appreatice&jp, and .:youth training4 workmen's qoppenmtjon; a weekly day of rest. Some of these rnettecs have beep, dealt with elsewhere beoause

resemble9 t h e International Labour.fOr&i&tibn, in do 60, should not be prevented .fro@laoting,6 the iqterqagonal field. The gviee adopted by British Provincial 00ptr01 oveg m w phases of. labour F ,,bolumbia iq L921 CS gassin@ egia!@iop but atipulrting legislation is desirable ior several reasons. The t h l ' i t should not come 19 force until other .prQy- , , I . . S

inces had enacted sl@ilar, lkgitjfatioh, has qot been , +:t, . , 4 l4 g 100 B et f Trgdeb apd Labor Con sp ef su~aesafu1~"8 Canada: ). 17; Er. '984,%de! of Cpnadiap Chaqber of ,FQ%eTce. . . $ p. 8. - I .t , . " , - . . ,, A idem em b$ r ap ry t a t i ve I $z and, 1(4or-&-&&

For 'g comgreb~daipe l ~ ~ e y of labour le aldtidn ( ~ o i n i n i b m l . E x 00 ile o e ! ~ $ i ~ r n m t i 0 n , ! p , a, w d ~ovimpial) r i( 1

~ p u r r f e g i a b ; ~ ~ ~ ( l ira bd %L..GO i % o ~ 4 P ~ 0 a. .M P ew j(dx,

.n W ? ~ J O O ( ~ bed) rind z~sruipsr. ~ p # % ~ d f h .&S ~qwinss U*; of ~ i r i d l e ' QUS~O'O. LaWw T+e#b?stf& ~i%$E1","&d6t8~~~~3Qk9 cz($@p.9tt11\$5E

l Sse aa tP yn? Iompnt p, 24, and,p ,tq e uq*tion, p. 60. i, ki90:#1 ; $hg Ont, Mip r r p M,niIW. of L E O Ak.?~~' k: ib t .~a

d o n h *m to L* -L ~ i r ~ i r e n i IL.. h p k i . wt. 0 hP j$$ii~; r t o m the OM a tgm a h n g u*et treaties be*- ~ * ~ ~ m p i m l~?$itPn over i~n. ~e i&$ons % pp iti MY i L ,pp. and foreien ooun%ries. 32. 4). Nulesroyg priya&, org&ati&~* ';n e .#Is lm I

1 A. 1. Qraner, hbour L ~ ~ l o t i o n ~ p. 174. (Mimsographed.) dwndatiom. + , c , j ,: C - 9 (

I 1 - , 1 -

- . ',1 45

I' relations 01 employer and employee, and notably such matters art apprenticeship, should conform to the general social outlook of the region. Further, situations may arise in labour matters in whioh prompt action may be needed and it may ofGn be the provincial government which ie the betteq able to2&c$,p;omptl~ @d effegtively. Men with a sense of griey'ance are naturally insisf~nf, bn meeting with those in whose p,owei it lies to t,ake ,effective ao$i~n to redress the grievance. In practice #is may mean pinisters rather than officials,, There are man? ' industries in, which wprkers and employers find ,+t more conyenient to approach the provincial $ov&rn$qnt than Dornipion ministers in Ottawp.6 'some of the industrial standards acts recently enacted by certqin pr~vincas require elhb~rqtg

ministrative npchinery. An intimate knowledge 'local conditions is requisite if dgtajled regulp

$ions are to, be applied intelligeptly and modified both intelligently anq p r o ~ p t l y to ,weet wforesegn contiiie~ncies, This point has been weU*illystrated $ $e,xiae of legislation providing for workmen's co~pengqtion apd fbr p~ecautions against qdus- ~ i h l ,accidents whic?h hss long peen adrni~istered by the 'provinces., , Even if the possibifity puce e~iated of yecuring &re economical administration of thesg t y > ~ t ? of legislation by grea!er centraliza- tipn, ecanowes gou\d now be ,q$scted oply a t the cost of upsetting a conqider@ble,volume of provincial legislgtion. '

