Canadian Industrial Relations, 3E Jon Peirce Solution Manual

INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Doug Fletcher Kwantlen University College

Canadian Industrial Relations Third Edition

Jon Peirce Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada Karen Joy Bentham Centre for Industrial Relations, University of Toronto

Contents Preface

ii

Chapter 1: Introduction to Industrial Relations

1

Chapter 2: The Environment and Management of Industrial Relations

8

Chapter 3: The History of the Canadian Labour Movement

15

Chapter 4: Union Membership and Structure

25

Chapter 5: Union Actions and Impacts

36

Chapter 6: Employment Legislation

46

Chapter 7: Collective Bargaining Legislation

54

Chapter 8: Labour Relations and Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector

62

Chapter 9: Collective Bargaining Structures and Processes

72

Chapter 10: The Collective Agreement

81

Chapter 11: Strikes, Lockouts, and Dispute Resolution

89

Chapter 12: Grievances: Function, Resolution, and Prevention

97

Chapter 13: Industrial Relations Around the World

107

Chapter 14: Key Themes and Issues

116

Appendix I: Answers to Video Case Questions

120

Appendix II: Answers to Case Questions

130

Appendix III: Sample Exams

136

.

i

Preface This handbook contains a number of resources which I hope instructors will find useful.

For each chapter, I've provided a one-paragraph overview summarizing the main topics covered in the chapter, an outline, and a fairly detailed summary for use in the preparation of lectures. (In a pinch, an instructor unavoidably forced to miss class due to a last-minute emergency could even assign a teaching assistant to read the summary as a substitute for the normal lecture, though I certainly don't recommend the practice on a regular basis). There are also detailed answers to the end-of-chapter discussion questions and to the questions attached to the cases contained in the appendices. Finally, I have included three sample tests: an undergraduate mid-term, an MBA mid-term, and an undergraduate final including a case analysis. These tests should be particularly helpful to new instructors who would like some guidance as to sample tests and test questions but who are not yet ready to go the multiple choice route.

My textbook is suitable for all levels of industrial relations course, including community college and graduate (MBA) as well as beginning- and advanced-level undergraduate university courses. Some adaptations may be necessary for those wishing to use the book in a community college setting. The specific adaptations any given instructor will need to make depend on which topics are covered by courses other than IR, and which can therefore be omitted, as well as on the number of classroom hours available for the IR course. What follows is a rough outline for a community college course which assumes that economics and employment law have been covered elsewhere and which passes over international IR in the interest of saving time. Obviously community college instructors should feel free to modify the sample outline as needed, but at least this is a start.

Class 1: Introduction to IR (Chapter 1) Class 2: The Environment and Management and IR (Chapter 2) Class 3: Union Actions and Impacts? (Chapter 5) Class 4: Labour Movement History (Chapter 3) Class 5: Union Membership and Structure (Chapter 4) Class 6: Test Class 7: Collective Bargaining Legislation (Chapter 7) Class 8: LR and Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector (Chapter 8) Class 9: Collective Bargaining Stuctures and Processes (Chapter 9) Class 10: The Collective Agreement (Chapter 10); prepare for simulation Class 11: Negotiation exercise or bargaining simulation Class 12: Strikes (Chapter 11) and Grievances (Chapter 12); Discussion of arbitration cases (from appendix).

Class 13: Conclusion (Ch. 14) Final Exam If instructors wish, the negotiation exercise or bargaining simulation can be given two classes either by omitting the review class or by cutting labour history and using the extra time for a second simulation period.

.

ii

I have already used the book for an MBA class as well as for an introductory one, and have found it works quite well at the higher level. I believe it will work even better at this level now that a comparative chapter has been added; this chapter should be of particular interest to international students, of whom there seem to be growing numbers in MBA programs these days. MBA instructors may wish to supplement the book with a broader range of cases, or with student presentations, if class size permits. The latter is my usual practice, assuming there are no more than 15-18 in the class. What I particularly like to do in MBA classes is invite students to apply the concepts of the course to a practical workplace situation they've encountered on the job. Again, presentations are an excellent way of doing this, if time permits.

Please be sure to let me know how this book has worked for you, and what you would like to see added. Your comments can help make the third edition an even better book.

Thanks.

J.P. Ottawa July, 2002

It was my privilege to add to this manual for the third edition of Canadian Industrial Relations. The substantial changes made by Jon Peirce and Karen Joy Bentham have I hope been reflected in this edition of the manual, without sacrificing the unique ‘voice’ of the previous edition. Use it well!

Cheers, Doug Fletcher Coquitlam, BC July, 2006

.

iii

Chapter 1: Introduction to Industrial Relations Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to offer a very brief introduction to the field of industrial relations (IR). The chapter begins by considering the significance of work in most Canadians' lives. After a brief discussion of IR's interdisciplinary nature, it offers some definitions for the term. Next it considers some of the best-known theories of industrial relations, including the systems framework and the strategic choice framework. The chapter concludes with a discussion of five perspectives for the study of IR and a brief outline of what the rest of the book will cover.

Chapter Outline I) The Significance of Work A) The Changing World of Work II) What Is Industrial Relations?

A) Defining Industrial Relations III) Theories of Industrial Relations A) Dunlop's Systems Theory B) The Strategic Choice Model IV) Perspectives on Industrial Relations A) Neoclassical Perspective B) Managerial Perspective C) Institutional Perspective D) Reformist Perspective E) Radical/Political Economy Perspective V) What the Book Will Cover Chapter Summary I) The Significance of Work (pp. 2–5)

Work is important for a variety of reasons, including both psychic and economic ones.

Most of us spend a large share of our waking hours at work; to a large extent our adult identity is shaped by the work we do and the jobs we hold. We meet many of our friends at work, and a good many of us actually meet our life partners there. Work's economic importance is equally important. Most of us derive virtually all of our income from

.

1

work-related earnings, and work is essential to produce goods and services, like food, housing, and telephone service, on which we all depend.

Of late, the world of work has been changing quite dramatically. Until quite recently, most jobs in Canada were full-time and full-year, and many people stayed with one employer, or at most a handful of them, throughout their entire working lives. Over the past two decades, the incidence of "atypical" forms of employment has increased dramatically. As Figures 1.1a and 1.1b show, the increase in part-time work has been particularly dramatic. Other forms of "atypical" employment which have been increasing include casual and contractual work, self-employment, and work performed at home rather than on the employer's premises. As well, most people enjoy far less job security than did their parents and grandparents. Few young people entering today's work world can realistically expect to stay with one employer, or even one occupation, throughout their entire careers.

The Canadian work force has been changing equally rapidly. Once predominantly male and almost all white, it now includes nearly 50% women as well as people from many different ethnic and religious backgrounds. It also includes people with varying types and degrees of physical and mental disability.

Taken together, these developments pose major challenges for managers, for individual workers, for the unions that seek to represent their interests, and for public policy-makers responsible for regulating working conditions. For example, managers find it hard to generate loyalty and commitment from workers when few of those workers have any assurance that they will still be on the payroll at year's end. Similarly, government officials regulating workplace health and safety find it difficult to monitor working conditions in work done in employees' homes using their own equipment.

II) What is Industrial Relations? (pp. 5–8)

The example I use in the book illustrates how many different fields IR draws on in analyzing a single phenomenon—the different rates of union membership in Canada and the U.S. Among the fields IR draws on in analyzing this phenomenon are economics, law (especially labour law), political science, history, psychology, and sociology. Other IR issues may require a knowledge of business management, music, folklore, literature, or even ergonomics.

How, given IR's complexity and interdisciplinary nature, should we define our field?

One possible starting point would be, "the relations between unions and management."

Such a definition isn't all bad, by any means. Union-management relations are at the core of our field. But it's important to note, as well, that such a definition leaves out a lot.

Among other things, it leaves out government's important role, as regulator of the IR system. It also fails to take into account non-unionized workers, who make up about two-thirds of the Canadian labour force. Finally, it doesn't consider the extent to which the IR system affects the lives of all Canadians—even those who, like children or retired people, are not themselves employed. For these reasons, I propose adopting a broad definition similar to that put forward by Thomas Kochan, who sees IR as addressing all aspects of the employment relationship.

.

2

To be sure, IR is by no means the only discipline which deals with the world of work.

Other relevant disciplines include organizational behaviour (OB), human resource management (HRM), sociology, labour economics, and labour studies, to name just a few. Where IR differs from other fields is in its concern for balancing the interests of management and workers, as well as in its interdisciplinary approach. While OB and HRM courses tend to take a pro-management approach, and labour studies a pro-labour and often pro-union approach, IR courses seek to make students aware of the needs and interests of both workers and management. Similarly, while labour economics courses focus on work's economic aspects, and sociology courses focus on its behavioural and psychic aspects, IR courses treat the different aspects of work as interrelated.

III) Theories of Industrial Relations (pp. 8-14)

Dunlop's systems theory For many years, John Dunlop's systems theory was by far the most important industrial relations theory. Despite many criticisms, it has remained important to this day.

Dunlop says that an IR system comprises certain actors (managers, workers and their representatives, and government or specialized private agencies which regulate relations between managers and workers), certain contexts (economic, technical, and power or political ones), a body or web of rules governing the actors' workplace behaviour, and a common ideology binding the system together. The workers may or may not be unionized. It is their job to do the work, following instructions given to them by management, whose job it is to provide such instructions. Government's primary interest is as a peacekeeper and rule maker, though within the public sector it wears a second hat as employer. Changes in any of the three contexts are likely to produce shifts in the balance of power between managers and workers, and each has its greatest impact on a particular subset of the rules. For instance, the market context affects pay and benefit levels.

The web of rules includes substantive rules regarding system outcomes such as pay, benefits, hours of work, and workplace safety, and procedural rules on such matters as collective bargaining, grievance procedures, and procedures for strikes and lockouts. For the most part, procedural rules are contained in labour relations legislation, while substantive ones are contained in employment standards legislation applicable to most workers. The two sets of rules are largely distinct, though there are a number of areas of overlap between them, as the text points out in more details in Chapters 7 and 8. As for what is meant by a "common ideology," this has led to a fair amount of confusion over the years. While it would probably be fair to say that most employers and workers share a common preference for democratic government rather than Communism or fascism, this doesn't go far toward explaining to what extent workplace conflict might be restrained or modified as a result of the "common ideology."

Criticisms of the systems theory The notion of a "common ideology" has long been criticized as being of little practical guidance. In addition, the systems framework has been criticized for failing to provide a theoretical core which can generate testable research hypotheses, for minimizing the .

3

importance of environmental inputs beyond Dunlop's three contexts, for underplaying the importance of conflict, and for assuming that IR systems possess a greater degree of stability than they actually do. Craig's modification of the systems framework allows for a much broader range of inputs than Dunlop's, but has been criticized for paying inadequate attention to the role of management and (like Dunlop's original theory), for underplaying the importance of workplace conflict.

The strategic choice framework The strategic choice framework (SCF) arose out of concerns by Thomas Kochan and his associates that existing IR theories (like the systems framework) paid insufficient attention to the role of management and placed too much emphasis on collective bargaining and not enough on events taking place at other levels of the organization. A key element of the SCF is its insistence on linking firms' IR and HR strategies to their global strategies and workplace- or shop-floor level strategies. Kochan et al are also unwilling to assume that conflict can be contained or worked out through the normal activities of collective bargaining, or that management will necessarily even be prepared to sit down and negotiate with unions. Within the SCF, the extent of conflict is now something to be measured empirically rather than taken for granted. Particularly in the event that management refuses to have anything to do with unions, this conflict may be far more severe than most of the types envisaged in the systems framework. Because the SCF is of particular importance in explaining management behaviour, a full discussion is left to Chapter 3.

IV) Perspectives on IR (pp. 14–18)

The existence of a number of different perspectives among industrial relationists is yet another reason to question Dunlop's notion of a shared ideology. Even within the same union or management organization, different individuals may hold widely divergent views on key issues. The five perspectives whose key features are listed below address such things as the importance individuals attach to unions, their major research focus, the extent to which they believe conflict is inherent in the IR system, and their location on the political spectrum (right to left). The five perspectives identified here will be useful throughout the book, particularly when it comes to considering someone's position on such things as labour law or collective agreements. It is thus extremely important for students to master these perspectives early on.

The neoclassical perspective is really more of a pure economics perspective than an IR one. It emphasizes the study of markets, especially labour markets, and tends to use large statistical data bases for research purposes. Neoclassicists are on the right of the political spectrum and have little use for unions or the government agencies that regulate them. They tend not to concern themselves with questions related to conflict since they believe all such questions can be resolved through the operation of market forces.

The managerial perspective is closely related to OB. Managerialists' main concern is the motivation of workers, both individually and in small groups; unlike neoclassicists, they seek to motivate through positive incentives rather than through fear. Politically they are right of centre but not far right; unlike neoclassicists, they do believe government has a positive if limited role to play in regulating the economy and IR system. On the question

.

4

of unions, they're ambivalent—willing to cooperate if the union is but generally somewhat skeptical, and unwilling to work with adversarial unions. A major research tool is the employee survey (not in text but perhaps worth mentioning anyway); much of their research deals with issues such as what management techniques and organizational structures will reduce an individual's propensity to engage in industrial conflict. On the question of conflict, managerialists believe that while managers' and workers' interests may diverge in the short run, in the longer run they will converge, assuming management uses appropriate progressive HR policies to link the company's interests to individual workers' needs.

The institutional (sometimes called orthodox pluralist) perspective is the one taken by most mainline industrial relationists. This perspective arises out of the recognition that in competitive market places, individual workers are unable to resist the demands of powerful employers. Unions and collective bargaining are therefore needed to balance what would otherwise be an uneven playing field. Instititutionalists generally have a strong interest in real-world IR institutions (unions, management organizations, and government agencies regulating the IR system) and in public labour policy issues. Much of their research tends to be of a practical nature, and they tend to rely more heavily on interviews and case studies than do neoclassicists. While their political views are not monolithic, most are not too far from the centre of the political spectrum. As for workplace conflict, institutionalists certainly recognize that it exists. At the same time, they believe that much if not all of it can usually be dissipated through collective bargaining and other activities carried out within the IR system.

Members of the reformist school think that labour law and collective bargaining could work, but that as things stand, the odds are weighted too heavily in favour of employers, and the rich and powerful in general. While supportive of unions in principle, they believe that in practice, unions often can't be of much help to workers, particularly in small organizations or peripheral sectors of the economy. Accordingly, they seek major economic redistribution, such as changes in the tax system and improved social programs, as well as pay and employment equity and other employment law reforms designed to correct what many of them view as widespread structural and political inequality. Left of centre politically, they combine a theoretical critique of work-related issues with a practical interest in such subjects as discrimination, worker safety, and layoffs and plant closures.

Unlike members of the four schools already discussed, members of the radical or political economy school believe that widespread inequality is an integral part of capitalist society and cannot be overcome under existing economic and political arrangements. In the past, most members of this school were of a Marxist or quasi-Marxist bent and had relatively little use for unions, regarding them as at best a Band-Aid solution, at worst a distraction from what should be the working class' primary mission: to overthrow capitalist society, whether by political means, a general strike, or some combination of the two. More recently, those taking a political economy perspective have moderated their prescription somewhat. While still on the left politically and still in agreement with traditional Marxists as to the centrality of power issues, few now call for the violent overthrow of

.

5

capitalist society. Instead, most are more concerned with working for employee ownership and management of businesses or with getting unions to reach out to the communities in which their members live. Interestingly enough, like the neoclassicists (and unlike most institutionalists), members of this perspective have tended to operate from a strongly theoretical base, though in recent years they have tended to show more interest in practical workplace problems.

V) What the Book Will Cover (pp. 18–19)

Largely self-explanatory. The following points may be worth considering: After the introduction, the book considers the major actors (Chs. 3–5) and the legislation (i.e., rules) governing their behaviour in Chs. 6–8. Chs. 9–12 deal with negotiation, the collective agreement, and with conflict arising out of negotiation and the interpretation of collective agreements.

• Ch. 13 examines both developed and developing countries.

• Ch. 14 examines five key themes in the course of revisiting the Canadian IR system as a whole.

• Where appropriate, the book incorporates a discussion of elements from Quebec's IR system and from foreign systems.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Experiential question. I have found this a good way to bring out shy students. You might even consider using this question as part of the process of "introducing" of class members to each other. I often do.

2) Strengths of systems framework. Offers useful insights into IR's interdisciplinary nature and offers a convenient introductory approach to the study of foreign IR systems, allowing for some degree of consistency in comparing such systems.

Weaknesses of systems framework. Doesn't really provide IR with a theoretical core or generate "testable hypotheses." Viewing the IR subsystem in isolation may not be realistic—IR strategy needs to be linked to other aspects of the firm's strategy, and this also tends to minimize the importance of various environmental inputs beyond those Dunlop has identified. Notion of a "common ideology" isn't very clear. Doesn't distinguish between types of conflict (cathartic and destructive) or even indicate to what extent conflict is inherent within the employment relationship—seems to assume that where conflict does exist, it can be worked out. Also seems to assume that IR systems are more stable than they actually are.

3) SCF doesn't consider IR and HR strategies in isolation; instead it seeks to link these strategies to firms' larger strategies. The level of conflict is no longer a given; instead it's something to be measured empirically. In particular, union acceptance no longer a given; it is seen as just one of several strategies firms may use toward unions. SCF recognizes the existence of serious (dysfunctional) conflict which cannot be resolved through collective bargaining (as when mgmt. won't even recognize or negotiate with a union). In

.

6

general, SCF pays more attention to mgmt's role than systems framework does, esp.

Craig's version thereof.

4) Covered under Sec. IV, above. Useful to note that not all industrial relationists can be consistently identified with one of the five perspectives, and that there are some surprising similarities between the neoclassical and radical/political economy perspectives.

5) IR differs from other work-related disciplines a) in its interdisciplinary nature; b) in its attempt to balance the interests and needs of workers with those of managers and employers; and, c) through its study of both the economic and behavioural aspects of work. Its distinctive contribution lies in its balanced, interdisciplinary approach and in its treatment of the different aspects of work as interrelated. In these ways, it takes a more holistic approach to work than do the other fields mentioned in the text.

6) Answers will vary but might include the challenge of “virtual work” generally and telecommuting in particular as the services industry is revolutionized by web-based communications technology. Other possibilities—continued contracting out of production work to jurisdictions outside of Canada; the retirement of the ‘baby boom’ generation and the stresses that will put on the domestic labour force, need for higher levels of immigration, etc.; or the effects of a potential influenza pandemic.

.

7

Chapter 2: The Environment and Management of Industrial Relations Chapter Overview This chapter opens with a look at the economic, political, and social contexts of industrial relations. Each contextual factor uniquely influences the bargaining power and decisions of both management and labour, shaping the interactions within, and the outcomes of, the Canadian industrial relations system. The chapter then goes on to take a closer look at the management of industrial relations, both the growing role of management within the industrial relations system and the evolution of management practices. We also discuss the search for alternative management practices and the various industrial relations strategies employers typically pursue.

Chapter Outline I) The Political Context of Industrial Relations II)The Social Context of Industrial Relations III) The Economic Context of Industrial Relations A) Basic Dynamics B) Labour Force Trends C) Unemployment IV) Impact of the Economic Environment on the Management of IR V) The Evolution of Industrial Relations Management Practice A) Pre-Industrial Era B) Coercive Drive System C) Scientific Managmeent D) Welfare Capitalist Management E) Bureaucratic Management Practice F) The Search for Alternatives VI) Current Management Practices in Canada A) Industrial Relations Strategy VII) The Environment and Management of Industrial Relations in Canada

.

8

Chapter Summary I) The Political Context of Industrial Relations

Canada’s provinces have jurisdiction over labour relations except for federally-regulated businesses (banks, airlines, crown corporations, etc.) and federal government employees.

With the federal jurisdiction, Canada has eleven industrial relations “subsystems” which, although different, share a similar ideology and are subject to similar contextual influences. Each jurisdiction does enact and enforce legislation that reflects the political parties’ perspectives regarding the appropriate protection of rights and balance of power between labour and management. As employers, governments implement policies and pratices that affect all public and para-public sector workers. Governments also attempt to shape the values and beliefs of all the industrial relations actors and provide various programs and mechanisms to support preferred industrial relations and management practices. Governments are also responsible for broader social, economic, fiscal and constitutional policies that shape the industrial relations environment.

II)The Social Context of Industrial Relations

The social context of industrial relations primarily relates to the goals and values of society regarding unionization of workers. Attitudes, values and beliefs regarding the role of unions or the rights of employers and workers may vary according to one’s background, life experiences, and political orientation, which in turn may be influenced by one’s peers and whether or not a member of one’s family belongs to a union. The attitudes, values, and beliefs of the actors in an industrial relations system both influence and are influenced by the other subsystems. The degree to which the social subsystem has influence on industrial relations systems outcomes independent of its influence on the other contextual systems is arguable.

III) The Economic Context of Industrial Relations

Within the constraints imposed by the legal context, the economic environment most fundamentally affects system outcomes, especially the degree to which workers and their unions will be able to improve compensation and benefits and the relative ability of employers to restrain labour costs and increase profits.

Basic Dynamics The business cycle dictates some basic dynamics regarding the balance of power between actors within an industrial relations system. Periods of strong product demand are usually associated with low unemployment rates, and this has implications both for employers and unions. In periods of strong product demand, the cost of a strike is more severe for employers in terms of lost sales in the short term and longer term if customers find more reliable alternative sources of supply. Lower unemployment rates tend to increase workers’ alternative wage, and make substitute employment during a strike action more likely, both contributing to lowering the cost of strike action for unions. The situation is reversed in times of low product demand and its associated higher unemployment rates. While the business cycle has a direct impact on the bargaining

.

9

power of the parties (and bargaining outcomes), it is not a predictor of strikes because the parties take this information into account in preparation for bargaining.

Labour Force Trends The labour force includes all persons 15 years of age and over who are either employed or unemployed and looking for work. Trends in Canada’s labour force include a substantial decline in the number of workers in primary industries in Canada (agriculture, forestry and fisheries), and a growing decline in the manufacturing sector. Employment growth has occurred in the services sector of the economy. Three notable trends include the aging of the workforce, increased participation of women and ethnic minorities, and the rapid growth of non-standard employment.

By 2015 workers aged 45-64 will constitute 48% of the working age population. While some workers will choose to continue working after age 65 (due to the removal of mandatory retirement restrictions in some jurisdictions) the retirement of the ‘baby boom’ generation will mean skills shortages and escalating wage rates.

Women’s labour force participation has steadily increased since the 1950s, and now 47% of labour force participants and 48.6% of union members are female. The implications of increased participation in the workforce is the need for daycare and workplace policies and practices that facilitate work/life balance, parental leaves, flexible work scheduling, and rights and protections for part-time workers. For unions, there has been increased scrutiny regarding the representativeness and inclusiveness of union leadership, internal decision-making structures, and collective bargaining agendas. Ethnic minorities, and especially recent immigrants, face a number of barriers to full employment including devaluation of foreign work experience and difficulties in equating foreign qualifications and training to Canadian standards.

Non-standard employment can encompass virtually any form of employment other than the traditional full-time, full-year contracts of indefinite term. This includes selfemployment, moonlighting, home work, part-time and contract employment. Selfemployment in particular has grown significantly, and overall both part-time and selfemployment are increasing as a proportion of total employment, leading to challenges for all of the actors in the industrial relations system.

Unemployment There are three types of unemployment and it is important to distinguish between them as each has different implications for the industrial relations system. Frictional unemployment occurs when workers change jobs—this type of unemployment is often voluntary and is a small proportion of total unemployment. Structural unemployment occurs when there is a mismatch between the jobs available and workers’ skills and/or location. Structural unemployment must be addressed through public policy initiatives in the areas of skills training and relocation incentives. In sectors facing long-term decline unions have been involved in designing retraining programs funded by government to assist members find employment in growing industries. Demand-deficient unemployment occurs because of an overall lack of jobs, at the low end of the business

.

10

cycle. There are two broad policy options for government to address this type of unemployment: stimulation of demand through monetary, fiscal and taxation polices; or reducing work hours to spread the available work around. Unions have attempted to bargain a shorter work week, and overtime bans, in periods of reduced demand.

IV) Impact of the Economic Environment on the Management of IR

Canada’s economy has become increasingly market oriented, through privatization, deregulation, and trade liberalization. Growing foreign competition has put pressure on management to contain labour costs without compromising product quality. The result has been at least a partial reversion from accomodationist post-war management practices to a more pro-active approach to industrial relations, especially in the United States.

V) The Evolution of Industrial Relations Management Practice

Pre-Industrial Era Pre-industrial employment was characterized predominantly by self-employment.

Employees were governed by master and servant law in a paternalistic model.

Coercive Drive System The early industrial period saw a growth in paid employment but with virtually no protection for employees. Craft workers such as coopers and printers were able to set rates in good times, but most workers had to take what they could get. Owners hired managers to oversee production, and fear was the primary motivator employed in a system with no job security.

Scientific Management The aim of scientific management was a harmonious workplace in which workers would be rewarded for superior effort and would share in the firms’ gains, by out-performing quotas established through elaborate time and motion studies. Managerial work was systematically separated from that of ordinary workers, and tasks broken down into their simplest components. Experiments in efficient working conditions (Mayo studies) led to the conclusion that increases in productivity could be gained by paying attention to workers’ needs. The human relations school focused much of their attention on individual motivation, group dynamics, and social support for employees.

