Skip to main content Skip to navigation Skip to search Skip to footer
Friday, October 10, 2025

CLAC’s Response to the BC Labour Relations Code Review Panel’s Submission

CLAC has concerns regarding a recommendation that may destabilize the construction industry and the BC economy at large.

The BC Minister of Labour appoints a committee of special advisers every five years to conduct an independent review of the BC Labour Relations Code and make recommendations.

The panel met in early 2024 and their report was made public in June 2025, at which time various stakeholders, including CLAC, were invited to respond. 

CLAC is generally supportive of the review panel's recommendation; however, we have concerns about the final recommendation—number 25—as we believe it could negatively impact BC construction workers, the industry as a whole, and the economy.  

Recommendation 25 proposes that an Industrial Inquiry Commission be appointed to conduct a review of collective bargaining and labour relations in the construction industry and make recommendations for changes to the labour relations code. 

Now is the worst possible time to consider major changes. As tariffs are threatening Canada’s economy, governments are advancing large construction projects to support growth. The success of those initiatives depends on reducing, not increasing, barriers for project proponents.

Historically, reviews of construction labour relations in BC have operated as a vehicle to undermine wall- to-wall bargaining units. We submit that eliminating wall-to-wall organizing undermines the economic viability of major projects and several core principles of the Code.

Canada’s largest construction companies, all active in BC, rely upon workforces that have opted for wall- to-wall representation in collective bargaining. These companies bring the largest labour pools and the expertise to build cost-effectively. Imposing craft-based models artificially limits the number of bidders, increases costs, and reduces the number of projects that can move forward.

Indeed, experience in eastern Canada, where wall-to-wall organization is restricted, shows higher costs, fewer projects, and weaker economies. Only BC, Alberta, and Saskatchewan—none of which outright prohibit access to participation in the construction industry by wall-to-wall based union organization—enjoy sufficient economic strength to not receive federal equalization payments. All have relatively robust construction sectors, including private sector construction activity.

You can read the full text of our submission below. 

Related Documents