Federal intervention in potential Air Canada strike would be ‘troubling': labour prof
Labour experts say if Ottawa meets Air Canada's call for government intervention in a contract dispute with its flight attendants' union, it could further erode collective bargaining rights in future negotiations.
The airline has requested government-directed arbitration through Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code, however Ottawa has not indicated whether it will intervene.
The move comes as roughly 10,000 flight attendants for Air Canada and Air Canada Rouge are poised to strike Saturday around 1 a.m., with the company also planning to lock them out if an eleventh-hour deal can't be reached.
Federal Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu said she has asked the union to respond to the company's request for a referral to send the parties to arbitration. The union has indicated it plans to do so by Friday at 12 p.m. ET.
She urged both sides to return to the bargaining table.
'The deals that are made at the bargaining table are the best ones,' said Hajdu in a statement.
'To the parties: I strongly urge you to come to an agreement -- do not waste this precious time. Canadians are counting on you.'
Brock University labour professor Larry Savage said Air Canada is using its lockout notice 'as a pressure point on the prime minister,' as the Mark Carney-led Liberal government faces its first major work stoppage of federally regulated employees.
Under former prime minister Justin Trudeau, Ottawa was called upon last year to intervene through binding arbitration in a potential strike by Air Canada pilots. However, Trudeau said the government would only step in if it became clear a negotiated agreement wasn't possible.
The airline and the union representing its pilots eventually reached a deal on their own.
However, the government took a different approach in other recent cases.
In August 2024, Canadian National Railway Co. and Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. locked out more than 9,000 workers before then-labour minister Steve MacKinnon intervened. MacKinnon directed the Canada Industrial Relations Board to order binding arbitration through Section 107 of the labour code.
That regulation gives the minister power to take actions that 'promote conditions favourable to the settlement of industrial disputes,' including by referring the matter to the board.
When workers at B.C. ports went on strike in 2023, then-federal labour minister Seamus O'Regan also used the mechanism to direct the board to impose final binding arbitration if a negotiated resolution wasn't possible.
'Management at Air Canada is taking a strategic cue from employers in the ports and the railways,' said Savage.
While he said there is 'a long tradition' in Canada of government intervention in labour disputes, Savage said the increasing reliance on Section 107 of the labour code is 'troublesome' because it allows the minister to take action without any parliamentary debate, as would be necessary for governments to pass back-to-work legislation.
'It also highlights how easily collective bargaining rights can be trampled on,' said Savage.
'When the government swoops in only at the behest of employers, it undermines our entire system of labour relations.'
On Thursday, an Air Canada official said the airline agrees that resolving the deadlock through negotiations would be the best outcome.
Arielle Meloul-Wechsler, Air Canada's executive vice-president and chief human resources officer, also noted the company had offered the union the option of entering voluntary arbitration, which it rejected earlier this week.
A binding arbitration process would have suspended the union's right to strike, as well as Air Canada's right to lock out union members. CUPE said it preferred to negotiate a contract that its members could then vote on.
'We're still available for negotiations. We're still available for consensual arbitration,' Meloul-Wechsler told reporters at a press conference.
'Should that all not materialize, we do have to think about the very serious disruptions that would ensue ... We have asked for the government to consider intervening if we get to that point. But we are doing everything in our power to avoid getting to that point.'
But the union said Air Canada has been missing in action at the bargaining table since issuing its lockout notice. The Air Canada component of the Canadian Union of Public Employees said it has yet to receive a response from the company to its latest counter-offer on Tuesday.
'The company is counting on this government, the Liberal government, Minister Hajdu to come in and save the day,' said CUPE national president Mark Hancock.
'That's to come in and squash the strike before it happens. I'm here to deliver a loud message ... that we're not going to allow that to happen, that we will have a collective agreement when our members that work for Air Canada decide that we have a collective agreement that works for them.'
Barry Eidlin, an associate professor of sociology at McGill University, said he's been disappointed watching talks reach a standstill.
