it is I recently entered into a collective agreement probably not worth our while to have you fined which for the first time enacted a sexual harassment $5,000 which would be the maximum penalty for clause. That agreement is null and void. We will that. We will express our response to that through have to wait a year to have an enforceable sexual committees such as this, through the actions of our harassment clause for that group of employees. members, betweenelections and during elections. The employer wants it and the employees want it, The next document in my package is a letterfrom but your proposed Bill 70 makes that impossible. the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) to the There was a presenter up here earlier talking president of our Federation of Labour. I will not read about some specific negotiations which I certainly the whole letter. It has a couple of paragraphs am not part of, those directly with government which are of no interest to me, and I find no comment employees, and he characterized it as worthy of those first two paragraphs. The last nonbargaining. I turned to the second page of my paragraph says for the record: introduction of this presentation. I tell you what I think it is. I think it is legislation to control public sector spendingwas not Boulwarism. I think it is a bargaining tactic involving the first choice of this government. However, the the delivery of management's final position at the alternatives of either raising taxes or reducing outset of negotiations on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, serviceswere deemed to be far worse than asking combined with an attempt to sell the offerdirectly to certain employees in the public sector to set aside the employees, all with a view to undermining the their wage demands for a one-year period. unions' bargaining authority. It is an unfair labour Now let us break that down. We had a member practice as determined by the courts in the United States ofAmerica. It is an argument that unions use retire from our staff four years ago who started working for CUPE in 1944. He told me that in all his in the province of Manitoba and throughout Canada. years of negotiating in the public sector, there was (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Acting Chairman, in the never a time that a public employer, a government, Chair) came to the bargaining table and said, this is a good The most insidious part of it is when management, year for a wage increase. We feel like putting up as you apparently did in the recent round of taxes. We think we will cut services to give you bargaining with the MGEA, attempts to go over the more money. Think ofwhat this statement says. It July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 125

was not the first choice of the government to raise downloaded to the City of Winnipeg with your most taxes or reduce services. recent budget. You have increased taxes in the city of Winnipeg. I am very glad to hear that. It has never been the choice of any government that I have ever come I also believe you have increased school board across. No government wants to raise taxes. taxes in every school division in the province with Governments have raised taxes to provide services your zero-and-two policy. You have left those that Manitobans and Canadians want. Sometimes school boards with no option but to go to the doing that saves people money in the long run. I am ratepayers. You might say they could cut, and they reminded of the recent series of television programs will pay the political price for that. You have by the former Surgeon General of the United States downloaded to them. of America outlining why they cannot afford a Do not tell the president of the Federation of universal medical system when they spend more Labour that your first choice was not to raise taxes. per capita on medicare with less coverage than we You have not directly raised taxes on individual do. Manitobans this time. You have indirectly done it As a matter of public policy in this country, we through funding policies to the school board and to have universal medicare. Governments have to tax the municipality. Yet you ask us to set aside our for that. Not one of those governments at the wage demands for a year. federal level wanted to introduce those taxes. Rather than hear me talk about what I think about There is not a government that I know of that you asking us to set our wage demands aside, let knowingly wants to reduce services, ever. It is a us look at that pillar of left-wing rhetoric, the prescription to be a one-term politician, and this Winnipeg Free Press editorial page. On May 18, government might be the second majority they said this to your government. They called a government to serve only one term in this province. recently negotiated public sector settlement in the So what is the third option? Asking certain city of Winnipeg • A modest wage settlement." I will employees in the public sector to set aside their only read twoparagra phs. wage demands for a one-year period. Why not for It says: "Winnipeg's largest municipal union has a two-year period or a three-year period? Tell me recognized the city's financial difficultiesand agreed when you as a government are going to want to to wage increases significantly below the rate of increase taxes or cut services? You are never inflation. If Finance Minister Clayton Manness can going to want to do those things. If we capitulated win such a favorable settlement with the Manitoba every time a public sector employer told us that they Government Employees' Association, he should did not want to raise taxes or cut services, therefore thank his lucky star." It goes on to detail what this we had to take zero, there would not be one agreement was. Then it says, on May 18: "The unionized worker in the public sector because they provincial government is still bargaining with its would have tossed us out years ago. unions. Mr. Manness and his colleagues may be The final point on this letter, before I turn to the able to persuade them to delay their increases and next page to talk some more about Bill 70, is that I watch their purchasing power diminish as city disagree with the statement there. I do not believe workers are doing. If the CUPE settlement in this government has not raised taxes. This Winnipeg is to be considered as setting the going government has raised residential taxes in the city rate for public sector settlements in Manitoba, it is a of Winnipeg through its fiscal policy with the City of rate the province can accommodate." Winnipeg. You have continually reduced per capita That is not the Manitoba Federation of Labour or grants to the city. Your grants in lieu of taxes now CUPE or even the City of Winnipeg talking. That is represent 20 percent of City of Winnipeg revenue. the Winnipeg Free Press, no friend oflabour, in my Three years ago they represented 23 percent. view, but reflectingwhat they think is a reasonable Your failure to touch the property tax credit has public opinion on their editorial page. eroded that to the extent that if it had been moved What did you do between May 18 and June 3? with inflation since 1980, instead of being $325 it You did not do anything. On June 23, when the City would be $267 more now. That would have of Winnipeg had ratified that agreement, you alleviated pressure on property taxes. You have received this glowing press report from the same 126 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

left-wing rag. "Mayor Bill Norrie scored a political Mr. Moist: Madam Acting Chair, excuse me, if the success against the Conservative provincial meeting that I advised you of, that I must go to at a government and its supporters in the council in quarterto eight tomorrow morning, continues to one winning ratification of the three-year agreement with minute past 10 and you call my number, I will have the Canadian Union of Public Employees. Finance lost the right to speak under your rules. Minister Clayton Manness was reduced to muttering In any event, the Free Press concluded on June darkly about revenge." 23 by saying this: "Mr. Manness, beaten, started It was not Susan Hart-Kulbaba; it was not Paul looking for a way to hit back. He announced that he Moist. It was the left-wing rag, the Winnipeg Free would forbid a new city tax on motorists if the city Press, friend of worker. "The finance minister's comes asking for one. That would put them in their burst of ill-temper can safely be ignored. place. Ratification of the city's CUPE contract-" "He would almost certainly refuse that permission anyway. Mayor Norrie and the council need decent Point of Order relations with city employees andwill still need them Mr.Manness: I do not mind being berated by the after Mr. Manness's tantrum passes." witness at all. I am used to it. The member for That is the view of Winnipeg's leading daily Thompson (Mr. Ashton) does it regularly in the newspaper about the actions of this government. I House, but I would ask the member, given that he guess I want to say, Madam Acting Chair, to you and now is attemptingto read press releases, which we to the members of committee and indeed for the have all read, into the record, I would ask from him record, because I believe that I will not be here a some indication, particularly in view of the question number of years from now and neither will any of he put to the committee earlier, if his intentions are you, that there will still be unions in this province, to speak for a considerable period of time. I would and there will still be a government and there will still ask him for an estimate of the length of his be a labour relations act. We are only caretakers of presentation. those things. Mr. Moist: I cannot make an accurate estimate, I will say right now to you: Bill 70 represents the although I have a lot to say to you and to members greatest intrusion into building the kind of trust that of this committee. is needed between employees and employers. It Mr. Manness: Madam Acting Chairman, I will be represents the greatest intrusion into that trust moving a motionthen, as soon as I have it drafted. relationship that has existed for the last 72 years. Mr. Moist can continue to speak. I will be moving a There has never been a piece of legislation in motion shortly. Manitoba that has set aside collective rights like this

*** one does. I know that there are members of the government, Mr.Moist: I find it regrettable, Madam Acting Chair, members of the cabinet, who know about collective that because of the late hour, people are going to bargaining. I know there are many of them that start movingmotions which I fully anticipate will limit know that it is based on trust. It is also based on the amount of time people can speak before this power, and there is absolutely no question that in committee. My preference would have been to labour relations, just like the politics of this province, come here tomorrow morning, tomorrow evening, the pendulum swings. Right now it has swung to a Saturday; but I know what is coming down the pike, Conservativemajority government. You know, and and I expect nothing more and oftentimes Jess from I know, you will not be a majority government here the person who just spoke. forever. The pendulum in Canada has swung away

* (0200) from working people to some extent. I know it will swing back, and I hate to think of the price that The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Dacquay): Mr. Moist, workers will extract for that. just for clarification and to put on the record, you fully had the opportunity to return tomorrow morning, On December 14, we were honoured to meet with regardless of whether your name was called this the cabinet of Manitoba. I regretted at the time that evening or not. the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) was not July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 127

there, but he announced, that day, informal wage disputes with services being withdrawn? No round guidelines. That was the prelude to Bill 70. of bargaining had got to that stage yet. What caused the rights of 48,000 Manitobans to be set (Mr. Chairman in the Chair) aside? I suggest it was the government did not like Those informal wage guidelines made an the rules. They made a deal in this House last exception-! agreed with the exception-the December to prorogue in exchange for extension of exception for the Manitoba Nurses' Union. Why a piece of legislation. Employees accessed that was an exception needed for them? Because they legislation. The law of Manitoba permitted them to deserved a catch-up. They had fallen behind. do so. One group did it after 60 days on the picket Their work had not been valued properly. I line, and seemingly the provincial government supported that and my colleagues here supported cannot honour the deal that they made in the it, and Manitobans supported it. Unfortunately, it Legislature with their colleagues. They took a 30-day strike. You with Bill 70 are going to retroactively snatched that deal back. I call that create the same situation. You are going to create welshing. My dad taught me that was welshing. the injustice that requires catch-up at the bargaining What did that do? table and workers are going to come back and The root cause of the government's overreaction bargain for that. The economy might be a littlefuller to the bargaining situation in Manitoba, I think, lies than it is right now. The surplus of labour might be in the hands of four or five radical men-David a little less, and you are going to be in an awful Bowman, Jack Chapman, Martin Freedman. position. You are going to create the need for These are radical people who will lead the next another exception which you announced yourself on general strike, you might believe if you read the December 14. newspapers. All they have done is apply the I think the Winnipeg Free Press editorial page principles that arbitrators must apply when gave good advice to the government of Manitoba. I arbitrators are set with a task to do. Now you as think decent labour relations ought to be valued legislators are caretakers of a lot more legislation betweenworkers and the people whothey work for. than just The Labour Relations Act. Make no bones about it, all we have is the labour Your forebears decided that firefighters in this that we are selling to you. We have in collective province should not have the right to strike. We agreements the rights that you do not have. We have the firefighters arbitration act, an act of this have abridged some of your rights as management. Legislature which sets out that process. Police We need those collective agreements to be opened officers have the same thing, an act of this regularly, not to be frozen, to adjust things that have Legislature. Teachers, as a matter ofpublic policy, nothing to do with money. do not have the right to strike. Housed in this My union has 2,400 of those collective Legislature is the rules for them settling their agreements across the country, 400,000 members. agreement. What are those rules? Did we just Ninety-eight percent of those locals are members make them up in Manitoba? They are the product, under 50 people. They do not have a lot of clout and basically, of the British legal system and our labour a lot of power-daycares, school board workers. relations system which is patterned loosely after it. Why do we get settlements 95 percent of the time Those rules require arbitrators, because of case without job action or arbitration-because we are so law and precedent, to follow certain rules. They powerful, because we have clout? There is not a lot applied those rules in the context of final offer of clout in a daycare of 12 people. We know how to selection in four or five awards which found such sit down and negotiate at daycares that have no disfavour with the government of the day that the money. We negotiate things like extra days off. We government has retroactively overruled those negotiate paid education leave. We keep wages awards and snatched back the deal they made with low because we cannot drain those daycares. We the other parties in the House last December. What are responsible at the bargaining table. did those arbitrators do to cause that backlash? There are members in this cabinet who know how What did they do? Did they ignore conventional our union can conduct ourselves. Why do the arbitral guidelines? Did they take, literally, foot bargaining rights of 48,000 Manitobans have to be upon foot of precedent and toss it out that window? set aside? What precipitated it? Was it protracted No. They applied those principles. 128 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

They are going to do the same thing when Bill 70 public sector than it is in the private. It is of lesser is gone, and you will pay for that if you want to weight in the eyes of the law. Why? I think it an engage in arbitration as opposed to collective important point to indicate clearly that I disagree with bargaining with the strike option. Those rules were Mr. Kells who argued for the government as to not invented by the labour movement. They were blurring the distinction between public and private not invented by any government. The principles of undertakings. You tried to argue in that arbitration arbitration that arbitrators must follow are the that there is no difference. The private sector has product of decades anddecades of case law, and the ability to pay or not to pay at times. Government they have no other option but to follow those. is no different.