Welfare Capitalist Management The human relations movement was the foundation for a number of management changes that occurred in the period 1900-1930. Many organizations established ‘personnel’ departments to administer welfare benefits such as paid vacations, pensions, life and accident insurance plans, stock purchase plans, savings plans, low-cost loans and home ownership assistance plans. Another function of the personnel departments was to hire workers, and to resolve disputes between workers and their foreman. Most major employers in the United States brought in the eight-hour day during the 1920s, and many firms established ‘works councils’ or other worker representative bodies. One of the motivations for companies was to avoid unions, which were systematically resisted. The Depression of the 1930s led to an abandonment of many progressive programs and a

.

11

reversion to the coercive drive approach. By the end of the 1930s, however, organizations were forced to adapt their practices to conform to the new labour relations legislation and the collective agreements made possible through legal protection for unionization.

Bureaucratic Management Practice By the end of the war management of industrial relations had begun to specialize.

Personnel departments continued to be responsible for maintaining benefit plans, hiring new workers, training workers and supervisors, and ensuring compliance with ever-more rigorous employment legislation. Industrial relations departments were established to conduct collective bargaining and administer union agreements. The economic environment of the 1970s became increasingly difficult due to inflation and the oil price shock of 1973. Economic pressures meant it was increasingly difficult to ‘buy off’ union discontent with large pay and benefit increases. At the same time, the ‘baby boom’ generation was entering the workforce, more highly educated and with higher expectations about working life than the previous generations had been. Many firms began instituting quality of work life (QWL) schemes to address their workers’ intrinsic needs. A new wave of legislation in the 1960s and 70s caused a revolution in ‘personnel’ departments which began evolving into ‘human resources.’ The legislation also led to the increased application of strategic planning and analysis to human resources management.

The Search for Alternatives The high levels of inflation at the end of the 1970s and early 80s led to a severe recession, one consequence of which were several rounds of concession bargaining, which sometimes resulted in two-tier wage systems as employers tried to ‘manage down’ their labour costs. Some employers tried to maintain or enhance employee participation programs, even as they were adopting hard-line practices at the negotiation table.

VI) Current Management Practices in Canada

There is no dominant form of industrial relations practice currently, although there seems to be a trend toward increased employee involvement in decision-making and desire to implement high performance work systems. The effort to launch high performance work systems is such that many organizations do not fully implement them, and the results from organizations that have implemented them are mixed. There is some evidence of improved outcomes for employees in terms of work satisfaction, however such systems are also associated with higher levels of employee stress over the pace and intensity of work.

Industrial Relations Strategy The strategic choice theory suggests a typology that seems to describe management practice in Canada. A union acceptance strategy is one where employers do not actively resist becoming unionized or make attempts to rid themselves of existing unions, and employers with established unions frequently adopt this strategy. The focus for such employers becomes negotiating the best possible agreement terms consistent with the organization’s overall strategy. A union resistance strategy is one where employers accept existing unions but vigorously oppose additional certifications or expansion of

.

12

coverage for existing unions. Such employers often extend union-scale wages and benefits to non-union employees in an effort to limit the impact of the collective agreement on the organization. A union removal strategy is one where employers aggressively try to eliminate any unions that already exist within their operations and avoid any new certifications. Such employers will move production to non-union facilities, and engage in hard bargaining with any existing unions, forcing them to take concessions and not granting any advantage over non-unionized employees. A union substitution/avoidance strategy is one were the employer’s goal is remain union free by implementing practices designed to substitute for union protections. Examples of Canadian companies employing this strategy are Imperial Oil, Dofasco, and WestJet. A broad range of factors underlie a firm’s choice of industrial relations strategy. These include management’s business strategy, the degree of unionization within the firm and its industry, current collective agreement provisions, relevant labour laws, relative union power, the union’s receptivity toward co-operative endeavours, and its militancy (especially its willingness to strike).

VII) The Environment and Management of Industrial Relations in Canada

The political, social and economic contexts affect and constrain managerial industrial relations strategies. For example, the statutory limits on employer behaviour during union certification campaigns mean that union resistance or avoidance may be less viable options. Both macroeconomic and industry- or firm-specific economic factors also affect the feasibility of certain strategies and increase the instrumentality of others.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Will vary depending on province of residence and the comparator used.

2) See the summary above for the description of aging of the workforce, higher participation of women and ethnic minorities, and growth of non-standard employment trends.

3) See the summary above for the description of frictional, structural, and demanddeficient unemployment.

4) Largely experiential (based on discussion). Here are a few suggestions: PRO: Would create at least some additional jobs. Would improve family life as people had more time to spend at home. Net income loss would probably be less since people would have fewer work-related expenses (child care, cleaning, parking, lunches). People could spend more time at productive hobbies or in community service. Not at all unrealistic—many European countries are moving in precisely this direction. We need to think about working better hours, not more hours; long hours are the sign of underdeveloped countries (like Brazil). Overwork brings with it high social costs, ranging from increased use of medical facilities to increased child abuse and neglect.

CON: Might not create as many additional jobs as it seems. Employers might be hard hit. Sounds great. . .but would people really start writing novels or sailing boats?

Wouldn't most people just spend more time watching TV or playing video games?

.

13

Legislation is too rigid; the "one size fits all" solution won't work. Low-income workers already earn too little without having their income cut even further. Some occupations inherently hard to legislate; this is fine for factory workers but what about doctors and professors? Unrealistic—will never fly politically. We need to work more hours, not fewer, to stay competitive (H. Kohl). The labour movement is not at all unanimous on this issue. But in connection with this whole discussion, it’s useful to note that even if you don't want new legislation, you could at least enforce existing legislation and ensure that no one who doesn't want to is working more than 40 hours a week. For many Canadians, that in itself would be a big step forward. Here are some ‘existing’ solutions that just need to be used more aggressively than they have been. Use EI funds to provide short-term compensation for employees on reduced (4-day) work weeks, on the grounds that it's better to have many people work a little bit less than to have some laid off.

Increase the overtime premium (say to 200%). Reduce payroll taxes for employers reducing hours to create or maintain jobs. Amend employment standards legislation to allow workers to choose to work shorter hours, at a corresponding reduction in pay.

5) The shift to Coercive Drive System from Pre-Industrial Era was largely a function of necessity as enterprises grew from one or two apprentices or “hands” to much larger production centers and the need arose for “manager” positions distinct from owners.

Scientific Management started out as a refinement of the Coercive Drive System and evolved into a more wholistic view of the interaction of workers and technology through experimentation, giving rise to the human relations school. Welfare Capitalist Management was an extension of the ideas of the human relations school to workplaces growing in complexity and size. Bureaucratic Management Practice evolved in concert with the simultaneous growth in size of industrial workplaces combined with ever more complex legislative compliance and collective agreement support activities. Finally the current Search for Alternatives has been provoked by a need to adapt to changes in the business environment which has seen a major shift due to privatization, deregulation, and freer trade bringing with it a higher level of global competition.

6) The four strategies are summarized in the above discussion. A broad range of factors underlie a firm’s choice of industrial relations strategy. These include management’s business strategy, the degree of unionization within the firm and its industry, current collective agreement provisions, relevant labour laws, relative union power, the union’s receptivity toward co-operative endeavours, and its militancy (especially its willingness to strike).

7) Experential.

.

14

Chapter 3: The History of the Canadian Labour Movement Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to trace the development of the Canadian labour movement, including both the organized and unorganized portions thereof. The chapter follows Canadian unions through three stages of development—from craft through industrial to public sector unionism. Along the way, it also considers the role of government in the development of the Canadian labour movement, the nature of political involvement entered into by Canadian unions, and the role played by international unions, or unions headquartered in the U.S. but with branches in this country.

Chapter Outline I) The Development of Canadian Unions: A Brief Overview A) The Pre-Industrial Period B) Early Labour Organization in Quebec C) Labour in the First Industrial Revolution D) Labour in the Second Industrial Revolution E) The First World War and Its Aftermath F) The Postwar Retreat G) Labour During the Depression H) Labour During the War Years I) Labour During the 1950s J) The Canadian Labour Movement's New Face K) A New Era of Restraint L) The 1980s Recession and Its Aftermath M) Canadian Labour in the 1990s N) Canadian Labour at the Dawn of the New Millennium Chapter Summary I) The Development of Canadian Unions: A Brief Overview (pp. 47–84)

The Canadian labour movement has come a long way from its days as a small, locallybased movement in the early 19th century. In addition to obstacles common to most Western labour movements, such as employer and government opposition, it has had to contend with a number of problems peculiar to this country, notably Canada's late

.

15

industrialization, sparse population, a high degree of outside control over the Canadian economy, and the fragmentation of the labour movement into separate English and French movements. But the most serious barrier of all may have been the tendency of Canadian unionists to join American-based internationals rather than unions based here.

During this century, government has played an important role in the labour movement's growth, primarily by passing legislation designed to encourage union growth.

The Pre-Industrial Period (pp. 48–9) While there is some evidence of organized labour activity, including strikes, as far back as the 18th century, such activity was rare in Canada prior to the First Industrial Revolution, which began about 1850. Most Canadians were self-employed, and even those who worked for someone else typically worked for a relative, friend, or neighbour in a paternalistic employment relationship (this was discussed in some detail in Ch. 3).

Union activity was strongly discouraged by harsh anti-conspiracy legislation. Those few unions which did exist often represented themselves as "friendly societies" providing members with a degree of mutual insurance against death, illness, or unemployment.

Most were purely local and rarely confrontational. Labour conflict increased with the arrival of large numbers of unskilled Irish, British, and Scottish immigrants, who would often engage in spontaneous "crowd" behaviour to protest alleged employer injustices.

During the 1840s, Irish canal labourers began to engage in more highly organized forms of labour action to protest against their wretched pay and appalling working conditions.

Early Labour Organization in Quebec (pp. 49–50) Effective labour organization developed even more slowly in Quebec than in the rest of Canada. Like other Canadian governments, the Quebec government banned unions as criminal conspiracies in restraint of trade. But its restrictions on worker protest did not end there. Public protests over high prices were treated as seditious, and craft organizations were subordinated to the Catholic Church and not allowed to play a meaningful economic or political role. Later, discrimination against Quebec workers seeking jobs on the canals and railways caused many of them to seek their fortune in the U.S. rather than in English Canada, a fact which further retarded the development of a strong movement in Quebec.

Labour in the First Industrial Revolution (pp. 50–1) Canada's first sizeable factories appeared shortly after the middle of the 19th century.

These new establishments and the mines, railways, and lumber mills that also emerged about this time often employed hundreds of people, instead of three or four as the earlier craft shops had done. Employers now had to make profits to compete in larger markets on the basis of cost and to pay for their expensive new machinery. To do this, it was necessary to control their labour costs—the one cost most had some control over. The result was the introduction of "coercive drive" management (described in detail in Ch. 3), which sought to extract the maximum possible effort from workers.

Workers' response to these harsher conditions was to form craft unions, many of which affiliated with American internationals. Other key events during the "First Industrial Revolution" were the formation of "nine-hour leagues" which sought to reduce working

.

16

hours, the creation of the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada, the country's first national labour federation, and the expansion of the U.S.-based Knights of Labor into Canada. Though ultimately the Knights would not endure in either country, during their time they posed a significant challenge both to employers and to conventional craft unions, with their emphasis on education, political action, and wide-reaching social transformation. The federal government grudgingly recognized working people's greater political power by passing a Trade Union Act in 1872. Though the act gave unions real powers, it did remove peaceful picketing from criminal prosecution and to some extent enhanced unions' legitimacy.

Labour in the Second Industrial Revolution (pp. 53–6) A second industrial revolution began in Canada during the 1890s. Factories became larger and even more capital-intensive, and supervision grew even stricter and more brutal. Sensing that conditions were ripe for a new wave of union organizing, AFL president Samuel Gompers enlisted the services of Hamilton carpenter John Flett, who carried out a whirlwind wave of organizing which brought more than 100 new AFL locals into the Canadian labour movement in a two-year period and firmly set the Canadian movement on an international path. This new direction was confirmed at the Berlin convention of the TLC in 1902, where Flett was elected Congress president and the organization banned "dual unionism," or the recognition of a national union in an industry in which an international union already existed.

Though the Berlin convention appeared to set the Canadian labour movement on a moderate as well as international course, not all union members would buy into this kind of approach. The century's first two decades saw a series of increasingly violent strikes in mines, railways, and logging camps on the country's two coasts. Especially in B.C., many workers were attracted by radical unions like the International Workers of the World (IWW), which placed their faith in direct action rather than collective bargaining or politics. An Alberta coal strike would lead to the passage of the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act (IDI Act) in 1907. This act provided for compulsory conciliation in essential interprovincial industries. But though the act was welcomed by most of the general public and even many within the labour movement, it did little to promote union growth or enhance unions' powers, since it did not provide basic bargaining rights or protect workers against employers' anti-union tactics. Nor did it do much to stop labourmanagement conflict at a time of growing international political ferment and experimentation with socialism and other radical political ideologies.

The First World War and Its Aftermath (pp. 56–7) Wartime labour shortages, rising prices, and a wartime government ban on employer antiunion activity combined to make the First World War a period of very rapid union growth. Angry that the government had not consulted with it, as other countries' governments had with their labour movements, the Canadian labour movement initially sought to elect members to Parliament on a labour ticket. After this attempt failed, the movement turned to radical protest and direct action, culminating in the Winnipeg General Strike of 1919 and the launching of the socialist "One Big Union" by westernbased radicals. Though the Winnipeg strike would spawn a nation-wide wave of

.

17

sympathy strikes, it proved a colossal failure in the end, as all three levels of government combined to crush it in the most brutal and authoritative way possible (see photo, p. 122).

To all intents and purposes, the collapse of the Winnipeg General Strike marked the end of the country's radical labour movement.

The Postwar Retreat (pp. 57–9) The 1920s were an extraordinarily difficult decade for the Canadian labour movement.

They began with a severe depression that led to massive layoffs and wage cuts, and continued with government repression, a renewed employer offensive against labour, and deep schisms within the movement itself, resulting from the launching of confessional (Catholic) unions in Quebec and the Communist Party in Ontario.

Labour During the Depression (pp. 59–64) Working people were hit very hard by the Great Depression of the 1930s. By 1933, one worker in four was unemployed, 15% of the population was on relief, and a large number of young men had been consigned to a brutal life in government-sponsored relief camps which provided inmates with 20 cents a day and room and board in return for six days a week of hard labour.

In the face of these desperate conditions, the country's working people showed surprising courage and resourcefulness. Faced with conclusive proof of the failure of conventional political and economic approaches, many began to try out a wide variety of new approaches both in workplaces and in the political arena. In Ontario, the Communists' Workers' Unity League managed to organize a fair number of furniture, textile, and garment workers despite fierce government repression. In Regina, a broad-based coalition launched the socialist Co-Operative Commonwealth Federation, or CCF. This party and its successor, the New Democratic Party (NDP) would eventually become the labour movement's major political allies.

By 1935, developments in the U.S. were starting to give Canadian workers some hope.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt's "New Deal" included a National Labor Relations Act providing broad bargaining and strike rights for workers. An important consequence of this act was that it facilitated unionized of unskilled and semi-skilled workers who would otherwise have had considerable difficulty forming unionism. Many in the U.S. labour movement, such as the United Mine Workers' John L. Lewis, were quick to see the potential of a new, broad-based unionism known as industrial unionism. Unlike traditional craft unionism, industrial unionism sought to organize all workers in an industry and relied on political action and mass worker mobilization as well as collective bargaining. Though industrial unionism was slower to take hold in Canada than in the U.S. because this country's workers still lacked basic bargaining rights, American industrial unions managed to sign up a fair number of Canadian autoworkers, steel and rubber plant workers, and garment workers during the late 1930s and early "40s.

Labour During the War Years (pp. 64–8) Prime Minister Mackenzie King's stubborn refusal to grant Canadian workers the kind of basic bargaining rights American workers had won through that country's "Wagner Act"

.

18

virtually guaranteed labour strife during the war, when labour was scarce and wages were controlled but prices were not. But neither a strike wave rivalling that of 1919 nor a National War Labour Board urging King to grant Canadian workers basic bargaining rights would budge him. Only the growing political threat from the left posed by the CCF induced him to change his mind.

Canadian workers finally won the right to join unions and to conduct legal strikes in 1944 as a result of Order in Council PC 1003. The bill also established the Canada Labour Relations Board to administer the act. Together with the Rand Formula (1945), which put unions on a secure financial footing by allowing members' dues to be deducted at the source, PC 1003 helped usher in a sustained period of union growth. For the most part, women did not join the new industrial unions, because public sector workers continued to be excluded except in Saskatchewan, and governments and the country's advertisers ensured that women left the defence plants and factories where many had worked during the war, to create jobs for returning servicemen.

Labour During the 1950s (pp. 69–71) After the heady war years, the 1950s were a period of quiet consolidation and stabilization for most of the country's labour movement. No longer concerned with fighting for their right to exist, unions racked up impressive gains for their members at the bargaining table, allowing them to buy cars, appliances, and other goods which working people had previously only dreamed of owning. But union members began to view their unions more or less instrumentally, and by the early "60s membership was on the decrease, after peaking at 34% in 1958. The decade's major event was the merger of the Trades and Labour Congress and the Canadian Congress of Labour in 1956, a year after the two major American federations (the American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Organizations) had joined forces. The decade also marked the end of Communist influence within the labour movement. While most strikes tended to be conducted much more peaceably than they had before World War II, bitter disputes at Murdochville, Quebec (see photo, p. 123) and Badger, Newfoundland offered grim reminders of the labour movement's stormier past.

The Canadian Labour Movement's New Face (pp. 71–4) The character of the Canadian labour movement changed dramatically during the 1960s.

The single most important change was public sector unionization, which began with the unionization of federal and then provincial government employees but quickly spread to the rest of the public sector. With the granting of bargaining rights to the public sector, large numbers of women and professional and white-collar workers joined the labour movement for the first time. Their addition would lead to major changes in public sector unions' bargaining agendas. The "60s were also a decade of renewed militancy in private sector unions. But nowhere was labour militancy greater than in Quebec, where the former confessional unions emerged as the leading exponents of radicalism in the province. The high water mark of this radicalism was reached with the 1972 "Common Front" strike.

.

19

The younger workers entering the labour force for the first time rebelled in a different way. Critical both of management policies and their union leaders' established, often bureaucratic ways of doing things, they insisted that there was more to jobs than a paycheque and were eventually instrumental in the development of quality of worklife initiatives.

Though the period overall was one of great prosperity, many workers didn't share in that prosperity. In hotels, factories, restaurants, and fields, large numbers of women and immigrants continued to toil long hours, often under appalling conditions, for the minimum wage or less (see photos, p. 123).

A New Era of Restraint (p. 75) In 1974, the Canadian labour movement was in very good shape, with rising membership rates and its political ally, the NDP, in a balance-of-power position federally and in control of three provincial governments. Starting that year, however, all this would change. With the 1973-4 energy crisis and subsequent wave of inflation and unemployment, Canada's economic and political climate turned far more conservative. In 1974, the federal NDP lost its balance-of-power position and half its seats; within the next three years, it would lose power in B.C. and Manitoba.

In 1975, a three-year program of wage-price controls was introduced by Prime Minister Trudeau, who had ridiculed the idea during his 1974 election campaign. The controls infuriated the labour movement and caused it to withdraw many of its representatives from tripartite government bodies. Though "normal" collective bargaining resumed in 1978, public sector workers' rights were sharply restricted. A second energy crisis starting in 1979 led to another inflationary spiral and caused the federal government and most provinces to respond with a new round of controls, this time confined to wages and directed solely at the public sector.

The 1980s Recession and Its Aftermath (pp. 75–8) Starting in 1981, Canada entered its most serious recession since the Second World War. Many of the high-paying manufacturing and resource jobs lost during this recession never came back. Unions sought valiantly to replace the lost members by organizing workers in banking and the retail service sector, but were generally unsuccessful due to fierce management resistance.

The tough economic climate led management to believe it could get away with a much tougher line at the bargaining table. By the mid-"80s, concession bargaining (where the union was forced to accept pay cuts or reduced benefits) and two-tier bargaining, where new workers were paid far less than experienced ones, had become commonplace. Life became even more difficult for the labour movement following the 1984 election of a Conservative government under Brian Mulroney, whose agenda featured free trade with the U.S., large-scale privatization of public enterprise and deregulation of regulated ones, and relaxation of foreign investment controls. This agenda would lead to even more layoffs and plant closures, as employers sought to cut labor costs.

.

20

Throughout the "80s, the Canadian labour movement also suffered from serious internal problems, including major schisms within labour federations, breakaways of Canadian branches from international unions, and increased union raiding (attempts by one union to sign up members of another). The most serious schism was the departure of twelve building trade unions from the CLC over issues of the Congress' support for the NDP and partial Quebec autonomy. These unions formed their own federation, the Canadian Federation of Labour, which from 1982 through 1997 on strict Sam Gompers principles of business unionism and political neutrality. Other major schisms occurred in Quebec.

Breakaways were caused both by a growing climate of nationalism within the Canadian labour movement and by more specific frictions such as disagreements over politics, bargaining and strike strategy, and the alleged inadequate servicing and funding of Canadian branches of U.S. internationals. The most famous of these breakaways was that of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) from the parent United Auto Workers union in 1985.

Union raiding resulted from attempts by the big industrial unions to make up at least some of the membership lost through economic restructuring and deindustrialization.

While understandable, it sometimes caused the labour movement serious embarrassment, as in the celebrated dispute between the CAW and the United Food and Commercial Workers over the right to represent Atlantic Canadian fisheries workers.

Canadian Labour in the 1990s (pp. 78–83) Major changes in the economic and political environment made the 1990s an even more difficult decade for Canadian labour than the 1980s were. The single most important development was the formation of a North American trading bloc, following implementation of Canada-U.S. and North American free trade agreements in 1989 and 1994. The trade agreements, by intensifying competition, put even greater pressure on employers to cut labour costs and led to an even greater wave of restructuring, downsizing, plant closures and mergers and acquisitions. An important consequence was the growth of atypical work arrangements (described in Ch. 2), most featuring little if any job security and few if any benefits.

The decade was particularly hard on public sector workers, who have been subject to large-scale layoffs, harder work for those who have kept their jobs, and severe restrictions on collective bargaining rights. In response, these workers staged large numbers of strikes and other public protests, including a Parliament Hill protest against the federal government's decision to appeal the Human Rights Tribunal's pay equity award. The labour movement also responded by consolidating large numbers of smaller unions into six key private sector unions and by renewed attempts to organize the private service sector Politically, the labour movement began to revisit its links with the NDP and Parti Quebecois, chiefly as a result of anger over what these parties have done to the labour movement when they have formed the government. The NDP's poor showing in the 1999 Ontario provincial election and 2000 federal election may in part be attributable to continuing anger over the earlier NDP government's "social contract," which forced public sector workers to take unpaid time off. (Not in book but worth noting anyway).

.

21

Canadian Labour at the Dawn of the New Millennium (pp. 83–84) The changes to the economic and political environment of the IR system over the past 15 years or so have not been merely cyclical ones. Rather, they represent a fundamental “sea change” in the way work is organized and scheduled, in employers’ and unions’ strategies, and in national governments willingness and ability to regulate their economies and IR systems.

Even as the economy has “recovered,” insecurity of employment has remained the rule, and the loyalty and sense of mutual obligation that were once common features of labourmanagement relations have become extremely rare, with even highly profitable firms not hesitating to wield the axe to provide shareholders with even greater short-term gains.

Moreover, with the formation of broader regional trading blocs all around the world, it’s no longer possible even to pretend that Canada can insulate itself from larger world economic developments. More and more frequently, unionized workers in Canada find themselves competing with workers in Third World countries working for extremely low wages and under appalling conditions. In addition, the new generation of workers now entering the workforce appears to have extremely individualistic values. Major challenges for today’s unions include that of providing representation to an increasingly diverse and geographically dispersed work force, many of whom do not even have a regular workplace, that of countering increasing fierce employer opposition to unions (as evidenced by a growing willingness to use replacement workers and even to resort to violence against strikers; and that of finding an effective political partner to help with legislation and political advocacy, whether that partner be a renewed NDP or some other party—perhaps one that doesn’t even yet exist.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Experiential. Typically I've found that most students know disturbingly little, even when it comes to major events like the Winnipeg General Strike. I think the high schools have a great deal to answer for here.

2) Barriers found in most industrialized countries included employer and government opposition, the latter often taking the specific form of conspiracy laws ruling unions as conspiracies in restraint of trade. In many European countries, as well, unions were faced with such additional obstacles as working people's inability to vote or gain access to free public education; this significantly affected the character of these countries' labour movements. (Not in book but worth noting, especially for an advanced or MBA class).

Barriers unique to Canada included late industrialization, sparse population, a large land area which made communication between regions difficult, a high degree of outside control over the Canadian economy, a high degree of seasonal employment, a belief that self-employment should be the ultimate goal, fragmentation between English and French Canadian labour movements, and above all the strong influence of "international" (American) unions.

3) In both Quebec and English Canada, unions were viewed as conspiracies in restraint of trade, and most people's goal was to become self-employed rather than to remain an employee. But Quebec's craft confraternities were tied to the Catholic Church and even

.

22

more rigidly circumscribed than English Canada's friendly societies. Later, Quebec workers faced considerable discrimination in English Canada, which led them to migrate to New England to seek work. Taken together, these factors led to slower growth of the Quebec labour movement and were perhaps a reason for the emergence of confessional unions in the early years of this century.

