Bulletin
Bill 3: muzzling unions in the name of transparency
31 October 2025
ARTICLE SUMMARY: Under the guise of “modernization,” the Quebec government seeks to impose a series of rules and procedures on unions that could stifle their ability to take collective action. Bill 3 raises serious concerns about the future of union democracy in Quebec. It represents an attempt to reassert political control over labor organizations, a back-door way to silence those who continue to defend workers’ voices.
Yesterday, Labour Minister Jean Boulet tabled Bill 3, a piece of legislation purportedly designed to “improve transparency, governance, and democratic processes” within unions.
At first glance, it’s hard to oppose such a virtuous goal. But a closer look reveals something else entirely: the bill is not about transparency, it’s about control.
The government wants to impose its own vision of union democracy, as if it needed to “correct” a system already rooted in member participation, without even consulting those who make it work.
“When a government that is also one of Quebec’s largest employers decides to redefine how its counterparts should operate, that’s not transparency, it’s control. Unions belong to their members, not to the political establishment.”
— Marie Deschênes, Acting President, UES 800
A government-employer pretending to be an impartial referee
The concern runs even deeper when we remember that the Quebec government is one of the province’s largest employers, negotiating with more than 600 000 public and parapublic-sector employees, where over 80 percent of unionized workers are found.
When a government-employer starts dictating the internal rules of its own bargaining partners, it creates an obvious conflict of interest.
“The Labour Code explicitly prohibits any employer interference in its employees’ union representation. By dictating how certified unions must hold meetings, adopt bylaws, or manage their funds, the government is dangerously crossing that legal line.”
— Philippe Viens, Acting Executive Vice-President, UES 800
This constitutes an intrusion into the freedom of association and the fundamental right of workers to organize freely.
And when the same actor is both employer, legislator, and referee, workplace democracy stops being a dialogue and becomes a one-sided power play.
Union autonomy: a cornerstone of democracy
Unions don’t need the government to tell them how to practice democracy. They need space to debate, evolve, and challenge themselves. That is exactly what they are already doing through initiatives such as the États généraux du syndicalisme (Quebec Labour Forum), which is currently underway.
This kind of collective reflection comes from the movement itself, not from a ministerial decree. That’s the difference between a living labor movement and a democracy under supervision.
What Bill 3 would actually change
Two separate union dues
- The main dues could only fund so-called “core union” activities: bargaining, enforcement of collective agreements, grievances, and related matters.
- A separate, optional contribution would finance everything else: public campaigns, participation in social movements, legal challenges, and political advocacy.
Prohibitions and penalties
Any political or social expenditure paid from the main dues would become illegal, subject to fines ranging from $5 000 to $50 000.
A flood of new administrative requirements
Bill 3 introduces a host of new obligations: mandatory votes in every bargaining unit, periodic bylaw reviews, strict voting timelines, and detailed reporting for each activity. Under the pretext of transparency, the government is bogging down union operations and diverting precious resources from defending members to filling out paperwork.
“Our practices are already rigorous and transparent: our finances are audited, our votes are secret, and our bylaws are public. What the government adds is not transparency, it’s bureaucracy. By multiplying procedures and votes, they want to make union democracy so cumbersome that it grinds to a halt. The goal isn’t to make us more transparent, but to silence us.”
— Cyntia Gagnier, Vice-President of Administration, UES 800
Impact on UES 800: weakening what makes us strong
UES 800 does much more than negotiate wages.
It promotes French-language learning, training, workplace safety, equity, the protection of migrant workers, and the establishment of decrees that secure fair standards for all.
Under Bill 3, all these activities could be deemed “optional,” subject to an onerous consultation process: detailed documentation sent to every member, a mandatory 72-hour waiting period before voting, a 24-hour ballot window, and annual majority approval in every bargaining unit.
It doesn’t stop there. To modify the main dues, collective decisions made at conventions would no longer suffice. Each unit would now have to vote separately, by secret ballot, before any change could take effect. The same rule would apply to union bylaws.
These new procedures would turn union democracy into an administrative labyrinth so cumbersome it would become nearly impossible to take collective positions on laws or policies that directly affect workers.
Coordinated action across regions or sectors would become almost impossible. How can unions mobilize quickly to defend their members if every structural decision requires a separate vote in each unit?
This legislative regime doesn’t aim to modernize union democracy; it aims to neutralize it.
And the real question remains: who does this serve?
When a government that privatizes public services and erodes workers’ rights claims it wants to “democratize” unions, one has to wonder:
Who really benefits from these changes?
The workers of Quebec?
Or those who would rather see them divided, silenced, and too busy filling out forms to stand together and speak up?
UES 800, like the broader labor movement, will continue to fight for a vibrant, strong, and free union democracy.
Because without strong unions, there is no counterbalance to power. And without that counterbalance, it is workers who lose their voice.