• (0210) Mr. Bowman, not me, not the union, not the Free Press, the arbitrator that you agreed to said this to The final piece ofpaper that I am going to refer to, that argument: It has been observed by many I believe, had a lot to do with Bi11 70 and the fact that arbitrators and others that whereas a private this government most likely will pass Bill 70. It had employer may be unable to pay simply because it to do with the settlementfor the operating engineers. cannot increase the cost of its product without losing I am only going to dwellon the ability-to-pay section, its share ofthe market, and there is no way to reduce because what happened in that final offer selection other costs of production, this does not apply and process? Here is a group of workers whose cannot apply to the public sector. In the public contract ended at the end of December. They sector, it is always a question of choices made by worked without a contract for a while. They then the governing body concerned. There are choices withdrew their labour as was their legal right and, between increasing taxes or cutting services. after 60 days, they legally accessed the provisions There are choices as to what taxes to increase or to of The Labour Relations Act giving rise to final offer decrease. There are choices inevitably as to what selection. are the Important and lesser concerns and who What were the outstanding issues? Money. should pay, or who should be helped, or who should What did the union take in there astheir final position get more, or who should get less. These are and the arbitrator has to take this or that? No mixing philosophical or ideological conclusions. Hence, They took in there a 4.5 percent increase to all when we are dealing with public funds and public classifications effective the date of the selector's choices, they are political considerations. award, which was dated June of this year, June 5. That is not dogma written by some trade union or They went in with their bargaining position with a some group that you do not findfavour with. Those six-month wage freeze put on the table for the are the principles that have been applied to the government. That finds such disfavour with the public sector throughout Canada, in Britain, and government that you need to impose a 12-month throughout the Commonwealth. There is not the freeze? I will bet youdollars to doughnuts you could third option that you housed in your letter to the have talkedthis out with that group of employees. president of the Federation of Labour, that we set What did the arbitrator say about the ability to pay, aside wage increases for a year. There are two because I fully want questions on that from you. I options, tax or cut. Have the fortitude to go to the want to share with you, not my views on the ability people of Manitoba and say, yes, these services are to pay, the views of case law throughout North important, we are going to tax or, no, we cannot America-! should say, throughout the afford them, we cannot provide this service. You Commonwealth. We are based on the British want the third option that doesnot exist in law. model. We follow those principles. What did David He concludes, and this is the final excerpt that I Bowman in canvassing the ability-to-pay argument choose to read from Mr. Bowman's award: For an say? arbitrator, whether under final offer selection or in another context, to review the choices made by a He startson page 12of that award which you have government, and substitute his/her own scale of in front of you. He says at the bottom, I must be values and philosophy, he says that is wrong. mindfulof the numerous decisions to some of which I will make later reference, indicating that the The argument of ability to pay when it relates to a ability-to-pay argument is one which is necessarily provincial government necessarily invites that kind of significantly lesser moment when invoked in the of examination. I do not intend to embark upon a July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 129

critique of governmental funding and spending option. He imposed the zero because he thought it decisions. This is not within my purview. Similarly, was warranted in the circumstance. however, I am not obliged in carrying out my function There are only two options for government: tax to rubber stamp or blindly adopt the priorities and or cut services. Do not take it off the backs of your choices of government in order to say that there is workers. Do not so impair your relationship with no capacity to meet a wage increase. workers that you are going to cause them to ruin that David Bowman finishes in discharging his arbitral employment relationship. responsibilities by saying this, and Bob Olien, a I have a phrase that I use at times with employers. witness earlier tonight, touched on it: If free Sometimes they listen to it; other times they do not. collective bargaining had been able to work I would I do not believe labour relations is a one-inning, a not be dealing with the matter. In the instant case, three-inning or a nine-inning ball game. It is the employer says free collective bargaining perpetual extra innings. produced no change in the employer's fiscal approach and the strike made no difference to it. There will be people sittingin this room 50 years Accordingly therefore, the union would have to from now from unions and from government. They come around to accepting the employer's position will be talking about matters such as this. Some of in the long run. The union replies, of course, that it, them will be here from CUPE. Some will be too, did not change its position and the employer Conservatives. Some will be NDP. They will be might have to come around. Neither of these talking about these things. What will we have done propositions is in any way capable of proof. to contribute to their relationship? They will be talking about these things a hundred years from What is reasonably apparent is that there was now. We are not going anywhere. So, if the nothing which could be properly termed free pendulum has swung in your direction in this collective bargaining. When the funding source has recession, have fun with it, because the pendulum expressly taken the position that there is an never stays there. It never stays there. immutable limit, it becomes apparent that the employer's bargaining representatives had none of * (0220) the freedom ordinarily associated with bargaining. Look at the pictures in this room. They all reflect Bargaining invokes give-and-take, the the pendulum swinging. In Manitoba, thankfully, I advancement of a position knowing it may be say, as a third-generation person born to this necessary to alter that position. Here there is no province, I am glad we have not swung like the sign of give-and-take and no sign of any real province of British Columbia or Great Britain at bargaining. He concludes by saying he can find no times. I am glad we have not gone out here and out evidence that the operating engineers at hospitals here. I believe that would be not in the public in Manitoba cause the government's fiscal interest. I believe Manitobans have elected problems. Therefore, it is unfair to take it out on governments lately of Conservative or NDP stripe. them. He chooses for the employees. He chooses Both of those governments, up until very recently, their position of a six-month wage freeze after 60 have gone-nobody has taken advantage of the days without pay on a picket line that they voluntarily confidence of the public. got themselves into--do not get me wrong. He What is happening now? You want to create a chooses the union's radical position at cost to the situation. I guess I should thank you, because you employer of less than 3 percent and he so orders. know what you are doing. You are awakening up a Bill 70 comes along and zaps that out of the air. work force that is not going to tolerate this. The The workers who have not had a wage increase public in Manitoba is not going to tolerate this, not for 18 months now will not have one for another 12, because they think government workers should despite the radical musings of David Bowman in have a blank cheque in dealing with government. discharging his arbitral responsibility. He rejected The people of Manitoba who are not directly categorically the third option in the fourth paragraph affected by this are going to find it to be unfair, of the letter that yousent to my Federation of Labour. because collective bargaining is a fair process. The Mr. Freeman has found favour with government union I work for does not rape taxpayers. We argument on a recent occasion. He imposed the conductourselves responsibly. Our main goal is to zero. He rejected, in imposing that zero, the third get agreements, not cause problems. 130 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

It was a big problem 72 years ago that put us filing a grievance, parties simply put down their where we are now, with not a bad Labour Relations tools? Is that the productivity Canada needs to Act that you are setting aside. That problem is compete in the global economy? canvassed and it is only a two-hour read. It would I recently negotiated a collective agreement be far better reading than perhaps what we have which took a step out of the grievance procedure, been engaged in for the last six hours. which takes lawyers out of the grievance procedure. There is a two-hour read that you could all People such as me and government negotiators, lay purchase that has recently been published by a people, will argue the arbitrations. Your legislation Winnipeg publishing firm here this month. It is a will freeze provisions like that, freely entered into in novel called Fox. I read it last Saturday night. It is collective bargaining, because the collective written by a woman whose name is Margaret agreement says how you will process grievances. Sweatman, and her father took steps into politics a That has to be amended so that the parties are trying number of years ago, Allan Sweatman. She has to do responsible things. written a novel, which is only a couple of hundred pages, about young people who are courting one You do not read about collective bargaining that another, two couples. It is not different than any gets settled. In Canada, thankfully, over 85 percent novel that you could pick up anywhere except its of what we call collective bargaining amongst the backdrop is Winnipeg in the months of April, May four oddmil lion of us who are organized, you never and June 1919. One of the male characters is a hear about it. It is not the statistic published in member of the committee of000, 1 and one of the Labour Canada aboutwhatthe percentage increase male members is a member of the trade union is. That is one part of bargaining. It is seniority movement. Both of the females have nothing to do systems, layoff systems, how do we manage with either. technological change, maternity leave, grievance procedures. We sortour differencesout so that this If you want to know how we have come to be what employee over here doesnot lay down his tools for we are and divisions that exist in this city that we three hours when he has a bitch. We put together have mended but firm positions that we take on rules to deal with the fact that in Canada now It Is issues like this, and I will not get personal here or differentthan when I grew up. My mother was home take personal swipes at people, but I will tell you every day, by choice; many of the members I there are fundamental differences in this room on represent, the female partners in that relationship or things such as free collective bargaining. The trade the male, cannot choose to stay home. They must union movement will fight you through all legal work. devices if you embark on this path and continue to That creates a need for structures, new do so. Why? Because we value so much the rights structures in the workplace, daycares, deferral of that our forebears have been able to secure for us. wages in exchange for benefits such as increased Those were born out of 1919. maternity leave. We cannot even talk about doing those things on behalf of the women and men who There has been a standoff between labour and we represent during the period that Bill 70 freezes management in this city for over 70 years. There our working conditions. It is despicable. has not been an explosion unless you want to call our activities at elections explosive at times. I think Collective bargaining works in Manitoba. We what happened in 1969 was rather explosive, but have, over the past two decades, an enviable nothing comes close to what happened in 1919 in record. No province save for Prince Edward Island the 72 years since. I want to tell you what can ignite comes close. When I see things like Bill 70--and I things like that. Bill 70 has every potential to ignite regret this, but I have to agree with a former member feelings as extreme as that, because you have not of this Chamber, the former member for Inkster, Mr. done what other provinces have done in Canada in Green, who argued as a matter of principle. He recent months. I find what they have done would have comment on Bill 70, and he may be reprehensible. They have frozen wages. You have here. He would say about Bill 70 this, this is the not just frozen wages. You have taken away the product trade union movement of having sold your ability for a set period of time for unions and most fundamental right. He would argue that. I find management to negotiate working conditions. Do such disfavour with that argument, although at its you want to return to the system where, instead of core there is a lot of substance to that argument. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 131

Those who argue that are putting forward the can only create more unemployment. It can only proposition, no mediation, no conciliation, no hurt the economy of Manitoba. arbitration, your power versus our power. You do The members that I represent or that Mr. Olien not like what we are offering, withdraw your labour. represents or the other people who have been here I notice, Mr. Chairman, a member of the tonight, they do not send their money to Swiss bank committee nodding his head to that. I, in concept, accounts. They do not invest outside of Manitoba. find it hard to argue with that concept that it does They spend. unfortunately-because I believe we come down to power. I do not think it serves the all should try to save, it is the way I was brought up. citizens that make up our province very well. I They are spending virtually 1 00 percent of their would much rather lookeyeball to eyeball with my money here in Winnipeg and Manitoba. How can employer and say, we have a problem here. The that be bad? easy way out is to say, oh, well, we cannot solve it. There are 48,000 Manitobans right now. If they I am going to go on strike, and I am going to try and do not own a house or have to renew a big mortgage beat you. You might beat me this time. I will beat and are extremely worried about doing that, does you next time. That is the easy way out of these that help the construction industry? You are problem�r to give it to a third party. It is easy. It restraining the economy in the midst of a recession. is extremely easy. It defies, absolutely defies, conventional economic Do you knowwhat is hard to do? It is hard to get thought that has been borne in Europe and in North into a room with the position that you have narrowed America, and you will hurt every Manitoban by doing down to and the position that the employer is that, not just the 48,000 people who have had their narrowed down to, and you are still apart. You have rights set aside for a period of 12 months, which we a responsibility to try to narrow those are so indignant about. Every Manitoban will be positions-you, as the employer, to keep services hurt because every Manitoban engages in being delivered to Manitobans; we, as trade commerce. unionists, to not get our people in situations that There are Manitobans running stores. Every none of them want to be in. other Manitoban goes in those stores. You are I have never met a worker who wants to, as a taking and choking the economy. I think you have matter of course, withdrawhis or her labour-never. choked the economy of the biggest engine that I have met many workers prepared to do that when drives this province, and that is the economy of the they face indignant action, such as Bill 70, tactics at city of Winnipeg. I believe you are going to choke the bargaining table. the rest of the economy with policies such as this. What do we do? We do not have money. We go I ask members ofthis committee, in reflecting, to on strike for 60 days. We feed each other in each think about what Bill 70 represents. It would be very other's homes. We give each other clothes. We narrow of me to say that it represents an attack on lose our houses. It does not matter. There is that just 48,000 Manitobans. It attacks their families dignity to collective bargaining. The absolute and, indeed, every Manitoban any time you remove lunacy of this is that collective bargaining works. a right so fundamental as collective bargaining. I What precipitated the introduction of Bill 70? Are believe you could have negotiated with each and we going to restrain the economy of Manitoba in a every public sector union in this province. You recession? My God, I find that inconceivable. could have taken a hard line in bargaining, but you could have bargained. You had a choice to bargain, In the last recession, the Pawley administration and you chose not to bargain. spent. They borrowed in the first couple of years of that recession. They got Manitoba out of that I guess I want to conclude by telling you what I recession quicker than any other province. think will happen to your workforce as a result ofthis. I think it is wrong when employers create situations • (0230) where employees feel negative about coming to I tell you, if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had work or negative about their employers. There was behaved as this government, we never would have a fellow who spoke here tonight. He made a very gotten out of the Depression. They spent. Policies candid presentation from the Manitoba Telephone of restraint that take $70 million out of the economy System, talking about how the management there 132 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

had tried to instill pride in them and what happened fraternity, or whatever you want to call it, at the time in the MTX fiasco, and things like that. He struck people retire. me as being very sincere and proud to be an That is what you are going to get when you take employee of MTS, and I saw both sides of this table away fundamental rights like collective bargaining. listening to him intently. What do you do to that It is not a broken system. It is the system that has when you do not let those people negotiate a new kept us in check and balance with each other for daycare space, an extra sick day, get to the decades. It has kept us from getting too extreme. bargaining table to solve a problem? You create a It has kept, I would hope, government from getting negative situation in the workplace. too extreme in terms of exploiting workers. It has My dad was a public servant for 45 years and a created one of the best countries on Earth, if not the proud one. When he started to work-1 believe it best, but let us not play on people's good will. was 1938. Then he went to the war and came back Bill 70 plays on good will. It plays on the fact that to the same job. When he started to work in 1938, people will bite their lip and go not 18 months without there were people in the place where he worked who a wage increase, they will go 36 months. They will had crossed the picket line in 1919. He was make ends meet. They will get a second job. You employed 19 years after that strike ended. Those are playing on people's nerves that have not been people had been working for 19 years since the tapped into for a long time. You are tapping into strike ended. No one spoke to them. They had them now, and you are going to create disharmony. violated the sacred trust that exists between working You are going to make the labour movement more people. I do not believe that would be a productive organized than it has ever been. relationship to create-19 years in a workplace and I am going to be in a position, possibly, to have your co-workers will not speak to you. At its some role to play in the organization of that labour essence, that is what government does when it force. I am going to do my best to continue to tell divides workers. It creates situations like that. them that collective bargaining can work, but I am My dad retired from the public service and had a going to have a hard time convincing them that it is retirement party and elected officials came there. the best system when they see it cast aside like this. The member for Kirkfieldcame there, and numerous This is fundamentally wrong, absolutely, other elected officials came there, and he had had fundamentally wrong, in the midst of a recession, for fights with those people over issues of policy, you to be restraining the economy like this, and disagreements, fundamental disagreements. I nothing precipitated this. There was no massive withdrawal of services that hurt Manitobans. have fundamental disagreements with the member from Kirkfield, but we know each other well. We You took care of the special case, as you called have those conversations, but we have a cordial it, on December 14. What was left? A bunch of relationship, I think. He thought enough of my dad's workers, one of whom stood before you tonight and 45 years of service to come and break bread with said we did not want much, 2 percent or 3 percent. him on the last day that he worked when he was I mean, I think you are in the midst of making a honoured. H you create the divisions that existed, colossal goof, a political goof which pleases me flowing from 1919, when my dad entered the work because you will not be around three years from force in 1938, when people did not even speak to now, more importantly, a moral goof. You are each other who did the same job, I do not believe breaking apart a relationship that has been patched you foster a situation that leads to retirement parties. together after a significant breakup in 1919.

