Bill C-284, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (replacement workers), proposes to amend the Canada Labour Code. The supplied material describes the goal as preventing certain people from doing the work of bargaining-unit employees during a strike or lockout; this is a proposed change, not an established rule based on the material provided.
It would replace one paragraph of the Code. The proposed wording covers “any employee” and people who perform management functions or work in a confidential capacity on industrial-relations matters, if their normal workplace is elsewhere or they were transferred to the affected workplace after notice to bargain collectively was given.
The bill’s summary says employers could not use covered people from another workplace to perform the duties of bargaining-unit employees on strike or locked out.
The supplied text creates no new agency, program, fee, fine or benefit.
Employers: During a strike or lockout, the summary says an employer could not use the covered people to do the work of bargaining-unit employees. The supplied material does not explain the full scope of the restriction or how it would be enforced.
Bargaining-unit employees: The proposal would restrict the use of certain other workers to perform their duties during a strike or lockout. It does not describe a broader change to wages, benefits or bargaining rights.
Other workers and the public: The bill does not directly change their rights or services in the supplied material.
The Canada Labour Code itself was not supplied, so the current wording and how the proposed paragraph fits into the existing section could not be verified.
The bill text includes “any employee,” while its summary focuses on management or industrial-relations confidential staff from another workplace. The supplied material does not explain the difference or the full reach of the wording.
The supplied text does not set out exceptions, enforcement details, penalties, a start date or how disputes about the restriction would be handled.
The material does not say whether the bill has passed. No publicly available information on its status is included.
A possible argument for the bill is that limiting the use of certain people from other workplaces could prevent employers from using them to do the work of employees on strike or locked out.
The proposal sets out a condition tied to notice to bargain collectively: a transfer to the affected workplace after that notice is given would bring a person within the wording.
The restriction’s reach is hard to judge because the supplied material does not include the surrounding Code provisions, exceptions or enforcement rules.
The wording’s reference to “any employee” may cover more people than the summary’s focus on management and industrial-relations confidential staff. The supplied material does not resolve that uncertainty.
A possible trade-off is reduced employer flexibility to assign people from other workplaces during a strike or lockout; the material does not explain how urgent situations would be handled.