Bill 101: A new omnibus bill on Quebec labour law

On April 24, the Quebec Labour Minister tabled Bill 101, An Act to improve certain labour laws. This new legislation aims to amend several important legal regimes in labour and employment law, including the Act respecting industrial accidents and occupational diseases¹ (AIAOD), the Labour Code² (LC) and the Act respecting labour standards³ (ALS), the Act respecting occupational health and safety⁴ (AROH) and An Act to modernize the occupational health and safety regime⁵ (AMOHS).

Bill 101 proposes various changes affecting, among other things, the grievance arbitration process, union transparency, health and safety, and dispute resolution procedures. 

We will discuss the main proposed changes below. Please note that Bill 101 is still in the early stages of the legislative process and may be amended before it is passed. In addition, its coming-into-force date has not yet been determined.

Amendments to the Labour Code

Intended as a response to issues surrounding the timeliness and efficiency of grievance arbitration, Bill 101 first introduces measures to speed up and streamline the process, including the following:

1. If a grievance arbitrator is not designated within six months of the grievance being filed, the party that filed the grievance will have to ask the minister to appoint one within 10 days after the time limit has elapsed, failing which the party will be deemed to have withdrawn its grievance.
2. The first day of a grievance hearing must take place no later than one year after the grievance is filed, unless the arbitrator agrees to the time limit being extended at the parties’ request. However, it will be possible to extend this time limit for a specific number of days and only once. 
3. Mandatory disclosure of evidence between the parties within the time limits set at the pre-hearing conference, or, failing that, at least 30 days before the hearing, unless an urgent situation arises or unless the arbitrator otherwise decides to ensure the proper administration of justice. 

Another major change is that Bill 101 requires the parties to consider mediation before arbitration and specifies, among other things, that, subject to the parties' consent, the mediator may not act as an arbitrator in the same case if mediation fails and that the content of the mediation is not admissible as evidence.

At the same time, Bill 101 also amends the LC to enhance the financial transparency of unions by requiring each certified association to submit audited financial statements to its members annually and to provide a copy of these statements free of charge to any member who requests them. It also requires central labour bodies, federations, unions, confederations, and other similar organizations to provide a copy of their financial statements free of charge to any member who requests them.

Amendments to the Act respecting labour standards

Bill 101 also proposes a number of amendments to the ALS. In particular, it enshrines the right of employees to be absent without pay and without risk of losing their jobs when they comply with a recommendation, order, direction or decision issued under the Public Health Act, the Quarantine Act, or the Emergencies Act. Similarly, new provisions are intended to allow Canadian Armed Forces reservists to take leave without pay to participate in operations abroad or recover from health problems related to their military service. 

Amendments to the Act respecting industrial accidents and occupational diseases

Bill 101, if passed, will extend the application of AIAOD provisions to executive officers when they perform work for a person other than the person for whom they hold the status of executive officer. It also introduces the obligation for the CNESST to offer the parties, in certain situations (e.g., eligibility of the claim, capacity, suitable employment), the opportunity to participate in a negotiation process following an application for review.

Bill 101 revises certain rules relating to determining gross income used to calculate a worker's income replacement indemnity, particularly in cases of recurrence, relapse, or aggravation. 

In addition, Bill 101 provides for fines of up to $10,000 for a legal person who, for example, contravenes the provisions limiting access to the file of an injured worker when the file concerns an employment injury resulting from physical or psychological violence.

Other changes and impacts

In addition to the changes mentioned above, Bill 101 also provides for a substantial increase in the fines imposed under the ALS and the LC for penal offences. For example, fines for bargaining in bad faith will increase from $100 to $1,000 per day of violation to fines ranging from $1,500 to $7,500 per day of violation. Fines for illegal lockouts or strikes are also increasing dramatically, now ranging up to $100,000 for employers, employee associations, unions, confederations, and federations. Another example is that fines for employer violations of anti-scab provisions are increasing from a maximum of $1,000 per day of violation to fines ranging from $2,500 to $25,000 per day of violation.

Finally, Bill 101 amends the AMOHS and postpones by one year, to October 6, 2026, the latest date of entry into force of the provisions of the AROH that apply in particular to the prevention representative, the health and safety committee, and the prevention program. Thus, the interim regime introduced in April 2022 will remain in effect until October 6, 2026, at the latest, and until the adoption of the Regulation respecting prevention mechanisms. 

Comments 

Ultimately, if passed, Bill 101 will introduce significant changes, mainly in labour relations. 

However, some of the provisions would benefit from being adjusted during parliamentary proceedings to ensure consistency and guarantee their practical effectiveness. 

In particular, the obligation to designate an arbitrator within six months risks overburdening arbitrators with grievances that will be settled later. This is particularly true of the many collective agreements that include a 12-month amnesty clause. To protect the interests of their members, unions will therefore designate an arbitrator pending the application of the amnesty clause. While the objective is laudable, since such a provision will force the parties to discuss and attempt to resolve grievances more quickly in order to avoid unnecessary designations and subsequent cancellation fees, it seems that a period of approximately 12 months might be preferable.  

Furthermore, regarding the obligation to disclose evidence in advance in grievance arbitration, unless the proper administration of justice otherwise permits, we believe it should be clearly stated that such an obligation does not apply to matters relating to witnesses' credibility.

We will therefore remain attentive to any changes to the bill and will keep you informed of any relevant developments.