I believe you foster relations that lead to * (0240) disharmony. So I tell you, do whatever you want, but a lot of If a politician showed up, if somebody would be what I have said tonight is based on my decade as inclined to get extreme, he would not be welcome at a person entrusted to speak on behalf of working an event like that. That would be regrettable, people. I believe collective bargaining can work. I because there is certainly a role for employers have seen it work. I know it works. It is the best and fiscally and morally to say thank you to people who the fairest way to settle the difference between us devote their lives to jobs. I would hate to see a about what our labour is worth and what you are system created which would disallow that type of prepared to pay for it. So it only takes a little July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 133

reflection, I think, and you might think twice about I do not think too many people would argue that. this thing. I suspect you will not, but I suspect the That could continue as long as there were people people left in this room at 20 to three on July 11 or out there prepared to lend you money. The issue 12, whatever it is, are entrenched in their positions. then was not taxation, in the minds of the We know where we come from, and we know the government of the day, it was deferred taxation-let exercise we are going through right now. I wish it somebodyelse worry about it in the next generation. was not so, and if it is not so, I ask this committee This government took a different approach, not to set aside Bill 70 and recommend to the because we are so pure ideologically, but because Legislature that it not be adopted. we believed in two or three years the bankers were Mr. Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Moist. going to tell us, you would take a differentapproach, At this time, I believe there might be a number of just like what happened in Newfoundland. Still we questions for you. had-you are right, we could increase taxes for Mr. Manness: Let me compliment Mr. Moist on a another year or two or we could cut services. We very powerful presentation, one that I am sure have cut out of the budget this year internal reform deserves not only listening to but reading when it is roughly $28 to $40 million. We have heard about it committed to print as a record of the proceedings every day in the Legislature from some colleagues tonight. around this table, each one of those cuts in some way being called Draconian, almost as Draconian Mr. Chairman, the government decision to enter as this legislation, to use some people's words. into the drafting of Bill 70 was not a very easy decision. As a matter of fact, it was incredibly Mr. Chairman, I say to Mr. Moist that the decision difficult, because many of the points that Mr. Moist was not entered into easily. I say to him that has addressed and has brought forward in his governments, the six of them across the country presentation certainly were considered and provincially that have brought in some fashion of this weighed, weighed very heavily. type of restraint have not done so to garner votes. I As Mr. Moist, obviously from a philosophical, and do not see where a lot of votes are garnered. I am not going to cast judgment on what philosophy Maybe there is an argument to be made that there may or may not be important to him, but certainly is a real problem out there and that governments of from an economic point of view, and I hear his the day that take that problem seriously feel like they reference to Roosevelt and I heard his glowing have to do something. I would just hope that those reference to the former Premier and how it is that in opposition to Bill 70 would at least give the one comes out of recession. I heard particularly his government that much credit. reference to an arbitrator, and I forget which one Beyond that, Mr. Moist talks about other now, that he indicated said that governments have negotiations, and his statement is fair. Other people the choice. They can tax and/or they can cut have made this point. How can you, through this services. bill-it is bad enough that you pull away Unfortunately, as I see it, and I do not claim to be compensation, but by this bill you have frozen a labour expert, I mean that is known by everybody everything. Is there any type of a regulation, draft in this room, but as I surveythe political process over or something that I could show Mr. Moist or, indeed, the last 20 years, I look at the models, certainly the anybody who brought forward that particular models of arbitration and some of the flirtations with criticism, that would convince you and others that other models that we have had in this province over the government is not wishing to restrain that period of time, that they are always based on negotiations and bargaining around governments, and I will say governments that, in nonmonetary-if they could be shown and defined support of those processes, of course, did not tax as nonmonetary-issues? Government is not but, indeed, went and borrowed money. interested in trying to interfere with the bargaining It is very easy, of course. Those of us who are around nonmonetary issues. Would that make any around the cabinet table now are forced to make portion of this bill easier to accept? difficult decisions but, over the last 20 years, in any Mr. Moist: Mr. Chairman, through you to the province, regardless of who was in power, the minister, he said a number ofthings, before I get to easiest place to get a yes from was the cabinet table. his notion of an amendment. He said this was a 134 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

tough decision for cabinet. Was it a unanimous who is doing nothing more than following the rules decision of the cabinet of this province? of the committee andI thought gave a very relevant Mr. Manness: You know better than to ask that presentation. question. I just hope you remind the members of the public Mr. Moist: The minister cannot answer, Mr. of that so they do not feel affected by those Chairman. -(interjection)- comments. Mr. Chairman, I am getting spoken at by Mr. Chairman: No problem. The honourable somebody without a microphone on. I did not hear member did not have a point of order, as he is aware her. of. Point of Order ***

Mrs. Dacquay: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. Mr. Chairman: There are no time limits, in effect. The procedure in the committee andin the Chamber Mr. Moist, if you can answer the question that was is that the members ask the debater or the presenter put forward, please. questions, notthe other way round. I think we have Mr. Moist: Mr. Chairman, with respect to an been very diligent, very patient. Everybody's amendment, I would think it is incumbent upon the patience is waning. government of the day, with the bargaining agents It is my understanding that Mr. Moist, representing those 48,000 employees, to get behind unfortunately,I think, to the detriment of some of the closed doors with them and talk about what ought people in this room, used in excess of one hour in to happen with collective bargaining in Manitoba. It his presentation. I think to expedite things we is not a proper forum at ten to three in the morning, should be very firm in our procedural rules. afterthis many hours of discussion and debate, for Mr.Chairman: There wasno point of order there. a representative-here as a private citizen, but a Not only to yourself, Mr. Moist, but to other members representative nonetheless of the trade union of the committeeand presenters, I have been trying movement-to take a position on what partiesought to keep the matters relevant this evening. I would to be doing behind closed doors.

appreciate if the questions that were being put * (0250) forward to the presenters were put in a littleshorter You ought to be hammering things out behind form, if there are a number of clarifications. closed doors. Go to Mr. Olfert,who represents the I can understand emotions are high. With the Manitoba Government Employees' Association, ask presentation of the type of Mr. Moist's, there is a lot him for a meeting, sit behind closed doors with him of information to bring forward. I do not believe this and his committee and hammer something out. is the time or the place to be debating with Mr. Moist There is no way on earth that a representative of the on specific issues of this bill. I would appreciate it if labour movement appearing here on behalf of his we can keep our questions short. Possibly we can organization, or as a private citizen, is going to put keep things relevant, and it will be much easier to any context in an amendment when the government have this committee operate with a little bit of does things like they did in December. They made decorum. a deal to extend final offerselection legislation, and Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Industry, Trade then they snatched it back. They welshed on it. and Tourism): Not to prolong this, but I would be The comment there: it is easy to borrow and in most interested in getting to Mr. Moist's answer, to two or three years the creditors will come knocking the very specific question that the minister on Manitoba's door. I guess we are to take from that concluded with. I think it is a very pertinentquestion comment that this government knows best. The and would appreciate hearing Mr. Moist's response. credit rating-no one has announced it is in any Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, I know you ruled danger of being lowered from where it is right now, there was not a previous point of order. I would just to the best of my knowledge, but in anticipation of hope that you would also reiterate to members of what New York or Standard and Poor's may do two the public that we do not have time lim its in terms of or three years from now, we must put this package this. I find it unfortunate that a member of the of restraint on the table. We must take $70 million committee would criticize a member of the public out of the economy. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 135

And what happens yesterday in the Free Press? So is there an amendment that can deal with The member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock)questions the nonmonetary items that will be less of an intrusion Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) saying that your into the collective bargaining processthat we could projections were very, very off, and he bases that find favour with? The answer I say is for you to on a preliminary report from the Conference Board speak to the bargaining agents of those groups of Canada. He is suggesting-! believe the behind closed doors in a proper bargaining setting. member for Osborne was suggesting, you have You may find-1 do not know, I do not speak for manufactured this situation. So you put the them-groups willing to negotiate. The operating question to me, and you tell me It was a tough engineers went into an arbitration with a wage decision. I think it was a simple decision for the freeze on the table, a wage freeze for six months. I cabinet of this government. It was a simple believe you could talk with those groups and sort decision. It is easier to say no to your employees this matter out, so my answer to your question is, than it is to say no to Brian Mulroney. It is earlier to speak to the people who need to be spoken to. say no to your employees than it is to say no to Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Moist. Mr. Ashton creditors who may come knocking in three years. It has some questions for you. is completely, fiscally, responsible for governments in times of recession to borrow. Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, I do commend Mr. Moist for his presentation, particularly the clarity of I will not get partisan, Mr. Chairman, buttherewas the presentation, given the late hour, and I found the a comment made earlier about the 1987 budget of comments to be very interesting. I found one the previous government, and we are to believe comment in particularto be interesting. I wanted to from the commenter that was an inappropriate just- budget, an attackon people in Manitoba, an attack on the purse of Manitobans, a revenue grab of Mr. Chairman: Mr. Ashton, if you could just bring untold example. You are reaping the benefit of that your mike up so that Hansard will pick you up a little fair taxation policy which fairly taxed people equally. bit. You are not giving a cent of it back to people. It if Mr. Ashton: Sorry, Mr. Chairperson. I found one was so unfair, why are you not giving it back? comment in particularto be interesting, and that was Give it to the members. Give it to the 48,000 the reference to 1919 because, following the protest Manitobans who have paid the tax that you called that took place, I commented in the House, when I unfair -(interjection)- It is in the pocket of the had the opportunity to speak on the bill, on one of Government of Manitoba. the placards that struck me the most,and it was not the more cryptic comments that were put, although I guess what I am saying is that if that budget so some of those were certainly interesting-some offended the current Minister of Finance when he Garys are doers, others are dictators-there were was Finance critic in 1987-as he expressed in the various items of that nature, but what struck me most House, it offended him as a revenue grab of untold was one that said: 1919: Lest We Forget. proportions-why has that revenue grab, as the opposition of the day called it, not been given back The fact that in 1919, there were those, the to Manitobans? You are reaping the benefit of the Committee of 1000, the elite of Winnipeg, the windfall that produced for the coffersof the Province establishment of Winnipeg, whatever term you want of Manitoba. You are using it to justify holding down to use, who basically crushed a labour movement at taxes now. You are not willing to tax or spend any that time which consisted essentially of veterans money to give workers who have not had a wage returned from the then war to end all wars, increase, the lion's share of them from the MGEA, unemployed many of them, underemployed others, since October 1 , 1989, the last time they saw their who were fighting for some basic working rights, paycheque jump. You are not prepared to give including, in many cases, the right to collective them an increase in the face of the GST, in the face bargaining. of every economic argument that we have. They What I found interesting from your comments was cannot have a 3 percent or 4 percent or 4.5 percent the parallel of what happened. While they broke the raise. That is actually astounding, and it depresses strike, they did not break the labour movement, they our economy, and I am told it takes $70 million did not break the political movements, the socialist potentially out of the economy. parties, the social democratic parties which later 136 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

formed the CCF. In fact, some leaders of the strike Mr. Moist: Mr. Chairman, I said earlier that I believe in 1919 were later elected to political office, the foundation of collective bargaining is trust. I do including in this Legislature, in some cases from jail. believe there are huge amounts of power involved The reason I am raising that is that-1 am realistic; in it, but I also believe favourable labour relations this government has a majority. We were reminded are based on mutual respect coupled with trust. I of that on election night-a majority is a majority is said earlier that I thought Bill 70 was an intrusion of a majority. It is not always a permanent majority. such magnitude that it would break the trust Even four- or five-year periods do not necessarily between employers and employees. operate. We saw that in 1988. I also know what is being called into question in My question, Mr. Chairperson, to the presenter is: my dealings with workers on the shop floor. This Given the fact that obviously this government has morning, at 7:45, when I go to that meeting, they are the numbers, and I had hoped that there might be calling into question their trust in people such as some who would be willing-it would only take one myself. You might find that to be an oddstate ment, but I have told them that collective bargaining can or two Conservative members to vote with their work. I have told them that, when we formulate conscience on this or abstain to grant its packages for negotiations, please do not expect to passage-butassume that they can deliver that and get what you go in with, even though every one can use their power as a government, a temporary be articulated as being legitimate. I have government as all governments are, to put through encouraged people to enter into negotiations in the this bill, what do you feel the impact is going to be spirit of give-and-take, co-operation and, at times, in terms of the labour movement and labour firm stances, but it ain't over till it is over, and at relations in the future? times, we have been hours, minutes away from I know you have touched on the reaction, but I serious disputes which we have hammered out. want to give you theoppor tunity, particularly in terms I told them in recent rounds of bargaining leading of the many people you work with and represent, up to June 3 of this year, look it, it is tough because I think one of theproblems the government bargaining. I do not believe we are going to get has had in this building and the bunker mentality of everything we want, but let us stick together. Letus this building is that they have not seen the anger, play by the rules. When the rule book gets the frustration that I have had the opportunity to see. amended or altered or gutted to the extent that the I have talked to many CUPE members, for example. rule book we have to live by is going to be altered I had the opportunityto talk to many, and we shared by Bill 70, itis going to hurt the trust relationship not that opportunity. only between employees and employers but between employees andthe unions that represent I have not seen that level of anger and frustration them. in the 1 0 years I have been in this Legislature on labour relations issues. I think the only parallel was I have always had a saying that it is an easy, easy back in 1984 on another issue. You know, I have thing to get into a dispute, extremely easy. It would talked to people who have served longer than I have be an easy thing for me to spank my daughter and and been involved in labour relations; and, when I send her to her room in a gesture of power, much start hearing people saying Sterling Lyon was not harder thing to deal with the root of the conflict all that bad in the labour movement, Ken between us by sorting it out. It is a dumb analogy you might think, but it is exactly the same in labour MacMaster, I defeated in 1981 , was not all that bad, relations, extremely easy to get on a picket line. It when I hear myself saying that in the Legislature, is hard to get off of one. It is easy to get on them. something is happening. It is macho. Some might think it is macho. I have I am wondering if you could maybe relay in a way spent my career and many colleagues in my union that I cannot, although I understand what is and other unions have spent their careers trying to happening, with your direct contacts with the avoid that, to try to tone down the rhetoric. grassroots, how people are reacting out there to this In my dealings with politicians at other levels of government and Bill 70, something that is really government and employers who are not political, we unparallelled since 1919. have tried not to pepper our presentations with