He called Air Canada's approach a 'predictable result of the pernicious effect of repeated federal intervention in labour disputes.'
'The purpose of the 72-hour strike notice is to create this last-ditch attempt to reach an agreement at the bargaining table,' he said.
'What's happened now with the government's repeated use of Section 107 of the labour code ... is that employers no longer feel that pressure because instead they feel that they (can) just let the strike happen and then wait for the government to intervene and kick things to binding arbitration.'
Eidlin added it would go a long way for workers' bargaining position if the Carney government were to take a stand against getting involved.
'If the government really did signal that they're not going to intervene, then that would really force the company's hand,' he said.
'I think we would see some sort of agreement because the economic pressure would be tremendous.'
---
Sammy Hudes, The Canadian Press
With files from Natasha Baldin in Toronto
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 14, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
17 minutes ago
- CBC
Albertans told to stay on topic at raucous town hall
Not everyone who got up to the mic was allowed to pose their question to the Alberta Next panel. Here's one of those exchanges, followed by a question about equalization that was allowed.
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
How CIRO's new guidance for DIY investing compares with proposals from U.K. regulator
The growth of online investing has introduced millions of new investors to markets, but they're not always using the best information when making investment decisions. Regulators in Canada and elsewhere have raised concerns about do-it-yourself (DIY) investors relying on unregulated advice from social media and so-called 'finfluencers,' sometimes resulting in high-risk investments. Part of the issue is how advice is regulated. Online investing platforms are restricted from making recommendations, as self-directed investors haven't undergone suitability assessments. The Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO) took a step toward changing that this week. As Kelsey Rolfe reported, CIRO's proposed guidance (which is out for consultation until Nov. 10) narrows the definition of 'recommendation' significantly to communication that 'endorses a specific investment decision for the client.' That means order-execution-only dealers will be allowed to provide 'decision-making supports' to DIY investors. These include tools to help find securities that align with an investor's strategies and goals, and sample portfolios that help with asset allocation (without mentioning specific investment products). The U.K. regulator is looking to go a step further. In June, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) released its own proposals that would allow firms to offer free, 'targeted support' to groups of investors with common characteristics. For example, firms are currently allowed to suggest to a consumer that they're in a position to invest; under targeted support, the firm would be allowed to suggest a specific investment product. For those already investing, firms would be able to not only flag risky investments and offer explanatory materials, but suggest an alternative product. Similarly, when an investor holds an expensive fund, firms would be allowed to suggest a product that costs less. As with CIRO, the proposed change revolves around online investing platforms making recommendations. To adopt the proposals, the U.K.'s Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 would need to be amended to create a new specified activity of 'targeted support,' different from existing forms of advice. With investing becoming easier and cheaper, it makes sense for better information to be more available, too. But what does this mean for advisors? CIRO said in its initial consultation that it doesn't want to 'diminish the value' of the full-service advice channel. The FCA makes it clear that the targeted support proposal is a compromise: not as beneficial as more personalized advice, but a worthwhile tradeoff in the absence of support. And research has shown that most DIY investors want advice from a human at some point. Still, the proposed changes raise the bar ever so slightly, putting more pressure on advisors whose practices are built on investment recommendations without offering the personalized financial, tax and estate planning that isn't available cheaply and generically. A perfect storm: The wealth management industry is experiencing an unprecedented wave of consolidation. Combined with aging advisors behind on their succession planning, the result is a perfect storm of capital, urgency and opportunity, writes Joe Millott of Fort Capital Partners. What's in a name? In June, the Investment Industry Association of Canada (IIAC) changed its name to the Canadian Forum for Financial Markets (CFFiM). As Rudy Mezzetta reports, the move follows other rebrands from major industry organizations in the past two years, and the entrance of a new competitor. Sage advice: For money manager Paul Harris, investing is akin to meditation, especially when markets are as volatile as they've been lately. 'When you meditate, you're supposed to let things happen and not react. It's the same kind of philosophy I have with investing, which is to just absorb what's happening, because often it's only short-term,' says Mr. Harris, a partner and portfolio manager at Toronto-based Harris Douglas Asset Management Inc. Here's what he's buying and selling. Fraud risk: In early January, Megan Tong lost around $70,000 after hackers logged into one of her self-directed investment accounts, cashed in all her holdings and briefly bought and sold tens of thousands of dollars worth of two Chinese stocks. But Ms. Tong's discount brokerage, Questrade Financial Group Inc., has declined to reimburse her for most of the loss, saying it didn't result from a breach of its system, writes Erica Alini. Tax risk: Rental property owners should be aware of how the Canada Revenue Agency treats rentals to friends or relatives. As Tim Cestnick explains, a recent court decision highlights some potential red flags. Tariff risk: Canadians have been bracing for price hikes from U.S. tariffs. While some things have gotten more expensive, Mariya Postelnyak reports, not all the price spikes have been as high as anticipated, and some prices have held steady or fallen.
