Labour unions have the right to worry for their future 

While Prime Minister Mark Carney has gone to great lengths to protect, grow and diversify the Canadian economy, has he taken it too far? From April 17 to May 25, the federal government quietly held consultations regarding proposed changes to the Canadian Labour Code. Unions are raising warning flags about this brief, suspiciously quiet move to change the law. Some of these changes mark important updates to the inevitably outdated law enacted in 1968, but others appear to allow regression of Charter-given rights under the pretext of improving productivity. Canadians need to pay particular attention to these changes to protect their rights and ensure that workers’ rights do not regress. 

The government is trying to help, at least in some ways, bring positive changes to workers across Canada. Some people have lost their jobs to artificial intelligence (AI), so the government is providing free training to those unlucky few to help them find their footing. There are also initiatives to prioritize health and safety for workers in dangerous trades.

The controversial change, though, is regarding Section 107 of the Labour Code. This section already allows the federal government to force workers back to work in the case of a strike that disrupts “industrial peace,” overruling the right to strike embedded within the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In the last 30 years, the number of strikes has increased significantly, and in turn, so has government interference in workers’ rights to exercise job action. The new changes proposed to Section 107 could potentially give the government even more power to limit strikes.  

The government of Canada argues that limiting strikes, and therefore their impact on Canadians and the economy, could be achieved by increasing the number of worker titles deemed “essential.” If large-scale strikes interfere with Canada’s international trade, Carney and the federal government could, with the help of new changes to the labour code, classify these workers as “essential” and force them back to work. 

On the other hand, Unifor, Canada’s largest private-sector labour union, raises concerns over the changes to the labour code. According to Unifor National President Lana Payne, these proposed changes appear to be “aimed at weakening organized labour.” The minimizing of workers’ right to strike could be potentially harmful to existing workers’ rights. 

This is not the first time the Liberal Party of Canada has used Section 107 of the Labour Code. When the party used this in the past, they claimed it was for the “good of the country.” But, as perceived by the unions of Canada, this is an infringement of Charter-given rights. For many, the threat and possibility of striking is the only leverage they possess to protect or improve their pay, safety, and working conditions. The New Democratic Party (NDP), alongside the unions, have spoken harshly of the labour code and this section. They have even put forth a private member’s bill in the House of Commons for the removal of the section altogether. 

The criticism of Section 107 was also observed in August 2025, when Air Canada flight attendants went on strike but were forced back to work less than 12 hours later. The government invoked this section to maintain “industrial peace.” According to the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), the use of Section 107 sets a dangerous precedent in rewarding Air Canada employers despite their unwillingness to participate in fair negotiations. According to experts on labour and social movements, the use of Section 107 is inspiring companies to introduce similar clauses to impede strikes and other workers’ rights. 

The threat of losing or minimizing the right to strike should concern all Canadian workers since it directly inhibits Charter-given rights and eliminates the only leverage possessed by workers to protect and improve their working conditions. Without this right, workers risk losing other important rights, protections, and freedoms. 

This situation must remain closely monitored, and the federal government must remain accountable to its promise of protecting the well-being of Canadians. No one in this country should ever feel a threat from the Charter-given rights. While limiting strikes might increase the reliability of Canadian exports, helping Canada solidify new international alliances, no amount of productivity can be worth the costs of limiting Canadian rights and freedoms. The right to strike is what keeps our labour system democratic and protects the strength, motivation and health of our essential workers, so we better fight to protect it.