4) Though some might not agree with such an interpretation, it could be argued that until the late 19th or early 20th century, Canada didn't really have the critical mass to support an independent labour movement. Canadian workers found the internationals attractive because they could be, in effect, a meal ticket in a situation where they might often be forced to migrate to the U.S. in search of work for at least part of the year. The internationals were also bigger, wealthier, and more experienced and possessed larger strike funds and a greater pool of organizing expertise. By the late 1960s, a weaker U.S. labour movement and growing nationalist currents in this country had led many to reconsider the virtues of international affiliation. Specific points of friction included disagreements over politics and bargaining and strike strategy, and resentment at what many deemed to be the poor servicing and inadequate funding of Canadian branches of the internationals. These factors led to a substantial number of breakaways of Canadian unions from their internationals through the 1970s and early "80s.

5) By eliminating dual unionism (which meant that the TLC would not recognize a national union when an international union existed), the Berlin convention set the Canadian labour movement on a moderate and international course. It also centralized control over the movement in Ontario, a fact which led to considerable resentment especially among the more radical western unionists.

6) It differed from traditional craft unionism both in scope and in method. Traditional craft unions organized workers from a single trade (i.e., bricklayers); industrial unions sought to organize all workers in an industry, unskilled and semi-skilled as well as skilled. Of necessity, since such workers would have little protection from arbitrary employer action without legislation guaranteeing them the right to join unions, industrial unionism relied on political action and mass worker mobilization as well as collective bargaining. However, it’s important to bear in mind that by no means all workers joined as a result of industrial unionism and PC 1003. For one thing, the public sector was still excluded; for another, unionization remained a distant dream for most people in the private service sector. All of this meant that in practice, most female workers could not join, nor could many male minority group members and others at the bottom of the country's socio-economic pyramid. Until the granting of public service unionization rights, union membership remained, in practice if not in principle, largely the preserve of male blue-collar workers in heavy industry. (See Forrest, 1997—full source in text— for an interesting discussion on this issue).

7) The unionization of public sector employees in the 1960’s and 70’s significantly changed the character of the Canadian labour movement in two ways: first, public sector unions had a much higher proportion of female membership and female involvement in the union movement rose as a direct result; second, the public sector unions shifted the

.

23

focus away from the dominant business unionism approach to include a greater focus on a social unionism agenda.

8) Globalization and liberalized trade have together significantly eroded the power of industrial unions. Highly paid unionized jobs have been “outsourced” to low-cost (and usually non-union) production centres—sometimes within North America to “right to work” states in the US but more predominantly to countries such as Mexico, China, and India. Recent developments in China (a growing gap between rich and poor; environmental degradation) may result in longer-range trends that “normalize” the wages and working conditions of those employed in other countries, but in the foreseeable future there appears to be no stopping the forces of globalization. The impact on the labour movement in Canada is increased dominance by public sector unions.

9) In the past, the labour movement has benefitted immensely from the NDP and CCF before it. The threat of CCF victory was what induced King to grant bargaining rights in 1944; the NDP's balance-of-power position in a minority Liberal government was instrumental in getting public service legislation passed in 1967. Provincially the NDP has done even more to liberalize labour legislation; more generally, it has tended to be more willing to follow full-employment policies which benefit workers than have other parties. Recently, though, the link has come into question because NDP (and also PQ) governments have often turned on their erstwhile labour allies once in power, as was the case in Ontario in 1993 and is the case in Quebec today. Mr. Bouchard's handling of the 1999 Quebec nurses' strike will certainly do little to win PQ support from the province's labour movement at any point in the foreseeable future. Others (apparently including CAW chief Buzz Hargrove) appear to think that the NDP has become too weak to offer meaningful support to the labour movement, and have begun to engage in "strategic voting" in provincial elections.

10) Private service sector workers, especially young people, women, and members of ethnic minority groups. The retired. Those working at home. The use of young people, women and minority group members as organizers (see Crain, 1994) might help bring in these groups. A renewed emphasis on the union as a place where people can come together and socialize (a role it often played in the 19th century) might help attract or retain retired people and those working from home, who are often lonely and would be eager to have adult companionship.

.

24

Chapter 4: Union Membership and Structure Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to consider changing patterns of union membership in Canada and to examine the structure of the Canadian labour movement. We begin with a brief look at what unions are and the functions they serve. Next we consider changing patterns of union membership, both for Canada as a whole and within different industries and provinces. Among the issues considered here is the growing divergence between Canadian and American union membership rates. The chapter then considers the structure of the Canadian labour movement, looking at activities carried out at the local, provincial, and national levels. Special attention is paid to the role played by international unions based outside Canada—a distinctive feature of this country's labour movement. We conclude with a discussion of union democracy, or the extent to which unions are responsive to their members' wishes.

Chapter Outline I) Unions: A Brief Overview II) Union Membership A) National Membership Trends B) Changing Union Membership Components C) Canadian versus American Union Membership Rates III) Union Structure A) Union Locals B) Parent Unions C) National and Provincial Labour Federations D) Functions of the Canadian Labour Congress E) Provincial Labour Federations F) National and International Unions IV) Union Democracy A) Components of Union Democracy B) Limitations on Union Democracy C) Safeguards for Democracy D) Union Democracy in Canada and the U.S.

.

25

Chapter Summary I) Unions: A Brief Overview (p. 88)

Unions can be defined as workers' associations formed to enhance their power in dealings with employers. While their core functions are collective bargaining with employers and grievance-handling, they do many other things as well. Additional activities include a broad range of political action, publicity campaigns, business ventures, and educational ventures. The various types of union activity are covered in more detail in Chapter 6.

While aggregate Canadian union membership rates have remained quite stable, there has been considerable change in the composition of the country's labour movement, which now represents many more women and white-collar and professional workers than it did a generation ago. In addition, the movement's structure has changed significantly, with new federations springing up both at the national level and in Quebec and many traditional industrial unions merging and expanding their organizing efforts in an attempt to attract workers from the private service sector.

II) Union Membership (pp. 88–97)

National Membership Trends Canadian union membership has risen steadily throughout most of the twentieth century, except for brief periods of decline during the early 1920s, 1930s, and 1960s and stagnant growth since the 1990s. Union density, or the percentage of organizable workers belonging to unions, has also generally increased throughout most of the century, again excepting brief periods of decline during the 1920s, early 1960s, and the period since about 1990.1 The two major periods of growth during the postwar period can be closely linked to legislative changes making it easier for workers to join unions. During the decade after1944, the year which saw the passage of PC 1003, the bill which extended unionization rights to most blue-collar workers, large numbers of unskilled and semiskilled workers in heavy industries joined the organized labour movement. Similarly, large numbers of public servants and other public sector workers joined the labour movement during the decade after 1967, the year which saw the passage of PSSRA, the bill extending unionization rights to federal public servants. During the 1940s and 1950s, the postwar economic boom and a more favourable political climate also helped facilitate union growth, while liberalized provincial labour legislation and the existence of several NDP provincial governments may have helped during the late 1960s and early "70s. A conservative political climate, saturation of unions' traditional strongholds, and the continuing lack of public sector legislation were reasons for the stagnation of membership growth between 1958 and 1964. As for the current stagnation, this can 1

The reader may well wonder why union membership declined during the 1930s but union density did not.

The answer, quite simply, is that high depression-era unemployment meant there were fewer potentially organizable workers in the Canadian labour force; hence the denominator of the union density equation decreased as well as the numerator.

.

26

mainly be attributed to the lack of new legislative initiatives comparable to PC 1003 and PSSRA and to widespread deindustrialization and restructuring, which have led to the loss of hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs and to the growth of part-time and temporary employment at the expense of full-time employment.

Changing Union Membership Components The single most important change in the composition of the Canadian labour movement has been the growing number of women in that movement. In addition, the movement now represents an increased number of ethnic minority group members and workers with disabilities and workers from ethnic minority groups. The extension of unionization to the public sector has arguably been the most important reason for the increased proportion of women in the labour movement.

Provincially, there is somewhat less variation than there once was (see Fig. 5.2).

However, provinces like Newfoundland, Quebec, and British Columbia continue to have significantly higher density rates than provinces such as Alberta, P.E.I., and Ontario.

Though the definitive study of interprovincial variations in union membership rates has yet to appear, industrial structure, variations in labour legislation, and the presence or absence of pro-labour governments have all been identified in the literature as significant determinants. By industry, union density rates vary even more than they do by province; in 1997, those rates ranged from 2% in agriculture to more than 60% in utilities and public administration. Over the past two decades, density rates have declined sharply in traditional union strongholds such as construction and manufacturing, as has the absolute number of members, while in the private service sector both membership and density rates have increased somewhat. However, the increases in the private service sector are nowhere near enough to make up for the hundreds of thousands of members lost in the private goods-producing sector and, more recently, in public administration.

The evidence suggests that public sector workers are far more likely to be union members than are private sector workers and full-timers are a good deal likelier to belong to unions than part-timers. While there is little difference between men and women, those working for large firms and those with relatively long tenure within organizations are far likelier to be union members than workers employed by smaller firms or those with shorter tenure. Age and educational attainment, in contrast, were of relatively little significance in determining union membership propensity, except insofar as workers under 25 were far less likely than others to belong to unions.

Canadian Versus American Union Membership Rates Many IR scholars have sought to explain why, despite roughly comparable economic experiences in Canada and the U.S. and the two countries' increasing degree of economic integration, their union density rates have increasingly diverged over the past three decades. With economic factors arguably of little explanatory value in this case, the major explanations have revolved around the two countries' differing public labour policy, the presence or absence of pro-labour political parties, and the extent of union organizing efforts in the two countries.

.

27

With respect to public labour policy, key differences include greater protection of union security in Canada than in the U.S., different certification methods in the two countries, which arguably make it easier for workers to join unions here than in the U.S., stronger public sector union rights here, and this country's stricter enforcement of labour legislation. Of particular significance is Canada's lack of anything resembling the U.S.' "right-to-work" zone, established as a result of the 1947 Taft-Hartley amendments to that country's National Labor Relations Act. Politically, the presence of pro-labour parties like the CCF and NDP has helped advance labour's interests in Canada, particularly with regard to the passage of pro-labour legislation. It has also been suggested that the lack of a labour or social democratic part likely helps explains at least part of the recent decline in U.S. union membership rates.

As for union organizing efforts, while there are now signs that the American labour movement is showing renewed interest, historically the divergence between the two countries' labour movements has been so great that in some years Canadian unions have actually signed up more new members than their American counterparts, despite the two countries' immense difference in population.

II) Union Structure (pp. 97–107)

Canada's Fragmented Union Structure By international standards, Canada's union structure is quite fragmented, which means that it has a large number of small unions. One result of such competition can be dual unionism, or competition between two or more unions seeking to represent workers in the same sector. Another is the inability of smaller unions to provide members with the same degree of political clout or level of services which larger, broader-based unions could provide. Though Canadian labour organizations conduct their business at local, provincial, national, and in some cases international levels, the local level is arguably the most important one, since it is the level with which most workers are most familiar.

Union Locals A union local (sometimes called a local union) organizes workers within a given geographic area (most often a city). In some cases, it will represent all workers in its area; in others, it will represent only workers at a particular work site. Locals in unions where bargaining is conducted at the local level tend to operate somewhat differently from those where bargaining is conducted at the industry, provincial, or national level.

The local is so important to members because it is at this level where most meetings are held, officers elected, policies and bargaining strategy established, and strike and contract ratification votes taken. In most cases it is the local which is also responsible for handling members' grievances. As is the case with many other organizations, much of the local's work is done by a variety of committees, to which members devote many hundreds of unpaid hours. In addition to their affiliations with provincial and national labour federations (discussed below), most locals are also affiliated to municipal and district labour councils. These organizations, whose primary objective is to advance the labour movement's interests at the local and municipal level, may do anything from organizing demonstrations in support of striking unions to running a booth at a Labour .

28

Day fair. Particularly in large cities like Toronto, district labour councils can be a potent force.

Parent Unions Some local unions are independent locals and function as “stand alone” unions. Most union locals are affiliated with international, national, or provincial “parent unions.”

CUPE for example is a national union that also has a provincial union structure, and union locals the majority of whom are either municipal government or school board workers. The “parent union”—whether in trades such as the IBEW; in manufacturing like the CAW, or public sector, like CUPE—coordinates bargaining and usually provides expertise to local bargaining committees who frequently act as spokespersons during bargaining. The parent union also supplies expert help with grievances that are proceeding to arbitration, holds a supplemental strike fund (to which locals contribute) for relief during a strike or lockout, and is the primary initiator of organizing new locals.

Parent unions also will take a direct role in local union organization when required.

The officer positions (President and Vice Presidents; Secretary Treasurer, etc) of parent unions are usually elected by members of local unions at a union convention, and typically are individuals who have been in elected positions within a local union.

National and Provincial Labour Federations While some unions, particularly those representing professionals such as university professors or nurses, choose to remain completely independent from other labour organizations, most see distinct advantages in joining forces with other unions at provincial and national levels.

Functions of the Canadian Labour Congress At the national level, by far the most important labour federation is the Canadian Labour Congress, which represents over 60% of the country's union members. It doesn't normally engage in collective bargaining with employers. Its major functions are political and international representation of the Canadian labour movement, provision of services, such as research and organizing assistance, to affiliated unions, managing relations between its affiliates, and enforcing its ethical code. Of these functions, the two most important are political representation and maintaining relations between affiliated unions. From 1982 through 1997, the Canadian Federation of Labour, a group of 12 building-trade unions which split off from the CLC over such issues as the Congress' support for the NDP and Quebec autonomy, represented over 300,000. However, in 1997, crippled by the loss of 40% of its members as a result of the return of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers to the CLC, it ceased to exist as a central labour body.

Provincial Labour Federations Provincial labour federations play an important role in Canada because most labour legislation is under provincial jurisdiction, and therefore the labour movement needs to maintain a strong political presence at the provincial as well as federal level. The CLC has 12 provincial and territorial federations affiliated with it. Like the CLC itself,

.

29

provincial federations generally carry out activities which affiliated unions lack the resources to carry out for themselves, such as political and legislative lobbying, research, and labour education. In some cases, their range of activities is extremely broad; in a recent year, the Ontario Federation of Labour (OFL) engaged in activities ranging from carrying out research on health-related issues to holding seminars on homeworking and teleworking.

Quebec's Special Situation: Multiple Labour Federations One of the most distinctive features of Quebec's IR system is the existence, in that province, of multiple labour federations—a result, originally, of the existence of confessional (Catholic) unions alongside more conventional trade unions. Major federations include the Quebec Federation of Labour (QFL), the CLC's provincial wing.

Other federations include the Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN), the successor to the former confessional union federation, the Centrale de l'enseignement du Québec (CEQ), or teachers' federation, and the Central des syndicats démocratiques (CSD), a small group of mainly private sector unions that left the CSN during the 1960s in protest over that federation's radicalism. In addition, the province has an unusually large number of independent (i.e., unaffiliated) unions. While the existence of multiple federations has definitely led to friction and at times even to violence, it is not clear whether, overall, the situation has helped or hindered the Quebec labour movement.

One consequence of the multiple federations has been the CLC's granting of significant autonomy to its provincial wing, the QFL. In 1974, the parent organization ceded power over labour education and local labour councils and allowed the QFL to recoup funds for national services that gave Quebec members no tangible benefits, such as unilingual newspapers. In 1994, it went even further, granting its Quebec affiliate some powers that would normally be granted only to a national labour organization, such as the right to name its own representatives to international labour bodies. While these actions were highly controversial within the CLC and indeed were arguably the main reason for the departure of the conservative building trades unions in 1982, many would argue that they were necessary to keep the QFL within the CLC at all, in a situation in which it must compete for members with avowedly nationalist federations.

National and International Unions Canada is one of very few industrialized countries to have a sizable number of union members represented by unions headquartered as outside the country. Generally referred to as "international" unions, these organizations are really American unions with Canadian branches.

While their role has always been a source of controversy, they probably made a good deal of sense in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As was noted in the labour history chapter, the bigger, stronger, richer, and more experienced American unions could provide a level of services, including logistical and organizing support, that simply wasn't available here. But by the late 1960s, the situation had changed completely. With the Canadian labour movement stronger than the American one, many Canadian members were questioning how much help American unions could really be to their Canadian

.

30

branches. In addition to specific disputes over levels of service and funding, politics, and bargaining and strike strategy, a growing current of nationalism throughout Canada led many union members to view it as unacceptable as such to be represented by nonCanadian unions. Yet another relevant factor was the rapid growth of public sector unionism, starting in the late 1960s. Even if American unions could still represent private sector workers, it was difficult to imagine how they could be of much benefit to Canadian government workers, schoolteachers, or health care workers.

Taken together, these developments led a large number of Canadian branches to break away from their parent internationals, the most famous of these breakaways being the departure of the Canadian Auto Workers from the United Auto Workers in 1985.

Moreover, even Canadian unions remaining within their internationals have been able to achieve significantly more autonomy than they previously enjoyed, thanks to CLC autonomy guidelines passed in 1970 and again four years later. By 1990, a movement which had been largely international as late as 1962 had become primarily a national one, with twice as many members represented by national as by international unions.

However, the pace of secession has recently slowed considerably, if not halted altogether.

Indeed, some have suggested that given today's increasing political and economic integration and the formation of regional trading blocs, the time may be ripe for the formation of genuinely international unions.

III) Union Democracy (pp. 107–114).

(Note: This is quite thoroughly covered, in what I think is a self-explanatory fashion, in the text; hence the discussion here may seem a bit skeletal. I have found this an excellent topic for debates and discussions).

Union democracy is of interest to the labour movement for many reasons, not least because actual or even perceived lapses in it can hurt the movement's public image considerably. While various definitions are possible (see text, p. 174, for examples) in general union democracy may be defined as unions' responsiveness to their members' wishes.

Components of Union Democracy Basing these criteria in large measure on the Edelstein-Warner definition quoted at p.

147, I identify freedom from corruption, membership participation, selection of officials, legitimacy of opposition, and due process as key components of union democracy.

Membership participation is a more complex issue than it seems, or than it is usually treated in the literature is being. Undeniably attendance at most union meetings is low; on the other hand, low attendance at meetings must be balanced out against much higher attendance at important meetings (those where officers are elected or strike strategy set) and the untold number of volunteer hours provided by members serving on unions' numerous committees. Overall, the evidence suggests that Canadian unions fare best with respect to freedom from gross corruption, worst with respect to due process.

.

31

Limitations on Union Democracy Full-scale democracy of the type envisaged in the Edelstein-Warner definition is difficult if not impossible for most unions to achieve. Cynics often suggest that the main reason is that most union leaders are more concerned with remaining in power than with actually serving their members—the so-called "iron law of oligarchy." Here, at least one study has found a healthy degree of turnover among Canadian union presidents—evidence which suggests that the "iron law" may not apply to any great extent here. More serious limitations have to do with the inherent nature of unions as collective majoritarian political organizations. For example, it is impossible to maintain absolute democracy on a picket line, where failure to follow the picket captain's orders could lead to the collapse of the strike or even to serious injury or death. Similarly, financial and human resource constraints mean that no union could conceivably hope to carry all its members' grievances through to arbitration, no matter how worthy the individual cases might be.

Safeguards for Democracy The limitations just described are balanced by a number of safeguards. First, despite low attendance figures, many leaders actively encourage membership participation. Second, members who are unhappy with their leadership have a variety of options open to them, ranging from voting the incumbent slate out to rejecting tentative agreements or, in extreme cases, filing for decertification. Third, duty of fair representation provisions found in most Canadian labour acts have the practical effect not only of forcing union leaders to be fair, but to be perceived to be fair.

Union Democracy in Canada and the United States Although Canadian unions are not paragons of town hall-style democracy, they appear in many respects to be far more democratic than their American counterparts. Over the years, they have been far less heavily involved with organized crime or other forms of outright corruption. The duty of fair representation provisions described earlier undoubtedly act as a deterrent to arbitrary conduct by union officials. Perhaps most important of all, the Canadian labour movement has been far more democratic at the national level than the American movement. Here, the president of the CLC serves a limited number of terms and then moves on to other things. In the U.S., in contrast, the presidency of the AFL-CIO has typically functioned more like a monarchy, with no realistic chance of removing the incumbent during his working lifetime. The result has been that, free of the possibility of electoral defeat, AFL-CIO presidents have engaged in high-handed behaviour often not in the labour movement's best interest, such as George Meany's unwillingness to organize the unskilled or his support for the Vietnam War. Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Experiential—a good way to start this class.

2) Major periods of increase (for the period covered in Table 5.1) were the first decade after World War II and 1967–77. Both were largely driven by legislation: PC 1003 and the "Rand Formula" in the case of the early period, and PSSRA and its provincial offspring in the case of the later period. The postwar economic boom and early postwar

.

32

inflation were also factors in the case of the first period, while inflation caused by the oil shock may have been a factor in the case of the second one, and more liberal provincial legislation, particularly regarding exclusions, was probably also a factor there.

Membership has never actually decreased during the postwar period, except for a very brief period during the early 1960s, but it stagnated, and union density decreased, between 1958 and 1964 and through the 1990s. Political conservatism, an unsympathetic government, revelations of union corruption in the U.S., a perception that union leaders were "fat cats" who had lost touch, and the continuing lack of representation of public sector workers and saturation of existing membership bases were the reasons for the first period of stagnation. Deindustrialization, public sector cutbacks, the increasing importance of the hard-to-organize private service sector, and the move to more part-time work and other forms of atypical employment are probably the major reasons for the current period of stagnation.

3) Public sector (with much higher rates of female membership) has been making up an increasingly large share of the labour movement. Rates have been dropping sharply in traditionally highly unionized (and traditionally male-dominated) private sector industries like manufacturing and construction. Unionization rates have been increasing in the private service sector, which is also female dominated. However, this sector started from a very low "base" and still has a far lower proportion of workers unionized than either the public sector or private goods-producing sector.

4) Highest in Newfoundland, Quebec, Manitoba, and B.C. Lowest in Alberta, then P.E.I., Ontario, and the Atlantic provinces other than Nfld. Relatively liberal labour legislation and a high concentration of resource-based industries which are likely to be unionized are factors for the three "high" provinces. High proportion of public sector workers (because of province's small population) may also be a factor in Nfld. Liberal labour legislation and history of NDP government may be factors in Manitoba. Nfld's sharp decline between 1991 and 1997 may be in part a result of the province's shift from a card count to a vote as a method of establishing certification. May also consider existence of pro-labour culture, though this is a squishy thing that one shouldn't take too far. . .along these lines one could even consider the Catholic Church's role in promoting labour organization in Quebec and Nfld. The Church may have restricted unions in some ways but at least it seems to have understood the need for collective action better than most Protestant churches. Again, this is a squishy variable one shouldn't take too far.

Alberta, Ontario, and P.E.I. all have restrictive legislation and histories of conservative, anti-labour governments. In addition, Ontario is a large province which means it has relatively fewer public sector workers per capita. This would seem not to gibe with P.E.I.'s situation—but bear in mind that before widespread public sector unionization P.E.I.'s rates were much lower than they are now. Alberta is a fairly agricultural province which may also be a factor since these workers are excluded from unions.

(See Ch. 8 for more details concerning provincial labour legislation).

.

33

5) The economy has probably had little impact since the two countries have had roughly similar economic experiences. Covered pretty well in text, but major factors include more liberal labour legislation and stricter enforcement in Canada, lack of a restrictive "right-to-work" zone here, existence of a pro-labour party (NDP) here, and unions' more diligent organizing efforts. Is this changing? A judgement call which depends on whether one thinks Canada's distinctive culture and the fact of provincial jurisdiction will outweigh the effects of ongoing and increasing economic integration between the two countries. Recent evidence, including the growing prevalence of “employer freedom to communicate” provisions and certification through a vote rather than the traditional card count, should be far from reassuring to supporters of a distinctly Canadian model of IR. 6) Typically though not invariably, the local carries out the lion's share of the union's overall activity. It is the local which calls meetings; most often, as well, it is the local that elects officers, conducts bargaining, handles grievances, and calls strikes when these are necessary. Municipal and district labour councils advance the labour movement's interests in a given city or regional municipality; this can mean anything from providing strike support or even conducting demonstrations to giving the media labour's perspective on economic and political events of the day.

7) In general, these organizations do NOT conduct collective bargaining with employers but do provide unions with services they lack the money or human resources to provide for themselves. Political action, particular lobbying to promote favourable legislation, is probably provincial and federal labour federations’ most important single activity. More specifically, the CLC's major functions include political and international representation of the Canadian labour movement, provision of services such as research and organizing assistance to affiliated unions, enforcing its ethical code, and the managing of relations between affiliated unions. As the text indicates, provincial federations like the OFL have often been involved in an even wider range of activities, such as liaison with the environmental movement and participation in arts conferences.

8) The major difference is the existence in Quebec of multiple federations. This situation was caused originally by the formation of confessional unions which operated alongside more conventional unions in the province. Later, the competition was based more on politics than on religion. In this respect, Quebec is unlike other Canadian provinces but very much like many European countries. Related to the existence of multiple labour federations is the far greater degree of autonomy given by the CLC to the Quebec Federation of Labour, the Congress' provincial wing. Though this has certainly been a source of resentment among unionists from other provinces, it has arguably been necessary to keep the QFL within the CLC at all, given a situation in which it must actively compete for members with avowedly separatist federations. It is not clear whether the existence of multiple federations has strengthened or weakened the province's labour movement overall.