• (0300) undue rhetoric. We have had serious July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 137

disagreements at times, but if we disagreed today I want to ask you, since you are obviously feeling on this round of collective bargaining and we settled that pressure, as someone who is essentially a for something less than fair, we knew we had to deal problem solver by background, because I believe with each other next week when a plant had to be that is what the labour movement is about-it is closed down. You are going to have to deal with about problem solving, although that is not often those things. Workers have to be taken care of if portrayed to members of the public. It is about you are going to close down a plant. negotiations. It is about the 99.9 percent of The employment relationships that I have had, I contracts that are settled without strikes, without have told my members to trust the actions we are lockouts, through agreement. How is that going to taking. They are going to call that into question affect your ability? Not only are we seeing the because I have told them to play by the rules and difficulty here with this bill that there are no the rules are being changed. I was brought up to negotiations with the government for one year, but respect those rules. I think the work ethic within the now the government is saying, well, it is just going public sector in Manitoba is one to be applauded. to be a one-year bill. I believe the Premier (Mr. We do not have what existed in many other Filmon) called it a temporary pause. countries in terms of shoddy public services and How are you going to be able to go back to the shoddy public servants. You as employers have people you are going to meet tomorrow and say to mechanisms in place to weed out those public them, well, we are frozen, but the government says servants. You have a committed public work force, it is only for a year, maybe, because they have not and you are trodding on their rights to such a degree totally given up the possibility of introducing a that you are going to shatter the trust that the guy second year? Even if we are to accept that, what is from MTS talked about earlier tonight. That is the the reaction going to be from your members in biggest potential disaster about Bill 70. starting the negotiating process all over again after, Mr.Ashto n: I signed the document,which was an basically, one year's time, in terms of negotiations, agreement between the three parties, as House has been wasted? What kind of reaction are you leader, signed by the minister and by the other gettingfrom people now? opposition House leader, the Liberal House leader, Mr. Moist: Mr. Chairman, I guess if l-andI hear it which stated that final offer selection would be in when I sit in the gallery and watch Question Period place. It became a public document. It was in the main Chamber. I could give a glib response communicated to members of the public. and say there has been no pause on prices. I will I note in your presentation, you refer to one not do that. What is going to happen is what a selector decision that has now become null and presenter talked to you about a few hours ago. That void, even though the government had said, signed was Mr. Olien. He talked about signing a document officially,that it would be in place. I understand your and giving his word that was a deal and then having sense in terms of trust. I understand what you are somebody welsh on that, even though they had saying in terms of strikes because I have been signed it. That is unforgivable. He did not know through two strikes personally. I was through one how you could repair that relationship again. in 1976 in Thompson and in 1981 , actually, before I There is no magic about bargaining. I want to tell was elected. Actually, at the time, I do not think I you, the toughest part of bargaining is bargaining really recognized the significance of what was within your own committee. I have sat face to face happening. What did strike me after the fact was with politicians, with small committees and paid the fact, in many cases-in 1981 , for example, that spokesmen, whatever you want to call me, and done strike was about a lot more than the contract. It was a deal. I have gone back into the committee room about frustration. People were mad at the and said, that is the deal, that is best I can get, that company. They were mad, and they were going to is the deal. I have spent more time in that committee walk almost no matter what happened. room than I spent face to face with the em pi oyer and What I still remember from that process is how had a tougher time. tough it was for the negotiating committee to * (0310) negotiate once people walked. There was a lot at stake and a lot of difficulty, so I understand the My skin has been peeled much further down my context you are putting it in. back by my own committee members than by any 138 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

employer, because people who are not face to face bear our soul and get sucked in? They are going to and not partof the so-called "short strokes" oftendo call into question the integrity of the employer. By not realize why their proposal for paid daycare has definition, because the employer cannot make a not been granted. It is fair. That is bargaining. You deal by himself, they will call into question what kind do not get everything you want. of deal the negotiators made. Then you do not have twoparties. Collective bargaining is supposed to be I am very worried, through the Chair to the two parties, the union and the employer. Then you member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), that we are have three parties,or you have the media out there, going to leave large negotiating committees,go into a fourth party. You have all these different things small rooms in an attempt to do deals, come back playing into it because there ain't no trust there. with a tentative deal-and it is only tentative, you must ratify it in your own hotel room-with people I am not going to give a glib response to your saying, well, big deal. It is initialed. Is it for real? Is question and quote some poll or something. I am it going to be snatched back, Paul? Are you selling going to say, there is a fundamental alteration going me a bill of goods? on here that I do not think can be repaired once 12 months is up without a lot of trial and tribulation I want to tell you, the toughest part of bargaining betweenus. is the compromise that each party comes to. You must sell it to your colleagues in cabinet and caucus, Mr. Ashton: I appreciate your comments on that, I guess, at some point. I know for a fact within because I know from people I have talked to-they political groups I have had to deal with there are are saying this will long be remembered, not strictly people within that group who hate the deal. It is too in a political context, although obviously that will much. It is too rich. It is crazy, but their colleagues always be a consideration for people since this bill, who were at the bargaining table, who were privy to by definition, is a very political issue in terms of the the arguments that the negotiators put forward,who impact in the workplace. What I do find frustrating, were privy to the detailed days and days of by the way, as someone who has been in public life presentation on the issue of whatever, technological for 1 0 years, is once that trust is gone the next step change, contracting out, and were convinced that is cynicism, and it is cynicism that starts about the they ought to recommendthat to their colleagues in individuals and leads to a cynicism about the cabinet or council, went back and sold it to their process. colleagues. I understand the difficulty of dealing in that What do you think goes on on the union side of situation. I find myself increasingly-assomeone in the bargaining table when we have dropped off an public life, I start getting cynical, quite frankly, when important proposal to some people? We go back signed documents do not mean anything, when and explain the compromise, and we get it. We get campaign promises do not mean anything, when it good at times from our members. Eventually they statements made two or three months ago do not become convinced, come to the conclusion, mean anything. become aware, agree, a consensus is formed that I appreciate your comments tonight in dealing the compromise was reasonable. Management with that as lucidly as you did in very late does not want to give us this clause. We gave up circumstances. Thank you for that presentation, this to get that. and we would just like to ask one final question, because I know you are very comprehensive in We go back to our respective rooms at times. terms of the brief and touched on a wide-ranging Political groups I have dealt with-and members series of issues. I realize you prefer in many ways here will know what I am talking about-political to deal privately with individuals, but I have said this groups have taken upwards of 1 0 hours behind to other presenters. There is one thing, apart from closed doors to ratify what their principal negotiators items you have dealt with the broader issues, that have shook hands on and signed. What do you you would want to address to someone who might think happens on the union side of the table? We be considering voting their conscience on this, some take eight hours, nine hours. We have to go behind of the government members who might be keeping closed doors. an open mind on this. What would it be? Out of all Our members are going to say, Paul, what do you the issues you have touched with, fine-but one on have there? Is it here now, vanish later? Did you one, what would you say to them if you had the July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 139

opportunity to really express to them why you feel entered into responsibly. So if I had that moment they should not support this Bill 70? that you spoke about, alone with whomever, I would tell them to think very carefully and value to a large Mr. Moist: Through the Chair, I would tell that degree the enormous potential that trust between person that a comment made earlier, not by myself, labour and management can realize. It can realize bears repeating, and that is that unions can be governments out of situations like this government viewed one of two ways. They can be viewed as feels it is in, not get them further into trouble. enemies of productivity, or enemies of the state, or enemies of employers; or they can be viewed as Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Chairperson, I have only one problem solvers. In the best trust relationships that question. First of all, I would like to thank you for I deal with, in the best circumstances, we are viewed making such a well-detailed presentation. That was as colleagues to solve problems, to get production really first class, very informative, I found. going in a fair manner where employees are treated The question is in regard to trust. Trust is fairly. Nations in Europe have come to that something that has come up time after time understanding with their unions. They are not throughout your presentation and now that trust has enemies of the state. They are partners, and they been violated because of Bill 70 being introduced. set aside narrow and parochial issues at times to We heard earlier from a gentleman representing deal with matters of state, matters of social policy. himself who worked with MTS and made reference I am very pleased, and I encourage all of you to to the MTX scandal and how long it took for the read the 164-page decision of the Supreme Court employees to get that behind them. My question to which affirms the social significance of unions. We you is in terms of Bill 70. If it is passed, how are not narrow groups that negotiate wages and long-or do you believe that the current overtime clauses for people. We have played a administration or other administrations are going to social role in this country, and we have the right to be able to garner that trust back from, in particular, continue to do so, as determined by the courts. the MGEA and other Civil Service Crown corporations? I would tell people to look at the European model. Look at what Bob Hawke did in Australia upon his • (0320) first term; he is now in his fourthconsecutive. In his Mr. Moist: Through the Chair to the member for first term he signed what is known as the Australian Inkster, I guess that depends on how you view the Accord with Labour, which voluntary restraint was magnitude of Bill 70. Will it cause a temporary entered into by the trade union central and abided separation of government from its employees that by voluntarily by all groups, public and private, to set can be patched up and conciliated and counselled, aside extreme wage demands for a period of one or will it cause a divorce between those parties? I year to get Australia back on a proper footing. think people get up in the morning and go to work There was a price to pay for the Hawke government wanting to do a good job. I do not know many for that. There was pension legislation of some people who get up in the morning wanting to do a magnitude, some deferment of payment to the bad job, but I know the frustration that is created in workers, but there was an entered-into accord which people's minds when their lying supervisorsin those bodes well as an example of what workers can do Crown corporations and their lying management, with government. with funds set aside for wage increases who are The social chartersbeing floated in Europe right ordered not to put those on the table, I know how now which seek to bring up Portugal and Spain to frustrated those heads of those Crowns feel certain standards before the harmonization of because they know that they are going to have to currency and the economy of Europe are examples manage the day-to-day relations with the workers. of governments recognizing that there is a The workers are not-1 believe witness Buckley basement level ofsocial responsibility, that they do was correct a few hours ago when he said, I do not not have to fight with working people about, that can think there is going to be a backlash. People are not be negotiated with workers. going to go and sabotage the workplace. They are I am sure that there is not a unanimous consensus going to be frustrated. Those $20,000 a year in Europe or in Australia amongst working people employees are going to get a second job. You tell about what was done in those instances, but it was me their head is in their job the next morning if they 140 LEGISlATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

work at another one all evening. Do not create a of workers will be expressed to whatever situation which has all the possibilities for breaking government serves here in those years from now. apartem ployment relationships. Labour will continue to struggle to represent its The heads of the Crowns in Manitoba know they members to the best of our ability. have good work forces. We have good solid The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Dacquay): Thank relations with most Crown corporations in this you, Mr. Moist, for your presentation. province. Those Crowns do not like this policy one Barry Belt? George Hammerling? Richard iota. They do not. They know the fallout and the Lennon? Shirley Denesiuk? Is Richard Lennon years that the fallout can exist and in a fuller here? You were called just prior to Shirley. I am economy, a fuller employment economy, they would sorry. The clerk has just drawn to my attention that be losing workers right now. What purpose is you were present. Richard is on the list, No. 36. served if ManitobaTelephone System investsin that Please come forward. Do you have a written fellow who was here tonight, 1 0 or 12 years of the presentation and copies to submit to the committee? people's money in making him into whatever he is, only to have him frustrated or to lose him? I think it Mr. Richard Lennon (Private Citizen): No, I do is counterproductive for the employer and then by not. logical extension to the public. I think most The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Dacquay): Thank employers want to create workers that want to work you. You may proceed. well for them. Mr.Lennon: I would like to startoff by thanking the (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Acting Chairman, in the committee for giving me the time to speak today on Chair) proposed Bill 70. I am going to be making my One of the most fundamental normal things about presentation to this committee as a private citizen. a work relationship is a discussion of that Now the proposed Bill 70 is, I believe, unjust and relationship at regular intervals, and Bill 70 stops the a direct attackon the rights of working Manitobans discussion. Can it be kick-started again and to free collective bargaining. It will affect all restarted and repaired? Look it, we are going to Manitobans by lengthening the recession as well. continue to look at each other and negotiate once Bill 70 is undemocratic andis a betrayal by Premier Bill 70 is long gone. We will be negotiating with Gary Filmon, as he has previously stated that he each other, and this will be Hansard housed in would never tamper with free collective bargaining. books in libraries. I am saying, every time you This change of position ultimately takes away the trickle or set aside rights so broad as collective rights of public sector workers to bargain in good bargaining, you do a little bit of damage to the faith with their employers. This bill will lengthen the relationship which is irreparable. That does not recession in this province and will destroy jobs as it mean the relationship cannot be put back on track, takes away the buying power of public sector but a portion of it is not retrievable. That is the workers. Contrary to a well-known myth, most sadness. So to what extent, in which work public sector workers have been losing spending situations, that will be divided up within those work power over the past 1 0 years as a result of inflation. locations. By implementing a wage freeze, most public It is an absolute tragedy that the government sector workers, who have already been struggling elected by the people last September would so under the current recession, will lose even more of intrude upon a fundamental right like collective their buying power. This buying power is crucial in bargaining. It is regrettable. It is something that my supporting many businesses in Manitoba who might forebears, the people who fought before me for otherwise be forced to cut back, layoff employees, trade union rights-and I do not like even using the or even declare bankruptcy. word fought. I was brought up to work hard, do a good job, respect employers, respect workers, While public sector workers are forced to cut respect the dignity of bargaining, and it absolutely back, inflation continues to rise causing prices, shatters my belief in the collective bargaining profits and other forms of income to rise without any process to see it set aside so quickly, but I know I type of restraint. It is unfortunate that this will be here a year, two years from now, but once I government wants to hurt those most in need by am gone another person will be here, and the rights freezing their wages and extending the recession. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 141

