DHL Express Canada reaches tentative agreement with union
Delivery company DHL Express Canada has reached a tentative agreement with its union, paving the way for the company to resume operations.
The deal comes after almost a year of negotiations. Details of the agreement will not be disclosed until after a ratification vote is held, which is expected in the coming days.
DHL Express Canada locked out workers on June 8 and as of last Friday, temporarily halted its operations. The company says it "expects to lift service suspension with immediate effect" once the deal is ratified.
Unifor represents more than 2,100 truck drivers, couriers and warehouse and clerical workers at the company.
The company and its union have sparred over the use of replacement workers as federal legislation banning the practice took effect during the work stoppage.
Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu said she met with both sides last week after DHL asked her last week to intervene in the standoff by compelling work to resume.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
22 minutes ago
- CBC
Canada orders China's Hikvision to close Canadian operations over security concerns
The Canadian government has ordered Chinese surveillance camera manufacturer Hikvision to cease operations in Canada over national security concerns, Industry Minister Melanie Joly said late on Friday. Hikvision, also known as Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Co., has faced numerous sanctions and restrictions by Canada's neighbour, the United States, over the past 5½ years for the firm's dealings and the use of its equipment in China's Xinjiang region, where rights groups have documented abuses against the Uyghur population and other Muslim communities. "The government has determined that Hikvision Canada Inc.'s continued operations in Canada would be injurious to Canada's national security," Joly said on X, adding that the decision was taken after a multi-step review of information provided by Canada's security and intelligence community. Her statement did not mention China or Xinjiang or specify how Hikvision would harm Canada's national security. "We strongly disagree with this decision and view it with deep concern, as we believe it lacks a factual basis, procedural fairness and transparency," a Hikvision spokesperson told Reuters. "Instead of evaluating our technology on its cybersecurity merits, the decision appears to be driven by the parent company's country of origin, reflecting broader geopolitical tensions and an unjustified bias against Chinese companies." The spokesperson said the company "urges the Canadian government to base its actions on facts rather than prejudice, and to uphold a fair, transparent environment for all businesses and investors." China's Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The company, which describes itself as the world's biggest maker of video surveillance equipment, said last year it had exited contracts in Xinjiang through five subsidiaries that were added to a U.S. trade blacklist in 2023. The Chinese government has denied all allegations of human rights abuses in Xinjiang and has criticized or targeted companies for removing Xinjiang firms from their supply chains. Canada said last year it was reviewing an application to impose sanctions against Chinese surveillance equipment companies, including Hikvision, after rights advocates alleged the firms were aiding repression and high-tech surveillance in Xinjiang. Joly said Canada was also banning the purchase of Hikvison's products in government departments and agencies, and reviewing existing properties to ensure that legacy Hikvision products were not used in the future. She said the order does not extend to the company's affiliate operations outside Canada but "strongly" encouraged Canadians "to take note of this decision and make their own decisions accordingly."
CTV News
28 minutes ago
- CTV News
‘The U.S. doesn't have all the cards': Giffin on Trump's claims of leverage over Canada
Watch Former U.S. Ambassador to Canada Gordon Giffin on the 'disruptive' termination of trade talks between Canada and the U.S.
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
'What if we just forced people to buy stuff?': The imagined thoughts of the Canadian EV mandate
Article content The Carney government is under growing pressure to drop what is known as the 'EV mandate.' This is a policy first introduced in 2022 wherein Canadian auto manufacturers will be mandated to sell a minimum quantity of EVs each year until 2035, when the sale of new gas-powered cars will be banned entirely. Article content The singular problem with the mandate is that nobody wants to buy EVs. Even with Canada having the highest fuel prices in the hemisphere, sales of EVs have only ever peaked at about 20 per cent of new vehicle sales. And even that has been in freefall in recent months. Article content In Dear Diary, the National Post satirically re-imagines a week in the life of a newsmaker. This week, Tristin Hopper takes a journey inside the thoughts of the EV mandate. Article content Monday Article content One of the most pressing challenges of modern governance is how to compel ones' citizenry to meet a rote, inconsistent and often contradictory picture of ideal behaviour. We have identified the perfect Canadian life: The specific pattern of development milestones, core values and consumer choices that will yield a citizen best attuned to the interests of the collective. Article content The only problem is to how to take this average Canadian — a scared, superstitious and mostly obese bipedal primate — and mould them into the rational, inclusive, evidence-based form that we have decreed for them. Article content Because it is here where we are weakest. I need not remind you that China is nipping at our heels. If we are to stay competitive, I'm afraid that we risk too much by sticking to archaic models of 'letting people buy the vehicles they would like to buy.' Article content I admit the EV mandate may look draconian in isolation. If presented as a stark dichotomy of 'freedom' versus 'compulsion,' a sentimental public will naturally favour the former. Article content But if we start from the premise that the Canadian public must obviously be compelled to cease purchasing internal combustion engines within 10 years, then the only question is how to go about it. Article content My sober and reasonable offer is that private businesses be obliged to meet an objective, and the details are left to them … as would be expected of any free society. Article content Would a better solution be to incarcerate the owners of gas-powered cars? To mandate gasoline additives that prematurely wear the engines of ICE vehicles? To make highways more dangerous to facilitate higher attrition of the existing vehicle fleet? I think you'll agree that mine is the most humane and inobtrusive option. Article content Wednesday Article content In this line of work, one quickly grows weary of the bottomless mendacity of the auto sector. Their chief criticism of the EV mandate, to my read, is that it stands in defiance of 'consumer preferences.' They say the Canadian auto buyer does not want to purchase EVs at the 'arbitrary' rates we are setting, and thus the program is unworkable. Article content I find their lack of imagination insulting, if not traitorous. These are companies that routinely convince chartered accountants that their daily driver needs to be a Ford F-350. Or that a 700-horsepower sedan is an appropriate vehicle to pick up their kids from school. There are people out there driving Cybertrucks, Pontiac Azteks and Hummer H2s, all of them brainwashed by clever marketing into thinking that they made a smart decision. Article content Tell the public that the gas cars cause impotence. Shoot a couple commercials with Jason Statham. Offer the cars with a free Spotify subscription. It's not my fault you're not trying hard enough to sell EVs. Article content The public has an unfortunate habit of obsessing over the alleged downsides of green policy. This came up often in regards to carbon pricing. Joe and Sally Taxpayer would complain endlessly about the extra $10 or $20 at their fill-up, without a thought as to how their government had won the acclaim of closing plenary delegates at multiple U.N. climate change summits. Article content But these boors miss the opportunity inherent in the mandate. Remember when we made it unbelievably difficult to build houses, thus causing a housing shortage that caused the existing housing stock to perpetually skyrocket in value? In a world with no new gas-powered cars, your 2009 Jetta could become a luxury commodity sooner than you think. Article content The worst thing about all this current controversy is that when the policy is inevitably a smashing success, all of today's critics will pretend they supported it all along. But any cursory reading of history reveals that true progress comes only from government telling private firms the precise share of their sales that should be filled by a politically desirable consumer product. Article content Did the fisherman not swap out row boats for motor vessels because a government told him to? Did we not transition from VHS to DVDs based on the sage yet mandatory advice of a centralized bureaucracy? Forcing people to purchase things is the Canadian way. Article content