, ye$ ih, o h e r nit& unifprpi'ty is de&&\e. fleoietically, un/formity could be achieved by pqiieepqnt, between the qrgvinceg implemented. by joirit legislaiion. put , , the diiculties of securig (~greqment bqtwee~,nine provibces and of effecting unlform changes in lggislati~n enacted in this way are obvious. Jn labour ,matt,ers where pniformity is des/rab,lq, therg is thus a strong case for juois- diction by the I)q~inion Parliament,

I WAGES; B o w s OF L ~ O U R ; A Q ~ OF 'ENYLOYMENT

On three silbjects in particular, minimum wages: maximum honrs, and age of employment, basic

l .", a > *

%The evidence of the late Hon M M MacBride Minister of Labour r O~tario, on this point was il$i .p. 7 8 8 3 4 ) : "Dealing Tci&U# m t b " uUt10n of !ndu~trIal 8 a "tea may 1 expres t is odinfon. that boeb the rearesentatives o? the emolofees and

uniformity of legislation throughout Canada would b highly desirable. I n the firet place, so long as , t a ere are wide differences between provincial laws on these su,bjects, there are strong incentives for a province w ~ t h high standards on these matters to discriminate agflinst the products of other ,. prov- inces with lower standard4 h order to pro*$ect both oapital and labour within the pr.ovince from unfair competition from without, Lgislstion,of this sort almost inevitably leads to retaliation, and in any carte tends to impair freedom of trade between provinces. In the second place, federal jurisdiction over maximum hours, minimum wage& and age of employmefit, while not absolutely essential for administration of unemployment relief by the Dominion would,facilitate effective'and systematic action. Neither in the ba& of protect5ng internal freedom of trade, hot for purposes .of handling ff nemploymenX relief, wohld compl$t6 'and exclusive juri~diction ovet these matters be required. I t w'ould'be suBiient if the Dominion had authority to establish' ba ic midimuin standards in gacb case, leaving to^ eac! province the power to inipoqe such highh standards q i t desira. The power of the Dominion, Pailiament in ' these respects . should, however, be ~recipely delimited because, as we have pointed out iq our'diqcussions of the social services, there is real qqnger to proyincigl,autonomy if much lqtitude is left .to, the courts in deciding what l e g k

'lative power is $0 be regarded as .ancillary to a d e h e d fqderal power. ' The relationkhip between minimum wages and

relief is especially 'close. If wage4 are lower, or little higher than relief rates, workers will be tempted to leave their employment and claim relief. This may be especially so in the oarte of men with large families, since their incornerr from relief may be mu+ higher than %eir wages, if employed. Indeep, the test of willingness to work ia meaning- less,~ gxcept in relation to a wage soale. On the other hand,, )when there is a labour surplus, employers may be tempted to pay wages below relief rates,, leaving thie stste to make up the difference in, relief: As wart pointed,out in hearings, this situation is especially liable to develop in the case of part-time employment.@ If the Dominion assumes responsibility for relief of employables it would follow that it ought ta have poker to establish basic minimum wages in ,order to protect the taxpayer agqpst ,pbuses of re,Uef by employee or employer. D J

c*

OEv. pp. 79776. .,,L- - m - g - . , #<;# -

could piobably be very efficiently combiaed: ,y~itb ~S:~rs~$t~~wofri:gp~iJnnins~a~~ - L u I I ~ ~ P *&ich pretniuma mete b o l l ~ t & f ~ r w J l i c ~ ~ : a v e r ~f&~edi.aa:~a pdrcentage I 08 t?wages. IaButfil~in' ,@general wa9, enforcement seemdCo~bC~spprbpri~~lp~fbvi~oi&l p , t a - ; L X " l (':(U ',

