By the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM Union)
On June 19, 2025, the Competition Bureau of Canada released its final report on airline industry competition: “Cleared for takeoff: Elevating airline competition”. Its central recommendations? That Canada consider allowing foreign-owned airlines to operate domestic routes and re-evaluate current ownership limits. By proposing to eliminate cabotage restrictions and foreign ownership limits, the Bureau’s suggestions threaten to unravel the very infrastructure that sustains Canada’s aviation sector, with devastating consequences for workers, communities, and national sovereignty.
As the union representing over 16,000 airport workers across the country, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM Union) sees these proposals not as policy progress, but as a direct threat to Canadian jobs, an erosion of our national aviation infrastructure, and a dangerous precedent for public policy driven by short-term economics instead of long-term, Canadian public interest.
The United States strictly prohibits foreign carriers from operating domestic routes, and other regions – like the European Union – only allow such access among member states. Opening our skies unilaterally would offer foreign carriers privileges they don’t extend to us in return.
While we recognize that the airline industry needs reform, deregulating access to our domestic market is not reform. It’s a retreat.
There’s no level playing field – only a losing one
Canada’s aviation sector operates under complex constraints: vast geography, regional routes that are economically and logistically essential but unprofitable, and a regulatory environment already strained by fees and infrastructure gaps. The Bureau’s proposal to allow foreign carriers to fly domestic routes – also known as cabotage – assumes all competitors arrive equally burdened.
They do not.
No major nation, including the United States, offers Canada the same access. Foreign airlines would be invited to pick the most profitable routes without contributing to the rest of the network. That’s not competition. It’s market cherry-picking, and it undermines the carriers and workers who keep the full system running.
Workers will pay the price
For thousands of Canadians, airport jobs are often unionized, come with decent wages, benefits, and job security, and offer permanence increasingly rare in the broader labour market. Our members are the backbone of the aviation economy. Foreign operators with no commitment to Canada will just bring lower wages, fewer benefits, and more precarious, outsourced labour.
This isn’t speculation – it’s history. We’ve seen it deteriorate countless Canadian airlines – from Canada 3000 to Jetsgo to Canadian Airlines International – and there’s no evidence this time will be different.
What makes these recommendations particularly troubling is the lack of labour consultation throughout the Bureau’s study. Only one labour union was interviewed over the course of a 13-month process, despite the airline sector employing tens of thousands of unionized workers. While the IAM provided a detailed written submission to the Bureau, we were never interviewed. Without input from the frontline workforce, these policy recommendations lack the perspective needed to understand their full impact.
National infrastructure cannot be offshored
Our airlines operate in one of the most challenging geographies on earth. They serve small towns, remote communities, and Indigenous territories where air travel is not a luxury – it’s a lifeline. Foreign carriers, with no long-term investment in our infrastructure or workforce, will swoop in for the profitable urban corridors – Toronto to Vancouver, Montreal to Calgary – leaving Canadian carriers to shoulder the financial burden of essential, unprofitable routes.
Once weakened, Canadian carriers will collapse – and with them, thousands of jobs.
If Ottawa opens the door to foreign operators without long-term obligations, what happens when those players exit the market in a downturn? Who ensures continued service to the North? Who remains accountable to Parliament?
The answer cannot be: “whoever’s left.”
If the goal is a better system, let’s fix what’s broken
We do not dispute that Canada’s aviation system has problems. But they begin with issues that tend to be ignored: airport rent and landing fees, overburdened infrastructure, outdated navigation systems, and underinvestment in regional access.
Fixing these problems requires political will, not privatizing the problem and hoping it solves itself.
Conclusion
Canada has a responsibility to foster competition that serves the Canadian public, not foreign corporations. That means strengthening our airlines, protecting our workers, and building an aviation system rooted in resilience, not deregulation. These are national priorities, not global business opportunities to be auctioned off to the highest bidder.
The IAM urges the Canadian government to reject the Competition Bureau’s recommendations on cabotage and foreign ownership. These proposals may promise cheaper fares, but they will come at the cost of sovereignty, safety, and economic stability.
Our skies are not for sale. And the people who keep them running shouldn’t pay the price.
For the full report from the Competition Bureau, please click here.
To see the IAM Union’s submission to the Competition Bureau, please click here.
