Labour Code changes will increase transparency amid high-profile bargaining disputes, Hajdu says

The federal Jobs Minister is defending controversial new amendments to the Canada Labour Code, saying the changes will lead to greater transparency of employer-worker disputes and not undermine workers’ right to strike.

In an interview with The Globe and Mail, Patty Hajdu, minister of jobs and families, defended the government’s proposed amendments to the Canada Labour Code, which include new language that gives the minister in charge of industrial relations the power to intervene to end a strike if it “adversely affects the national interest.”

The right of workers to strike is enshrined in the Canadian Constitution. Unions have expressed outrage at the new amendments, saying they effectively disregard workers’ constitutional right to withdraw their labour, and entrench the involvement of the government in labour disputes.

But Ms. Hajdu said the reforms do not violate the Constitution, noting that her department repeatedly consulted with union representatives and employers on the federal government’s Tripartite Advisory Council for Labour Policy before proposing amendments to the Labour Code.

“We did consider the constitutional right to strike when coming up with these changes,” she said.

“It was members of the Tripartite Advisory Council who told us to make sure the changes we propose do not jeopardize relationships, because 95 per cent of labour negotiations end without a strike. There are healthy relationships between unions and employers,” she added.

The proposed changes to the Canada Labour Code are part of the Building Canada Strong Act, a sweeping new omnibus bill tabled on Monday that aims to speed up approval of major projects and limit supply chain disruptions.

AFN criticizes federal push to set timelines for major project approvals

The Canada Labour Code governs approximately 1.4 million federally regulated employees who work in the public service and across banking, telecommunications, broadcasting and transportation.

A key amendment in the new legislation involves the appointment of a “special mediator” in negotiations where employers and unions are struggling to achieve a settlement and have reached an impasse. The special mediator will work with both parties for 21 days; if the dispute is still unresolved, the mediator will write a report that will be submitted to the minister for consideration and subsequently be made public.

“The reality is sometimes people are not bargaining in good faith. So, we wanted a transparency function that would allow union members or shareholders of a company to really understand what was going on at the table,” Ms. Hajdu said, explaining the government’s decision to compel the special mediator to publish a public report amid tough negotiations.

Ms. Hajdu also emphasized that she had been present in “many” negotiations over the past three years, and observed that both employers and unions were often not putting their “best foot forward” to make a deal.

A series of high profile strikes in 2024 and 2025 involving workers at ports, railways and airlines prompted repeated interventions by the federal government to end the work stoppages. The labour disruptions also spurred employers to begin lobbying Ottawa for legislative changes that would make it more difficult to strike, arguing that strikes cause widespread economic damage, especially in the climate of a trade war.

In a news conference on Tuesday morning, Bea Bruske, the president of the Canadian Labour Congress, said her union took no issue with the creation of the special mediator role, adding that it would be “helpful to have a third party to help move things along.” The real issue, she said, is Section 107 – a clause in the Labour Code that allows the minister to order the Canada Industrial Relations Board to direct striking workers back to their jobs and impose terms of a collective agreement.

Multiple unions, including the Canadian Union of Public Employees and Teamsters Canada, have launched constitutional challenges and judicial reviews against the government’s use of Section 107. Unions had hoped that Monday’s bill would have eliminated the clause altogether, but it instead it added new criteria to Section 107, by stating that the minister must consider the special mediator’s report and weigh it against the “national interest” before making a decision on whether to end a strike.

Ottawa will not interfere with workers’ right to strike, Hajdu says

Barry Eidlin, a labour expert and associate professor of sociology at McGill University, said the reason why most labour negotiations do not end in a strike is because of the presence of a credible strike threat by workers, which, he noted, is the entire basis of collective bargaining.

“If employers enter bargaining knowing that the risk of workers striking has essentially been eliminated, their expectations change. The proposed changes to Section 107 and the role of the special mediator essentially creates a new mechanism that makes it much easier to circumvent strikes,” he said.

Business groups have welcomed the proposed changes to the Labour Code. “It does appear that the government is moving in the right direction by putting enhanced tools in place to help resolve disputes that put the larger economy in jeopardy,” Dan Kelly, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses, said in a statement.

Pascal Chan, vice-president of strategic policy and supply chains at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, applauded the legislation, saying on Monday that the bill provided “greater certainty for the communities that depend on the reliability of our supply chains.”