Bill C-39 would tighten federal strike intervention rules

By Nathan Brooks

Working days lost in Canada’s federally regulated private-sector industries fell about 35%, from 127,810 in 2023 to 83,150 in 2025, according to Employment and Social Development Canada figures cited by the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC). The CLC used the decline in its Nov. 3, 2026 challenge to Ottawa’s claim that expanded ministerial authority would prevent work disruptions.

If enacted, Bill C-39, tabled in September 2026, would rewrite Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code and extend conciliation from 60 to 90 days. It would add conditions before a minister can use that power to end a work stoppage. For HR teams in federally regulated sectors, the immediate task is a review of bargaining strategy.

What changes under Section 107?

Canada’s ministers currently use Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) to end work stoppages in federally regulated sectors.

The Building Canada Strong Act would require a minister to consider a special mediator’s public report and conclude that a dispute harms the national interest before intervening.

Jobs and Families Minister Patty Hajdu’s press secretary, Jennifer Kozelj, told CBC News in October 2026: “Bill C-39 would not give the minister any new intervention powers under Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. Instead, it would create new requirements for the minister to satisfy before any intervention is possible.”

Parliament’s LEGISinfo database lists the bill before a House of Commons legislative committee and a Senate committee pre-study. The bill has not taken effect. Its 90-day conciliation period and national-interest test remain proposals, not current Section 107 requirements.

What does the stoppage data show?

The Employment and Social Development Canada figures count working days lost. The CLC notes that they do not measure the value of disrupted trade, which limits their direct use in assessing wider economic stability.

The CLC also cites a 2010 C.D. Howe Institute study by Benjamin Dachis and Robert Hebdon. It found that when a public-sector contract had been settled through a provincial back-to-work order, the odds of a freely negotiated deal in the next round were 67% lower.

In the Nov. 3 backgrounder, CLC president Bea Bruske said: “Canadians have every reason to expect reliable transportation, functioning supply chains and a strong economy. But there is no evidence that taking away workers’ rights will deliver that stability or prevent future disruptions.”

Bruske also said economic stability depends on good reasons for workers and employers to reach agreements that last. Ottawa should strengthen those incentives, she argued, rather than give employers a reason to wait for intervention.

How do employers read the same bill?

Derrick Hynes, CEO of Federally Regulated Employers – Transportation and Communications (FETCO), told The Canadian Press in September 2026 that the bill contains positive changes that will improve and stabilize collective bargaining. FETCO represents railway, port and airline employers.

National HR bodies have called for tighter limits on federal intervention in labour disputes. Legal analyses published by Mondaq and Legal 500 advise federally regulated employers to review their bargaining strategies now.

Why do unions oppose the proposal?

The CLC says Ottawa has invoked Section 107 at least eight times since June 2024. It urges Ottawa to repeal, rather than codify, the ministerial power to end legal strikes.

Union leaders often cite August 2025, when the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) told flight attendants to defy a CIRB directive. Air Canada halted its restart of flights as the union defied the return-to-work order.

What legal risk remains?

The CLC warns that Bill C-39 could face constitutional challenges. It cites the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2015 ruling in Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan as grounds for that warning.

In September 2026, CLC secretary-treasurer Lily Chang said Canada cannot claim to champion workers’ rights around the world while weakening them at home. She said the congress would complain to the International Labour Organization if Parliament passed the bill unchanged.

What should employers do now?\n

Employers have one immediate action: complete the bargaining-strategy review recommended by Mondaq and Legal 500. The 90-day conciliation period and national-interest test remain proposals, not current Section 107 requirements.

The next checkpoints are the House and Senate committee stages. If Parliament advances C-39 unchanged, the CLC’s constitutional warning and promised ILO complaint will put the government’s stability rationale under renewed scrutiny.