L , L L ! $ 1 l 5 ; l L - 1 9 r

Our dihuesid~~of*itke~~@tatus1 bf l i b i r ~ r sudbns and 0% cooJliaMarl?akd~aibitratiom must'bti .in very gen4mIn.term~r irCh&i t;bfiie~li &W aot as', clodely allied?to~hserdhl~ pfoblems as1%$e bther phhMm+of labour ~ ~ l e ~ i 1 a t i o f weirabve h&K:v6ry~(little eVjdencd conoehfng thfrta,&ot >6uch1 hni%~&bidns !ha &i% imposed. on the - aotivlties .c of /fuiriond : of employers "m e h ~ l o y & e s ~ by' bhetiariminak% h* are datters] UPifedeFhl jur.isdioiiof& 'and the poheita) 'of the Bederall ~PkPli&ften~.tb #&e. laboh@f:unlons a certaln'l sta61is dnd: dapacity fmd t~ regulate ' the ibtetcnal fights. .theii. nidmberd id an&lo'$bus t;o its ,itnplied7pb&r :tdq ind6Dpbttate ooapatiia &with Domini6n. obje>ts,> On the bCh& hand,,'th& :civil righte. 'tttid 1iabiQtW of l ab6b ;u'niiirr&' are, in & e ~ e r a l , ~ d e t a i r i e d ',by the proviaoes.11 8bme degree of untfondity in" prbVPindiailF'le'gislation ie highly, desirdle, 'but i& lrttainment mu&( be by agreerhent between 5 t h ) ~provhicee" a$ tkansfee of jutisdictioa 6f1 such '& lsubje&.. ta the Federal Pdliament wodkd 'qresem linsupefabler,rdW~ultiee, We lattir , propode' re$ul&r Doxhinion~provincial labour bonferkhces and these might be a oonvenienb Wans A of faoilihtin$ unifohity : &of: pi.ovincia1 legislation in the matter of civil rights apd liabilities of labour unions. .I_ ,l

I p T h ~ y 9% oomidued ih our research etudiea: fort status of labbur union8 seeSA. E. QrauO Labour Le Irlatton. [Mime- *a hed) CHJ V amd Appendix b h s d r a s Minvhe a a a o w Legfc

!at& a<d ~ ~ d J # e r u i ~ ~ . k , the Pror)boe of uebdb, Ch. IX and for c ~ ~ d l l i ~ ~ b n and arbibmt~on, lee otausr, 0Bi3 IX4,and Midrflls, Bh. fX. . 1 1 r l

lrrau: c g - 1 1

','Since< 4ome induittkiil 3hIputeg ~'UB f1iittber4: of merely local oonbefn dhile' 66h& extend 6Lttwd oP~iim0r8('~rotrin'c~~ %h6 a1Idcbti01i Lbf 1 ~j~Fi$di~tidfi o$ep &rbibf&tion'. sfid 0onofliati6n' iki'(bu6P;di~ u W p~e~6hts:r mat *difficult!& th@,Canadlhn 'gb- in other fed%al &ystems. Butl, Oheke! di@hltied dBk8 not appBr8nt in 1867 and t & e l not 'f6r&Xeli'*w@6h the British Nbrth ~Ameiio&~Act'walr~ dl'hftedr' ,The Dominion i n 1907. attempted;' in ' the I'&duitfilli Die utes Act, 46' exercise e wide8 jurisdicti'ih' th& Is &~ible under the British Nokth ' AnieriqiC(libt b$ <purpartilrg to deal Prrith a' mmbeb'of 9tibli8 utiliticls? only Botae of which Were Und$~. fblletaj jurisdiction.-*.Although'.% iv ftjeule~of litigatfoil $I 192912 ttbiBs Act was 'Mendel 'grid its soojd~ restricted, iD cannot be'i'saitl that iit had 4~h$$6tl geri6us incsdvenience td , &he prbv'in~es while l%'

had been believed 46 be law. '.All tiie provincl: except 'Prince l Edwafd Islhnd; st$sequently p m e d enabling legislation (as to the bbhtjtitdiohalit$+ji' of which there @ppeme.~to ,be some doubt) applyfng tbe mended ..Apt- to disputes viMn exolusiv? provipci J jurisdiction. British Colurpbia h& sincre repealed this legislation. But .each pcovince hw its pwn ,legislation as well and, therefore,.ins eomg provipges &ere are two metJlode by , h i & the same dispute may be dealt with: one under the federal Aqt as e~tended to .the provjpce, the o a e r under provihqial legislation.18

