Bill 89: Letting the fox guard the chicken coop
Bill 89 was adopted on May 29, 2025 (Bill 14) by the government of François Legault. This legislation gives the Minister of Labour the power to control our right to strike, without considering essential services. You know… when a lawyer for the government, like the Minister of Labour, Jean Boulet, wants to amend the Labour Code, we are entitled to ask serious questions.
According to this government, the purpose of this law would be to « better protect the population when there is a labour dispute. »
Minister Boulet’s argument is that Quebec is the undisputed champion of strikes in Canada. According to him, 91% of the country’s work stoppages take place in La Belle Province. « It’s troubling. Many strikes have unfortunate social, economic, or other impacts. » he stated. However, it is important to point out that these statistics are completely false and were revised by Statistics Canada.
You will remember, this minister was not embarrassed to grant himself a 30% salary increase in June 2023, and now he is lecturing us. He did not have to picket on a sidewalk to get his salary increase, did he?
What a vision at the opposite end of the spectrum, my dear Mr. Boulet!
The unions believe that before the adoption of this law, the rules governing the use of strikes made it possible to maintain an essential balance in the balance of power between workers and employers. They argue that Minister Boulet has turned everything upside down in order to restrict the bargaining power of workers to the benefit of the bosses — his clients.
This new law will also have an impact on non-unionized environments. By weakening the balance of power among unionized workers, it will reduce the ability of all workers to obtain better conditions. Another step towards the impoverishment of the most vulnerable. We have to stop this CAQ madness!
Why resort to a strike when negotiations are stagnating for months? Because 2022 was the year with the highest inflation in the last 40 years. Workers are fighting to address impoverishment, for good jobs, and to prevent the privatization and outsourcing. There is nothing wrong with demanding a dignified, decent, and well-paid job.
To counter this law, the labour organizations are now turning to the courts. It seems clear to us that the limits imposed on the right to strike will not stand up to the legal test. The Canadian and Quebec charters, as well as the Supreme Court’s decision in Saskatchewan, are unequivocal on this point. The right of association and the right to negotiate one’s working conditions are an integral part of fundamental rights.
Let’s talk a little about US
During the last round of negotiations, the Inter-Union Common Front in Health and Education, fought hard. We went on strike for eleven days, while respecting the essential services approved by the Administrative Labour Tribunal, in the middle of winter.
It is important to point out that this battle has only maintained our working conditions and provided wage increases that barely keep up with the cost of living: 17.4% over five years.
Is this abusing the right to strike? Why did this government force us to go out for 11 days to get to this point? The real abuse isn’t that we have been forced to do so.
A brief comparison of Wage Increases in previous Collective Agreements
2020–2023
• 2020 : 2 %
• 2021 : 2 %
• 2022 : 2 %
2016–2020
• 2015 : lump sum ($0.30/hr)
• 2016 : 1.5 %
• 2017 : 1.75 %
• 2018 : 2 %
• 2019 : lump sum ($0.16/hr)
(Lump sum = no wage increase, only a one-time amount)
2011–2015
• 2010 : 0.5 %
• 2011 : 0.75 %
• 2012 : 1 %
• 2013 : 1.75 %
• 2014 : 2 %
2006–2009
• 2 % per year
With the last negotiation, we obtained an increase that is at least in line with the consumer price index. However, we have not recouped the salary adjustment/catch-up we are entitled to.
And now they want to take away our main means of pressure? REALLY?
Bill 3: And it wasn’t enough…
And as if it were not enough, this same government added its famous Bill 3, allowing the government to interfere in union affairs. Why not, coconut? While we’re at it…
Is it normal not to be able to have a decent place to live because the rents are too high?
Is it normal to pay $10 for butter or deodorant?
Is it normal to wait four years for a family doctor?
Is it normal to live from one paycheque to the next, with the constant fear of not having enough to pay the bills?
With Bill 3, the attempt is to destabilize the « bad unionists » by imposing an optional union dues component, in other words, by splitting the dues in two: a mandatory part and an optional part.
What is that all about?
Boulet, again, claims that union members should decide where the dues money goes…
Yet unions are among the most democratic organizations. The majority of positions are elected. Power is divided between the general assembly, the union council, and the executive. The main orientations are discussed and voted on in general assembly, which remains the supreme authority.
Each jurisdiction (Locals, CPAS, CUPE) has rigorous accountability mechanisms. Each year, the budget forecasts are presented and voted, and the balance sheets are tabled and approved. Independent trustees (auditors) audit the books and send their reports to the national union. Major expenses must be authorized at a general meeting, and any member can consult the financial records and minutes on request.
Take an interest in your unions.
Ask questions.
Get involved.
There is always room for those who want to contribute.
The « optional component » of the contribution touches on three fundamental dimensions: • Legal remedies to challenge legislation, particularly in the area of pay equity; • Awareness and information campaigns, which the government never hesitates to use to influence public opinion; • Social struggles: housing, minimum wage, social justice, occupational health and safety, reproductive rights, etc.
None of these struggles are optional. They are all an integral part of the trade union role.
François Legault has done his soul-searching and resigned recently. His strategy of attacking and targeting everything that moves has somehow tarnished his credibility.
In your opinion, without François Legault, will the party be able to get back on track or will it follow the same path?
One thing is certain: checks and balances are more necessary than ever, and the labour movement will remain an essential pillar of a healthy democracy, regardless of what the CAQ and some of its friends in the big business group say.
Sophie Bibeau