(Mr. Chairman in the Chair) any terms and conditions that the Lieutenant Governor in Council considers appropriate. As well, the reasons the government has put forwardthis bill must be questioned. Bill 70 is aimed In other words, by a simple back-room cabinet at some of the lowest paid public employees, while decision this act could be extended to any collective many of the highest paid are exempt. Provincial agreement, whether public or private and on any judges, the president of MTS and even the terms whatsoever. When a vote on important Premier's own staff have, in fact, been receiving pay changes to this act does not even have to be put to increases while other workers are forced to bear the our representatives in the Legislature, this makes burden of economic mismanagement by the current the bill all that more undemocratic and all that more provincial government. an attack on Manitobans' rights as voters. As well, if the government were to extend this bill over all While from the outside this bill seems rather Manitobans and all collective agreements, it could vicious, its contents are even worse. For example, drive Manitoba into a deeper recession than the in Section 2, subsection 3, the government has current one by cutting the spending power even found a way to renege on certain agreements made more of Manitobans. between September 1, 1990, and June 3, 1991 , where an agreement was made but where an actual The government has said it would not extend this collective agreement was not yet signed. This act to all collective agreements. Manitobans should covers both agreements made under the final offer beware if previous promises by this government are any indication. As well, in Section 9, subsection 1, selection process as well as agreements made the government could extendthe wage freeze for an under an arbitration process. This bill would extend extra year over collective agreements currently all collective agreements which expired during that covered by Bill 70. This would, of course, only term, whether or not a decision of a selector, cause working families to suffer more than they arbitrator or arbitration board has been rendered. have already. For the government to do this is to go back on its promises. How can Manitobans trust such a A (0330) government in the future? As I have shown, Bill 70 is an attack on rights of In Section 4 of this bill, the government has made Manitobans as well as being detrimental to the this act to prevail over every other regulation, Manitoba economy. However, this bill seems to be decision, obligation, right, claim, agreement or only a part of the government's series of attacks on arrangement of any kind. One could question why Manitobans. Bill 70 is an attack on workers. the Filmon government would put this Cutbacks and changes to Child and Family Services undemocratic, unjustified bill over all other previous are an attackon families and children. Increases in promises and agreements the government has tuition fees and cutbacks in student employment made, as well as the human rights act. programs are an attack on youth. There are similar attacks on cultural groups, women's groups and In Section 6, subsection 3, the act states once social programs, and these are but a few of the again that any processes that related to the renewal attacks on people by the Progressive Conservative or replacement of a collective agreement are void. agenda across Canada. Being still years before an In some cases, this has put many months of expected election, many Manitobans must be progress between governments and employees to wondering if their jobs and standard of living are next waste. on this government's hit list. In Section 9, subsection 1,the door has been left As a concerned Manitoba voter, I urge this open to extending this bill to any collective government and this committee to withdraw and agreement in Manitoba as well as extending the oppose Bill 70 as it attacks our fundamental rights wage freeze over collective agreements for past the and takes away money from those who can least current one-year limit. afford it. Thank you . Subsection 6 of the same section states, and I Mr. Ashton: I wanted to commend the presenter quote: The Lieutenant Governor in Council may for a well-researched brief in terms of the specific make regulations extending the application of all or sections. It is very much a far-reaching bill, and it is any part of this act to any collective agreement on very Draconian in its impact. I want to ask, because 142 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

I have not had the opportunity to go through the bill Mr. Chairman: Denesiuk. In that case, I will say and look at those sections, whether he has any "Denesiuk," or I will try. Go ahead, Ms. Denesiuk. concerns about the fact that, as part of this bill, this Ms. Denesluk: Ladies and gentlemen of the government can literally with a stroke of a pen do committee, my name is Shirley Denesiuk. I work at most anything it wishes involving the collective Manitoba Hydro. I have been employed at Hydro bargaining processand collective agreements. for approximately 17 years, and I am here on behalf I am wondering if the presenter had any of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local comments on those sections of the bill-1 noticed he 998. referenced other sections-but specifically on the We welcome this opportunity to make a powers of this government now by Order-in-Council submission to this committee of the Legislature to make sweeping moves that affect the collective about Bill 70. CUPE Local 998 represents over 900 bargaining process. employees working in clerical, administrative and Mr. Lennon: As I was stating before, I think technical positions with Manitoba Hydro. We specifically Section 9 of the agreement talks about represent the inside workers at Manitoba Hydro. Lieutenant Governor in Council which can make Last night you heard from Ron Mclean. Their decisions by cabinet. I think when you are talking union, the IBEW, represents the outside workers at about major decisions-and you could extend this Manitoba Hydro. freeze over all public collective agreements over all The Manitoba Division of CUPE has already Manitoban�t does not really specify, and it says addressed this committee. Local 998stands firmly right away that it only needs to be decided in council. behind the positions taken in that presentation and I think, as a voter myself, I find that really is in full agreement with arguments made. It is not undemocratic. I think it should go to the House at our intention merely to repeat these positions and least to be put to all MLAs and all the representatives arguments. Therefore, this committee should be in the House. That is one of the parts I have had the apprised that our remaining silent on any most trouble with about this act. substantive matter raised in the CUPE Manitoba Mr. Ashton: I appreciate once again your brief does not, in any way, indicate that our local comments. I know this bill is not a lengthy bill but it considers these mattersto be unimportant. Rather, is fairly complex in its sections, and I wish more we feel that the CUPE Manitoba brief speaks for all people would take the time, as you have, to read CUPE members on points germane to the issue. through the sp ecific sections. I, quite frankly, feel Nevertheless,our position as employees of a Crown that even the most disinterested Manitoban-when corporation owned by the provincial government I say "disinterested" I am saying in the sense that compels us to speak specifically to the impact of this people might not otherwise follow bills of this nature legislation on members of Local 998. and might not, perhaps, have as much at stake as It would be impossible for us to understate our some others. I am sure we have had the same opposition to this extremely regressive piece of reaction that you did, which is, this bill is very legislation. Bill 70 has frozen our wages and denied far-reaching and Draconian. So I appreciate the us fundamental rights to free collective bargaining research and I appreciate your comments. Thank that millions of workers around the world enjoy. Not you very much. only are our wages frozen but all other terms and Mr.Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Lennon, conditions of our employment with Manitoba Hydro for your presentation. are frozen as well. Number 37, Shirley Denesiuk. Do you have a Does it come as any surprise to you then that we writtenpresent ation? are opposed to this legislation? Of course not. It should not come as any surprise that we are very Ms.Shirley Denesluk (Canadian Union of Public angry about having a most unfair piece of legislation Employees, Local 998): Yes, I do. masquerading as fiscal policy foisted upon public Mr. Chairman: If you could wait until it is employees in Manitoba. distributed. Would you give me the correct Wage freezes do nothing to alleviate provincial pronunciation of your name? deficits and do nothing to stimulate an economy in Ms. Denesluk: I say "Denesiuk." recession. All it does is take millions of dollars out July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 143

of the economy at a time when the economy can only be maintained through our employees' desperately needs leadership which will boost continued commitment to the attainment of this confidence in the economy and increase goal." "The successful operation of Manitoba Hydro consumers' purchasing power. depends on its people. Day after day, they demonstrate their commitment to maintaining a The remainder of our submission, ladies and gentlemen, will focus on the extremely unfair impact continuous supply of electricity to the people they that this legislation has on employees of Manitoba serve. All Manitoba Hydro staff share aconcern for providing Manitobans with high quality service both Hydro. now and in the future." As employees of a Crown corporation owned by the Manitoba government, we fall, to our There can be no question that the employees of bewilderment and dismay, under the terms of Bi11 70. Manitoba Hydro are central to the provision of a quality service in Manitoba and this contribution is It was not many months ago that Premier Filmon recognized as such by the board of Manitoba Hydro. stood in the Legislature to assure public employees that free collective bargaining would be respected Rnance Minister Clayton Manness has indicated in Manitoba, and I quote: "We will act in good faith that the ability of the Manitoba government to pay at all times in the open free collective bargaining for wage increases played an important role in the process with all the employees with whom we have decision to implement a wage freeze. This rationale to negotiate." Premier Filmon has betrayed these is extremely misguided and is being used to place words and has destroyed free collective bargaining the responsibility for the state of the economy at the for a period of one year. feet of public sector workers rather than at the feet of Premier Filmon and Prime Minister Mulroney who The free collective bargaining process has always have mismanaged the economy to the point of worked reasonably well within Manitoba Hydro until creating a "made in Canada" recession. Bill 70 intervened. Negotiations have always been tough, as one should expect, but over the years It is not the ability ofthe government to pay which CUPE and Manitoba Hydro have been able to reach should be at issue here. Rather, it is the ability of responsible, mutually agreeable settlements. The Conservative governments, at both the provincial bargaining record shows that negotiations have and federal levels, to meet their obligations to the never had to be resolved as a result of a strike. Both citizens of Manitoba and Canada which should be sides have been willing and able to "bang out" an under scrutiny. agreement. The concept of "ability to pay" is, at its heart, a We believe that the bargaining climate at political concept rather than an economic one when Manitoba Hydro has been a workable one because applied to the public sector. The ability of a the employees are recognized as valuable government to pay for wage increases is limited only resources to the organization and integral to by the government's ability to tax or to borrow the meeting its mandate of providing hydro-electric necessary money. power to the province. The President and Chief This fact has been acknowledged by arbitrators Executive Officer of Manitoba Hydro, Mr. R. B. for many years now. Owen Shime, one of Canada's Brennan, states in the annual report for the year most esteemed arbitrators, made the definitive ending March 31, 1990, and I quote: "The success statement on this matter in 1 976. Arbitrator Shima's of any organization in today's rapidly changing position on the "ability to pay" is almost universally business and technological environment is largely accepted and is summed up rather bluntly by Innes dependent upon the competence and Christie in a 1981 University of Toronto decision. resourcefulness of its employees. At Manitoba He said: "Interest arbitrations in the Canadian Hydro, we are richly endowed with an outstanding public sector have not allowed governments as group ofem ployees and I thank them for their efforts employers to hide behind their own skirts in their role during the year." as a source of funds." * (0340) This is clearly what the Filmon government is The integral role of the employees is further doing. It is attempting to hide behind its own recognized in the main body of the annual report, political agenda in order to deny public employees and I quote again: "High quality customer service fair and equitable wages. This government has 144 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

decided, unilaterally, to place the burden of paying ability-to-pay criteria are applied to the finances of for public services squarely on the shoulders of the corporation, it is clear that it has the ability to pay, those who provide the services. The wage freeze and the wages and working conditions of its is designed to ensure that public employees in employees should be subject to the usual process Manitoba receive substandard wages and that they of collective bargaining. There is no economic fall behind in their purchasing power. reason for Manitoba Hydro employees to have their What of Crown corporations? The government wages frozen. owns Manitoba Hydro but raising revenue is not The underlying motive for the Film on government, exactly the same as providing funds out of general then, must be political. They have decided that revenues from taxation. However, the corporation Crown corporations are to be included in Bill 70 can and does apply to the Public Utilities Board for primarily to drive down all wages in Manitoba, to approval of average general consumers' rate redistribute government tax revenues to corporate increases. interests that are clamouring for investment The mostrecent rate increases were granted and incentives and subsidies and to ensure that profits implemented on Apri1 1, 1989. At that time it was 5 continue to be made by the Crown corporations in percent-April 1, 1990, 4 percent and this year on question. The political agenda of the Tories is to April 1, 1991 , 3.5 percent. The April 1, 1991 help their friends in the corporate community during increase added additional revenues to the recessionary times. They can do this by taking corporation of approximately $21 million. Manitoba money out of the pockets of public sector workers. Hydro has every opportunity to ensure that users of In the case of Manitoba Hydro, the wage freeze electricity, especially corporate users, share in the makes no sense. The corporation's ability to pay is cost of producing that electricity. When the cost is clearly demonstrated. The unions at Manitoba spread out over all the users, the burden for any Hydro and the employer should be at the table individual is not very great. negotiating the workers' fair share of the All the financial data indicates that Manitoba corporation's economic success. We should be Hydro has been very successful in meeting its there right now, but the Rim on government has mandate over the past six years and is in very good denied workers that right. Instead, Manitoba Hydro fiscal shape. Now, the graph on the bottom of page employees are subsidizing the consumer rates for 7 indicates that the corporation has shown a profit hydro-electricity in the province, and they are in four of the last six years. It is actually longer than subsidizing the profitability of the corporation. that. This is a graph from the last annual report of The money that should rightfully be allocated to Manitoba Hydro. The new report is not out, at least employees in the form of wage increases is being not to people like me, yet. appropriated by the corporation at the instigation of The net profit for the year ending March 31 , 1990, the Progressive Conservative government for its was $24.2 million, and Manitoba Hydro has also own financial reserves. This will allow Manitoba indicated that the financial results to March 31, Hydro to provide electric power at less cost to both 1991 , indicate a record net income ofappro ximately public consumers and private sector corporate $48.5 million for the year. consumers. Any gain to the Manitoba public on this matter is very small when compared to the millions The financial reserves of the corporation were of dollars that the wage freeze will siphon out of the healthy at $1 16.6 million in 1990 and have improved economy and the stimulus that this money would at approximately $165 million as of the end of March provide to an economy in a recession. It is a 1991 . The reserves have never fallen below their reprehensible situation where employees are $78.4 million level in 1984. ordered to sacrifice their own standard of living for The graph on the bottom of page 8 indicates that the profitability of a government-owned Crown revenues have been consistent over the past six corporation. years, from $506.4 million in 1985 to $664.1 million On page 11 we talk about what CUPE Local 998 in 1990. The expected revenue for the 1991 fiscal members stand to lose because of Bill 70. The year is approximately $700 million. wage freeze will take real dollars out of the pockets These figures all indicate that Manitoba Hydro is of our members. Workers will see their purchasing a healthy Crown corporation. When any kind of power eroded by a percentage amount equal to the July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 145