9) Definition is a judgement call. The question of whether standards are too high is in part a judgement call as well, but worth noting that such a definition sets up tremendously high expectations and may even contain mutually incompatible expectations. On the

.

34

subject of Canadian vs. American union democracy, it’s important to note that while there are undoubtedly great variations within both countries’ labour movements, the Canadian movement is MUCH more democratic at the national federation level, there has been little gross corruption here of the sort rampant in the Teamsters union, and the duty of fair representation provision found in most Canadian labour acts but not in the American National Labor Relations Act offers significant safeguards. On the subject of limitations, the "iron law of oligarchy" may be such a limitation. Unions' limited resources are definitely a limitation in the case of grievance-handling. Their need to maintain solidarity is a limitation in the case of strike discipline. And their need to carry the bargaining process through to conclusion is a limitation in the case of collective bargaining; as I note in the text, if the union had to stop and go back to its membership every time the management changed its position, few if any agreements would ever be successfully concluded. How can unions improve their performance in this area? Once again, this is largely a judgement call. Some kind of public (preferably expedited) review process involving an external third-party neutral might help. Perhaps the labour movement as a whole could fund this, given the limitations on individual unions' resources. Attendance might well improve if unions were to avoid night meetings and/or provide child care, but these changes probably are not enough in and of themselves.

Maybe the Fryer Committee’s recommendation that meetings be held on workplace premises during working hours could help, too. Another interesting debate topic!

.

35

Chapter 5: Union Actions and Impacts Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to examine the kinds of actions unions take in support of their objectives and the economic and social impacts they have, both in workplaces and within Canadian society as a whole. We begin with a brief overview of union actions, and of the way in which these actions have changed in recent years. We then take a more detailed look at a broad range of union activities, from traditional ones such as collective bargaining and political action to modern ones such as the creation of union-supported venture capital corporations. Next, we examine unions' wage impacts, both on employers and on other, non-unionized workers. After a brief look at the ways in which unions achieve their wage goals, the chapter goes on to consider unions' productivity effects and their impacts on the management of organizations, before concluding with a discussion on their broader effects on Canadian society as a whole and of whether unions are still needed today.

Chapter Outline I) Union Actions A) Collective Bargaining B) Joint Union–Management Ventures at the Workplace C) Joint Participation Outside the Workplace D) Political Action E) Publicity Campaigns and Member Communication F) Unions in Business G) Education H) Unions' Expanded Scope of Action II) Union Impacts A) Wage Impacts 1. direct wage impacts 2. impacts on fringe benefits 3. indirect wage impacts B) Union Impacts on Productivity C) Union Impacts on Management of the Organization D) Union Impacts on Society as a Whole III) Are Unions Still Needed?

.

36

Chapter Summary I) Union Actions (pp. 120–133)

Although collective bargaining and political action remain at the core of unions' activities, the scope of both has expanded considerably in recent years. In addition, unions have expanded their overall sphere of action to take in such things as participation in joint union–management ventures, publicity campaigns, and educational and business ventures. Thus, while their general objectives remain the same as those of unions in the past, today's unions tend to operate within a far broader context, and they also have available to them a range of strategies and technologies which earlier unionists could only dream about.

Collective bargaining Wages and job security remain unions' central concerns at the bargaining table. But the range of bargaining issues is now far greater than it was 100 years ago. During the early postwar period, unions began to negotiate a broad range of fringe benefits, including pensions, vacations, and medical and hospitalization insurance. More recently, demands from women and ethnic minority group members have caused unions to negotiate maternity and paternity leave provisions, flexible schedules, and anti-discrimination and anti-harassment provisions. The introduction of new technology and unknown substances into workplaces has caused unions to seek to negotiate protective provisions in these areas, while concern for their members' well-being has led many to negotiate employee assistance programs to help members with drug, alcohol, or other personal problems. In addition, more and more unions have begun to engage in integrative (problem-solving) bargaining, rather than the distributive (adversarial) bargaining which was the norm in the past. The move toward integrative bargaining requires a significant attitudinal change on the part of both parties, a change which may not be easy to achieve given that many managers and union leaders have been brought up to distrust the other side.

Joint union–management ventures at the workplace In recent years, unions have begun to participate in a large number of joint ventures with management. Many of these joint ventures are designed to increase morale and productivity. They range from single-issue labour–management committees to broad gainsharing plans such as the Scanlon Plan, and can also include quality circles, selfdirected work teams, and employee stock ownership plans. In some cases, unions and management have negotiated joint governance arrangements whereby the union becomes, in effect, a full partner in managing the organization. Quebec's “social contracts,“ discussed in detail in Ch. 4, are a good example of such joint governance arrangements.

While they offer many opportunities for unions, they also pose many challenges. Most importantly, they seem to entail a radical transformation of the union's role, from that of workers' advocate to that of co-manager of the organization. They also open up far greater possibilities for direct communication between management and workers— possibilities that run the risk of reducing the union's influence in the workplace. For this reason, such joint governance schemes remain controversial within the labour movement.

.

37

Joint participation outside the workplace Canadian unions are also involved in a variety of joint ventures with management outside the workplace. In recent years, unions and management groups have formed a number of sectoral councils to address such issues as training, economic restructuring, trade policy, and labour–management cooperation on an industry-wide basis. Among the best-known of such councils are the Canadian Textile Labour–Management Committee and Canadian Steel Trade and Employment Congress. (See Chaykowski and Verma (1992—full source in text) for a useful discussion of how these councils work). In addition, Canadian unions have been involved in a number of tripartite, or labour– management–government initiatives. Perhaps the most important of these is the Canadian Labour and Business Centre (CLBC), formerly known as the Canadian Labour Market and Productivity Centre, which in recent years has done research on labourrelated issues ranging from work hours to women's changing role in the workplace.

Political action Most Canadian unions engage in some kind of political action. Indeed, some kind of union political involvement would appear to be inevitable, given that unions' ability to achieve their objectives depends to a large extent on the types of legislation and government policies in place. To influence legislation and government policies means getting involved in politics in some way or another.

There is some difference of opinion within the labour movement as to the appropriate form political activity should take. While most unions believe their objectives can best be achieved through formal or informal affiliation, some unions and labour federations, notably the former Canadian Federation of Labour and Centrale des syndicates démocratiques, have argued strongly against any such affiliation. Over the years, linkages between the labour movement and the NDP and its forerunner party, the CCF, have generally proven beneficial to the labour movement in English Canada. Thanks in large measure to the work of its political partner, the labour movement has achieved basic bargaining rights, liberalized labour legislation, and a broad range of social programs to benefit all working Canadians. Much the same has been true in Quebec as between the labour movement and the Parti Québécois. In both cases, however, the linkages are now being questioned because of the tendency of NDP and PQ provincial governments to turn on their erstwhile labour allies once in power. Another recent tendency is the carrying on of a broader range of extra-parliamentary political activity. A vehicle which a number of unions are now using to address political issues, particularly those around international development, is the Social Justice or Humanity fund whereby participating employers are required to contribute a certain quite nominal amount for each hour worked by a bargaining unit member.

Publicity campaigns and member communication Like most other modern organizations, unions find they are having to spend an increasing amount of their time and energy communicating, both with their members and with the public at large. External union publicity efforts serve a variety of purposes, ranging from informing the public what the union is doing on a particular issue to protesting government policy or expressing support for a political party. These campaigns are

.

38

particularly important for public sector unions, whose bargaining rights are often severely restricted. Internal publicity efforts are needed both to keep members generally informed of what unions are doing, and to keep them “onside,“ especially with regard to controversial issues where the organization may be divided. The illustrations on pages 166 and 167 of the text are good examples of recent union publicity campaigns.

Unions in business The severe recession of the early 1980s caused many labour organizations to start working proactively to create jobs and promote local and community development. It was at this time that the first labour-sponsored venture capital corporations began to appear. While the best-known of these ventures is the Quebec Solidarity Fund, launched in 1984 with support from the Quebec government, many other such funds have since been launched across Canada. Unions and labour federations have also been heavily involved in social housing and in using members' pension funds to promote such objectives as community development and affordable housing. The vehicle normally used for the latter purpose is an Economically Targeted Investment (ETI), a pooling mechanism that allows pension funds to channel a certain portion of their assets into such worthwhile ventures.

In some cases, unions and their members have bought significant interests in the firms for which members work. The strategy has been used most often in single-industry towns where the employer wants to pull out even though the enterprise may still be viable.

While many unions have been critical of employee buyouts, the Steelworkers have been a notable exception to this trend, as has the CEP. Education The labour movement has been involved in education since the 19th century, when union halls often served as libraries, concert venues, and forums for public lectures and seminars. Ever since, unions have mounted a broad range of educational efforts. While many union-sponsored courses have obviously addressed 'core' union issues such as organizing and negotiating strategies, a recent trend has been expansion to include courses on personal development issues such as assertiveness and public speaking and contemporary economic and political issues of special relevance to members. For example, CUPE, which represents large numbers of health care workers, has begun to offer a broad range of health and safety courses of both a general and a specialized nature.

Unions' expanded scope of action While collective bargaining, grievance-handling, and legislative and political lobbying continue to be central concerns for most Canadian unions, most have expanded their sphere of activity greatly in recent years. For example, many have entered into a broad range of partnerships with management, both at the workplace and beyond it. Politically their activities have moved beyond Parliaments and legislative assemblies to encompass coalitions with other progressive groups at home and with foreign unions and Canadian NGOs promoting international development and human rights overseas. Particularly since the mid-1980s, many unions have entered the world of business, learning how to

.

39

use available funds such as pension monies to promote job creation, community development, and other social objectives. As for labour education, a number of unions, such as CUPE and the CEP, have expanded the labour 'curriculum' beyond traditional 'labour' subjects to encompass personal development courses and technical courses in health and safety and environmental protection. Supporting all these efforts has been an increasingly sophisticated publicity apparatus using the full gamut of media approaches, from traditional newspaper and magazine ads to direct mail campaigns and the establishment of Web sites on the Internet. While this expanded scope of union action has not been uncontroversial, either within the labour movement or outside of it, most would probably agree that in today's environment of economic crisis, few unions can afford simply to “stay home and mind the shop.“ Overall, it appears likely that the scope of union action will continue to expand into the 21st century.

II) Union Impacts (pp. 133–142)

Unions achieve a broad range of impacts both at the workplace and beyond it. While the impacts of greatest interest to any given individual are likely to depend upon the individual's general perspective, I believe it is important to take the full range of impacts into account to have a good understanding of how unions operate in Canada today.

Wage impacts are of obvious importance since the major reason why many workers join unions is to achieve higher wages. Overall, the direct union wage impact (or premium a worker receives from union membership) is in the 10-25% range in Canada, though it's far higher in certain industries, such as construction. In general, the impact is greater for blue-collar than for white-collar workers, in the private sector than in the public sector, and for less-skilled than for more-skilled workers. Unions' impact on fringe or non-wage benefits is greater than their wage impact, since most unionized workers prefer to receive a relatively large proportion of their total compensation package in the form of such benefits, and indeed many employers prefer this as well, as a way of “locking workers in“ to avoid costly turnover.

Indirect union wage impacts are the effects unions have on the wages of non-unionized workers. Overall, the indirect effect of unions on wages is a small negative one— probably less than 4%. But it's misleading and perhaps not even very meaningful to speak of a single indirect union wage effect, since there are really two separate effects, pulling in different directions and applying to quite different groups of workers. The 'crowding' effect which results from added unemployment due to unionization in competitive markets tends to depress wages. On the other hand, the 'threat' or 'shock' effect which results from employers' willingness to raise wages to forestall unionization drives or the departure of skilled workers with scarce skills is a positive one. The former effect applies mainly to unskilled workers with little labour market power; the latter, to skilled professional or technical workers with considerable labour market power. In effect, the latter is a soft union-avoidance tactic, since its primary aim is to reduce workers' demand for union services.

While the existence of a union/non-union wage differential tends to increase the amount of wage dispersion in the economy, overall the effect of unions is to reduce the amount of

.

40

wage dispersion since there is less of a “gap” between the highest wage and lowest wage among unionized workers than between the highest wage and lowest wage of nonunionized workers.

How unions achieve their wage goals Collective bargaining is unions' major method of achieving higher wages, but it is by no means the only method they use. Other methods include support for restrictive licensing and credentialing policies for trades and professions (in order to keep potential competitors out), opposition to free trade agreements and liberalized immigration policies, and support for higher minimum wages and equal pay legislation, which is aimed at reducing the relative cost of union as opposed to non-union labour, thereby increasing or at least maintaining the demand for the former. In the political sphere, unions may also support changes to labour legislation aimed at improving the bargaining environment, such as liberalized certification and exclusion policies or more centralized bargaining structures which can increase their strike power.1 Union impacts on productivity It is extremely difficult to determine unions' overall impacts on productivity. One reason is that, outside the goods-producing sector, productivity itself can be hard to define, much less quantify. Another reason is that unions' productivity impacts often vary according to the nature of the individual union–management relationship, whose effect on productivity can only be determined by detailed, workplace-level case studies. Neoclassicists and others who take primarily an economic view of unions argue that unions reduce productivity by raising wages above competitive levels, by reducing outputs through the strikes they call, and by forcing management to agree to restrictive work rules that result in the substitution of machinery for human labour, and hence increased unemployment levels. Institutionalists and others primarily interested in workplace equity or equity within society as a whole argue that unions generally have positive effects on productivity. These include reduced quit rates and improved morale and workermanagement cooperation resulting from union grievance processes, joint committees, and other “workplace voice” mechanisms. They also argue that unions can induce manage to use more efficient production methods and personnel policies and that they can increase productivity by collecting information about the preferences of all workers, information that can help the firm select better personnel policies and a more appropriate mix of wages and benefits. (For more details, see the answer to discussion question #8).

Union impacts on management of the organization Here again, there's considerable debate over whether union impacts help or hinder organizations overall, although almost everyone agrees that those impacts are substantial.

What can be said is that in North America, unionization does constitute a severe limitation on management's ability to run enterprises as it sees fit. Unions' most important impacts on the management of the organization come through the grievance 1

For a more detailed consideration of these methods, see M. Gunderson and D. Hyatt, “Union Impact on Compensation, Productivity, and Management of the Organization,“ in M. Gunderson and A. Ponak (eds.), Union–Management Relations in Canada (Don Mills: Addison-Wesley, 1995), esp. pp. 318-322.

.

41

process, work rules laid out in collective agreements, and joint participation with management in various committees.

The fact that management must operate in accordance with the collective agreement makes management in a unionized environment more formal and more legalistic than it would otherwise be. Whether this is good for the organization or not depends on the type of organization we're considering. To the extent that the collective agreement brings a degree of certainty to what might otherwise be confused, chaotic, or arbitrary management practice, the firm will likely benefit. To the extent that its work rules stifle creativity and innovation and cause everyone to be more concerned about legalistic observance of the contract than about doing their jobs better, the firm is likely to suffer.

Here again, no theory can tell us whether the positive or negative effects are more likely to predominate; the only way to tell is to go to individual workplaces and do detailed case studies.

Union impacts on society as a whole While union's impacts at the workplace level appear to be somewhat mixed, the situation is more clear-cut for society as a whole. At this more macro level, unions' impacts appear to have been almost entirely positive. These impacts, achieved mainly through unions' political participation, include publicly-funded medical care, unemployment insurance, public pensions, and other worthwhile social programs. The labour movement has also done a good deal to raise the profile of health and safety issues, encourage adult education, and to bring in affirmative action, pay equity, anti-discrimination legislation, and other human rights measures benefitting all Canadians. All in all, the evidence strongly suggests that had unions never existed, Canada would be a much poorer and meaner-spirited country than it has become.

III) Are Unions Still Needed? (pp. 142–4)

Many recent commentators argue that while unions may have served an important purpose in the 19th century, they are no longer needed in today's modern workplace where workers are almost always well paid and well-treated and where few have to labour under unsafe conditions. Other chapters of this book (esp. Chs. 2, 3, and 7) suggest that pay and conditions are not always good for today's workers and that many continue to be subjected to arbitrary management practices of various kinds. Another, more general argument in support of unions is that free trade unions seem to go hand-inhand with democracy. Almost all democratic societies have such unions, while societies in which unions' rights are fully or partially restricted tend to be to some degree totalitarian or dictatorial. Yet another general argument in favour of unions is that without them, there would be no group in contemporary Canadian society big or powerful enough to provide a check to the economic and political clout of big business and the political right, or prepared to advance the economic and political interests of ordinary working Canadians.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Experiential question.

.

42

2) In collective bargaining, broader range of issues brought to table, and more integrative (problem-solving) bargaining with management, including some joint governance arrangements. In political action, something of a move away from formal party affiliation to more informal single-issue coalitions and humanity funds. Launching of a wide variety of union-supported business ventures, such as venture capital corporations.

Expanded range of publicity campaigns, including both external (those directed at the public) and internal (those directed at members) ones, esp. in public sector. Use of a broader range of media in publicity campaigns; the Internet is now an important medium.

Expanded range of educational ventures, including some in subject areas outside 'core' union areas (i.e., assertiveness training). Is this healthy? In part a judgement call—but arguably it's necessary, given government's growing unwillingness to go in for local and regional development programs and the need for public sector unions, in particular, to get their message across to the general public.

3) Argument for both sides of debate. PRO: These vehicles have a proven job creation record. If unions' don't use their funds to create jobs, who else will, at a time when governments are cutting back almost everywhere?

CON: Unions have no business being in business—may not be a 'democratic' use of members' funds. Arguments basically the same in both cases, but somewhat stronger in case of employee buyouts. “Is it really our job to clean up the mess when management screws up?“ I would say that in both cases the potential benefits outweigh the risks, though it must be acknowledged that there are risks, esp. in the case of outright buyouts of failing firms.

4) Because public sector unionism is always inherently political, and in recent years, with collective bargaining having been severely restricted or even curtailed in much of the public sector, the unions have found it imperative to reach the general public to try to persuade it to induce governments to change their budget-slashing ways and get politicians to increase or at least maintain existing levels of public spending. In a sense, the general public (as users of public services) can be seen as the natural allies of the unions (whose members are the providers of those services). Publicity campaigns are a way to make sure the public is aware of this common interest.

5) Unions' direct impact on wages (meaning the additional wages workers receive for union membership) are positive but relatively modest overall—probably in the 10 to 25% range in Canada. In some industries (i.e., construction) these impacts are far greater, while in general these impacts are greater in the private than in the public sector.

Aggregate indirect union wage impacts (the effects unions have on the wages of nonunionized workers) are modestly negative, but this aggregate figure is quite misleading since it compounds two very different types of impact which are going in opposite directions: the negative 'crowding' impact which applies mainly to unskilled workers in competitive labour markets, and the positive 'shock' impact which is much more apt to apply to skilled professional or technical workers. Overall, unions also appear to reduce the amount of wage dispersion both at the national level and within organizations. In recent years, at least in Canada, the direct union wage impact appears to have been going

.

43

down, perhaps because of the greater prevalence of public sector unions within the labour movement.

6) The most serious problem with measuring unions' direct wage impacts is that they assume other things (i.e., the skill and education level of the workers or capital intensity of the plant) are equal. Often this is not a safe assumption; in many cases the so-called union wage impact may simply be a premium for the workers' greater skill and experience, a greater level of technology within the plant, or the fact that because of that higher level of technology, unionized workers may be made to work harder. In particular, there are numerous differences between unionized and non-unionized work forces. The problem with the indirect wage impact was addressed in the answer to the previous question; basically it is not a single impact but two different ones which apply to two very different groups of workers in two very different sorts of situations.

7) On the question of unions' impacts on productivity, one's position is apt to depend quite heavily on one's overall perspective on IR. Neoclassicists argue that unions generally reduce productivity by raising wages above competitive levels, by reducing output through the strikes they call, and by forcing management to agree to restrictive work rules. (Not in text, but very much worth considering. A more sophisticated argument often advanced by managerialists is that unions restrict productivity by forcing management to keep workers who should be let go, as a result of the difficulty of dismissing workers when there is a grievance process in place, and by standing in the way of incentive programs which might increase productivity. In my view this is a far worthier argument than most of those advanced by the neoclassicists, especially since the number of working days lost through strikes is far lower than the number lost through absenteeism and various other causes).

Institutionalists argue that unions have a number of positive impacts on productivity.

These include reduced quit rates and improved morale and worker-management cooperation resulting from union grievance processes and other mechanisms (i.e., joint committees) that give workers some say in what goes on in the workplace. Unions can also induce management to induce more efficient production processes and, in some cases, better personnel policies. Finally, they can increase productivity by collecting information about the preferences of the entire work force—information that can help the firm select more appropriate personnel policies and a more suitable mix of up-front pay and fringe benefits. For a very useful overview of these issues, see Freeman and Medoff (1979—full source in text). It's difficult if not impossible to determine unions' overall effect on productivity for two reasons. 1) Outside goods-producing sectors, we often don't even know what productivity is or how to measure it. 2) What determines whether or not the positive factors listed above will outweigh the negative ones is generally the nature and history of the individual union–management relationship. There is no way to 'measure' the impact of this theoretically; to find out what the impact is, it's necessary to go into workplaces and do individual and generally quite detailed case studies. Given the difficulty of measuring productivity in much of the service sector, asking what unions' impact on productivity is may not even be the right question.

.

44

It's equally difficult to determine whether unions' impacts on the management of organizations are beneficial. Here again, the answer is apt to depend on the individual researcher's overall perspective on IR, though people from all perspectives are prepared to agree that those impacts are substantial. What can be said is that unions substantially limit management's freedom to run organizations as they see fit. They do this through grievance processes, which constitute a significant restriction on management's power to discharge and discipline as they wish; through the collective agreement's work rules; and through joint participation on a variety of union–management committees. Even many managerialists agree that joint union–management committees can be beneficial to organizations. However, both managerialists and neoclassicists argue that work rules are a serious incursion on effective management, and many argue, as well, that grievance processes have the effect of preventing management from maintaining effective disciplinary control over workplaces. In general, unionization means that management must use two sets of rules in managing workplaces: the unilaterally determined set contained in company personnel policies, and the jointly determined set contained in collective agreements. Having to live by two different sets of rules in one sense complicates decisions and may make decision-making slower. On the other hand, if management was previously arbitrary or incompetent, the collective agreement can at least bring some consistency and reduce arbitrary management behaviour, which in turn can have positive impacts on morale and productivity. At the same time, innovative and creative managers may be unduly constricted by collective agreement provisions. Again, this is a case where determining the effects requires us to go to individual workplaces and do detailed case studies.

8) Unions' major impacts on society as a whole have included publicly funded medical care, unemployment insurance, pensions, and other worthwhile social programs. They have also been instrumental in bringing about safer workplaces, pay and employment equity, and anti-discrimination legislation. For the most part, unions have achieved these impacts through political action carried out by their political allies (NDP, CCF, or PQ).

9) A good debate topic. The evidence is fully covered at pp. 142-4 of the text.

In connection with this point, I sometimes invite classes, especially advanced ones, to consider the different impacts unions have in different countries. To do this, it's necessary to consider the different roles unions play: collective bargaining agents in the U.S., founders of businesses in Canada, players in the mainstream political arena in Germany, mobilizers of radical political action in France. On occasion, this additional discussion has helped students realize that the problems often observed with unions are not related to unions as such, but to the roles they are asked to play in certain societies.

We sometimes come up with the conclusion that if the labour movement were given greater political legitimacy in North America, we might not see unions forced to write detailed and (admittedly) sometimes obstructive work rules into collective agreements.

In connection with this point, as well, it is also useful to consider the availability of alternative mechanisms (works councils in Germany, political parties in France). A good 'backdoor' introduction to comparative analysis!

.

45

Chapter 6: Employment Legislation Chapter Summary The laws that govern employment relationships in Canada can be divided into three interrelated legal regimes. The first, which governs non-unionized employment relationships, is the longest standing and is based on the common law concept of the contract of employment. The second, the collective bargaining regime, which will be covered in Chapter 7, applies only to unionized workers or those in the process of organizing a union at their workplace. The third legal regime, statutory regulation—or employment legislation—is comprised of the many pieces of legislation that set standards of employment that apply to both unionized and non-unionized employees. The focus of the first part of this chapter is the individual contract of employment. Topics covered include the problems associated with applying the principles of contract law to the contract of employment, the implied contractual obligations of both employers and employees, termination of the employment contract, and both wrongful and constructive dismissal. The latter part of this chapter highlights various types of employment legislation, including employment standards, human rights protections, pay and employment equity, and occupational health and safety.

Chapter Outline I) The Individual Employment Contract A) Implied Terms and Obligations B) Termination of the Individual Contract of Employment C) Dismissal Adjudication for Non-Unionized Employees D) Constructive Dismissal E) Reasonable Notice II) Statutory Regulation: An Overview A) Jurisdiction and Administration of Statutory Regulation B) Employment/Labour Standards Legislation C) Equity Legislation D) Health and Safety Legislation III) A Rapidly Changing Field

.

46

Chapter Summary I) The Individual Employment Contract (pp. 148–53)

Every employment relationship is based upon the parties entering into a contact that consists of the terms and conditions of employment. The contract may be in writing, verbal, or simply by virtue of the exchange of salary or wages for services. The assumptions upon which contract law is based (e.g., equal bargaining power) do not describe the reality of most employment contracts, which are usually based on managerial authority and a labour market characterized by persistent unemployment.

Enforcement of contracts is a problem in that only high-level managers and professionals can afford to pursue enforcement of their rights through the courts. The failings of the common law to adequately protect the average worker has led to each jurisdiction in Canada passing a range of statutes that set minimally acceptable terms and conditions of employment.

