Issue 126 – 26, November 1, 2026
The Fight for the Right to Strike
Workers should have the right to strike because it helps them bargain fairly, stand together, and have a say in their working conditions. Unions warn that Bill C-39 will make it easier for the federal government to end strikes. It would weaken workers’ bargaining power and give employers less reason to negotiate seriously. Government action should be used only in a true emergency, not just because a strike is costly or inconvenient.
Workers and employers do not always have equal power. An employer may be able to wait longer than workers who are missing paycheques. A strike lets workers act together when talks are not leading to a fair agreement. Without this right, workers will have little way to make an employer listen.
Unions worry that Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code could let the labour minister order workers back on the job and send a dispute to arbitration. They say that if employers expect the government to end a strike, employers will feel less pressure to compromise. As CUPE Secretary-Treasurer, Candace Rennick said, “Governments cannot legislate labour peace.”
The Canadian Labour Congress has asked the government to explain its reasons to Parliament before ending a legal strike. It has also proposed an independent group of experts to decide whether a strike has caused a true national emergency. The United Steelworkers, CUPE, NUPGE, UNIFOR, IAM, CUPW and other unions have argued that Section 107 should be repealed instead of rewritten.
Strikes can affect businesses and the public, and those effects matter. But a disruption is not automatically an emergency. As union leaders have warned, ending strikes through government action could lead to more conflict and court cases, not lasting peace.
The government says Bill C-39 would add limits to when Section 107 can be used. It argues that keeping important services running can protect the public and the economy. These goals are important, but workers’ rights matter too. The government should act only when there is a danger to the public, with strong checks on its power.
The right to strike does not guarantee that workers will get everything they ask for. It gives them a fair chance to negotiate. Parliament should make sure Bill C-39 does not take away that important balance. A strong economy needs workers who are safe, treated fairly, and able to speak up.
Union retirees fought hard for the right to strike. Now we need to defend that right.
The Canadian Labour Congress is planning an Action Week, November 9-13, all with the goal of making sure MPs across Canada hear from the people they represent. With union retirees help, we can pressure them to fix Bill C-39 and protect our right to strike.
Sign up to volunteer, and CLC will send you everything you need to get involved and spread the word.
Read more - Canada’s labour leaders to establish war room to fight Carney’s strike restrictions | Canadian Labour Congress
Register - Volunteer to defend the right to strike - Workers Together
United Nations Second Session on the Rights of Older Persons
The United Nations Working Group on the Rights of Older Persons held its second session from October 26 to 30 to discuss a new international treaty. The treaty aims to protect older people’s human rights and ensure they can enjoy these rights equally, without discrimination.
The Global Alliance for the Rights of Older People (GAROP) is a network of more than 400 organizations around the world. The Congress of Union Retirees of Canada (CURC) is a member. GAROP works to speak up for older people and supports creating a strong, legally binding treaty on their behalf.
Before the session, GAROP prepared four discussion papers. They covered the treaty’s introduction, what governments should do, who the treaty should protect, and which rights it should include. The papers were meant to support discussion, not serve as final proposals.
The session began with statements from governments and other groups. Many countries supported moving forward with a treaty. However, differences emerged, especially about what duties governments should have.
Participants discussed four main topics:
The preamble: Many agreed it should explain why the treaty is needed, be based on human rights, and strengthen existing protections, not weaken them.
Definitions: Many supported a flexible definition of older age. They said that relying only on a set age could overlook people’s different experiences and fail to address ageism.
Government duties: Participants called for clear duties that can be enforced. These should help turn rights into action while recognizing that each country has its own legal system.
A list of rights, many supported including civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. They also raised newer concerns, such as being left out of digital services and facing climate-related emergencies.
The group also discussed how to check whether the treaty is being followed. Many countries supported having an independent group of experts monitor progress. They discussed how to make this process effective without doing work that other groups already do.
GAROP and other organizations stressed that older people must have a real say throughout the treaty process. Older people and the groups that represent them should take part in discussions, not just be consulted after decisions have been made.
Meetings and side events gave governments, civil society groups, and national human rights institutions a chance to share ideas. Topics included meaningful participation, support for older carers, and ways to monitor the treaty.
The session showed broad support for developing a treaty that protects older people’s rights. Participants made progress on its purpose, the rights it should cover, government duties, and monitoring. Some questions remain, especially about how government responsibilities should be written and enforced.
The chair noted that some delegations were very large, while others might not have enough resources to take part. The chair encouraged countries and organizations to find ways to help others participate. CURC will work with GAROP to encourage support and find the resources needed for organizations to take part when they otherwise could not.
GAROP said it will continue working with governments and other groups. Its goal is a strong and fair treaty that helps all older people enjoy their human rights equally. It also called on governments to involve older people in their own countries and to help develop a treaty that protects everyone’s rights as they age. Overall, the session showed broad support for the treaty, though some important questions still need to be discussed.
Brazil was appointed Chair of the IGWG for 2027, and five pairs of co-facilitators will lead consultations on the content of the treaty. Under the proposed timeline, intersessional consultations will run from December 2026 to April 2027, with a draft expected by October 2027.
Day one – GAROP Daily Bulletin - IGWG2 Day 1
Day two – GAROP Daily Bulletin - IGWG2 Day 2
Day three – GAROP Daily Bulletin - IGWG2 Day 3
Day four - GAROP Daily Bulletin - IGWG2 Day 4
What Union Retirees Need from Budget 2026
Canada’s federal budget will be presented on November 5, 2026. The budget will set out the government’s plans for spending and taxes. For union retirees and seniors, one major question is whether the budget will do more to make our lives more affordable, care affordable, reliable, and available.
The “Alternative Federal Budget” is a set of proposals from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Its recommendations call for a larger public role in seniors’ care, with clear standards and public reporting on results.
More affordable seniors’ housing, that connects housing with care as people’s needs change.
A refundable Canada Caregiver Credit for people caring for a dependent aged 65 or older. Refundable means people may receive money even if they owe little or no income tax.
Better pay and working conditions for care workers, including stronger sick-leave protections and steps to reduce reliance on for-profit staffing agencies.
More home care and long-term care, so people can get help where and when they need it.
Public and non-profit care homes, built and run with public support.
Enforceable care standards, with federal funding tied to provinces and territories showing that the standards are being met.
A national plan for care workers, to help recruit and keep enough trained staff.
The central idea is that good care depends on having enough trained workers, fair working conditions, and public accountability, not just announcing new funding.
Union Retirees and seniors want to remain at home, but that can be difficult without enough home-care support. Others need long-term care, yet families may worry about staffing, safety, cost, or whether a suitable place is available.
The alternative budget argues that federal funding should come with clear expectations. Canadians should be able to see whether money is improving care and working conditions. It also argues that care should be treated as an essential public service, not mainly to earn profit.
CURC and other seniors’ groups have made different requests, such as raising OAS for all seniors aged 65 and over and ending mandatory RRIF withdrawals.
When the budget is released, seniors and their families can look for answers to a few practical questions:
1. Is there new funding for home care, long-term care, and seniors’ housing?
2. Will federal funding depend on provinces meeting clear care standards?
3. Are there specific plans to hire and keep care workers?
4. Will caregivers or seniors receive new financial support?
5. Will the government report publicly on whether the money improves care?
The alternative budget offers one clear vision: invest in care, set standards, and show Canadians what the funding achieves. Many other provisions in the AFB offer proposal to make our lives more affordable. Next week CURC Sunday edition will provide an analysis.
The federal budget will show whether the government chooses to take up any of those ideas. Watch will these ideas in mind.
Read more - Alternative federal budget 2026-27: Summary | CCPA