rate of inflation during the period that their wages increased significantly over the past eight years. If are frozen. you look at the graph on the next page, on page 13, it shows that the increase in CUPE wages at The annual average rate of inflation, as measured Manitoba Hydro have lagged behind percentage by increases in the consumer price index, in increases in the gross domestic product as well as Winnipeg for 1990 was 4.6 percent. However, the inflation. If you look between 1987 and 1989, CUPE highly inflationary goods and services tax that was Local 998 wages went up 11 .18 percent. The introduced on January 1, 1991 , almost immediately Winnipeg CPI went up 13.7 percent, and the GOP drove up inflation rates across the country by close went up 24.3 percent. If you lookat even the longer to 2 percent. The rate of inflation for the city of term, '83 to '89, our wages went up 27.2, Winnipeg Winnipeg in January 1991 was 6.8 percent. If it CPI went up 36.99 percent and the GOP went up were not for the impact of the recession, the rate of 63.7 percent. inflation probably would have jumped even higher than it did. Nevertheless, overthe first five months We mentioned earlier that our members have a of 1991 , the average percentage increase in the CPI right to share in the prosperity of the corporation. was 6 percent over the same period a year earlier. We would also argue more generally that all public sector workers contribute to rising overall input in * (0350) the economy. Many arbitrators have written that it It is always difficult to forecast rates of inflation, would be unfair to deny public sector workers their but we can make an educated guess as to what the fair share in the prosperity our economy generates rate will be for the period covered by the wage simply because they are public sector workers, or freeze. Given that the average is 6 percent for the because it may be more difficult to measure the first five months, it would be a very conservative value of what they produce. estimate to say that the annual average for 1991 would in the area of 5.5 percent. Let us use this CUPE Local 998 members are entitled to a share conservative estimate just as a case in point. in the economic prosperity of Manitoba Hydro and the province. The productivity of our members is An entry level Clerk I at Manitoba Hydro earns not in question. Manitoba Hydro's financial bottom $8.07 per hour or approximately $15,211 per year. line and the recognitionfrom top management of our This wage, by the way, is far below the poverty line employees' value attest to that fact. Yet, Finance of $29,494 for a family of four living in an urban area Minister Manness and this government are with a population greater than 500,000. This determined that we should not share in the rewards. worker, this Clerk I, will lose about $837 in We have seen our wages eroded by inflation. We purchasing power overthe 1991 year. have not received our fair share of economicgrow th, The top wage for a Library Technician II at and Premier Filmon through Bill 70 is denying us a Manitoba Hydro is $14.09 per hour, or $26,560 per basic right to go to the table to negotiate these year. At a 5.5 percent rate of inflation, this worker matters. This situation is grossly unfair, unjust and will lose $1,461 in real dollar terms this year. The deplorable. top rate in our collective agreement is $26.78 an We believe Bill 70 is based on bad economics. It hour. An example of a position which would be paid will seriously reduce the earnings and purchasing at this rate is the Process Control System Software power of CUPE members, of other public Specialist IV. At a yearly salary of $50,480, this employees and of all others who participate in worker will lose $2,776 over the course of 1991 . Manitoba's economy. Public employees are being The Film on governmentshows no concernfor the told to tighten their belts and sacrifice their income fact that it is freezing the wages of many workers so that the province's economy can recuperate and who are already subsisting below the poverty line, so that the province can reduce its debt. and it is unashamedly taking thousands of dollars We know, however, that wage freezes do not out of the pockets of our members who do earn a foster recovery. Wage freezes only serve to keep decent living wage. the economy in recession and to ensure that This is to say nothing of the factthat CUPE Local governments have monies available for subsidies 998 wages have lagged behind the rate of inflation and grants to the corporate sector. The earning in Manitoba in both the short and the long term. As power of Manitoba's public employees is being well, the gross domestic product in Manitoba has sacrificed, not for the well-being of all Manitobans 146 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

but for the good of corporate economic interests. CUPE Local 998 urges this committee in no Once again, public employees are scapegoats for uncertain terms to recommendwithdrawal ofBill 70. economic woes which are not of their own making. Failing that, we urge the members of the Legislature The thrust of all wage restraint programs is to as a whole to defeat this deplorable piece of lower wages and living standards of working people. legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. This occurs not just temporarily, as the government Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Denesiuk. How do claims, but permanently. Once wages fall behind I pronounce itagain? the rate of inflation, it is extremely difficult for Ms.Dene sluk: Denesiuk. You forgot. workers to catch up. Many years of very, very tough Mr. Chairman: Are there any questions? collective bargaining would be necessary to recoup any loss in real earning power which results from a Mr. Hlckes: I just have one question. You are with wage freeze. Manitoba Hydro. I would just like to know what the morale of other staff members who do work for Some economists estimate that approximately Hydro-what are they experiencing right now $70.1 million will be taken out of the Manitoba because of Bill 70? economy as a result of this wage freeze. This figure assumes that there would have been an average Ms.Dene sluk: To put it simply, morale is steadily wage increase of 4.6 percent for workers covered declining. You perhaps were not here last night by this legislation. This will result in future tax when Ron Mclean, a business agent for IBEW losses to the province of approximately $17.5 Local 2034 spoke about how his members felt about million. The fact that the Filmon government is Bill 70. Our members are, I guess to put it bluntly, pissed off. -(interjection)- I am not finished. They knowinglyand eagerly taking $70 million out of the are pissed off. They are getting tired. They are pockets of Manitoba's public employees is an getting cynical. indication that the Progressive Conservatives have little regard for ordinary workers. I am actually amazed at how many people in the work force, people that I never knew thought about This money is lost to the economy. It will never things like labour legislation, who normally do not be spenton thepurchase of goods and services as talk about things like wage freezes, coming up to it would have been if it were rightly allocated to people in the union and saying, what is going on? workers in the form of wage increases and other Why is this happening? Hydro is doing okay; they financial improvements. Instead, there is every were going to give us something. What happened? likelihoodthat this government will use the money Then, when you say, Bill 70, they talk about what to offer further subsidies and incentives to they think of the wage freeze. corporations which pay little or no tax. • (0400) The effects of Bill 70 on CUPE Local 998 are I am amazed at how many people know about the nothing short of disastrous. It takes thousands of other parts of the legislation that may mean further dollars directly out of the pockets of our members in erosion of their bargaining rights later. I am amazed lost purchasing power. It denies us the right to at how many people are really concerned that this negotiate other terms and conditions of bill not only freezes their wages and current employment. It adversely affects the morale of a collective agreement conditions, but the sweeping work force committed to providing a quality service powers that the government is going to have, if it to a deserving Manitoba public. It demonstrates to wants them, if this bill passes. People are talking us the complete and utter disdain that the Filmon about it, and actually I am amazed at the fact that government has for our members, workers which some people who would normally never care about the board of Manitoba Hydro holds in high regard as stuff like that are starting to care, are asking valuable resources to the corporation. questions and are saying, what is going on? Bill 70 is not the foundation for sound economic Our members do not think this is fair. We work policy which will lead to recovery in Manitoba's for Hydro. We know what the financial position is. economy. It can only worsen the situation of all We are pretty sure that if it was not for the workers in the province by eroding their purchasing government's interference, we would have gotten power. something better than a zero and two. We do not July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 147

know what it is, and it might have been tough. We Now, I value democracy dearly. It is one of the might not have gotten anything better, but we think dearest things to me after I came to Canada. I even we would have. All of a sudden, bang-you guys ran in a 1988 election. I got about 30 percent of the have nothing. vote. I am concerned because Bill 70 takes away the basic principles of collective bargaining. Now, Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Denesiuk. Are as far as 1 am concerned, a fundamental principle of there any further questions? If not, thank you very democracy is collective bargaining. much for your presentation. If you look at all dictatorships, minor or major, in Terry Turcan; No. 39, Steven Bridges; No. 40, Bill ages past, one of the first things that happen is the Anderson; No. 41, Carolyn Stadler and No. 42 is workers got abused. Now I realize that there are Martin J. Stadler. occasions when a government has to step in. I Do you have a written presentation, Mr. Stadler? mean if the firemen go on strike, if the police go on Mr. Martin J. Stadler (Private Citizen): No, I do strike, if the doctors should go on strike, public not. welfare is at stake, two parties cannot agree to a contract, a government has the right to legislate Mr. Chairman: In that case, just carry on. them back to work, call in an arbitrator to bring a fair Mr. Stadler: Hi. My name is Martin Stadler. settlement. But that is not what happened here. speak as a private citizen. My wife would have The MGEA, the Manitoba Government Employees' loved to be here. Unfortunately, she has to be at Association, was before arbitration. The work at 7 a.m. government knew damn well that their position was I would like to say on the record that I resent the unfair- way this is being conducted. I was advised by the Mr. Chairman: Order, please. I would ask you to Clerk of the Legislature that we were to speak after refrain from using some of the language. 8 p.m. tomorrow. We arranged for a babysitter so Mr.Stadler: Thank you, I will try harder. we could both be here. I got a phone call at approximately 1:30 a.m. that I had better get here The government knew very well that their position because apparently the government is in a bit of a was unjustified and if they took it to arbitration it hurry. It is a strange thing that, you know, any time would have been unwinnable. So rather than let involuntary copulation takes place, one party is democracy take its course, they basically decided always in a hurry. to legislate a contract. Now I cannot conceive any contract law in any democratic country, whether you Now, I take great pleasure in seeing that the are talking about common law or legislated law-1 minister responsible looks as tired as I feel. If I lose am not a lawyer-whatever law, I cannot conceive my concentration for a minute, please bear with me. of any contract law where you have two parties I am having a hard time staying awake. I have a subject to a contract and one party can basically little baby. I do not get much sleep as it is. impose its will on the other and call it a contract. It I was not born in Canada. I came here in 1968 is not a contract, it is dictatorship. after I watched the Soviet tanks roll through Prague. What is worse is, the government did not just I was 13 years old. With a littlehired help I made extend the contract, they picked and chose. They my own way through the iron curtain and I met my took sections which they did not like, namely, the family in Vienna. From Vienna we were admitted parking fees that they lost in arbitration on, they into Canada as immigrants. So I do not think I will started charging again. The no-layoff clause, they have to convince you that I am no socialist or said, well, that terminates now, we can lay off all communist. The reason I am here is because of these people. Hey, but when it comes to wages and what I see wrong with Bill 70. It is the type of a bill benefits, we will just stretch that part, because that that I would expect to see in Czechoslovakia passed - we like. by President Novotny in the 1960s, or it might have been Benito Mussolini when he stepped all over the They have been going around the province telling miners' rights in northern Italy in the 1930s. You people how overpaid the civil servants are and how see, there is really not much difference between poor the government is and the government cannot left-wing tyranny and right-wing tyranny, and that is pay anymore. The fact is that our civil servants what this bill is. have been basically very reasonable. They have 148 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

been signing concession contracts for the last seven cannot use my services, they not only have the right or eight years. Every one of those contracts was to lay me off, they have an obligation, but that is not below the level of inflation. what happened. I used to fix electronic equipment. Gee, I remember I started at Red River They paid me $16 an hour of which roughly one-third Community College in 1979. I was making $14,000 went back into taxes. a year for fixing electronic equipment. I believe I am I used to work on oscilloscopes, spectrum good at what I do and I believed I was earning a fair analyzers, computers, signal generators, power wage. Well, this April, just before I got laid off,I was supplies, electronic drafting stations, you name it. making roughly $30,000 a year, which seems like a Millions of dollars worth of equipment at Red River lot until you realize that about $10,500 of that was Community College, four technicians looking after clawed back by the government of one level or it, each one of them specialized in a different area. another, so I never really saw that. My net income The four of us complemented each other; we got the was about $20,000 a year. My standard of living is job done. We were grossly understaffed, but we got far less in 1991 than it was in 1979. That was after it done. 12 years of service at Red River Community Well, as it turns out, the government is now College. sending out the equipment that I do not fix. Some You know, I am pleased to see that the of it is cheap. It goesto Pulse Electronics at $40 an government found $3 million to give to the Royal hour. Some of it Pulse cannot handle, it goes back Trust Corporation as an incentive interest-free loan to Techtronics at $150 an hour. Some of it goes to so that they could build what they call a collection Vancouver, some of goes to as far as Oregon. agency in Winnipeg and hire 50 people. It turns out When an oscilloscope breaks down, I used to be I have a mortgage with that company, and if able to fix it in a matter of hours. We had the parts; someday I cannot pay up, it is good to know they we could do the job. Now it is gettingsent out. Not are going to be well-equipped to foreclose on my only does it cost more, but if that oscilloscope mortgage. breaks, the lab is minus one oscilloscope for three As it turns out, I worked, my wife works, we have or four weeks until it comes back. a baby. Our parents baby-sit because we cannot So do not tell me that thegovernment has to put affordto pay $400 amonth in daycare. We have an in Bill 70 to save money because the governmentis old house that was built in 1910, and I have been wasting money, and as long as the government working on it since 1979, and it is still not finished, continues to waste money, I have no sympathy for and I have a mortgage on it. I have a nice car. I this government. I believe very strongly in a should say I bought it back in 1981 . It is not a nice responsible fiscal policy. I believe the government car anymore. I drive it on studded tires because I should make every effortto balance its books, but I cannot affordto put summer tires on it. I do not drive would be very pleased if the government used a little it much because I do not want to get caught. intelligence when they go about it. * (0410) Basically, I think Bill 70 is Draconian. It has no We have been without a contract at Red River place in a democracy, and I think it is unjustified. since last fall. We were not asking for a heck of a That is ali i have to say today. Thank you. lot of money, but we wanted to keep up with inflation. Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Stadler. I believe We could not afford to fall any further behind. Well, there is a question for you. itdoes not matter actually, because I got laid off in April with 24-hours notice. As it turns out, the Mr. Ashton: I want to thank the presenter. I find government cut $3 million-what a coincidence­ your comments from your own personal experience from the Red River Community College budget to be very, very relevant to some of the discussions which resulted in 1 00 layoffs. Mind you, I think that even took place yesterday. Royal Trust is going to hire 50 of those people We were involved in a discussion with some of the probably, maybe at half the wage. presenters about the fact that what is happening in Pardon me if I sound angry, but I am angry, and I eastern Europe essentially started in Poland in feel justifiably so. I was good at what I did. I came 1979, with Solidarity, the trade union movement, and I always used to say that if the government and that one of the first struggles in democracy in July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 149