Implied Terms and Obligations The “climate of contracting” employment carries with it some implied terms and conditions. An employee must report to work punctually and regularly, perform duties honestly and faithfully, obey lawful and safe orders within the scope of their contractual duties, avoid gross misconduct such as drunkenness or insubordination, and particularly managerial employees must avoid any conflicts of interest. An Employer must pay employees regularly and cannot change their duties, status, or level of pay significantly without the employee’s consent. Employers must provide a reasonable safe workplace and are obliged to provide reasonable notice of termination except in situations of employee misconduct or failure to perform. Regarding dismissals, employers are required to act in good faith, in a procedurally fair manner, and to conduct the dismissal in a manner that is not unnecessarily humiliating or psychologically harmful.

Termination of the Individual Contract of Employment Contracts of employment are generally for an indefinite duration, and (in the absence of misconduct) can be terminated only upon adequate notice or pay in lieu of notice. There is no right to retain employment against the wishes of the employer at common law. The only recourse for non-unionized employees is through a civil action and the most they can expect tis for the court to order the employer to pay damages, usually in an amount no more than the pay they would have received had adequate notice been given. This contrasts dramatically with the protection for unionized workers in the grievance/arbitration process, where an employee can only be dismissed for “just cause”.

The substantial protection that union membership provides against arbitrary dismissal has frequently been cited in union-membership-joining and union-growth studies as a major reason why workers wish to join union. It should be noted that some statutory law does give non-unionized employees the possibility of regaining employment: in some jurisdictions this includes human rights, employment standards, and occupational health and safety.

.

47

Dismissal Adjudication for Non-Unionized Employees Nova Scotia, Quebec, and the federal jurisdiction all provide protection for nonunionized workers (after 10, two, or one years’ service respectively) under employment standards legislation. The adjudication process appears to apply the same standards at dismissal hearings as is the case in dismissal grievance arbitrations.

Constructive Dismissal A constructive dismissal occurs when an employer unilaterally and fundamentally alters the terms and conditions of employment such that the employee can construe the employer’s action as equivalent to dismissal. This notion does not apply to minor changes such a lateral transfers, providing they do not involve lower pay or a demotion.

Reasonable Notice Minimal notice periods are codified in the employment standards legislation of every jurisdiction, and all jurisdictions except PEI have special provisions for group terminations/layoffs. “Reasonable notice” at common law is generally longer at common law. The factors used by the court in arriving at an award include the nature of the employment, the employee’s length of service, age, experience, training, other qualifications, and the availability of similar employment. Courts have awarded additional notice due to employers’ unprofessional or bad faith conduct during a dismissal. Employees have a duty to mitigate their damages by seeking other substantially similar work. While the notice periods awarded by the courts are substantially longer than the employment standards’ minimums the expense and time required to pursue a remedy through the courts means this process is really only available to highly paid managers and professionals.

II) Statutory Regulation: An Overview (pp. 153–69)

The basis employment or labour standards statute generally covers such things as minimum wages, maximum permissible hours of work, overtime pay, minimum annual vacation entitlements, paid holidays, termination notice periods, and maternity and parental leave. Statutory regulation also includes other legislation covering occupational health and safety, human rights, pension benefits, pay equity, workers’ compensation, employment equity, and even privacy of information. Legislative protection is required because only one-third of all workers belong to unions, and some kind of legislation is needed to protect certain basic rights for all workers. A number of important workplace issues (like human rights) would be difficult if not impossible to regulate through collective bargaining. The notion of compromise inherent in collective bargaining does not lend itself to protection of fundamental rights and freedoms such as freedom from discrimination or a safe workplace.

Jurisdiction and Administration of Statutory Regulation Most statutory regulation falls under provincial jurisdiction except for employees of the federal government and federally-regulated businesses such as banks, airlines, and railways. Separate administrative law regimes exist for each major statutory regime such as human rights, employment standards, and occupational health and safety. Sometimes,

.

48

a violation of an employee’s rights can involve multiple tribunals. No Canadian jurisdiction has yet implemented a “mega tribunal” for hearing all complaints.

Employment/Labour Standards Legislation Employment/labour standards legislation is arguably most important for younger workers, part-timers, and low wage/low skill jobs in the growing services sector, all areas that have been difficult for unions to organize. Canada’s comprehensive labour standards have been criticized as a barrier to Canadian firms’ competitiveness in a global marketplace. The counter argument is that labour standards need to be acknowledeged in trade agreements and protected and enforced in order to prevent a “downward harmonization” of working conditions.

Employment/labour standards legislation does exclude certain groups, most notably farm workers and home care workers, in many Canadian jurisdictions—workers among the country’s least fortunate. Legislation has not kept pace with the growth of “nonstandard” employment, and part-timers outside of Saskatchewan and Quebec have no access to the wages and benefits of full time workers if an organization chooses not to extend these working conditions to them. Enforcement of employment/labour standards legislation relies on a complaints-based model and studies have shown the majority of awards occur after the employee has left their employment, indicating a reluctance of employees to file complaints against their employer.

Equity Legislation The purpose of human rights legislation is to prevent discrimination. Every Canadian jurisdictions' human rights acts prohibit workplace discrimination on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sexual orientation, marital and family status, and disability. Some also include convictions for which a pardon has been issued, source of income, and political opinion. Age is a prohibited ground of discrimination except below the legal working age and above 65. Direct discrimination is intentionally distinguishing between employees or job candidates based on a prohibited ground.

Indirect discrimination occurs when an apparently neutral policy or practice has the effect of disproportionately disadvantaging members of a protected group. An employers may establish rules that discriminate against members of a protected group if it can prove a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) for doing so.

A bona fide occupational qualification allows employers to discriminate for legitimate business reasons (i.e., vision requirements for pilots, strength for police and firefighters).

For a BFOQ to be valid an employer must be prepared to demonstrate the BFOQ is directly connected to the job, the BFOQ was adopted in good faith, and is reasonably necessary to the accomplishment of the job. An employer must also be prepared to demonstrate that it would be impossible to accommodate individual members of the disadvantaged group without incurring undue hardship. There is no formulae for defining “undue hardship” but factors considered include finanacial cost, size of employer’s operations, safety, legitimate operational requirements, interchangeability of the workforce and facilities, impact on the collective agreement (if one exists) and problems of employee morale.

.

49

Employers also have a duty to do everything in their power to prevent harassment on any of the prohibited grounds, and where it occurs, to find the offenders and deal with them appropriately to minimize the likelihood of any recurrence. Employers must be proactive, since the assumption is that hostility and offensive comments or conduct are inherently unwelcome.

Remedies for human rights violations include reinstatement with back pay for workers terminated for discriminatory reasons, or an employer may be directed to hire someone not selected through a discriminatory process. Additionally, and employee may also be given compensation for expenses resulting from the discriminatory action, such as legal costs. The commission may also order the employer to change the discriminatory practice in question. Recent court decisions have broadened the power of arbitrators in the to deal with human rights violations for unionized workers.

Despite improvements brought about by human rights legislation, women and members of many minority groups continue to be at a severe disadvantage in many workplaces.

On average, women receive only about 70.5% of the pay that men do. While some of the difference is the result of straight discrimination, much of the “gap” is the result of occupational segregation, which results in women being clustered in lower-paying, traditionally “female“ occupations. Pay equity legislation, providing that workers be given equal pay for work of equal value, is now in place in most jurisdictions, and is proactively required throughout most of the public sector. Enforcement in most jurisdictions is complaint-based in the private sector, however, leaving private sector workers without much protection from discriminatory wage setting practices.

The purpose of employment equity legislation is to break down patterns of occupational segregation that have made it difficult for women or members of minority groups to enter certain occupations. Quotas are not imposed under the federal act, but employers are expected both to remove any discriminatory barriers and to initiate positive hiring policies and practices to help ensure that members of the four designated groups (women, Aboriginal people, people with disabilities, and visible minority group members) are fairly represented in their work forces.

Health and Safety Legislation Although Canada's health and safety record has improved somewhat in recent years, it continues to be appalling by international standards. (Note: The Westray case discussed in the text still seems to provide lots of good material for discussion, even though the case is no longer by any means new). The Canadian approach to health and safety involves trying to prevent workplace accidents and illness from occurring where possible, and compensating the victims where prevention isn't possible. The two main preventive methods used are the “external system,“ which involves legislative enactment of health and safety standards, and the “internal system,“ or joint worker-management regulation of safety conditions.

External system: The two main components to the external system are detailed laws, often industry-specific, compelling employers to operate in a safe manner, and a general “performance duty“ imposed on both employers and workers, obliging them to promote

.

50

health and safety at work. Safety legislation is often extremely detailed, specifying how many parts per million of a given substance may legally be discharged into the air or water, or at what temperatures certain foods must be stored in restaurants. While health and safety legislation has undoubtedly made Canadian workplaces safer than they would otherwise be, the system is far from perfect. The most serious problem is inadequate enforcement. Another problem is that standards may be set too low to provide adequate protection against certain hazardous substances.

Internal system: The assumption behind the internal system is that working together, employers and workers can do a lot to ensure safer workplaces. The major mechanism of the internal system is the joint labour–management safety committee, required in all jurisdictions in workplaces of more than a certain size. The evidence to date suggests that these committees can work well at preventing injuries and illnesses, but only when management grants them some degree of real power and gives them a fairly free hand in the way they operate. Unfortunately, not all managers are willing to do this. The other two components of the internal system are the right to refuse unsafe work, and notification of hazardous materials (WHMIS). Although the right to refuse unsafe work applies to non-unionized as well as unionized workers, the fact that it is far more frequently exercised in unionized workplaces suggests that unions have a critical role to play in enforcing the legislation and educating workers as to their rights under it. It also suggests the need for stronger mechanisms to protect non-unionized workers, such as the equivalent of a dismissal grievance procedure in cases where a refusal to work under conditions the worker believed unsafe triggered the dismissal.

Workers' compensation (WC) is designed to compensate the victims of workplace accidents or work-related illnesses. All Canadian WC systems are non-fault, which means that a worker needn't prove employer negligence to be eligible for benefits but also is barred from seeking further remedies through the courts. Funds used to pay compensation benefits are drawn from a levy on employers based on the nature of the injury and the size of the employer's wage bill. Disability benefits may be either temporary or permanent and are based on the level of disability sustained by the victim.

Normally, top benefit levels range from 75 to 90% of the victim's regular salary up to a certain maximum. In recent years, provincial legislatures have been making increasing attempts to streamline WC systems through such measures as the experience rating of premiums (to reward employers for safe practice) and more intensive rehabilitation efforts.

III) A Rapidly Changing Field (pp. 169–70)

Despite employment legislation’s generally progressive evolution, there remain some serious concerns. First, many individuals and groups of workers continue to be excluded from even basic protection. Second, enforcement mechanisms have proved inadequate to enforce existing legislation; for example, non-unionized workers almost never exercise their right to refuse unsafe work. Similarly, discrimination in employment remains a ‘fact of life.’ Finally, globalization and freer trade continue to challenge Canada’s ability to enforce standards of employment that have evolved within the structure and affluence of Canadian society.

.

51

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) For non-union workers, there is no right to continued employment. An employer can terminate the employment contract for any reason as long as adequate notice or pay in lieu of notice is given. Employees have the option of challenging the employer’s notice in court, but that is expensive and usually only highly paid professionals/managers go that route. For unionized workers, the grievance/arbitration process requires that an employer have “just cause” for any discipline, including termination. This is a very high standard for employers to meet, and unionized employees frequently are reinstated by arbitrators. Nova Scotia, Quebec and the federal sector have protection for employees with varying service requirements, and the results of hearings in those jurisdictions tend to mirror the results for unionized employees.

2) Forces of supply and demand are not adequate to address issues in the realm of employment of human beings. Soybeans do not care where they are purchased or how they are used, and may be dried and stored for long periods of time without loss of value.

For human beings, however, employment is a necessary part of life and is one aspect that helps to define one’s identity. In the labour market, individuals do not bargain on equal terms with employers when selling their labour, and only one third of the Canadian labour force is a member of a union. Even with collective bargaining, some rights in the workplace are fundamental and should not be subject to negotiation (like safety and human rights).

3) An interesting debate topic for class. In the absence of “fair trade” agreements and the existence of markets for goods where the labour component is significant and low wage/substandard working conditions in other countries are part of mix, Canadianproduced goods may indeed be “uncompetitive.” The choices, though are to either mirror the substandard wages and working conditions, or to produce goods and services with higher value in the marketplace and/or to find ways of increasing productivity.

4) Web-based assignment.

5) Legislation summarized above. Public sector unions have been successful at pushing the pay equity/employment equity issues onto the bargaining agenda. At the same time, private employers have resisted the introduction of legislation with a reporting component as an unnecessary bureaucratic step to ensure that equitable practices are implemented or to catch “the few” who have inequitable policies.

6) BFOQ defined above. Students will have fun with this one.

7) The external system refers to the legislative establishment of specified (often industryspecific) health and safety standards such as those governing permissible levels of discharge of substances into air and water or the temperatures at which certain foods must be stored in restaurants. The external system also includes a general “performance duty“ imposed on both employers and workers, obliging them to promote health and safety at work. Under the internal system, management and labour assume joint responsibility for making the workplace safer. The primary mechanism of the internal system is joint

.

52

worker-management safety committees required in most workplaces above a certain size, but the internal system also involves workers' right to refuse unsafe work and the right to know about the actual or potential danger posed by various hazardous substances that may be used in the workplace (WHMIS systems). The committees are the central component of the internal system; they operate under the assumption that prevention of injuries and illness is most likely to occur when workers are actively participating in the prevention process, since those who operate a given piece of equipment are often the ones who best know the hazards of that equipment and how to get around them. Nova Scotia's health and safety act has legislatively enshrined the importance of the joint committees by declaring that they are the foundation upon which the entire act is based.

(See Swinton, 1983—full source in text's reference list—for a more detailed discussion on this point). (Note: This may be a good spot for a discussion of how effective the committees have been, and what circumstances tend to make for more or less effective committees).

8) Workers' compensation (WC) is normally under the control of a provincial board whose major responsibilities are to collect levies from employers and pay benefits to disabled workers. All Canadian WC systems are non-fault, which means that a worker need not prove employer negligence to claim benefits, but also cannot seek further remedies through the courts. The main basis for a disability claim is the level of disability sustained by the victim. Benefit levels generally range from 75 to 90% of the worker's regular wage or salary, to a maximum of $36,000-$56,000.

One problem with WC has traditionally been that since employer levies were generally based on the experience of the industry as a whole, employers had little incentive to engage in safe practices. This has been corrected, in some jurisdictions, through the introduction of “experience rating,“ whereby employers whose claims are above industry norms must pay higher premiums. In the past, as well, employers were under no obligation to rehire disabled workers and again, prior to experience rating, generally had little incentive to do so. Employers are now more willing to reinstate disabled workers, due to experience rating, but experience rating has created a new set of problems. Now, employers may be reluctant to recognize legitimate claims for disability and workers may be pressured into returning for work before they are ready. Both the old and new set of problems illustrate the fine line which WC boards must walk in designing systems. In this connection, the changes made by Ontario, which have included reduced benefit levels, limitation of appeals to the compensation board's decisions, and limits on compensation for mental stress, will bear close observation (see text, p. 251 for a fuller discussion).

.

53

Chapter 7: Collective Bargaining Legislation Chapter Overview Collective bargaining, or labour relations, legislation is of pivotal importance in any industrial relations system. It addresses such issues as how a union can become certified, when a strike or lockout may legally occur, and what constitutes an unfair labour practice. In this chapter, we start by considering the need for regulation of union– management relations and take a brief look at the development of collective bargaining legislation in Canada. Next, we examine some of the common features of Canadian collective bargaining legislation and go on to explain its major functions, including certification and decertification of trade unions. The final sections of the chapter briefly highlight Quebec’s special system of legislation and the major differences between the collective bargaining systems in Canada and the United States. Not that, in this chapter, we generally confine ourselves to private sector collective bargaining legislation. Public sector legislation is considered in the next chapter.

Chapter Outline I) The Need for Regulation II) The Evolution of Canadian Collective Bargaining Legislation A) Impact of the Charter III) Common Features of Canadian Collective Bargaining Legislation A) Legislative Fragmentation B) Majoritarianism and Exclusivity C) Voluntarism and Emphasis on Process D) Specialized Tribunals E) No Mid-Term Strikes or Lockouts F) The Duty to Bargain in Good Faith E) Statutory Freeze Following Notice to Bargain IV) Major Functions of Canadian Collective Bargaining Legislation A) Acquisition and Termination of Bargaining Rights B) Protecting the Right to Organize C) Regulating Industrial Conflict V) Collective Bargaining Legislation in Quebec VI) Canadian versus American Legislation

.

54

VII) Recent Trends in Collective Bargaining Legislation Chapter Summary I) The Need for Regulation (pp. 175–6)

Legal scholars, philosophers, historians, and others have written quite extensively on the rationale for labour relations legislation (LRL). The single most important reason for having such legislation is to prevent the suffering, chaos, violence, and economic injustice that would almost certainly exist without such legislation—and that did exist throughout the 19th century and the first few decades of this one, before LRL came into effect. Another important reason is to provide workers with some measure of input into managerial decisions affecting their terms and conditions of employment. While LRL has been criticized from the right as leading to economic inefficiency and an unwarranted intrusion on managerial prerogatives, and from the left as doing little to address the needs of the less fortunate members of society, most Canadians appear to believe that workers and Canadian society as a whole are better served with it than they would be without it.

II) The Evolution of Canadian Collective Bargaining Legislation (pp. 176–80)

Canada was among the last industrialized countries to grant its workers basic bargaining rights, doing so nine years after the U.S. and several decades after most European countries had done so. The reasons for this slow evolution of labour legislation and collective bargaining were discussed in some detail in the labour history chapter (Ch. 3).

See table 7.1 of the text for a description of the significant Canadian collective bargaining legislation milestones.

Impact of the Charter

When the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms first took effect in 1982, many observers believed it would significantly affect labour relations legislation. Some thought the change would be positive, with the courts using the Charter to strike down unjust laws, such as exclusions. Others feared it would be negative, with the courts taking over much business that had been carried out by labour relations boards—to the detriment of unions and workers. In the event, the Charter has generally had little effect on Canadian LRL, as the courts have been reluctant to use it to overturn existing legislative arrangements and thus reshape the IR system. In 2001, however, it was used to strike down Ontario’s agricultural exclusion.

III) Common Features of Canadian Collective Bargaining Legislation (pp. 180–6)

Legislative fragmentation To those familiar with other IR systems, the most notable feature of the Canadian system is its extreme degree of legislative fragmentation. Because of the fact of provincial jurisdiction, each province has had to write its own private sector labour act; there is also a federal act (the Canada Labour Code) for workers in enterprises of a clearly interprovincial nature. There is even more legislative fragmentation in the public sector, because different public sector groups often have their own separate acts. In all, there are

.

55

about three dozen different pieces of labour relations legislation in effect in Canada at any given time.

Majoritarianism and exclusivity These two principles are found in all Canadian LRL. Majoriarianism means that the majority defines the whole—whether it is the establishment of the bargaining unit, taking a strike vote, or another other aspect of the relationship. Exclusivity means that once established, the union is the sole bargaining agent for all employees—an employer cannot directly bargaining with employees individually, or with anyone other than the union.

Unions also have the right to exist. The “Rand Formula” or ‘agency shop’ is the default minimum union security in every Canadian jurisdiction except Saskatchewan, which has a union shop provision in its legislation. The employer must collect dues from all employees in the union and remit them on a timely basis to the union. As a balance to the majoritarianism principle, unions have a duty of fair representation to ensure that minority interests among union members are fairly represented.

Voluntarism and emphasis on processes An important assumption behind Canadian LRL is that it should operate primarily through free collective bargaining between employers and unions. It follows that LRL should not normally prescribe outcomes (i.e., a given wage level), but should rather confine itself to laying out processes that will allow free and free collective bargaining to take place. Closely related to this emphasis on processes is LRL's voluntarism, or belief in the ability of employers and unions to resolve disputes on their own, without compulsory government intervention. The one major exception to Canada's generally voluntarist approach to dispute resolution is the compulsory conciliation provision found in most jurisdictions' labour acts.

Specialized Tribunals Specialized tribunals, most often referred to as Labour Relations Boards, are established in every Canadian jurisdiction to administer the LRL in that jurisdiction. The powers of the tribunals are established by statute, and are very broad. For example, labour boards can certify a union without a vote, or where there is a minority in favour of forming a union, if the employer has committed unfair labour practices such that the true wishes of employees cannot be determined. Boards generally operate under a “make whole doctrine” which requires the guilty party to restore the victim to the position he or she would have been in had the offence in question not been committed. In general, labour boards are more concerned with finding practical solutions to workplace conflict than with laying down long-term precedents, but an extensive jurisprudence of board decisions has developed, and they tend to follow established principles as they assist the parties in interpreting collecting bargaining legislation and understanding board policies.

No mid-term strikes or lockouts Another key tenet of Canadian LRL is the “peace obligation” imposed on both sides during the life of the agreement. While the agreement is in force, a union can't strike and an employer can't lock out its employees. Instead, disputes arising during the life of the

.

56

agreement must be settled through a grievance process, which every jurisdiction's labour act requires every collection agreement to contain.

The Duty to Bargain in Good Faith The duty to bargain in good faith is a concept designed to ensure employers do not subvert the process of collective bargaining by simply refusing to meet or by engaging in surface bargaining. Boards look for a pattern of behaviour (see text p. 186) to indicate that a party has breached its duty to bargain in good faith.

Statutory Freeze Following Notice to Bargain Another common feature of Canadian collective bargaining legislation is the requirement that the parties “freeze” the terms and conditions of employment during their efforts to negotiate a collective agreement. The “freeze” extends up to the point where either party has acquired and uses the right to strike or lock out, or until the union’s bargaining rights are terminated.

IV) Major Functions of Canadian Collective Bargaining Legislation (pp. 187-97)

Acquisition and Termination of Bargaining Rights The single most important function of Canadian LRL is overseeing the certification process. The certification process begins with an application from a union to the labour board to represent the workers in a proposed bargaining unit. Before it can certify the proposed bargaining unit, the labour board must determine the appropriate bargaining unit and ascertain the union's level of support. In some provinces, support can be ascertained through a count of signed membership cards providing the union exceeds a certain threshold (often 55%). In others, including Ontario and British Columbia, a vote is always necessary. Where a vote is used, a simple majority either of those voting or of the proposed bargaining unit is generally sufficient. To minimize the likelihood of employer interference, the vote must normally be held within 5 to 10 working days after the certification application has been filed. In cases where the proposed bargaining unit is still in dispute at the time the vote is conducted, the board may direct that one or more ballots be segregated and that the ballot box be sealed until after it has decided on an appropriate bargaining unit.

Decertification is a process which allows members who are unhappy with the way their union has represented them to get rid of the union in favour of another one, or none at all.

Decertification applications will only be entertained near the collective agreement's expiry date, or in cases where the union has not managed to conclude an agreement within a reasonable period of time (often one year). Any bargaining unit employee may apply to the board for decertification, and percentage requirements are normally the same as for certification.

Protecting the Right to Organize A major purpose of Canadian LRL is to set standards for unfair labour practice and provide remedies for it. Unfair labour practice provisions apply both to employers and to unions; in some cases, they may also apply to individuals. Employers are barred from

.

57

participating in or interfering with a trade union, from discriminating against union members, and from seeking to induce employees not to join a union. For their part, unions are barred from interfering with the formation and operation of employers' associations. They cannot use intimidation or coercion to compel people to join and are specifically barred from trying to persuade employees to join at the workplace during regular working hours. They are also forbidden from disciplining members for refusing to engage in unlawful strikes. Unfair labour practice is policed by labour boards (discussed in more detail below). These boards have a broad range of remedies available to them, including (except in Ontario) the power to certify a union with less than majority support in cases where it is clear that the employer's unfair labour practice has prevented employees' true wishes from becoming known.

Maintaining union security Unions have protection for their right to carry out legitimate workplace activities through provisions stating that no employer or employers' organization shall participate in or interfere with the formation of a union or with the union's activities. Income protection is assured in most jurisdictions through some version of the Rand Formula (discussed in Ch. 3), which stipulates that all bargaining unit members shall pay dues to the union for the services the union renders in their behalf, whether they are members or not.

Regulating industrial conflict Strikes—Canada regulates strikes and lockouts more strictly than do most other countries. Generally, a strike or lockout can become legal only after the conciliator has reported his or her lack of success to the labour minister and a further length of time has elapsed. In addition, several jurisdictions require a secret strike vote, and in at least two jurisdictions, the labour board may conduct a further vote on the employer's final offer.

Two jurisdictions have special provisions for handling emergency disputes in the private sector, in cases where the government believes the public health or welfare to be at serious risk.

Grievances—As was noted earlier, every Canadian jurisdiction's labour act requires that collective agreements establish a grievance procedure, culminating in binding arbitration, to settle disputes over the agreement's application or interpretation. When collective agreements do not make specific reference to such a procedure, most jurisdictions' labour acts will deem them to contain one.

V) Collective Bargaining Legislation in Quebec (pp. 197–8)

In many ways, Quebec's collective bargaining procedures and administrative mechanisms differ quite markedly from those used elsewhere in Canada. While the province is probably best known to the English-Canadian IR community for pioneering antistrikebreaking legislation, the single most distinctive feature of its regime is arguably its decree system, whereby collective agreements are extended to the non-unionized sectors of an industry. The purpose of the decree system, which was established in 1934, is to encourage collective bargaining and to eliminate competition over wages and working conditions among firms in the same industry, especially low-wage industries made up mainly of small and medium-sized firms. Agreements to be extended are not the same as

.

