Ottawa looking to introduce labour code changes to Section 107

‘What we want to do is make achieving collective agreements easier’

The federal government is preparing to introduce changes to the Canada Labour Code as MPs return to Parliament Hill this week, with a key focus on the minister's authority to intervene in strikes and lockouts.

One of the first bills expected from the Liberal government would amend Section 107 of the code, a provision used repeatedly in recent years to end or curb work stoppages in federally regulated sectors such as air transportation, rail and postal services, Global News reports.

Government House Leader Steven MacKinnon told the publication that the goal is not to prevent the right to strike.

"What we want to do is make achieving collective agreements easier," he said. "We want to put federal resources at the disposition of those parties and, you know, really rare cases where we have chronic problems."

Section 107 grants the federal jobs minister power to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) to act "to maintain or secure industrial peace," Global News reports.

Last year, Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu used the provision to order binding arbitration hours after Air Canada flight attendants walked off the job. The flight attendants defied the order and remained on strike until a deal was reached days later.

Hajdu has given few details on the changes planned but says the government already has the authority to intervene when needed.

"The point is to reduce the times that the government is forced to solve the problem for employers and unions," she told Global News.

The provision has drawn sustained criticism since the government began invoking it more frequently starting in 2024. Readers can find more recent legislative updates affecting federally regulated employers in CHRR's coverage.

Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), told Global News that any expanded ministerial power to intervene would weaken the right to strike.

"Any new power to prevent or shut down a legal strike, including before it begins, would weaken that power. Canada needs workers with our elbows up, not our hands tied."

In a statement issued Sept. 10, the CLC said the government's What We Heard report "leaves the door open to proposals that would give government more power to intervene in strikes and restrict workers' bargaining power," and called for the repeal of Section 107 and stronger enforcement against wage theft and misclassification.

Derrick Hynes, president and CEO of Federally Regulated Employers – Transportation and Communications (FETCO), told Global News that employers want independent oversight of bargaining rather than repeal.

"The inclusion of a neutral, third-party special mediator who can provide a public report on bargaining and inform government actions would be a significant step forward."

These positions echo broader labour trends employers are tracking, including Amazon's recent wage increases amid ongoing union mediation.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) says small employers have carried disproportionate costs from recent federal labour disruptions without a role in resolving them.

Recent stoppages at Canadian National Railway, Canadian Pacific Kansas City, the ports of British Columbia and Montreal, and Canada Post cost small businesses a median of $10,000 each, according to a CFIB report released June 9, 2026.

The same report found 92% of members with a view support designating supply-chain-critical federally regulated workplaces as essential service providers.

Corinne Pohlmann, CFIB's executive vice-president of advocacy, says the government should retain its Section 107 powers to protect supply chains.

"Small businesses didn't have a seat at the table during recent strikes, but they were the ones paying the price," Pohlmann says. "The government needs to have the tools to intervene and prevent Canada's supply chains from being held hostage every time there's a disagreement with the unions."

Some labour relations academics expect a protracted fight over any change to Section 107. Ian Lee, an associate professor at the Sprott School of Business at Carleton University in Ottawa, says structural reforms to the provision should go through full parliamentary debate rather than regulatory amendment, and predicts a contentious process ahead.

"When you do that sort of thing, it should be done not through just a change in regulation, it should go to full-throated review and the Parliament of Canada," Lee says, adding that he expects "it'll be loud, and it's going to be long, and it's going to be arduous."

For HR and labour relations professionals in the federal jurisdiction, the coming weeks will clarify how far Ottawa is willing to go in reworking Section 107, and how it balances competing pressure from unions, employers and small business groups. HR teams may find it useful to review collective agreement summaries and labour relations reporting from across Canada for context on how federally regulated bargaining units are approaching this period of uncertainty.