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Tensions high at town hall as Alberta Next Panel faces polarized crowd in Edmonton
A polarized crowd shouted at each other — and at Premier Danielle Smith — at the third Alberta Next town hall in Edmonton Thursday night. The 16-member panel, chaired by Smith, are holding 10 town halls across Alberta this summer to hear what people think about some proposals for how the province can reset its relationship with the federal government. The panellists found a skeptical and critical audience in west Edmonton. Some in the crowd laughed at Smith, when she said in her introductory remakes, "when Edmonton speaks, we listen. Many in the audience jeered at the videos that introduced each of the topics, particularly the section on leaving the Canada Pension Plan in favour of an Alberta plan. Some even pushed back at the premise of the panel. "Alberta doesn't really want you doing this right now," one man said. While people hostile to the proposals dominated the microphones, many supporters were in the crowd. The majority of people in the room were in favour of each of the six initiatives during the straw polls taken throughout the night. Kathryn Speck thanked Smith for being a truly democratic leader who is willing to listen to citizens. "I apologize on behalf of these rude Edmontonians," she said. The panel is asking people to weigh in on matters like switching to a Alberta Pension Plan, replacing the RCMP with a provincial police service, and reopening talks on the Constitution "to empower and better protect provincial rights." Bruce McAllister, the panel's moderator, lost patience with the crowd at a number of points in the evening. He yelled at one person in the audience telling him to "knock it off" and urged another to not "be a jerk." WATCH | Will Alberta Next panel result in a plan, or just another outlet for frustration? Will Alberta Next panel result in a plan, or just another outlet for frustration? 27 days ago Premier Danielle Smith's Alberta Next panel aims to hear about how the province can protect itself Ottawa while building a strong and sovereign Alberta within Canada. The CBC's Helen Pike talks to a conservative strategist and a political scientist about what the town hall format is for, and what value the province might see in hosting these discussions. Most of the people who spoke about the Alberta Pension Plan proposal were opposed to the idea. Several people told the panel that Albertans have rejected the idea so they didn't understand why Smith and her government wouldn't let it go. Two audience members criticized the province's new expense disclosure policy, which removes a requirement for the premier, ministers, deputy ministers and senior staff to publicly disclose receipts for expenses over $100. Smith said she was also confused by the policy. She said cabinet wanted to address the concerns of MLAs who didn't want the names of their favourite hotels disclosed publicly for safety reasons. "That was what the policy was supposed to be," Smith said. "It turned out to be something quite different. So we're going to see if we can maybe track down how that happened and do a reversal on that." Thursday night's event was the third town hall meeting. Earlier events were held last month in Red Deer and Edmonton. At those town halls, some Albertans offered support for the proposals, some protested at the gates and others dismissed the panel as a self-serving political exercise meant to stir up discontent and division. It is set to host events in Fort McMurray and Lloydminster in two weeks. The premier has said one of the reasons for the panel is to address concerns that are inspiring separatist sentiment in the province. Alberta public opinion pollster Janet Brown has said the government's effort is not a polling exercise but a public engagement exercise and that changing the survey questions midstream underscores that.