This overlapping of jurisdiction >is apt G ' l e d to disqa.ti$faotion pmong employers epgloyees and to friction between governments. One side tp a dispute may wish to call in the Dominion service, the other the provin&L:. .It has even happened that both have been called in34 Even if both sides .have accepted the same service, 'the side diesati8fied with the final result may be inclined to feel that it would have been better off if the other codcili'ation service had been employed: In different disdutes in somebhat isimilar indu4 tries, decisions based on different pritlciples IABf be reached becaufie'the same conciliation service *iei not used. ( ' , I v

j , . . , -,,,,

e ~ o r o h t o llebtflo ~oinmfsabhera v. BflBnldqr [192kj, A.C. 296: . a I n point of fact the ovepvhelmiri majdrity bf "diap!itea B-'

dealt with y prouindql CO cillatiou tbe Labour ffoeeftq or March 199'$ where a t p 839 there'la a detailed list of the 6 9 strike; and ,looko ts n danada in l937 Qf b to hove been se2tTed udder the ~omin iou f j n T s t 2 3 b!&!?: Ih+estigation Aot hile'ove~!60 ap ear to h a ~ e been settled k y $be use of provin(i3 maohinqy, bealwye being settled in eoFe other manner.

14 The etrike 6f osL midere in Minto NB> in 1037 ill rates these two points h e rovin~ial conc!l:at~onJsemice d e a v w i h the situatibh f o r ' s o l ~ ) t k d but i cotlons4vetr nbb a redable Eb the United Mine Workers who a%ed the Dominion e artment of. Labour to a p s i n t a concili~tion board under th!&dust i d Dlsputea Imr;!t~gat~on Act. Thla r7quest wna ranted, an a hon that was a reat diaa painbent ' to the ~ ! t b r n ~ i g . ~ e u e r g of New ~runswicf . (gee T R ~ ffaestte, Montreal: Dec. 17, 1887.)

These labour conventions are the work of repre- B

possibilities that different ction by diierent sentativea of many countries, and it ie inconceiv- provincial services, eepecially if a , dispute is in able that an internatio~al convention could be

cluded between Canada and some .-other single cou~try, and what .w,e have mid about the juris-

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR Co~vm~qo~s diction to implement interqationsl labour conyen- tipns mu& not be taken to bpply to the more

'In one very important respect the situation with general k u e of legislative coppetence to imple- regard to 18bour legislation haa changed completely ment Canadian treaties, which we consider is outi Bince Confederation. For the 4gt twenty years side our terms of reference, A number of submissions . Canada has been a member of the League of made to the Cormpiseion argued ,that the~recent Nations and of the International Labour Organizw accession of Cagada ,to the status of a fully self- tion, Labour conventions of an international governing nation required that the Dominion

I charaoter are adopted from t h e . to time and Parliament should have ,power to implement such member-states of the International Labour. Organ- treaties aa Canada's international status enabled ization are invited to ratify them. Canada among her to cbnolude,17 In thesesubmissiaps the inability other nations haa ratified - a number of these to implemenb internationaLlabour, conventions wae conventions. To give effect to their pr~visions, quoted as a striking example of the diculties whiDh' are designed to establish uniform labour arising froa the absence of, such a power. Our standards throughout the world, requires legislation 1 'I t

RI which it is not within the competence of the 10 ~ h i a might be done by .cqnstitutional amendment, or, if our Parliament of Canada to enact,l6 and which the general recommendatron prondlng for delegation of power b a

province to the Dominion or vice verao is adopted, by delegatk. , provinces are under no legal obligation to enact. 17 EX., 100 League .of Nationa Societyt EX. 106, Trades and

It might have been supposed that on joining an Labor &rare& 17. EX 386 Uanadlan Le ion 4. Er 00 Lea for 8 0 ~ 1 a ~ ~ e c b n ~ t ~ 0 i o ; 1 i p, 83; Ex. 567 '&beita c ' c . ~ - c l u e p. 18.. Ex 206 Greater dancouver md def ~eatminnter Youth counh ,; 2 . l ~ ~ 200, Vancouver Youn Liberal Ass'n.

