Alaina Lockhart

Very strongly agree

Yes, the right to strike is meaningless if employers can simply replace their workforce

This closely matches the core pro-ban argument reflected in the Liberals’ 2024 federal anti-scab law (Bill C-58): strikes are less effective if employers can simply replace workers. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly agree

Yes

The federal Liberals have generally supported limiting replacement workers; notably, the Trudeau government introduced anti-replacement-worker legislation for federally regulated workplaces (Bill C-58, adopted in 2024) to strengthen the right to strike. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly agree

Yes, using "scabs" undermines collective bargaining and poisons the workplace culture

This aligns with the rationale Liberals used in advancing Bill C-58—reducing conflict and supporting meaningful collective bargaining by restricting replacement workers. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No, businesses must be able to stay operational to keep the economy moving

Liberals do emphasize economic continuity, but their recent stance still favors banning replacement workers while relying on essential-services rules and back-to-work legislation in exceptional cases rather than allowing routine replacement staffing. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No, the government should not interfere in private labor negotiations

While Liberals sometimes prefer negotiated settlements, they have supported government intervention via labor law to set rules (e.g., Bill C-58) and have also intervened at times with back-to-work legislation, so they would not agree with a strict non-interference stance. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No, this allows unions to hold the economy hostage by shutting down critical supply chains

The Liberals have not typically framed unions as “holding the economy hostage” as a reason to permit replacement workers; instead they pursued a ban (Bill C-58) and manage critical disruptions through other tools. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

No

A flat “No” conflicts with the party’s recent policy direction: Bill C-58 bans employer use of replacement workers in most strike/lockout situations in federally regulated sectors. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.