that eastern European country was the struggle for negotiate an agreement this year. The standing free trade unions and free collective bargaining. joke always was, well, so what, if they give 3 percent, the government is going to find a way to I appreciate your comments, having come from take away at least 2.5 percent. the experience of Czechoslovakia in 1968, with the repression of what in retrospect now, compared to Well, as you know, we get nothing this year, and what is happening, were really minor reforms the government is still finding a way to take away obviously, but were considered dangerous to the some money. I do not think it is fair, and I am really system at that time, and I appreciate your own appalled at the fact that I have lost my right to perspective, having gone through the layoffs. negotiate an agreement. I mean, what country am I living in? I cannot believe it. I talked to other people who had the same frustration as well, the same concern about the lack Not only have you frozen our wages, but we of logic, but I found it particularly fascinating, your cannot even open the agreement to discuss such comments about having been through your own things as uniform allowance. Uniform allowance experience and your obvious deep respect and has gone up at least 35 percent in the last three desire for democracy. It is something I know that a years, but the agreement is closed. My employer is lot of people who have grown up in Canada do not laughing all the way to the bank. He doesnot have understand. to worry about paying us more money this year. It is great for him. My wife is from Greece which went through a military dictatorship, andbelieve you me, she knows * (0420) what democracy is about. She knows what it is like Now we also have a dental plan, and the when you have to stand in front of tanks as an premiums for that dental plan are negotiated every unarmed student to prot est. She knows what it is year, simply because every year my dentist's fee like when people have died for democracy, so I goes up. Right now, the company is paying for me know perhaps at four in the morning, it is maybe at a 1990 rate. When I go the dentist next month, if unfortunate that we may not understand that. he charges me the '91 rates, I have to pay the I have never been through that, but I feel I am difference. I do not think it is fair. I mean, I am not beginning to understand why you would feel only losing in salary, I am also losing in benefits. stronglyenough to stay until 4:15 in the morning and I also noted on Tuesday night that the express your concerns to us, and I really thank you Conservatives found it quite easy to vote not to let for your personal perspective on Bill 70. this committee go outside the city of Winnipeg. Mr.Stadler: I would like to thank the committeefor Well, I guarantee you, if you were looking for votes, letting me speak my mind, I guess. you would find a way to get out of thiscity. I do not think it is right. Give the other people a chance to Mr. Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Stadler, express their opinion. for coming out. Number 43, Lyle Trochim; No. 44, Marty Dolin; 45, Ross C. Martin; 46, Dr. Gerry You went all over the province whenever it was McKinney; 47, Jan Chaboyer; 48, Raymond an election year, but boy, when it comes to Bill 70, Burgess; 49, Bob Collister; 50, Lynn Jonasson; 51 , you want to sit in this room that is loaded with Chery Johnson; 52, Marie Clow. Is there a written mosquitoes, and really, talking about mosquitoes, if presentation, Ms. Clow? you want to waste our money, why in the hell do you not put screens on the windows? It is our building. Ms.MarJe Clow (Prlvate Citizen): No, there is not. We are paying for it. You let us come here and Mr. Chairman: Okay, then just go ahead. Just sufferthrough this at 4:30 in the morning. That is all turn the mikes in. I have to say. Ms.Clow: Thank you for giving me this opportunity Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Clow. There are a to speak, even if it is very early in the morning. number of questions, if you do not mind. I am a health care aide, and I work in a personal Mr. Manness: Thank you very much, Ms. Clow. I care home. My salary is around $21 ,000. The last want to go on record to say that the governmentwill agreement we signed was in 1988. At that time, we do everything it can within the benefits area, within got 3 percent the first year, 3 percent the second, the regulations to make sure that whatever benefits COLA clause in the third year. We were to you have now are not lost or that there is not an 150 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

increased premium charge on you. That is a Mr. Ashton: Well, exactly, and obviously too,if you commitment I have made to others. lose that increase this year, when are you ever going I cannot bring it in by way of an amendment to the to make it up? That is another concern. bill, but certainly it is the intention by way of Ms.Clow: Never. regulation to safeguard your premium levels so that Mr. Ashton: I have another question, because lam you are not requested as an employee, or locked sure some of the people you work with are affected into paying more for the same level of benefits. as well and perhaps will not be able to come before That still, I am sure, does not take away your the committee. I really commend you, by the way, totai- for being here at 4:25 in the morning. Ms.Clow: I have to be at work in three hours. Ms. Clow: No. Mr. Ashton: Amazing. I really commend you for Mr. Manness: -dislikingof the bill, but the reality sticking here and expressing views, but what is the is we are trying to apply common sense wherever reaction of your fellow workers? The Minister of we can. Labour (Mr. Praznik) said that public sector workers Mr.Ashton: Thank you. I appreciate, by the way, are-and I can give you the exact quote, I have it your perspective because as you indicate in the right in my office-are willing to show sacrifice or context of getting out of this building into areas pleased to show . . . . What are your fellow workers across the province, which we had hoped would saying about Bill 70? happen, the other thing, as I have said at other Ms. Clow: They are absolutely livid because the committee hearings is, it has been a bunker workload does not get any lighter, and here we are mentality that people can getinto in this building. working for at least, well, I am going to say, till the One of theproblems with this bill, I feel personally, end of '92, because I cannot see it changing before is that the people who have drafted it have never then, at least to the end of '92 with no hope of an really taken the time to talk to the people who are increase. You know, our work does not get any going to be affected on a one-on-one basis. It is a lighter and they are absolutely livid. We have a lot lot easier to dismiss people and their concernswhen of single-parent families. They have got to keep on you can caricature things, and I have seen figures working. Either that, I guess, or they would be trotted out, government members saying, oh well, within their right to go on the welfare rolls, but then civil servants are well paidcompared to here or are our taxes are going to go up more to support that. well paid compared to the private sector. Mr.Asht on: I assume most of your fellow workers are working for similar sorts of pay scales. I just want to ask again so it is clear on the record: How much do you receive? Ms. Clow: Oh, yes. I am at the top. I have been there 18 years. Ms.Clow: Less than $21 ,000 a year. Mr. Ashton: After 18 years, you are at the top, you Mr. Ashton: So assuming you received a are earning $21 ,000, so most of your fellow workers cost-of-living increase, that would have been maybe would be earning less than that. what $1 ,200 or $1 ,300? Ms. Clow: Sure. Ms.Clow: About. Mr. Ashton: These are the people that are being Mr. Ashton: So this government by passing Bill70, frozen. for someone such as yourself earning $21 ,000, is Ms.Clow: That is right. going to be taking $1 ,200 to $1 ,300 out of your Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, I do not know how pocket? many more people such as the presenter have to Ms.Clow: At least. Plus, I mean, the rising cost of come before this committee for members of the water, hydro, telephone, property taxes went up. committeeto realize what they are doing. I think this You know, it is ridiculous. I am not only losing is one of the most disgusting things about Bill 70, $1 ,200 for 1991 ; I am losing a lot more than that. that someone earning $21 ,000 a year or less is They want to keep taxes down. Where are you going to have their wages frozen. Well, we all know keeping the taxes down? Keeping salaries down, prices and God knows what else is going to go up that is for sure. for the next period of time. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 151

I really thank you, by the way, because I think you, active voters. I am here to say that TEAM stands at 4:30 in the morning, probably brought the kind of opposed to the proposed Bill 70. personal direct experience that members of this This government's proposed bill is a gross committee have got to have, even the ones who violation of the trust employees in the free world and maybe will not change their mind and are going to Canada have in the collective bargaining process. force this through. I hope we are going to have the courtesy to talk to people such as yourself and find The right to collective bargaining is a out what it is going to be like living on $21 ,000 a year hard-fought-for right that democratic peoples have and then having a wage freeze thrown on top. I gained with great personal risk and loss. My own really thank you for coming forward. grandfather risked his life and his limb to bring the right to collective bargaining and subsequently Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Clow. workers' safety to coal miners in the Appalachians. Number 53, Heather Zuk; 54,Bob Deans; 55, Ry Today, thankfully, employees do not have to take Hass; 56, Evan M. Olfert; 57, F. Bilodeau; 58, L. great personal risks in order to have the right to Cassista; 59, R. Anderson; 60, D. Skwarchuk. collectively bargain. Free democratic governments in North America have recognized for many years Point of Order now the right of employees to use the collective Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, I think in fairness that bargaining process to negotiate fair wages and is as many names as we should call tonight. I protect and enhance employees' benefits. understand there are two other presenters, though, The management employees at the Manitoba that are far down the list, and I certainly would be Telephone System elected to organize and became prepared to listen to them if it is their wish to be heard a certifiedcollective bargaining unit a little over five now. If it is not, then certainly we would rise, but years ago. A major influence in this decision was they have been waiting a long time and, obviously, that the government of the day insisted that we I think it would be fair to hear them. should collectively bargain for wage increases and Mr. Chairman: I am going to call out their names if benefits. they wish to make the presentations this morning. Prior to our certification, our benefits and wages

*** were being seriously eroded. Our salaries, our wage increases and our benefits were not in line with those that were given to the clerical and the Mr.Chairman: Number 375, Nancy Webster Cole. plant who are unionized employees, and also to the Good morning. Have you got a presentation for upper management. us this morning? Collective bargaining, a hard-fought-for right, has Ms. Nancy Webster Cole (President, benefited our members in several ways: It has Telecommunications Employees Association of protected our existing benefits from erosion. It has Manitoba): Yes, I do. allowed us to work on the joint benefit committee Mr. Chairman: If you could give it to the clerk, and with other unions to ensure management she will circulate it to the committee. employees share the same benefits. It has ensured

* (0430) management employees are treated equitably and fairly in such items as promotions and lateral (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Acting Chairman, in the transfers where we seem to have the most Chair) grievances. It has also ensured that management The Acting Chairman (Mrs. Dacquay): Ms. Cole, employees have received at least a minimum you may proceed. annual wage increase, although we have not Ms.Webster Cole: Thank you . My last name is necessarily received full COLA. The only year we Webster Cole, by the way. ever received a full COLA was last year, nor have our wages kept pace with inflation. My name is Nancy Webster Cole. I am the president of the Telecommunications Employees A recent consultant's study that was done through Association of Manitoba, or as we call ourselves a consultant, who is usually hired by Manitoba TEAM. We represent 1 ,200 Manitoba Telephone Telephone System's Stevenson Kellogg, showed System management employees who are also that Manitoba Telephone System's management 152 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

employees' salaries are an average of 15 percent will speak with our votes in the next election. Our lower than comparable jobs in the industry. influence on other voters, especially in the I know myself, I chair a Telecom Canada management union, is vast and strong. Be assured committee, and I have asked the members of my that we will be a major force in the choosing of who committee, who are counterparts do the same job will be the governing party in the next election. that I do in other tel-cos, what theirwages are. My We are also a large body of consumers. We wages are atleast $10,000 less than the next lowest could be capable of boosting the Manitoba economy paid member of my counterparts on that committee with consumer spending . Wage freezes will who are in the same position. prevent that. Only through the collective process, we believe, Government and Crown employees have can we hope to achieve fair, equitable and historically been first on the list for wage freezes or comparable salaries for our members. Our lower than the cost-of-living wage increases. If we members' faith and trust in the collective bargaining have to bite the bullet one more time, we will all die process was hard won, and thatfaith and trust in that of lead poisoning. process and in this government's ability to act in a This selective freeze not only discriminates fair and reasonable manner will be severely violated between private and public sectors but between by the passage of Bill 70. The confidence of the profitable and unprofitable sectors. Why punish people in the integrity of this government and its those employees in sectors where the employer has MLAs will be grossly undermined for now and in the done well financially and is fully able to compensate future. its employees for their contribution to a successful TEAM also protests the inherent unfairness and corporation. inequity of a bill that applies itself selectively and in As employees of the Manitoba Telephone a real nonsensical manner to only one portionof the System, we have seen, andwe have helped realize working population. You have taken the easy route MTS, which is a Crown corporation, a net profit over of striking only at wages and only in the public $100million overthe past three years. A look at the sector. A selective wage freeze is not the answer last three year's annual reports will prove out those to economic problems orthe government's deficit. figures. MTS is self-sufficientand is not a negative Your proposedfreeze will only freeze disposable contributing factor in this government's financial income. As mentioned earlier this evening, taxes, woes. MTS has done well financially, directly as a prices for consumer goods, basic necessities, and result of its employees' dedication to its corporate insurance rates, are continuing on an upward spiral. goals and to the well-being of the province of A wage freeze will only severely limit much needed Manitoba. consumer spending and send more people across We are not blind to the fact that Crown corporation the border for bargains. wages do affect the public in rate increases and The discrimination you have shown with this overall cost of services. Yet, remember, MTS has proposed legislation andthe people it applies to is one of the lowest rates in North America for phone grossly unfair. Why should public sector service and has been reducing long-distance employees alone bear the brunt of this charges while remaining profitable. government's Draconian measures? We are tired Wages paid to ourmembers stay in Manitoba and of constantly being the scapegoats for the help boost this sagging economy. In return for government's problems and mismanagement which dedication to MTS and the hard work done by the was not the fault of the employee body. employees to keep the MTS profitable, If there is to be a freeze, it should apply to all self-sufficient, and at the leading edge of sectors, public and private. Is this government telecommunications, which by the way, attracts business to Manitoba, we demand that our right to afraid to put controls on its friends in the private sector like it is trying to put controls on the public collective bargaining be retained and protected and sector? This government should not be so not forcefully removed by government using desperate tactics to save face. confident that it can coerce the public sector employees into accepting this measure. Be The introduction of this bill also shows the lack of warned, we are a large and powerfulgroup, and we understanding the government has on the severe July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 153