58

'normal' collective agreements; they are limited to wages, hours of working, working days, vacations with pay, and classification of operations and of employers and employees.

Other important features of Quebec's LRL are special, highly centralized arrangements for the construction industry, an Essential Services Council to safeguard the public welfare during disputes affecting public services, and (at least until now), administration of the labour act through a Labour Court and a three-tier system including certification agents, labour commissioners, and general commissioners. While legislation was passed in 2001 replacing the Labour Court system with a more typical Canadian-style labour relations board, at the time of writing this legislation had not yet been proclaimed in force.

VI) Canadian versus American Legislation (pp. 198–9)

Canadian legislation originally evolved out of the American Wagner Act (1935), and there are still many similarities between Canadian and American legislation, including their emphasis on processes rather than outcomes and their voluntarism. But Canadian legislation has also taken some quite different directions, travelling further from its voluntarist roots than has American legislation. Important differences include Canada's compulsory conciliation and grievance procedures and the much broader range of protections offered workers here, including first-contract arbitration provisions and laws making permanent replacement of striking workers illegal. Laws against unfair employer labour practice are more strictly enforced here, as well, and Canada has no equivalent of the U.S.' "right-to-work" zone.

VII) Recent Trends in Collective Bargaining Legislation (pp. 199–200)

Most Canadian LRL has not changed in any fundamental way since the granting of public sector bargaining rights, although the application of human rights legislation has caused major changes in the way LRL is interpreted. The duty to accommodate minority group members, persons with disabilities, and others inadvertently discriminated against by collective agreement provisions has led in the direction of a greater individualization of the collective bargaining process. This trend toward convergence of individual employment legislation and collective agreement interpretation has not benefited unions, since increasingly workers look to receive protection through legislation applying to them as individuals rather than through their union, collectively.

Other recent trends have also not been favourable to unions. They include a growth in the use of a vote for certification rather than the traditional card count, and a growth in employer freedom to communicate provisions. Taken together, these policy shifts suggest that labour boards may now be prepared to entertain a more active role for employers in the union certification process and a greater degree of communication between employers and individual employees, even on subjects traditionally reserved for collective bargaining with unions. In addition, at a time when there is clearly increasing pressure to harmonize Canadian to American labour standards, these policy shifts represent a discernible, albeit gradual move in the direction of American-style IR—a style marked among other things by aggressive employer campaigning against unions

.

59

during certification drives, and by a willingness (tacitly encouraged by lax labour board regulation of unfair labour practices) to engage officially proscribed labour practices if that is what it takes to become or remain union-free.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Experiential. So far, Ontario and Alberta are among the most prominent examples of provinces which have altered their preface as suggested by the question.

2) The major rationale is to bring about industrial peace and prevent the kind of violence and economic injustice that existed before such legislation was in place. Another rationale is to provide workers with some degree of input into management decisions.

3) The impact has been quite significant, because employers are now obliged to interpret collective agreements in the light of anti-discrimination provisions contained in human rights acts. Systemic as well as intentional discrimination is now barred. The requirement to accommodate disabled individuals and members of different religious and ethnic minority groups has been construed to include the rewriting of collective agreement provisions or agreement to waive their application. We know that the duty to accommodate applies up to the point of “undue hardship” on employers. What we don't know (yet) is just what constitutes “undue hardship.”

4) Features common to all jurisdictions include: the principles of majoritarianism and exclusivity, voluntarism and emphasis on process, specialized tribunals, no mid-term strikes or lockouts, the duty to bargain in good faith and the statutory freeze following notice to bargain, all summarized above.

5) research on the web.

6) A good discussion question that could be used as a debate as to which method should be preferred. Card majorities establish the existence of a bargaining unit by a simple count of the cards once the bargaining unit has been defined; mandatory votes require that a vote be held of the bargaining unit to determine the wishes of the employees for union representation. The main argument for card majorities is that they prevent employers from unduly influencing the decision of employees. The argument against card majorities is that employees may not have heard “both sides” to the representation argument, or may have signed cards under some form of peer pressure, or may have simply changed their minds after signing the card. The argument for a mandatory vote is that it is the only reliable method of determining employee wishes at a particular point in time, and that employers should be given a chance to explain “their side” of the decision of whether or not a union is required. The argument against mandatory votes is that they turn the employees’ certification decision into a political contest where the employer has a much louder “voice” than the fledgling union.

.

60

7) The duty of fair representation is a check on the union’s exclusive bargaining rights and the majoritarian principles under which those rights were granted. The duty to bargain in good faith is required to give meaning to the union’s exclusive bargaining rights—once a bargaining unit is established the employer must negotiate a first agreement.

.

61

Chapter 8: Labour Relations and Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to consider why the public sector is so important in the Canadian IR system, and to examine the particular stresses facing that sector today. After noting the importance of the public sector to the IR system and indicating who should be considered a public sector employee, we discuss the evolution of public sector collective bargaining, an evolution quite different from that of private sector collective bargaining.

From there, we go on to consider some special features of public sector bargaining, including employer and employee differences, legislative differences, and special dispute resolution methods such as conventional and final-offer arbitration and the controlled strike. We conclude the chapter with a look at future prospects for collective bargaining and the public sector.

Chapter Outline I) The Importance of the Public Sector A) Who Is a Public Sector Worker?

II) The Development of Public Sector Unionism A) Why Public Sector Unionism Developed Slowly B) The Early Years: Public Employee Associations C) The 1980s: Wage Controls and Restraint D) The 1990s: Retrenchment and Restructuring E) The Twenty-First Century: Consolidation and Containment III) Distinctions Between Public and Private Sector Bargaining and Labour Relations A) Employer Differences B) Employee and Union Differences C) Legislative and Policy Differences D) Bargaining Unit Determination E) Scope of Bargainable Issues F) Dispute Resolution Procedures IV) The Future of Public Sector Bargaining: Is a Transformation Possible?

.

62

Chapter Summary I) The Importance of the Public Sector (pp. 206–9)

The public sector is important to the IR system for a variety of reasons. First, and perhaps most important, is the often essential nature of the work it performs. Public sector workers teach our children, care for our sick, and perform a host of other important if unsung tasks ranging from collecting garbage to issuing marriage and driver's licenses.

The public sector is also important because it makes up a sizeable share of the country's work force and almost half of its union membership, including more than half of the country's female union members. Finally, the public sector is important to IR students because of the state of crisis it is in, not just in Canada but throughout most of the industrialized world. A steady diet of restructuring, pay freezes, and layoffs has left the country's public sector workers in an angry mood. Even though the budgetary crises of the 1990s have generally ended, government restrictions on public sector workers’ bargaining rights have not. The result, over the past two years, has been a nation-wide wave of health care strikes, as well as a number of transit strikes and a wave of rotating strikes conducted by the Public Service Alliance.

Who Is a Public Sector Worker?

For our purposes, the public sector includes the federal and provincial civil services, municipalities, health care, education, and government enterprises such as the CBC and Ontario Hydro. While the percentage of employed Canadians working in the public sector has remained relatively steady at between 21 and 24% over the past two decades, there have been significant shifts in the various sub-sectors (i.e., public administration and health care). Because union density rates are far higher in the public than in the private sector, public sector workers make up a much larger share of the country's union members than of its work force. Despite recent declines in employment in public administration, public sector workers still accounted for slightly over half of the country's union members in 1998.

II) The Development of Public Sector Unionism (pp. 209–21)

Why Public Sector Unionism Developed Slowly Public sector unionism was late in coming to Canada because it came a good deal later than private sector unionism, and because Canada was the last major industrialized country to grant its private sector workers bargaining rights. (A time lag between the granting of unionization rights to private and public sector workers is normal in industrialized countries). Once public sector unionism did arrive, it evolved very rapidly, which made it difficult for governments to find appropriate bargaining structures and dispute resolution procedures.

The Early Years: Public Employee Associations Although it was not until very recently that most Canadian public sector workers enjoyed bargaining rights, public employee associations existed as early as the late 19th century.

They were, however, quite different from today's unions. Among other things, they sought to avoid confrontations with employers, had no compulsory membership

.

63

requirements, included management personnel up to the most senior levels, and didn't affiliate with labour federations. Rather than engaging in collective bargaining, they would play a consultative role by presenting governments with employees' concerns about wages and working conditions, in addition to undertaking various social activities.

The best-known consultative body was the National Joint Council, created in 1944 to address the needs of federal public service workers. Through the early 1960s, the consultation undertaken by these bodies marked the limit of permissible collective action for most Canadian public sector employees, the vast majority of whom were barred from unionizing under the "sovereignty doctrine."

As government departments evolved from small, intimate organizations into large bureaucracies, and as public sector salaries began to lag behind those in the private sector, frustration with association-consultation grew. Consultative bodies such as the NJC proved to have little real power, and key issues, such as wages, were often regarded as being outside the scope of discussable issues. By the 1950s, many civil service staff associations were questioning the NJC's value, and when John Diefenbaker's minority Conservative government rejected an NJC-recommended pay increase as "inflationary," demands for unionism grew. Eventually the Liberal minority government under Lester Pearson which replaced Diefenbaker's Conservatives would grant those rights through a Public Service Staff Relations Act (1967). A unique feature of this act was its dispute resolution mechanism, which granted public service unions the right to choose between binding arbitration and the more traditional conciliation-strike route.

With the enactment of the PSSRA, public sector unionization grew rapidly. First provincial governments gave their employees the right to join unions; later these rights were extended to other branches of the public sector, such as health care and education.

By the mid-1970s, the vast majority of Canada's public sector workers had joined unions, though not all enjoyed the right to strike. In addition to increasing the size of the Canadian labour movement, the great wave of public sector legislation also changed its character dramatically, as thousands of women, professionals, and white-collar workers joined for the first time. The new union members would push demands for maternity leave and anti-discrimination provisions, as well as for professional development provisions such as support for in-service education and travel to conferences.

From 1967 through 1975, public sector collective bargaining generally operated quite effectively, with only occasional government interference in the form of back-to-work legislation. The public sector unions negotiated significant increases in pay and improvements in working conditions, paying special attention to the correction of longstanding salary anomalies in lower-paid, largely female-dominated job classifications.

With the Trudeau government's imposition of wage-price controls in 1975, however, the "honeymoon" was over. Federal and provincial governments began to impose increasing restrictions on public sector workers, while for their part, the public sector unions, which initially had been less militant than their private sector counterparts, starting acting more and more like them. Grievance levels increased, and the public service unions began showing an increasing preference for strike action rather than arbitration.

.

64

The 1980s: Wage Controls and Restraint A second wave of inflation in the early 1980s led the federal government to impose a second round of controls, this time applied solely to wages and only within the public sector. Over the next few years, most provinces followed suit. Some, such as Quebec and B.C., imposed far more draconian pay restrictions than Ottawa had. Nor were the restrictions confined to monetary issues. The Quebec government, weary of having to end public sector strikes legislatively, imposed severe restrictions on public sector workers' right to strike, while in B.C., the Social Credit government of William Vander Zalm gave the Labour Minister the power to declare a category of workers essential whenever a dispute posed a threat to the province's economy and imposed drastic restrictions on the bargaining process generally.

The 1990s: Retrenchment and Restructuring The 1990s proved even more difficult for public sector workers than the 1980s did.

While governments continued to suspend collective bargaining and impose pay freezes and rollbacks as in the past, they didn’t stop there. The decade saw a severe reduction in government programs and services, which caused governments to lay off many of their public sector workers and work the remaining ones harder than before. A number of provinces, such as Ontario and Alberta, went in for wholesale restructuring of their health care and education services—again, at the cost of many public sector workers' jobs.

Throughout the country, such developments as privatization, contracting-out, and the use of short-term and temporary contracts likewise served to put public sector workers' jobs increasingly at risk.

In response, the public sector unions took an increasingly militant line, urging their members to vote against governing parties in elections, waging aggressive publicity campaigns against the government policies that are costing members their jobs, and accounting for an increasingly large proportion of the person-days lost to strikes. Recent major disputes in the public sector have included two Ontario teachers' strikes (1997 and 1998) and nurses' strikes in Saskatchewan and Quebec, both in 1999.

Federal government employees, who staged their first full-scale strike in 1991, were irate over the government's decision to appeal the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's pay equity award to 200,000 current and past employees. Things fared better in British Columbia, where an NDP government arrived at negotiated solutions with provincial government employees and health-care workers, but following the defeat of that government and its replacement by an ultra-conservative “Liberal” government in June of 2001, public labour relations once again became highly adversarial in B.C., as they had been during the 1980s.

The Twenty-First Century: Consolidation and Containment The first years of the twenty-first century have been good for provincial treasuries, with most now in the “black.” However, public sector workers have not benefited from the improved fiscal position, which has been referred to as a “rightless recovery” for public sector workers. Despite restrictions on strike activity, public sector strikes have accounted for approximately half the total person-days lost to strikes. Disputes in health care and education have frequently been ended by back to work legislation.

.

65

Governments have not experienced negative fallout from continuing to restrict public sector bargaining, and until public sector unions are able to form coalitions with the users of public services the current state of affairs is unlikely to change.

III) Distinctions Between Public and Private Sector Bargaining and Labour Relations (pp. 221–36)

In this section, we consider some of the many important differences between collective bargaining in the public and private sectors. The distinctions we focus on include employer differences, employee and union differences, and a broad range of legislative and policy differences, including those in dispute resolution methods.

Employer differences The single most important employer difference between public and private sector bargaining is the dual role government plays, as employer of public sector workers and as legislator. This gives it a degree of power that private sector employers can only dream of possessing. Most significantly, the government as legislator can achieve objectives which it hasn't been able to achieve at the bargaining table. This dual role is a source of considerable frustration to public sector workers and unions, and also to many public sector managers, who sometimes find themselves forced to administer governmentimposed solutions they dislike, and had no hand in fashioning.

Another key employer difference is the far greater diffusion of management authority in the public sector. There, in contrast to the single line of authority characteristic of the private sector, one often finds a "bewildering fragmentation of authority among numerous management officials." Such fragmentation complicates and lengthens public sector bargaining considerably, since it leads to much intraorganizational conflict on the management side of the table. Once again, it is a major source of frustration to public sector workers, unions, and managers.

In general, the main currency of private sector bargaining is money, while that of the public sector is political power. Arguably the lack of an economic "bottom line" makes it more difficult for public sector management organizations even to recognize they are having labour relations problems, let alone find ways of working out those problems with their respective unions.

Employee and union differences Like their private sector counterparts, public sector workers are mainly concerned with job security, maintaining real income levels, and workload. Nonetheless, there are some significant differences between private and public sector workers, and also between the ways in which unions in the two sectors tend to operate. Public sector union members are far more likely than their private sector counterparts to be female, professional, and white-collar. This means that issues such as pay and employment equity are of particular importance to public sector workers. It also means that these workers remain concerned with issues of intrinsic job satisfaction and with the quality of service they are able to provide to the public. Public sector workers' frustration at not being able to meet their

.

66

own standards of professional excellence and at their loss of control over working controls is almost certainly a factor fuelling the recent public sector strike resurgence.

With certain exceptions in the areas of provisions of special interest to women and professionals, public sector unions generally have fairly similar bargaining agendas to those of private sector unions—when they can bargain at all. The big difference here is that often, public sector unions cannot bargain at all, while even at the best of the times the scope of issues they can take to the table tends to be severely restricted. This means that these unions must place far more emphasis than their private sector counterparts on publicity campaigns aimed at mobilizing public support for their rights and for adequate levels of government spending. A high degree of union fragmentation is also quite characteristic of public sector bargaining, especially in health care and education. Like the employer fragmentation mentioned earlier, such union fragmentation can complicate the bargaining process considerably.

Legislative and policy differences The Canadian IR system as a whole is extremely fragmented, owing to the fact of provincial jurisdiction over labour relations issues. This fragmentation is even greater in the public sector. While some jurisdictions, such as New Brunswick and the federal jurisdiction, have a single act governing all their public sector workers, this is the exception rather than the rule. Ontario has separate acts for almost every public sector group, and some provinces (i.e., Quebec) have hybrid systems whereby all groups fall under the general labour act, but many also have specific legislation governing such things as bargaining structure and the maintenance of essential services.

In all, Canada has about two dozen separate pieces of public sector legislation (see Table 9.2, pp. 333–334). Complicating matters further is the fact that there is little consistency, either between or within jurisdictions, as to the groups covered by various pieces of legislation, the scope of bargainable issues, or the dispute resolution method to be applied (see Table 9.3, p. 278). In particular, those searching for any consistent policy rationale in the application of the right to strike will soon wind up throwing up their hands in despair.

Bargaining unit determination Another important difference between the public and private sectors has to do with the way in which bargaining units are determined. In the private sector, this determination is normally made by labour relations boards—often with considerable input from the parties involved. In the public sector, bargaining units are more often determined legislatively.

Unlike labour board officials, members of Parliament or legislative assemblies need not possess any labour relations experience; thus it should not be surprising that the determination of bargaining units by legislators often does not make for the most harmonious labour–management relations.

Scope of bargainable issues An even more important difference between public and private sector bargaining lies in the scope of issues which can be brought to the table. In the private sector, the parties are

.

67

free to bargain over any provision that isn't illegal. But in most public sector acts, the scope of bargainable issues is severely limited, though there is a fair amount of variation among different acts. For example, under the PSSRA, public service unions cannot bargain over criteria for appointments, promotions, layoffs, job classification, and technological or organizational change. They also cannot bargain over pensions—a rather bizarre restriction given that federal government employees are required to pay a significant portion of their salaries into the government's pension plan. Such severe restrictions on the scope of bargaining almost certainly hinder the bargaining process by creating frustration on the part of unions and by causing the parties to spend much time and energy bickering over permissible issues rather than actually engaging in productive negotiations.

Dispute resolution procedures Probably the single most important difference between the public and private sectors lies in the different procedures for resolving disputes in the two sectors. Special dispute settlement procedures have been devised for the public sector because of the essential (or allegedly essential) nature of much work in that sector.

Conventional interest arbitration is the method most often used for groups, such as police and firefighters, whose services are considered so essential that they cannot be allowed to strike. Arbitration is also sometimes imposed on other groups after the use of back-to-work legislation. Under conventional interest arbitration, arbitrators are generally free to fashion their own awards, within certain broad limits. Although there is considerable evidence to suggest that conventional interest arbitration leads to significantly lower rates of freely negotiated settlement than systems that allow strikes and lockouts, few Canadian jurisdictions have adopted an alternative which does not seem to have this problem, final-offer arbitration. Under final-offer arbitration, the arbitrator must choose either the union's position or the management. The possibility of "losing everything" is so unpalatable that typically the parties prefer to negotiate their own settlements rather than leaving matters with the arbitrator. As a result, settlement rates under final-offer systems are generally comparable to those under strike-lockout systems.

Under choice of procedures systems, one party (in Canada, normally the union) is given the right to choose between binding arbitration and the traditional conciliation-strike route. The procedure was devised initially as a kind of compromise between those who wished federal government employees to submit all disputes to arbitration and those who felt they should be given an unfettered strike right. The idea appears to have been that federal government employees, who at the time were generally less militant than most private sector unionists, would normally prefer the less confrontational approach of arbitration. But ever since the federal government imposed wage controls in the 1970s, public service unions have been increasingly choosing the conciliation-strike route.

Given its growing lack of acceptability to the public service unions, COP seems to be on the way out.

.

68

The controlled strike, based on the designation of certain employees who must remain on the job to provide essential services, has become the most common option in jurisdictions that permit their public sector workers to strike. Every such jurisdiction, with the exception of Saskatchewan, now has its own designation procedure in place.1 In principle, the controlled strike would seem the most attractive option because it ensures the continuation of essential public services while maintaining unions' right to strike. In practice, it is often fraught with difficulties. In some cases, especially in hospitals where it has most often been used, it is extremely difficult to know how many employees or positions should be designated as essential. And where management and unions must negotiate over designation, as in Quebec, the negotiations are often as long and difficult as the actual collective agreement negotiations themselves.2 Perhaps the ultimate lesson here is that there are no easy answers to the question of how to deal with labour disputes in the public sector.

IV) The Future of Public Sector Bargaining: Is a Transformation Possible? (pp.

236–9)

Though governments’ budgetary situations have generally improved, few have reduced the restrictions originally imposed on public sector workers’ bargaining rights for budgetary reasons. The result has been that these workers’ real incomes have declined over the past decade or so, while at the same time their workloads have increased and many have come to feel less secure in their jobs owing to the ongoing wave of restructuring, downsizing, privatization, and contracting out described earlier in the chapter. The result has been an increase in the already high conflicts of labour– management conflict in the public sector. Aggravating the situation still further is the aging of the public sector work force, which means that most Canadian governments are or will soon be faced with significant recruitment and retention problems, particularly in the health care sector. The extreme discontent felt by public sector workers has been documented in a number of recent studies.

The Advisory Committee on Labour–Management Relations (or Fryer Committee), struck in 1999 in order to improve labour–management relations in the federal public service, produced a final report calling for a collaborative model of labour–management relations. Among other things, the report called for an expanded scope of public service bargaining, a reduction in exclusions from bargaining rights and designation of workers as essential, and the consultation and co-development of policies at the service-wide, departmental, and workplace levels. With an eye to reducing the government’s legislative intervention in collective bargaining, the Fryer Committee report called for replacement of the “choice of procedures” dispute mechanism by a Public Interest Disputes Resolution Commission, which would have a broad array of remedies available to it in dealing with collective bargaining impasses. At this writing, however, it is not 1

Given Saskatchewan's recent difficulties with its nurses, one has to wonder whether that province will soon be bringing in its own public sector designation procedure.

2

For an interesting first-hand take on controlled strikes, see the section on hospital strikes in B.C. in Paul Weiler's Reconcilable Differences (Toronto: Carswell, 1980). As chair of the B.C. labour board during the 1970s, Weiler once had the nerve-racking responsibility of administering a controlled strike in Vancouver's hospitals.

.

69

clear to what extent (if at all) the government is prepared to implement the Fryer Committee’s recommendations. Nonetheless, that committee has provided a collaborative model for public sector labour–management relations—one which should be an attractive alternative to a continued escalation of labour–management conflict and growing labour shortages, as public sector workers who are able to do so vote with their feet for a less turbulent working environment.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Partly a judgement call. Public sector work is more apt to involve work caring for or helping others (teaching, health care, social work, librarianship). It is more likely to be of a white-collar or professional nature, and the public sector work force contains a far higher percentage of women. Also, especially in government departments or higher levels of other parts of the public sector, there are more likely to be political constraints affecting how one does one's job.

2) Because of the essential nature of much public sector work, because the public sector makes up a large share of the work force and about half the country's unionized work force, and because it is currently in a state of crisis and much of the country's strike action is occurring there at the moment. Also because of the many innovative dispute resolution methods that have been developed for the public sector.

3) Largely covered in the chapter summary. Initially (before PSSRA), there was association-consultation rather than unionization. Employee associations could consult with governments but had little real power. PSSRA and similar provincial legislation led to the "Golden Age" of public sector IR, when there was fairly free collective bargaining and unions achieved major improvements in wages and conditions. This ended in 1975 and was followed by a decade of restraint (the 1980s) featuring restrictions on public sector pay and bargaining rights and severe rollbacks in B.C. and Quebec. The 1990s have been an even more difficult decade, what with ongoing restructuring and layoffs and harder work for 'survivors,' in addition to the pay freezes and bargaining restrictions characteristic of the "80s. The early years of the new millennium have seen increased conflict, as governments have continued public sector bargaining restrictions despite greatly improved financial positions. A new wrinkle in this decade is the impending demographic crunch, which could well lead to severe labour shortages, especially in professional areas.

4) The bill brought full collective bargaining rights, including the right to choose between arbitration and the right to strike, to federal government employees. Immediately it brought many women, professionals, and white-collar workers into the Canadian labour movement. This trend continued as provinces passed their own laws giving provincial government employees bargaining rights and as bargaining rights were extended to other parts of the public sector (i.e., health care and education). Eventually the Canadian labour movement nearly doubled in size, and its character changed substantially as a result of the addition of so many women and professionals. Most notably, bargaining demands began to reflect the concerns of both of these groups.

.

70

5) Essentially covered in chapter summary. Main differences are govt.'s dual role as employer and legislation, employer fragmentation in the public sector, and the lack of an economic bottom line in the public sector, where political power is the major 'currency' of bargaining, as compared to money in the private sector.

6) Essentially covered in chapter summary. Most important differences are larger proportion of women, professionals, and white-collar workers in the public sector, these workers' concern for job satisfaction and their ability to serve the public effectively, and public sector unions' far greater reliance on publicity to achieve their ends, esp. when free collective bargaining is rare. May also wish to address issue of public sector union fragmentation, particularly in health care.

7) Essentially covered in chapter summary. Major differences include extreme legislative fragmentation (even by Canadian standards), legislative determination of bargaining units, far narrower scope of bargainable issues, and special dispute resolution methods (discussed in more detail in next question).

8) Methods themselves have been described adequately in the chapter summary. You may also wish to list med-arb (being used with increasing frequency after back-to-work legislation), back-to-work legislation itself, and industrial inquiry commissions. As for which appear most promising, this is largely a judgement call. You may want to note that there are problems with conventional arbitration (the “narcotic” and “chilling” effects in particular), that COP has largely fallen out of favour because of the unions' opposition, and that med-arb (discussed in Ch. 11 but not here) is becoming increasingly common.