16 See deoisioi) bf tbe Pri Oounoil Attornsy-ffewrol for Ex, 210, C . C ~ ((Bed. Sekion Ex 28 Greater %inni e YOU^ Oow& v. Attornev.Qqnsrol for %tor&, [I~S~I, A.C. 826. Oounoil, p. 2; nee also brief or)baak: p. '980, Ev. pp. 227u.

l I

l ' 1

ion Parliament ahould have

DOMINION-P~~VINCIAL LABOUB CONFERENCES

We have alreadv referred the laak of 1- uniformity in labour standard6 among the piov-

inceq and have pointed out the undesirability of undue centralization of jurisdiction as a means of effecting uniformity. The alternative method is co-operation and agreement am6r.g ' the provinces on labour standards, but heretofore thete has been no particular means for faoilitating co-operation, and it has, therefore, been lacking. There i s also

S lack of co-operation between' the Dominion and - the provinces in labour matters generally. As we

point out elsewhere a similar situation has hitherto existed in the matter of Company Lhw, but this condition seems to have been remedied by co- . operation between companies branches of provincial governments and the Dominion Secretary of $tatels Department to work out a uniform 'coqpanies Act. We th4k that much could be done to promote uniformity in labour legislation in a siinilar way L by co-operation among the Departmehta of Labour

- of various governments. Moreover, there are mariy other labour matters in which all governmefib, including the Dominion, have a common interet, as, for example, the administration of labour legislation, investigation and research in labour problems, and the preparation of statistics in labour matters.

The situation appears to call for regular confep- ences of representatives of Labour Departments. A conference of this sort did indeed meet in May, 1938, and appears to have been highly successfulJ8

We commind this step, and we think that annual conferences, either of officials of Labour Depart- ments meeting in a separate conference, or as part of a general and regular Dominion-Provincial Con- ference should be carefully mneidered by the appropriate authorities. Such a conference should go far to faailitate uniformity in labour lleglsletfon and to promote a better understanding among governments of their respective labour problems.

m ~iscLuBroNs

18 In May 1898 the fir& conference of the Cana i4n wpeia- tion of ddpliiistra&rn of Labour Le dation was hel%.in h w a . The Annomation is made U of the o#cials of the various Labour Departments in Canada. f t s objects are "to serve as a medium for the exchange of information and encoora e cpoperrtlon among its members; to prmoh the high& pouiile dandarda of law

1 It will be Fonvehient to sumtnarize h e ~ e our conclusions hnd recomrhenditions:-

1. In order to protect the principle of freedom of trade between pr~vincw and to facilitate the handling of relief for ernployablea by the Domipion, the Dominion Parlianient should have jurisdjction to establish basic minimum wages andAmaxm)um hours of labour, and to fix the age of. emplopent, leaving to any province jurisdiction to raise minimurd tvages, iower .hours of labour, or raise the age of employment if it so desirea. But, aa noted previously, the ~6;wem of Parliament should be precisely &&bd in order to protect 'the autonomy of the provincee. '

2. In the case of isdustdial aisputes, province8 ,should be empowered to ' delegate jurisdiction to ,the Dominion over any gategory of industrial ..dispute6 now within provincial jurisdiction. -! 3. The Dominion should be empowered to imple- t,ment any labour conventions of the Internatiohal Labour Organization, It ahould be understood, however, that we dq not here make any recom- mendations with respect to treaties in general.

4. Frequent and,, regular aonferences should be; 'held between Dominion and provincial Depart- ments of Labour. - ,

enforcement and adminietration. and to attain uniformity of legislation and regulations ther'nder." It is mible that thi. dasociation mav hrinp about more mlbrm lenimction ru between - the-~rovincii Lnd 6ettsr enforcei~nt. A. 'E. Qrauer. h b o w