Summary#
Bill 190 would create joint committees for a just transition in certain workplaces. A joint committee includes representatives from both the employer and the employees. At least half of its members would represent the employees.
The obligation would apply to employers belonging to categories determined by government regulation and who have at least 50 employees. The number of employees would be calculated based on an annual average.
The committee would have the role of making recommendations on:
- reducing carbon footprint, waste, greenhouse gas emissions, and other pollutants;
- creating and promoting green jobs;
- training and retraining employees affected by the ecological transition;
- social dialogue and climate justice.
The employer would be required to consult the committee on decisions related to these topics. They would also need to provide the necessary information and respond, with reasons, to its recommendations within three months.
The committee would meet at least once every three months during normal working hours. Its recommendations would need to receive a majority of votes from all members and a majority of votes from the employee representatives.
The law would come into force on the date set by the first regulation adopted for its implementation. Several important details, such as the categories of employers affected and certain operational rules, would therefore be determined later by regulation.
What This Means for You#
- Employees: In the targeted workplaces, you could be represented on a committee tasked with discussing the environmental and social impacts of the employer's activities.
- Training and Retraining: The committee could recommend training or retraining plans for jobs affected by changes related to the ecological transition.
- Work Participation: Employee representatives would be considered to be at work when participating in the committee's meetings and activities.
- Time Dedicated to the Committee: Each member would have 28 hours per year to fulfill their mandate, unless an agreement provides for more time.
- Employers: Affected employers would need to create a committee, provide certain information, pay for member training, and, if necessary, pay for the services of an expert whose costs are reasonable.
- Committee Power: The bill provides for a role of consultation and recommendation. It does not give the committee the power to impose its decisions on the employer.
- Exact Scope: The sectors involved and several modalities would be specified by regulation. No publicly available information.
Costs#
The bill does not specify the total cost for employers or for the government.
However, affected employers would need to bear certain costs, including:
- time spent on meetings and committee work;
- training for members;
- services of an expert, when the committee deems this assistance necessary and the costs are reasonable;
- preparation of a biennial report on topics determined by regulation.
Training could be considered an eligible expense under the Act to Promote the Development and Recognition of Workforce Skills.
Administrative costs related to the implementation of the law and the development of regulations are not specified.
Supporters' Viewpoint#
Supporters might argue that the bill:
- would give employees an official voice in decisions related to the ecological transition;
- would help employers reduce their emissions, waste, and other environmental impacts;
- would promote the creation of green jobs;
- would better protect workers whose jobs are transformed or threatened by the ecological transition;
- would encourage collaboration between employers and employees rather than unilateral decisions;
- would integrate the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of the transition.
Opponents' Viewpoint#
Opponents might argue that the bill:
- would impose new obligations and costs on affected employers;
- would create an additional administrative structure, particularly for companies with 50 or more employees;
- could lead to disagreements between employer representatives and employee representatives;
- would give the committee access to sensitive information about the company's finances, investments, and activities;
- would not yet specify which sectors would be affected or what detailed requirements would be established by regulation;
- could slow down certain management decisions, even if the committee's recommendations would not be binding.