9) Absolutely a judgement call. But the issue should make for some lively debates in class. Be prepared for the class to run late! This is a night you might consider continuing the discussion in a nearby pub over a pitcher of beer.

10) Many answers are possible here, depending on how governments adapt to the demographic shifts, and what sector of the public service is being considered. For health care, the challenge will be extreme: large numbers of health care workers will be exiting the workforce at a time when the challenge on the health care system will be extreme due to the same demographic change—aging populations increase health care usage. Classic industrial relations analysis would say that this will put more bargaining power in the hands of unions, but that may not be the case if one of the adaptations of government is to contract out some health care services to private health care providers.

.

71

Chapter 9: Collective Bargaining Structures and Processes Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to examine the negotiating process, which is critical in the IR system since in unionized workplaces, most outcomes are established through collective bargaining. We start with a consideration of bargaining structure, which may have a good deal to do with determining the relative balance of power between the parties and which may also be a factor in the ease or difficulty of negotiations. Next, we look at the negotiating process itself, with an emphasis on strategic negotiations, an preparing for bargaining. The importance of bargaining power is highlighted, and the chapter ends with an overall assessment of the bargaining process.

Chapter Outline I) Bargaining Structure A) Reasons for Canada's Decentralized Structure B) Effects of Different Bargaining Structures II) The Negotiation Process A) Bargaining Strategies and Systems of Activities III) Strategic Negotiations IV) Preparation for Bargaining A) Developing the Bottom Line B) Bargaining Goals and Outcomes C) The Stages of Negotiations V) The Role of Bargaining Power VI) Collective Bargaining: An Overall Assessment Chapter Summary Introduction

Collective bargaining may be defined as the "process through which the terms and conditions of employment of unionized workers are determined." The right to collectively bargain the terms and conditions of employment represents one of the fundamental differences between unionized and non-unionized work places. In Canada, as in most industrialized countries, such bargaining is conducted within a well-defined legal framework. The factors that influence the negotiation process, and the process itself, are the subjects of this chapter.

.

72

I) Bargaining Structure (pp. 244–51)

At its simplest level, bargaining structure answers the question, "Who bargains with whom?" Different bargaining structures are most commonly distinguished from one another through the number of unions, employers, work establishments, and/or employees involved. Bargaining structure is of considerable importance because it has been shown to influence the types of issues that will be brought to the table, the level of conflict and incidence of strikes, and the parties’ relative bargaining power.

Types of bargaining structure By international standards, Canadian bargaining structure is quite decentralized, with negotiations most often occurring between a single employer and a single union. At least in the private sector, this tendency toward decentralization appears to have increased in recent years, due mainly to the breakdown of traditional multi-employer or pattern bargaining arrangements in several major industrial sectors. The most common form of bargaining is single-employer, single-establishment, and single-union. This structure has evolved from the tendency of labour relations boards to consider community of interest as the overriding factor in union certification. Another common from is single-employer, multi-establishment, single-union, where one agreement is negotiated covering several work locations. Multi-employer structures are generally rare in Canada except in the construction industry, where they are often imposed by governments in an attempt to bring labour peace, and in the province of Quebec.

Reasons for Canada's decentralized structure The most important reason for Canada's generally decentralized bargaining structure is the fact of provincial jurisdiction over most labour relations matters, which tends to make national-level bargaining quite difficult in most industries. Another reason is labour boards' tendency to determine bargaining units according to criteria that favour the creation of relatively small, homogeneous units rather than larger, more heterogeneous, more broadly-based ones. A third reason is Canadian employers' general dislike of broader-based bargaining, particularly multi-employer bargaining which would require them to surrender at least part of their control over bargaining to an employers' association. The recent trend toward even greater decentralization has not been confined to Canada, but has occurred in the U.S. and many European countries as well, driven by globalization and trade liberalization and employers’ desire for greater flexibility in labour relations matters. In the public sector, on the other hand, the difficult economic climate has led to greater centralization, as provincial governments increasingly concerned with holding down public sector wages have come to play a more and more direct role in negotiations.

Effects of different bargaining structures The type of bargaining structure preferred by the major IR actors (employers and unions) depends largely on whether the economy happens to be strong or weak at the time. In good times, private sector unions generally favour decentralized bargaining structures, because such structures enable them to whipsaw employers (i.e., use a settlement with one employer as a basis for another, more favourable one with another). At such times, employers may be willing to give up some degree of control and enter into multi-

.

73

employer bargaining agreements which will enable them to combat whipsawing by establishing a common wage scale throughout the industry. In bad times, employers in the private sector prefer decentralized structures, because these give them more control over the results of negotiations and also allow them to whipsaw unions, by enabling them to obtain concessions from one union and use them as the basis for even greater concessions in subsequent negotiations with other unions. In bad times, unions generally prefer centralized structures because these can help reduce the incidence of employer whipsawing and will also make it harder for employers to get rid of unions than it would be under decentralized bargaining.

Overall, decentralized structures lead to bargaining outcomes determined mainly by market forces. With regard to wages, this means greater dispersion between unionized and non-unionized workers and between higher and lower-paid workers. At the macroeconomic level, centralized systems are marked by a greater degree of government involvement in the bargaining process and have been associated with lower levels of inflation and unemployment than centralized ones. Internationally, centralized structures seem to lead both to fewer strikes and to the loss of less working time. This does not appear to be the case in Canada, particularly with respect to working time. The likeliest explanation for the difference between Canada and other countries is that in other countries, centralized bargaining structures are usually accompanied by a shift in the locus of conflict from the bargaining table to the political arena, as in Germany and (until recently) Sweden; however, this is not the case in Canada. Thus it may not be centralization itself, but the shift in the locus of conflict that often accompanies it that seems to be the main reason for reduced conflict levels in centralized structures internationally. Even in European countries, however, centralized structures may lead to increased wildcat strikes, due to increased internal union conflict and membership dissatisfaction with the union.

The effects of centralization on the bargaining process appear to be somewhat mixed.

Centralization's most serious negative effect may be on representational issues, since by definition centralized negotiations tend to focus on issues of general importance, leaving out issues of more local concern and thus causing local union members and lower-level managers to feel left out. One way around this problem is to use two-tier or multi-tier systems whereby issues of general importance, such as the wage package, are settled at the top level, while shop-floor issues and other issues of local significance are addressed by the parties most directly concerned.

II) The Negotiation Process (pp. 251–5)

A study of the negotiation process is an important part of any IR course because collective bargaining involves detailed, often complex negotiations between unions and management organizations. While these negotiations have certain things in common with more conventional commercial negotiations, collective bargaining is distinctive in four aspects: 1) they are generally more complex because they involve issues some of which are concerned with the very messy business of regulating human behaviour; 2) the parties’ are more strictly regulated legally during bargaining; 3) representatives conducting the bargaining must get have their agreements accepted by their “principals”

.

74

(union membership ratification on the one side, corporate/board approval on the other); and 4) because most union–management relationships are of a long-term nature. A key objective of this section is to prepare students for the collective bargaining simulation which many instructors include as part of their introductory IR courses.

Bargaining Strategies and Systems of Activities Two basic bargaining strategies are “distributive bargaining” and “integrative bargaining.” Distributive bargaining focuses on one’s own substantive outcomes and is used when resources are (believed to be) fixed and the parties’ interest are in conflict, e.g., an increase in wages versus profit margins. Integrative bargaining focuses on joint outcomes when the parities’ basic interests are not fundamentally opposed. Each strategy is associated with a system of activities. For example, distributive bargaining requires information-seeking behaviour but little sharing of information about one’s own true objectives in bargaining, with the goal of discovering the other side’s resistance points.

Integrative bargaining requires the establishment and maintenance of trust, and sharing of real interests during bargaining, and a joint problem-solving approach. Few conflicts fall squarely within the categories of irreconcilable versus shared interests. Most issues are characterized by a range of interest, some which the parties may share and some that may be at odds.

Intra-organizational bargaining and attitudinal restructuring are also features of collective bargaining. Intra-organizational bargaining occurs within each union or management team and functions to achieve consensus within each of these groups. This process is complex for unions, since bargaining priorities are often determined through by canvassing members, and the bargaining “mandate” is often ratified by the membership prior to bargaining. Attitudinal restructuring refers to the activities that often precede bargaining but set the tone for the bargaining process; e.g., establishing trust and communication through a labour/management committee.

III) Strategic Negotiations (pp. 255–6)

Three strategic choices have emerged as employers and unions have had to adapt to a more highly competitive global market: forcing change; fostering change; and escaping the relationship. A “forcing” strategy is based on distributive bargaining with attitudinal restructuring designed to emphasize hostility and intra-organizational bargaining. A “fostering” strategy is based on integrative bargaining that builds organizational consensus on required change. Escaping the relationship can take several forms: relocating or transferring operations; increasing investments in non-unionized locations; contracting out; hiring permanent replacement workers; and attempting to decertify the union. Negotiation goals include a mix of social contract outcomes that directly affect relationship between the parties, and the substantive outcomes. An emphasis on substantive outcomes is associated with a distributive approach. While goals affect choice of strategy, it is also affected by the parties’ relative bargaining power and the contextual factors that would either support or undermine a strategic choice. Employers choosing a forcing strategy must have the bargaining power required to make it work. A fostering strategy will be more feasible is the union–management team has joint problemsolving skills and a history of successful collaboration. Interaction systems must also

.

75

support strategic choice: mandatory participation in centralized bargaining systems obviously constrain strategic choice.

IV) Preparation for Bargaining (pp. 257–62)

The statutory requirements for bargaining are for the union (in most jurisdictions) to give notice to bargain a new agreement. Once notice has been given, the parties are obliged to meet and begin bargaining. Prior to meeting each party will done extensive preparations.

Management will closely examine general and industry-specific wage trends and settlements, grievance history and arbitration awards, developments within the union, research on non-wage proposals, and input from line managers. A fully detailed costing model is usually developed to guide preparations and to assess bargaining positions during bargaining itself. Union preparation is very similar—instead of input from line managers unions survey members, and usually conduct one or more general membership meetings to discuss bargaining issues and establish priorities for bargaining. Because of a statutory duty to represent fairly all of its members, bargaining demands usually include measures that address the needs of all the constituencies within the union.

Developing the bottom line Once each side has conducted its research and determined for itself the bargaining issues it wants to address, it frequently meets to determine how bargaining should ideally proceed and its “bottom line” position on each of its issues. This process will be very much influenced by the strategy to be pursued during bargaining (predominantly distributive or integrative). Distributive bargaining is characterized by a “laundry list” of issues with no discernable (to the other party) priority during presentation, which are successively either traded off or dropped in response to concessions from the other side.

Integrative bargaining is characterized by a relatively shorter list of “interests” on which neither side takes a firm position until a full discussion of each has taken place. In either case, however, prior to bargaining each side will have determined for itself the characteristics of an acceptable “deal” and how it should be pursued during bargaining, and what to do if an acceptable “deal” cannot be reached without some form of job action.

Bargaining goals and outcomes Throughout negotiations, the aim is to discover a zone of potential agreement, or the area where the two teams' bottom lines intersect (see diagrams in Fig. 10.1A and Fig. 10.1B for examples). When a settlement zone does exist, skillful negotiators will usually discover it, assuming the negotiation process has been fully carried through. Often a lastminute meeting between the two chief negotiators will reveal the settlement zone, particularly if either or both have been prudent enough to hold a last-minute 'goodie' or two in reserve.

Failure to reach a settlement zone may be the result of poor negotiating tactics or unrealistic expectations, but is more often due to the nature of the issues themselves.

Issues of fundamental principle (i.e., sexual harassment or the union's right to exist), which are of an either-or nature, are generally not amenable to the sort of trade-off inherent in the very notion of a settlement zone. Among other things, this fact explains

.

76

why health and safety and human rights issues, which involve precisely such matters of fundamental principle, are regulated primarily through legislation rather than being left solely to the vagaries of collective bargaining. It also explains why disputes over such issues tend to be longer and more bitter than disputes over money, and can often be resolved only through direct government intervention. In some cases, failure to reach a settlement zone may be the result of severe environmental pressures, over which the parties have little or no control, such as those resulting from trade liberalization or globalization.

The stages of negotiation It's useful to divide the negotiation process as passing through four stages: settling in, consolidation, finalization, and mopping-up. Of these, consolidation is by far the longest, while finalization is often the quickest. Mopping-up refers to drafting specific contract language for provisions to which the chief negotiators have agreed in principle. It is important to attend to this carefully, as contract language that isn't carefully drafted can come back to haunt all concerned in the next round of negotiations. In general, it's important to go through all the stages, no matter how tedious the business may seem.

Attempts to push the other side too fast can result in unnecessary resistance, while overly rapid concessions can lead to trouble on one's own side, and possibly even to rejection of the tentative agreement.

V) The Role of Bargaining Power

Bargaining power can be defined as “the ability to secure another’s agreement on one’s own terms.” Godard’s view is that each party has power to the extent that they can impose direct and indirect costs on the other side. Influences on relative bargaining power can be categorized as either environmental or situation-specific.

Environmental influences on bargaining power include: • Business cycle: in times of high product demand, the cost of a strike for management is greater than in times of low product demand, and unions have relatively more power.

• Unemployment rate: when there is high unemployment the alternative wage for workers declines, and unions have relatively less bargaining power.

• Replacement worker prohibition: where legislation prohibits the use of replacement workers, it is more difficult for management to continue operations during a work stoppage and unions have relatively more power.

• Essential services maintenance: where unions are required to maintain essential services through legislative requirements, unions have relatively less bargaining power.

• Public opinion: to the extent that the public can be persuaded to take sides in a labour dispute, it can have an impact on the relative power at the bargaining table.

Situation-specific influences on bargaining power include: • Production technology: labour intensive technologies mean that it is more difficult for management to maintain production during a work stoppage and unions have relatively more power.

.

77

• • •

JIT inventory management: highly integrated management systems leave management vulnerable to a work stoppage—there is no stockpile of production that can be sold during a dispute.

Seasonality: this goes with the business cycle argument above—in low demand periods unions have relatively little bargaining power (teachers in summer).

Skill level of workforce: high skilled workers are more difficult to replace than low-skilled workers, and have more alternative employment opportunities during a strike or lockout.

VI) Collective Bargaining: An Overall Assessment (pp. 264–5)

A fundamental criticism of collective bargaining is that it assumes at least rough equality between the parties; however, in practice, this doesn't always exist, particularly not in bad economic times, when the balance of power shifts strongly toward employers. Where such a balance of power doesn't exist, it becomes harder for the parties to negotiate effectively, and the collective bargaining process does less well at defusing workplace conflict than it otherwise would.

Many of the current problems with Canadian collective bargaining and collective agreements may ultimately be structural in nature. The basis of most Canadian agreements is detailed regulation of individual workplaces. But in an era of increasing globalization, workplace-level bargaining seems unlikely to be able to address many of Canadian workers' and unions' most pressing concerns, such as those relating to job and income security. In the absence of significant centralization of bargaining, which seems unlikely without extensive government intervention (as was used in Quebec in formulating the "social contracts"), collective agreements will likely remain long, complex, and highly legalistic documents reflecting the often bitter power struggles that have accompanied their drafting.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Centralized structures feature a small number of negotiations each covering a large number of workers; decentralized ones, a large number of negotiations each covering relatively few workers. The former typically see more government involvement in the economy and IR system. In the latter, most economic matters are typically decided through market forces, with relatively little government intervention. In good times, it is easier for unions to ‘whipsaw’ employers with decentralized structures; in bad times, it is the employers who can whipsaw unions, which is why unions prefer such structures in good times rather than bad. The more difficult economy, resulting primarily from globalization and trade liberalization, has been the main cause for increased decentralization in Canada. For example, in a centralized or pattern bargaining arrangement, one of the weaker firms may find it can no longer meet the industry standard and remain competitive, with the result that it withdraws from the arrangement.

Sooner or later, other firms will likely find themselves in a similar position and likewise withdraw. Once this happens, the centralized arrangement is doomed. In recent years, growing competitive pressures have led to the break-up of traditional centralized or pattern bargaining arrangements in the railway, pulp and paper, trucking, and meatpacking industries. A related cause is employers' desire to retain greater control over

.

78

the results of negotiations than would be possible in centralized negotiations, particularly multi-employer ones.

2) Collective bargaining is distinctive in four aspects: a. they are generally more complex because they involve issues some of which are concerned with regulating human behaviour; b. the parties’ are more strictly regulated legally during bargaining; c. representatives conducting the bargaining must get have their agreements accepted by their “principals” (union membership ratification on the one side, corporate/board approval on the other); and d. because most union–management relationships are of a long-term nature.

The key difference that accounts for differences in dispute resolution is the long-term nature of the agreement. Commercial transactions can be enforced through the courts, but sometimes the resolution to a failed negotiation is to simply say no deal was reached and the parties go their separate ways. That is almost never the case in collective bargaining, where the parties must ‘live with’ their agreements.

3) Management will closely examine general and industry-specific wage trends and settlements, grievance history and arbitration awards, developments within the union, research on non-wage proposals, and input from line managers. A fully detailed costing model is usually developed to guide preparations and to assess bargaining positions during bargaining itself. Union preparation is very similar—instead of input from line managers unions survey members, and usually conduct one or more general membership meetings to discuss bargaining issues and establish priorities for bargaining.

The process is more complex for union teams because of a statutory duty to represent fairly all of its members; bargaining demands usually include measures that address the needs of all the constituencies within the union.

4) Distributive and integrative bargaining; intra-organizational bargaining and attitudinal restructuring (as described above). Experiential discussion from students.

5) The settlement zone (see figures on p. 261) is the area where management's bottom line intersects with that of the union. If management is willing to accept any settlement providing an increase between 1 and 3 percent in the compensation package, while the union is willing to accept any settlement providing between 2 and 6 percent, then the settlement zone will be between 2 and 3 percent. Assuming the negotiators are competent and allow the process to develop as it should, the final settlement will very likely be in that range. The settlement zone concept applies to monetary issues and other issues which can be readily quantified (vacations, benefits, etc.). It does not apply to issues of fundamental principle which can't be quantified (i.e., discrimination, harassment, the union's right to exist).

6) In competitive relationships, bargaining power determines the extent to which one side is able to impose its positions on the other side. In Godard's view (discussed in text), each side has bargaining power, and is likely to win concessions from the other side, to

.

79

the extent that a work stoppage imposes direct or indirect costs on the other side.

Management's bargaining power will normally be greater in bad economic times, in small towns or rural areas with relatively few employers, and when dealing with unskilled or semi-skilled workers. The union's bargaining power will normally be greater in good economic times, when there are apt to be labour shortages, in capital-intensive facilities, and in large cities with many employers. Skilled workers who can't easily be replaced also have significant bargaining power, as compared to unskilled or semi-skilled ones.

In case 9.1, the players had limited opportunities to work (in Europe) during the strike, and lost the battle for public opinion. Once the season was declared “over” the ‘seasonality’ of their employment then worked against the union.

.

80

Chapter 10: The Collective Agreement Chapter Overview Collective agreements are closely related to the negotiating process discussed in the previous chapter, because they serve as a written record of negotiating results and a guide to future negotiations. In this chapter, we begin by discussing some of the functions served by collective agreements and the evolution of the Canadian agreements through the twentieth century and into the twenty-first. From there, we go on to look at the most common types of agreement provisions. We conclude with a brief discussion of what collective agreements may say about a union–management relationship, and of the overall strengths and weaknesses of collective bargaining as a means of regulating workplace conflict.

Chapter Outline I) Evolution of Canadian Collective Agreements II) Main Types of Collective Agreement Provisions A) An Overview of Collective Agreements B) Union and Management Rights and Conflict control provisions C) Wage and hours provisions D) Work rules and job control provisions E) Work Behaviour and work environment provisions F) Collective Agreements and the Union–Management Relationship III) Collective Agreements and Collective Bargaining: An Overall Assessment Chapter Summary I) Evolution of Canadian Collective Agreements (p. 270–2)

Over the past century, Canadian agreements have gone from being short, straightforward documents to being lengthy and highly complex—sometimes so much so that only labour lawyers or IR specialists can understand them. The major reasons for this evolution are as follows: • The growth of larger and more bureaucratic workplaces and of industrial unionism. One hundred years ago, most unions represented members of a single trade. Today, many unions represent a large number of different groups of workers. Collective agreements have grown larger and more complex partly because of the addition of large numbers of different wage scales and sets of work rules addressing these different groups of workers.

.

81

•

Widespread technological change and the introduction of a broad range of hazardous substances at workplaces. Unions have sought to negotiate protection against the adverse effects of these types of changes. Where they have been successful, the result has been longer and more detailed agreements.

•

The growing diversity of the Canadian labour force. A century ago, almost all Canadian workers were white males. Today's work force includes a large number of women, members of many different ethnic minority groups, and a growing number of people with disabilities of various kinds. To address the problems faced by these workers, unions have sought to negotiate a range of antidiscrimination and anti-harassment provisions, maternity leave and flexible hours provisions for working mothers, and provisions making workplaces more accessible for those with disabilities.

•

The general application of the residual management rights doctrine. This doctrine, combined with management's continuing resistance to unions, has meant that unions have been forced to write detailed provisions into agreements in any areas in which they wished to limit management's otherwise unfettered authority to run the workplace.

•

The fact that, particularly over the past two decades, collective agreements have been expected to conform to a variety of laws beyond labour relations statutes, such as work standards laws, health and safety legislation, and human rights laws.

To give workers access to the collective agreement's grievance procedure, unions have in many cases incorporated such legal requirements explicitly into the collective agreement, thus adding further to its length and complexity.

There are a number of different opinions as to whether this evolution has been healthy or not. Unionists and IR institutionalists, while admitting that long and complex agreements cost time and money to administer, generally defend the evolution as necessary to protect workers' rights. On the other hand, managerialists generally regard the evolution as unhealthy, both because of the added costs collective agreements entail and because long and complex agreements tend to destroy trust between the parties and to make it more difficult to bring in progressive HRM practices.

II) Main Types of Collective Agreement Provisions (pp. 272–88)

An Overview of Collective Agreements At first glance, collective agreements appear to contain a bewildering if not incomprehensible range of provisions. However, closer examination reveals that most provisions fall into one of four general categories: provisions governing the respective rights of the union and management; those governing wages and hours; work rules and job control provisions; and provisions covering work behaviour and the workplace environment.

.

82

Union and Management Rights and conflict control provisions These "ground rule" provisions, found in virtually all Canadian agreements, include management rights clauses of both a general and specific nature. In some cases, these clauses may spell out the rights management specifically reserves to itself, such as the right to hire, promote, transfer, or lay off workers. They also include union rights provisions officially recognizing the union's position in the workplace, and provisions granting specific rights for union officials such as stewards. Union security provisions address the issue of how dues are to be collected (normally through some kind of payroll deduction process), as well as that of whether employees are required to be union members, and, if so, within what time frame.

Conflict-control provisions address the issue of how disputes arising during the life of the agreement will be handled (generally through a grievance process of some kind). In some cases, agreements will also establish joint committees or other problem-solving mechanisms to help reduce the incidence of grievances and other forms of workplace conflict.

Wage and Hours Provisions Since most people work primarily to earn money, wage schedules outlining different rates of pay for different classes of worker are a key element of most agreements. Wage schedules also frequently incorporate service increments, and also detail the conditions under which premiums are paid (overtime, shift premiums, standby or call-back pay, etc.). COLA clauses are less frequently seen in collective agreements now than in the 1970’s and 80’s, but various forms of incentive pay (individual and team-based) are increasing in frequency in collective agreements.

Benefits language specifies which benefits are included in the contract, which employees are eligible, and the costs to union members where premiums are paid in part by employees. In some cases, the benefit plans themselves are attached to the collective agreement either through reference or as an addendum. Specific benefits like vacation pay and sick pay are detailed in language, and may have a schedule of reimbursement that depends on seniority.

Work hours provisions cover such issues as the normal number of hours of work for any given job, overtime premiums to be paid, whether overtime will be mandatory or voluntary, and the possibility of flexible or reduced hours. They also address such matters as the length of time to be allowed for lunch, coffee, and washroom breaks and the allotment of vacation and holiday time off for workers at given seniority levels.

Work rule and job control provisions These provisions are often among the most bitterly contested in the entire agreement.

Management organizations generally resent unions' restrictions on their freedom to run enterprises as they see fit, while unions are determined to use the collective agreement to preserve some measure of worker control over the way work is done.

.

83

Hiring Process and Job Assignment—Among other things, job control provisions may require that employees be union members before being hired, or shortly thereafter.

Management’s response is to include probation language that gives reduced rights to employees on probation to grieve if management deems an employee unable to perform the job.

Work rule provisions regulate such things as the speed of assembly lines and production processes, the number of people who must be assigned to do certain jobs, the maximum allowable workload, and the question of who is to be allowed to do certain jobs. Over the years, workload restrictions have become an important part of bargaining in education, as teachers and university professors argue that if they are to provide quality education, there need to be restrictions both on the number of students they are asked to teach and on the number of classes or courses to which they are assigned.

Job control provisions govern the criteria used for changes in the firm’s internal labour market. Unions may bargain provisions that require vacancies to be filled from within the organization where possible, and that prevent supervisors from performing bargaining unit work. Most important of all, unions generally try to negotiate provisions stating that seniority will be an important or even the only criterion to be used in decisions on promotions, transfers, and layoffs. While these provisions have come under increasing attack in recent years, both because of their possible negative efficiency implications and because of their tendency to inadvertently discriminate against women and minority group members, they are likely to remain a fact of life so long as large-scale layoffs and restructuring continue in Canadian firms.