impact of wage freezes and the ban on collective on Mr. Ashton: I commend you as well for your the future of Manitoba's work force. Manitoba's presentation, particularlyat this hour. I just wanted losses of its best and brightest young people will to ask one question. I think the brief is very straight continue and increase. Our young and educated forward and to the point, very forceful, and indicates are Manitoba's future, and they will only increase obviously the frustration of the Telecommunications their exodus to regions in North America where Employees Association of Manitoba about what has workers do have rights to bargain, do receive fair happened. and equitable wages, and can trust the government I am wondering, apart from the position of TEAM to protect, not remove theirrights. itself, if you could maybe express to people, and you (Mr. Chairman in the Chair) mention your own circumstances, what the reaction TEAM recommends that this government not is. We have discussed, of course, some of the pass Bill 70, but instead set specific spending reclassification taking place in terms of the CO's priorities. The government should ensure that salary, et cetera. That has come up as an issue, but workers' rights to the democratic, free and normal I am not even dealing with it in that context. I am bargaining process between employees and sure that has been part of discussion, but what is employers are protected. Collective bargaining is the reaction of people now being told that their an effective, reasonable and civilized process. wages are frozen in MTS, which I believe has had a fairly profitable last couple of years? How do they The protection and use of this process is the mark react to gettingtold by the government that through of a free society, governed by a government that a stroke of a pen, through passage of a bill in the believes in the democratic processes and the rights Legislature, all their collective bargaining efforts of all the people. mean nothing, and they are going to get zero. TEAM also wants to point out our concernfor our • (0440) counterpartsin other collective bargaining units who have recently been successful in working through Ms. Webster Cole: I can only speak for the the collective bargaining process and have management employees that I represent, not the negotiated an agreement with their employer or plant or the clerical employees, although I have won a contract through the final offer selection understand a plant representative was here tonight process. This government, by using the in IBEW. There is a great deal offrustration in the retroactivity of this bill to declare such agreements employee body in the management, and especially null and void, is guilty of doing a grave injustice to in the area where I work which is called Business these employees. Communications. The government is pulling a hard-won, half-eaten As you know, terminal interconnect was approved loaf of bread out of the mouths of employees and for February 1 , and private line interconnect is their families. Here we have employees and coming on board. Come September 1, we will start employers who have bargained in good faith, the process of becoming federally regulated by the reached agreement, and when just about to go back CRTC. For the first time in our history we have had to regular business, find all the work done in the to deal with competition. The management process will have to be repeated for no good cause. employees have been gearing up for this for at least Where is the humanity and the common sense in a year, if not two or three. this government's skewed thinking? I know for the past three years, that is all we have TEAM believes the government can find better been doing is getting prepared. There is a great solutions to the economic woes and deficits of this deal of frustration in looking at the annual report and province. This government should and must apply seeing the profits that we have been realizing, and those solutions fairly and equitably. TEAM believes in working so terribly, terribly hard to ensure that this government must open its eyes and see how far MTS retains the market share in both the long it has strayed from democracy and freedom by distance and the terminal market, and to see that no attempting to impose Bill 70 on the workers of matter how hard we work or what we do or how Manitoba. Thank you. much profit we bring to the company, we get no Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Webster Cole. rewards for it. 154 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

What is also extremely frustrating is that not only the bonus, that it was a combination of how he was can we not bargain for wage increases or to get his salary increase as well as a bonus and all nonmonetary issues, it is that MTS instituted a tied into his overall salary but would not elaborate. bonus program for the upper level of managers who However, he did indicate that in my particular area, of course are out of scope of the collective which is business communications, the amount of bargaining unit. Their bonuses, particularly in my the bonus would be based on retaining market area-my manager's bonus is based on the share, I believe retaining net revenues and also in profitability and reduction of cost in my unit, which reducing costs, but trying to get the information for is something I directly affect, and I have done, yet I somebody at my level is impossible so I cannot get no benefit from that. I get no wage increase, I further elaborate on that. get no bonus, I get nothing. So there is a great deal I will tell you we do have bonus plans in place for of frustration. the sales people which is another level. Those Earlier in the evening there was talk about the people are in-scope. We have commission sales nonmonetary issues, and that is a great problem. people and we have salary sales people with Most of the things that we deal with as a union have bonuses, and that is not unusual in the sales to do with grievances that have to do with lateral environment, especially in a competitive transfers or promotions. We have put a couple of environment. grievances in abeyance until contract negotiations Mr.Lamoureux: Lastly-! do not want to keep you which were to start this month because there were much later. It is getting very early in the morning, things that we felt could be resolved better by and I actually thought I heard a bird chirp. That is in fundamentally changing certain articles in the terms of-we had one earlier speaker this evening contract. Now those will have to wait and what will or last night from MTS, and I failed to ask him this happen, which is frustrating to boththe system and particularques tion so I will ask you. us, we are going to be dealing with grievances when we could have put a clause in the contract that would During the MTX scandal, the morale dropped have resolved that issue. significantly with MTS. If you were, I guess, just giving me your thoughts in terms of what do you Mr.Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Webster Cole. believe this has done for the morale at MTS with the Ms.Webster Cole: You are welcome. employees, compared to the MTX scandal, do you Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Mr. Chairperson, the feel that this is something that has done more harm presenter brought up one interesting point, to the morale? something that was brought up, actually I believe it Ms. Webster Cole: I would not say it has done was from the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Carr), more harm, and I would not say it has done less and that was regarding the bonuses that were harm. It has done a different kind of harm. signed out. I wonder if she might just be able to elaborate a bit more on it. I was quite a young employee at MTS when MTX happened and not in management at that time, and We had received a phone call and actually had that was all kind of over my head, but I do know from asked a question, I think it was yesterday, possibly speaking to employees who are in the marketing the day before in Question Period,and the question department, which was the most affected at that was basically taken as notice. I am interested in time, which is where I work now, that the low morale terms of if she can cite the specific example of it. was due to a feeling of a loss of integrity. Ms. Webster Cole: My understanding of the Manitoba Telephone System employees pride bonuses at the management level, not the themselves on integrity, the work ethic, the quality vice-president level, was at what we used to call Tier of service that they try and offer our customers, and 1 , which is the-now they call them directors, which so the MTX affair affectedpeople in that way in that are the managers who report directly to the the perception that they had of themselves was vice-presidents, and I have dug and dug to try and grievously ruined. We had to go back out in the find some information but they are not sharing it. public and try to build ourselves back up again to The most I can tell you is that my particular where we thought we were perceived before as manager advised me, and actually a group of us ethical employees with integrity, doing our best for because I directly asked him at a staff meeting about Manitoba. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 155

Bill 70 and the past few years of low wage Ms. Zadorozny: It is the government's increases have affected morale in an entirely responsibility. different way. What they have done is that they Mr. Manness: I have no say in unemployment have said to the employees, we have worked really insurance premiums. hard to recover from the MTX scandal. We are Ms. Zadorozny: I am just saying, they are working really hard to remain at the forefront of increasing our wages, but yet stuff keeps going up. telecommunications because that is what is going Where does it end? to draw businesses to Manitoba. You cannot be behind in telecommunications or they do not come I cannot bargain this year on anything for the here. They will go to Toronto. people that I represent because of this freeze. We are not just talking wages. We are talking dental For all of our efforts and all of our work and all of plan, everything. When we do negotiate, and if that our dedication to the system, we are not gettingany happens in 1992, the dental plan that we have will rewards for it. We are not getting it in wages, and be three years behind, and is that going to make it we are not even getting it in praise from our any easier to negotiate in '92 than it would now? It management. I cannot say itis more of an effect on is going to make it harder. reducing morale, it is just different. You cannot really let this bill go through. It is Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Webster Cole. ridiculous. There are other people out there who Ms.Webster Cole: Thank you very much. work very hard for their money, and I do not think you appreciate that. Mr. Chairman: We will now move on to No. 612, Elaine Zadorozny. * (0450) Ms. Elaine Zadorozny (Private Citizen): Thank Mr.Chairman: Is that it, Ms. Zadorozny? you for hearing me. My name is Elaine Zadorozny Ms.Zadorozny: Pardon me? and I work in a health care facility, and we are Mr. Chairman: Were you finished? definitely affected by your Bill 70, which sucks. Ms.Zadoro zny: Yes, I think I am done. I am tired. I make $21 ,000 a year which is not a lot of money. I work for a small corporation which I am sure that Mr.Chairman: There are a couple of questions, if you are familiar with, Trizec Corporation. Their you do not mind. profit last year was $1 11 million. Mr.Ashton: First of all, I really give you credit for staying this late. That is a major profit, andour nursing homes are a large portionof their profits. Having this freeze on Ms. Zadorozny: I have worked a whole shift wages is just appalling. My rent still goes up. My already. I am tired. rent goes up 4 percent every year. Why is there not Mr.Ashton: I can believe it and to have to come in a freeze on that? My wages are not going to go up here, earning $21 ,000 a year, working as you say 4 percent. I have to buy food. I make $21 ,000 a for Trizec, and have to even--1 just cannot fathom year, but I do notbring home $21 ,000, and I do not in my mind how after you have worked your shift, think you guys could live on what I make, and you you come in, you are dealing with this kind of could not do my job. situation, how in your own mind you can handle a Mr. Manness, you were saying at midnight- government that is going to freeze your wages. Mr. Chairman: Order. please. I would like to let I want to ask you, and I asked the previous the presenter know that everything comes through presenter, who are your coworkers? Are they the Chair. We do not direct anything directly to any similarly paid, similarly employed? member of the committee-as long as we direct Ms. Zadorozny: I am the highest paid and I have everything through me. been with Trizec Corporation for 15.5 years. Ms. Zadorozny: Okay, that is fine. At midnight, Mr. Ashton: The other people in your workplace you said you had to put a freeze on wages because are getting paid less than that? you did not want to put the taxes up, yet you raised Ms.Zadorozny: That is right. our unemployment premiums. Mr. Ashton: And they are also affected by this Mr. Manness: It is not my responsibility. wage freeze. 156 LEGISLATIVEAS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA July 10, 1991

Ms.Zadorozny: That is right. I think it is incumbent upon people to see what Mr. Ashton: Do you see, in any way, shape or people are going thro ugh, where they are working form, how you, working for Trizec Corporation, and what they are working for before they go and earning $21 ,000 a year, and others who are earning freeze your wages. If that would be possible, I can less working for Trizec Corporation, have anything indicate I would be there, and I am wondering if you to do with whatever the Minister of Finance (Mr. could perhaps see if that invitation could not be Manness) had in mind with this bill, whatever extended to the other members of the committee, financial problems the province has? Do you feel it before they- is fair for this government to turn around and say that Ms.Zadorozny: It could, if you really wanted to. I you should be having your wages frozen because mean it, you could not do my job. You would not of those difficulties? have the stomach for it, just like I do not have the stomach for your Bill 70. Thank you very much. Ms.Zadorozny: No, they should not freeze these wages. You know, these people I work with who Mr. Ashton: That says it all, Mr. Chairperson. make less than me, this is without a word of exaggeration, have four jobs. Some of them have Mr. Lamoureux: It is more so just a closing remark, four jobs, just to make ends meet. just to pick up on the lead that the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) has putforward . If, in fact, Mr. Ashton: I can believe that. you were wanting representation from myself or the Liberal Party, we would be more than happy to take Ms.Zadorozny: Out of $21 ,000, I have rent, I have you up on it and visit with you, even though we share Autopac, I have food, just like all you people, but you the exact same concerns that you have on this are making a lot more money than I am. You can particular piece of legislation. survive. You cannot know how hard it is to survive on $21 ,000. Well, it is not even $21 ,000, because Ms.Zadorozny: Really? that is not what I am bringing home. Mr. Lamoureux: Definitely. Unfortunately, the Mr. Ashton: I think that is a very important point, combined opposition now does not exceed whatthe because the Minister of Finance says cabinet government has. Many argue that had it been a ministers have frozen their salaries. They get paid, minorty government, we never would have seen this by the way, $62,000, $63,000. MLAs-1 get paid bill, and it is somewhat unfortunate in that sense. $43,000. You are getting paid $21 ,000, and you are Ms. Zadorozny: I will share a little humour with expected to get a zero increase. you. Last night I sat here till 1 :30 in the morning after Ms.Zadorozny: I am doing a job that is much more a shift. I was so furious by listening to all of this, I stressful than yours, and I can prove that. I work went home, I went to sleep. This is the God's truth, with psychogeriatrics. Well, maybe I am not. I actually dreamt that Brian Mulroney had sold us down the toilet. He had to get a part-time job,and Mr. Ashton: Mr. Chairperson, indeed, I would he was driving a cab. Honest to God, this is how hope that one thing members of this committee much this thing upsets me. Thank you for listening. might do, and some of the members of the Legislature, who, when the vote on this bill is going to be coming up, if they vote yes to Bill 70, it will be Committee Substitution voting to freeze your wages and your fellow coworkers' wages- Mr. Hlckes: May I have leave to make a committee change? Ms. Zadorozny: I would not touch Bill 70 with this. Mr. Chairman: Is there leave of the committee? Mr.Asht on: I can say, by the way, as somebody Leave. Agreed. who will definitely not be supporting this bill, I would appreciate the opportunity to come and see your Mr. Hlckes: I move, seconded by the member for working conditions firsthand, and I would invite, Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans), that the com position ofthe perhaps, if that would be possible, I would like to go Standing Committee on Industrial Relations be down with the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), amended as follows: the member for Brandon East other members of the committee and see exactly (Mr. Leonard Evans) for the member for Thompson what it is like. (Mr. Ashton). Thank you. July 10, 1991 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 157

Mr. Chairman: Agreed? Agreed. It is with the In 1990, Progressive Conservative Premier understanding that this will be moved in the House Filmon spoke twice of his belief in the right of unions today sometime. to free collective bargaining-political double talk. Committee rise-at five to five. See you at ten. Progressive Conservative Finance Minister Manness uses the excuse of a tax increase to cover COMMmEE ROSE AT: 4:57 a.m. wage raises-notaxes pay MTS employee wages.

In the 1980s, the politically appointed head of WRITTENSUBMISSIONS PRESENTED MTS through MTX lost $29 million. Because of this BUT NOT READ my raises were held down so the Joss could be recovered. In the last three years MTS has cleared Employee of Manitoba Telephone System. more than $85 million, and now the Progressive In the 15 years I have worked at MTS, I have yet Conservative government is trying to legislate away to get a raise that was the equivalent of the cost of my right to bargain for a portion,which I helped earn, living for that contract year. Consequently, I cannot of this profit. catch up to the cost of living. I just keep falling From where I stand it appears every time the further behind. workers are going to get ahead by playing the game In the 1970s, Liberal Prime Minister Trudeau by the rules set up by the politicians, the politicians campaigned on a promise not be invoke wage change the rules. controls-political double talk. I ask the committee to recommend that the In the 1980s, New Democrat Premier Pawley government withdraw this legislation as it is enforced a 3 percent ceiling on wage/benefit discriminatory and unjust. packages for public sector employees. AI Pitt