Group says right-to-strike restrictions could put Canada in breach of labour treaty ratified in 1972
Federal employers relying on Ottawa to end costly strikes are facing fresh uncertainty.
The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) has sent a letter directly to Prime Minister Mark Carney saying that Bill C-39's right-to-strike restrictions could put Canada in breach of a labour treaty it ratified in 1972, the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) shared.
The ITUC, representing 191 million workers in 169 countries and territories, says the restrictions are "highly likely to violate" Canada's obligations under International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 87 on freedom of association. It wants them suspended pending meaningful consultation with unions.
"The right to strike must not become a right whose effective exercise is ultimately dependent on the discretion or political judgement of the government," wrote Luc Triangle, the ITUC's general secretary.
On May 21, 2026, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) found, by 10 votes to four, that Convention 87 protects the right to strike.
"Canada has a long history of standing up for fundamental labour rights," said Bea Bruske, president of the CLC in Ottawa. "It should concern all of us when the international labour movement is warning that legislation before our Parliament could put those commitments at risk."
The federal private sector spans more than 22,000 employers and over one million employees in industries such as transportation and telecommunications.
How does the bill change section 107?
Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, tabled Sept. 21, 2026, rewrites section 107 of the Canada Labour Code, which ministers use to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) to end work stoppages. The CLC counts at least eight uses since June 2024, prompting Ottawa's proposed changes to the minister's Section 107 powers.
A special mediator would have 21 days to broker a deal before reporting to the minister. Once a legal strike or lockout begins, the minister could order a return to work or binding arbitration if the stoppage "adversely affects or may adversely affect the national interest," weighing economic impact, social disruption and freedom of association.
Section 107 today "is relatively unfettered," Steven MacKinnon, Minister of Transport and Government House Leader, told the House of Commons on Sept. 23, 2026, adding the bill "would put in place specific guardrails that would govern its use."
‘Ability to act proactively’
Meanwhile, employers say that the strike powers do not go far enough.
"We would've given the minister, in extraordinary circumstances, the ability to act proactively before a work stoppage … in these rare circumstances where the risk to the public is so high," Derrick Hynes, president and CEO of the Federally Regulated Employers – Transportation and Communications (FETCO) in Ottawa, told The Canadian Press.
"I worry these changes may not be enough, or that they may be simply ignored by unions who want to test the government's resolve," said Dan Kelly, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB).
Chris Pigott, a Fasken partner in Toronto, sees no Charter problem. "The courts have said very clearly that doing that can be constitutional in the right circumstances, so we don't see a constitutional or Charter issue under these proposals," he told Canadian HR Reporter in its look at what Bill C-39 means for federal collective bargaining.
The bill reached second reading on Sept. 25, 2026, following Ottawa's second round of Canada Labour Code consultations. If the restrictions pass intact, the CLC plans an ILO complaint, and the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) has vowed defiance – CUPE-represented Air Canada flight attendants defied a section 107 back-to-work order in August 2025.
"There is still time to change course," said Bruske.