Technological change language is included in a bare majority of agreements that cover at least 500 employees, and the provisions are usually quite minimal consisting primarily of advance notice or training and retraining provisions.

Workforce reductions—Other job control provisions seek to prohibit or restrict employers from contracting out work done by union members. Where unions are not successful at preventing layoffs, they will often seek to cushion the impact of those layoffs through severance pay packages of various kinds.

Work behaviour and work environment provisions These provisions address issues relating to the social and physical environment in which work is performed. General rules governing work behaviour and disciplinary methods and more specific prohibitions on certain types of harassment relate to the social environment, while health and safety provisions are concerned with the physical environment.

Most collective agreements permit management to discharge or suspend employees for “just cause.” Agreements may also incorporate the specific progressive discipline procedure to be followed in cases of relatively minor offences such as absenteeism. A recent trend, arising from the growing number of women and members of ethnic minority

.

84

group members in the workplace, has been the inclusion of sexual harassment and antidiscrimination provisions in collective agreements.

As for health and safety, unions have long been leaders in pushing for safer workplaces.

In some cases, they will negotiate provisions giving allowances for special safety equipment, such as boots or hard hats. In others, they will insist on the inclusion of provisions allowing workers to refuse unsafe work. While the latter type of provision would seem to be redundant, given that these rights are provided in every jurisdiction's health and safety legislation, they allow unions to avail themselves of their agreements' grievance procedures, which may afford a speedier and more effective remedy than resort to the legislatively established procedures.

Collective Agreements and the Union–Management Relationship Collective agreement provisions can reveal a good deal about the underlying union– management relationship. Adapting some terminology devised by Godard (1994), we would describe provisions in which the delineation of the parties' respective territories is extremely detailed as characteristic of an exploitive relationship. Provisions that without in any way suggesting a fundamental change in the nature of the employment relationship are phrased in more general terms and allow some latitude in interpretation may be described as characteristic of an accommodative union–management relationship. In such cases, both parties tend to be concerned with the viability of the enterprise and with maintaining a good long-term relationship, as well as with addressing their own interests.

An occasional agreement, like the one between the Shell Chemical Plant in Sarnia, Ontario, and the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers' Union, moves beyond the egalitarian approach just described to adopt an egalitarian approach. Among other things, the Shell Sarnia agreement contains no management rights or grievance provisions. In place of detailed rules and regulations, the agreement reflects the management's and union's joint commitment to a number of key principles, such as a belief that employees are responsible and trustworthy and capable of making proper decisions relating to their work arrangements if given the necessary authority, information, and training.

III) Collective Agreements and Collective Bargaining: An Overall Assessment (pp.

290–2)

Excessively legalistic interpretation of collective agreements is characteristic of exploitive union–management relationships. Such interpretation can cost both sides large amounts of time and money in addition to leading to even further deterioration of the relationship.

Another problem is that collective agreements can't possibly cover all possible workplace situations. In particular, technological change and plant closures may alter the ground rules quite considerably. The case of technological change raises the question of how well collective bargaining, which is designed to stabilize the terms and conditions of employment, can be expected to operate in an increasingly global economy marked by the rapid movement of goods, services and capital across international borders and constant fluctuations in exchange rates.

.

85

Another, fundamental criticism of collective bargaining is that it assumes at least rough equality between the parties; however, in practice, this doesn't always exist, particularly not in bad economic times, when the balance of power shifts strongly toward employers.

Where such a balance of power doesn't exist, it becomes harder for the parties to negotiate effectively, and the collective bargaining process does less well at defusing workplace conflict than it otherwise would.

Many of the current problems with Canadian collective bargaining and collective agreements may ultimately be structural in nature. The basis of most Canadian agreements is detailed regulation of individual workplaces. But in an era of increasing globalization, workplace-level bargaining seems unlikely to be able to address many of Canadian workers' and unions' most pressing concerns, such as those relating to job and income security. In the absence of significant centralization of bargaining, which seems unlikely without extensive government intervention (as was used in Quebec in formulating the "social contracts"), collective agreements will likely remain long, complex, and highly legalistic documents reflecting the often bitter power struggles that have accompanied their drafting.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Experiential question based on student research of a collective agreement.

2) Student research required. Union and management rights and conflict control provisions. Wage and hours provisions. Work rules and job control provisions. Work behaviour and work environment provisions.

A provision allowing stewards time off to conduct union business would be an example from the first group of provisions. A provision granting workers with different seniority levels different vacation allotments would be an example from the second group. A prohibition on supervisors doing bargaining unit work would be an example from the third group. A sexual harassment prohibition would be an example from the last group.

3) Student research required.

4) Evolution itself is well-covered in the text and summary. Has it been healthy? In part this is a judgement call depending on one’s perspective toward IR. Those on the right (neoclassicists and managerialists) would tend to regard long and detailed agreements as wasteful, destructive of trust, and tending to intrude too much on management’s right to run enterprises as it sees fit. Institutionalists and to a lesser degree reformists would, while admitting that complexity can cause problems and lead to costs, generally support long and complex agreements as a sign that workers have had input into their daily working conditions. Those on the far left would probably view the exercise as a waste of time.

5) Seniority is especially important in determining the procedures for promotions and transfers, and in deciding who will get laid off in times of economic downturn or reduced demand. Seniority is also used to determine how much of certain types of benefits (such

.

86

as vacation time or pensions) a given worker will be entitled to. While the second type of seniority provision is relatively uncontroversial, provisions of the first type are often highly controversial.

The major argument FOR the use of seniority is that it prevents arbitrary management behaviour in promotion and layoff decisions. The major arguments AGAINST seniority are that it can lead to inefficiency if the best people are not promoted or retained, and the bumping chains set up in its wake can be a nightmare to administer, especially if they are plant-wide. Another problem is that seniority can lead to systemic discrimination because women and ethnic minority group members, as the last hired, would be the first to be let go in times of layoff. This said, the use of seniority is somewhat less controversial for layoffs than it is for promotions. Even some managers prefer it, since it spares them gut-wrenching decisions about whom to let go. However, seniority works better where jobs are relatively interchangeable (something that is increasingly rarely the case today).

6) Collective bargaining and collective agreements do not appear to do very well in regulating technological change, plant closures, and other large-scale organizational changes. They are also somewhat problematic in addressing work behaviour and work environment issues, because of the often 'categorical' nature of many of these issues.

(This was discussed in the negotiation chapter (Ch. 9) rather than in the current one, but is nonetheless a valid point to consider here). For this reason, such issues are often dealt with primarily through legislation.

Two other problems with collective agreements are the often highly legalistic ways in which they are interpreted by unions and management organizations, and the fact that collective bargaining assumes at least a rough balance of power between the parties.

Where this does not exist (as in the case of the current tough economic environment, which has seen power shift strongly toward employers), it may be extremely difficult for unions to negotiate effectively.

Possible ways around these problems: a judgement call. Here are three possibilities. A) The use of legislation (such as mandatory joint committees for technological change) to handle issues not being effectively addressed through collective bargaining. B) Greater centralization of bargaining structures. C) The use of alternative mechanisms (such as works councils) to handle at least certain types of shop-floor issues in a less adversarial fashion. In the short to medium term, 'A' is probably the likeliest; indeed, the Canadian system has already made certain changes along these lines (as in the creation of health and safety committees). Given current political realities, 'B' probably isn't very likely for the foreseeable future.

7) The evidence is that the dominant form of bargaining in Canada (single employersingle establishment-single union) has been remarkable able to adapt to changes when required to do so. Private sector union density has remained stable, and contract provisions have changed to accommodate new production practices. Concerns have been raised generally over the lag in productivity in Canadian manufacturing vs. U.S., but

.

87

there are alternate explanations for the productivity gap other than Canada’s higher unionization rate—such as the low Canadian dollar that has “sheltered” Canadian industry from competition and has had made investments in new technology priced in American dollars comparatively expensive. Now that the Canadian dollar seems to be rising long-term against the U.S. dollar, we will have to see how Canadian industries adapt, through new investment to achieve higher levels of productivity, or through costcutting, or both.

8) Potential ways to strengthen the language of 21.01 of the PIPSC agreement might include a push for language that guaranteed a fixed dollar amount of professional development each year, high enough to accommodate any professional membership required plus an amount for ongoing professional development. The argument for such a change would be that an investment in employee professional development will “pay back” the employer through higher productivity due to ongoing skills acquisition and higher levels of motivation among a professional staff group.

.

88

Chapter 11: Strikes, Lockouts, and Dispute Resolution Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to consider the significance of strikes in the Canadian IR system, as well as what causes strikes and some of the policy measures used to control them. We start by defining the term ‘strike’ as it is used in labour relations acts. Next, we consider different types of strikes and discuss how to measure strike incidence and some of the measurement problems involved. After taking a closer look at four recent Canadian strikes, we examine the causes of strikes, including both economic and noneconomic causes. The chapter ends with a discussion of some dispute resolution methods used to help prevent strikes or to reduce their impact.

Chapter Outline I) The Significance of Strikes and Lockouts II) Strikes and Lockouts Defined A) When Is a Strike or Lockout Legal?

B) Strike Restrictions in the Public Sector III) Measuring Strike Activity and Intensity A) Trends in Canadian Strike Activity IV) Some Recent Disputes V) What Causes Strikes?

A) The Causes of Strikes: Models VI) Dispute Resolution Methods A) Compulsory Conciliation B) Mediation C) Arbitration D) Fact-Finding E) Back-to-Work Legislation VII) Summary VIII) Understanding Strikes and Lockouts

.

89

Chapter Summary I) The Significance of Strikes and Lockouts (pp. 296–9)

Media reports to the contrary, strikes are far from being all there is to industrial relations.

It’s important to bear in mind that in most years, well over 90% of Canadian agreements are negotiated without a work stoppage, and also that strikes are but one of many forms industrial conflict may take.

There are, however, reasons why strikes are extremely important in any study of IR. Arguably, labour relations legislation has been enacted primarily to prevent or at least reduce the damage resulting from strikes, and a large section of all Canadian labour relations acts is devoted to the definition and regulation of strikes. Moreover, while strikes which entail loss of life are fortunately rare today, the consequences of strikes can nonetheless be extremely serious, and the regulation of public sector strikes can pose serious challenges for governments. Strikes are particularly important given the apparent recent resurgence in strike activity, both in Canada and in many European countries.

II) Strikes and Lockouts Defined (pp. 299–303)

In general, a strike must be a ‘concerted’ (i.e., planned) activity, involving a collective refusal to work. Most jurisdictions have ruled that partial as well as total stoppages constitute a strike; thus unions must be extremely cautious in calling for actions such as work-to-rule campaigns, slowdowns, or refusals to perform certain activities.

When Is a Strike or Lockout Legal?

In Canada, the right to strike is tightly circumscribed. First, the collective agreement must have expired, and the parties must have made a “good faith” effort to obtain a settlement. Second, in every jurisdiction except Saskatchewan, a strike1 cannot be legal until a government has appointed a third party (generally called a conciliator), and that person has reported his or her lack of success to the government and a certain length of time (normally seven to fourteen days) has elapsed. Some jurisdictions also require a second stage of conciliation; others require a supervised strike vote; while still others require an additional brief notice period before the strike can become legal.

Strike Restrictions in the Public Sector Public sector workers often face additional restrictions, including, in some cases, a total ban on the right to strike. In other jurisdictions, public sector workers face additional timeliness restrictions or additional dispute settlement processes which must be completed before the strike can become legal. In many jurisdictions, back-to-work legislation is frequently used to end strikes.

1

Except as otherwise noted, restrictions which apply to strikes also apply to lockouts.

.

90

III) Measuring Strike Activity (pp. 303–9)

In order to compare the relative strike intensity in various countries, or in different provinces or industries within Canada, it's important to have a commonly agreed upon measure. One such measure is “percentage of working time lost” (see the right-hand column in Table 11.2, pp. 304-5). This measure is calculated by multiplying the number of strikes, or frequency, by the size, or total number of workers involved, by the duration, or average length of strikes. This figure, which is the total number of person-days lost to strikes, is then divided by the total number of person-days worked in the jurisdiction or industry in question to arrive at the percentage of working time lost. While a completely exact comparison of strike intensity across different countries is rarely achievable, given such methodological problems as whether the disputes being enumerated do or don't include lockouts and differences in the number of workers who must be involved before a dispute constitutes an official strike, one can generally make reasonably accurate comparisons using the above measure.

Trends in Canadian strike activity The years 1996 and 1997 marked the end of almost a decade of declining strike activity.

The percentage of working time lost to strikes rose in both years. The major reasons for this increase were a huge increase in person-days lost in the public sector and a big increase in person-days lost in Ontario, many of that province's disputes being in the public sector. Looking at Canadian strike activity more generally, we can see that it has tended to rise and fall with the business cycle, particularly insofar as strike frequency is concerned. Periods of high strike activity have generally been times of high inflation, such as the periods after the two world wars and the middle and late 1970s and early 1980s. Strike levels have also risen, at least in the short term, as a response to major collective bargaining laws such as PC 1003 and PSSRA which have granted unionization and strike rights to large numbers of new workers.

IV) Some Recent Disputes (pp. 309–13).

(Note: Because the summaries in the text are self-explanatory, I don't repeat them here. This section is confined to themes and causes common to most or all of the four disputes summarized in the text).

Wages were clearly a factor in all three of the disputes. They were a particularly important factor in the case of the public sector disputes, given that the public sector workers had seen their wages frozen for many years during the 1990s and as a result had experienced a substantial decline in real income. By the same token, lack of respect and recognition must be regarded as a significant factor, not just in the two public-sector disputes but in the Falconbridge one. And government restrictions on unions’ bargaining rights were a key factor in the Nova Scotia health care dispute, and may also have been at least an indirect factor in the National Gallery strike.

Globalization and increased competition were clearly important factors in both the Goose Bay and Falconbridge disputes. In the latter, a series of mergers and reorganizations led the company to try to ‘strip’ the contract. Its globalized production chain also enabled it to maintain at least partial production despite the union’s valiant efforts.

.

91

V) What Causes Strikes? (pp. 314–6)

Strike causation is an extremely complex issue. Moreover, much of the literature on the subject presumes a background in econometrics and advanced statistics and tends to get into research methodology issues which are far too complex for most beginning students.

In general, it's safe enough to say that, leaving aside strongly inflationary periods (like the period right after World War II), when strike action is often necessary to prevent rapid erosion of real wages, experience suggests that most Canadian strikes appear to require serious medium- or long-term worker frustration and a triggering incident or incidents that channel that frustration, and around which union leaders can mobilize broad support for strike action. Though monetary issues may not themselves be enough to cause a strike, particularly in deflationary periods, they can and often do serve as a triggering issue in situations marked by high levels of union–management conflict because it is easy for leaders to mobilize broad support for higher wages.

The Causes of Strikes: Models The Asymmetrical Information or Private Information Model: This model treats strikes as a method of eliciting information from the employer. If a private-sector employer rebuffs a union’s wage demands citing inability to pay due to its dire financial position, and a union cannot ascertain the accuracy of the employer’s statements, a strike is one way of “discovering” the reality. A short strike followed by a favourable settlement for the union shows that the employer was bluffing; a longer strike with a settlement very close to the employer’s last offer shows the employer was accurately portraying its situation in negotiations. Lockouts can be explained by this model as well.

This model suggests that strike frequency can be reduced by information-sharing measures such as a union member appointed to the board of directors.

The Joint-Cost Perspective: This model views strikes/lockouts as one mechanism for resolving disputes, and will be preferentially chosen where the joint cost is relatively low compared with other methods. Any change that results in an increase in the joint cost of a strikes/lockouts will tend to reduce the incidence of strikes/lockouts even if the change only affects one party. A legislative prohibition on using replacement workers increases the cost of the strike or lockout to employers only, but since the joint cost has increased the incidence of strikes/lockouts will decrease in jurisdictions with this provision.

Strikes as Collective voice: John Godard's distinguishes between strikes that result from mistakes and those more appropriately regarded as expressions of their members' collective voice. The former group includes strikes resulting from immature or flawed bargaining relationships, as well as those caused by negotiators' lack of skill or tact. Also included in this group are disputes resulting from an asymmetry of information. Where the management possesses more complete and up-to-date financial information than the union, the union may then have no way of knowing whether management is telling the truth when it claims to be unable to meet the union's demands, and may therefore be forced to call a strike in order to call the management's bluff.

.

92

In Godard's view, it is naive to view strikes only as mistakes, given the conflict he sees as inherent in employment relationships generally. Rather, strikes should be seen as expressions of unions' collective voice, and as an expression of workers' frustration with their overall workplace situation. With this approach, what primarily determines whether or not a particular situation will lead to a strike are the extent and intensity of worker discontent, union leaders' ability to mobilize that discontent, the union's strike power, and management's willingness and ability to “buy off” discontent through generous wage settlements or progressive human resource policies.

VI) Dispute Resolution Methods (pp. 316–20)

Canadian jurisdictions have evolved a variety of dispute resolution methods designed to help prevent strikes or, in some cases, to serve as alternatives to strikes. Virtually all involve the use of a neutral third party.

Conciliation entails the use of a third party—normally someone from the labour department—meeting with the parties to determine the possibilities of settlement.

Despite mixed evidence as to its effectiveness, the procedure remains compulsory in almost every Canadian jurisdiction, though it has now evolved into something more closely approaching mediation in many provinces.

Mediation involves more active intervention on the part of the third-party neutral, including, where appropriate, the proposing of settlement terms to both sides. Unlike conciliation, it is normally voluntary; as we will see in Chapter 12, it can also be used to help resolve grievances.

Arbitration, in which a mutually acceptable neutral lays down the terms and conditions of the new collective agreement, is used primarily in the public sector, particularly for groups such as police whose services are considered so essential that they can't be allowed to withdraw them. Despite evidence which suggests that conventional arbitration hurts the parties' ability to negotiate their own settlements, Canadian jurisdictions have been reluctant to replace it with final offer arbitration, in which the arbitrator must choose one side's position or the other and is not allowed to “split the difference.” A major exception was the Nova Scotia health care dispute discussed earlier in the chapter, where, as noted earlier, final offer selection was imposed after the government withdrew its legislation suspending health care workers’ right to arbitration.

Fact-finding is a type of dispute resolution used less often now than in the past. The idea behind it is that if the neutral has published a report outlining the key issues, the parties will be more likely to settle. Fact-finding was previously used extensively by Ontario’s Education Relations Commission. Since the abolition of that body’s separate dispute resolution functions, it has rarely been used in Canada. But it is one of many options available in the “toolkit” approach to dispute resolution recommended by the Fryer Committee. If the committee’s recommendation for a public interest dispute resolution commission is adopted, this venerable mechanism could get a new lease on life.

.

93

Back-to-work legislation is used to end strikes (mainly in the public sector) which are considered to pose a significant risk to the public health, safety, or welfare. Often it is followed by a referral to med-arb or straight arbitration. Though some use of back-towork legislation is probably inevitable in any jurisdiction which allows public sector workers to strike, the frequency with which it has been used in Canada suggests that there’s something seriously wrong with our existing public sector bargaining arrangements.

VII) Summary (p. 320)

Overall, there appears to have been a gradual trend away from formal investigative mechanisms like second-stage conciliation, and in the direction of more informal facilitative mechanisms like mediation. Another important trend is governments’ growing move away from arbitration and in the direction of the conciliation-strike route for public sector workers.

VIII) Understanding Strikes and Lockouts

A great deal of time and effort has been devoted, within the IR profession, to developing dispute resolution methods designed to prevent strikes or at least minimize their impact on “innocent” third parties. While many of these methods have proved useful, dispute resolution methods are not enough. Attention must be paid to broader institutional factors, such as Canada’s decentralized bargaining structures and the ways in which the grievance procedure is likely to aggravate existing union–management conflicts in ways which lead to strikes. Despite the volume and variety of information and research, strikes and lockouts are neither particularly predictable nor adequately understood.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) A strike is a concerted (planned) activity involving a collective refusal to work. The work stoppage need not be complete; often work-to-rule campaigns or even overtime bans have been deemed to be strikes. An individual worker’s refusal to work (whether legal or not) does not constitute a strike. A lockout is the suspension of operations or a refusal to continue to employ workers for the purpose of inducing them to agree to terms and conditions of employment.

2) See table 11.1 on pp. 301–2.

3) Three methods of dispute resolution commonly used in the public sector include compulsory conciliation, mediation, and arbitration. Back to work legislation is also commonly used in the public sector to end strikes. Definitions of “essential service” will vary, but will provoke a discussion over which services are “essential”.

4) Through use of a measure which controls for population, such as percentage of working time lost or number of working-days lost per year per employed worker in the labour force.

5) Considering the period since World War I, strike activity (in terms of percentage of working time lost) was highest after the two world wars and in 1975 and 1976. It was

.

94

lowest during the depression of the 1930s and between 1993 and 1995. Inflation was a factor both after the world wars and during the mid-‘70s. Also a factor after World War I was a world-wide wave of worker militancy, while new collective bargaining legislation which granted most private sector workers legal bargaining rights for the first time was a factor after World War II. In 1976, anger at the government’s wage-control policies was a key factor, since it led to a one-day general strike in October of that year. Low inflation and unions’ generally weak position vis-a-vis employers were major factors in the years of low strike intensity. During the 1990s, public sector wage controls and freezes and suspension of bargaining rights were also an important factor, given that public sector workers by then accounted for about half the country’s union members.

6) Discussed in summary. Wages, lack of respect and recognition, job security and suspension of public sector workers’ bargaining rights were probably most important overall. The “strikes as mistakes” hypothesis does little to explain any of these disputes.

Most were the result of a relationship that had been antagonistic over the long term, followed by a serious triggering incident (i.e., the provincial government’s passage of legislation blocking nurses from arbitration in Nova Scotia).

7) Factors likely in increase workers’ collective discontent and distrust would include issues related to the grievance/arbitration process (unreasonable delays, and the number and type of disputes), the inability to solve long-running employer-union disputes satisfactorily, a perception that the employer does not respect its employees, and the lack of a “quit” option for employees (alternative jobs at comparable wages are unavailable in the local labour market). Management can address these factors through regular, respectful communication with employees and the union, and sharing information about the true state of the organization either through union membership on the board or other mechanisms.

8) The major preventive mechanisms are conciliation and mediation. (Increasingly the distinction between the two is becoming blurred, as conciliators are tending to intervene more and more actively in seeking a solution, and to act less and less like traditional factfinders). Mediation is probably more effective than old-fashioned conciliation of the fact-finding variety, since the neutral is working harder to find a solution.

Arbitration—essentially a strike substitute—is used almost entirely in the public sector, since few parties in the private sector are prepared to administer a settlement they have had no hand in fashioning. A problem which results from habitual use of conventional arbitration is that the parties tend to lose their ability to come up with their own settlement (the “narcotic” effect). Another problem is that, knowing the arbitrator will make the decision for them, the parties are often reluctant to make the sort of hard choices which could lead to a settlement, but which could also lead to serious intraorganizational conflict (the “chilling” effect). Despite these well-documented problems with conventional arbitration, Canadian governments have been reluctant to substitute final offer arbitration, which doesn’t seem to have those problems.

.

95

Designation (or the “controlled strike”) is a way of protecting the public health and safety while maintaining public sector workers’ right to strike. This approach was discussed in detail in the public sector chapter (Ch. 9). It is arguably a fairer way of handling public sector disputes than the use of back-to-work legislation, which has been frequent throughout the past two decades; however, most governments seem to find it irresistibly tempting to use their legislative powers to achieve whatever objectives they haven’t been able to achieve at the bargaining table. Frequent use of back-to-work legislation does little if anything to address the fundamental causes of public sector conflict; indeed, it probably embitters the parties (especially the unions) even more.

9) This would be a major blunder. The employer would be perfectly entitled to assume the professors had withdrawn their services, and lock them out. If you are going to take that risk, you might as well have a full-scale strike. Also, students could understand that better than not having their exams graded in a situation short of a full-scale work stoppage. To say that a refusal to grade exams would not be well-received by students, whom professors need to keep on side during any university dispute, is to understate the matter considerably.

.

96

Chapter 12: Grievances: Function, Resolution, and Prevention Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to explain the significance and functions of the grievance process, to consider how the grievance process works, and to discuss some of its shortcomings and some of the various policy measures that have been devised in an attempt to address those shortcomings. We begin by looking at the overall significance and functions of the grievance process. We then go on to examine grievance procedures and outcomes and the arbitration process itself. After some criticisms of the conventional arbitration process and a discussion of some innovative new dispute settlement mechanisms that have arisen in response to those criticisms, the chapter concludes with a “big-picture” look at grievances in the larger context of industrial conflict more generally.

Chapter Outline I) Grievances and Their Significance A) What Is a Grievance?

B) The Function and Significance of Grievances II) Types of Grievances III) Grievance Procedures IV) Issues Most Commonly Grieved V) The Arbitration Process A) Panels vs. Single Arbitrators B) The Arbitration Hearing C) Enforcement D) Judicial Review of Awards VI) Arbitration Outcomes A) Discharge Cases B) Use of Legal Counsel C) Lawyers as Arbitrators D) Other Outcomes VII) Criticisms of Conventional Arbitration Time Delays Costs Legalism

.

97

Accessibility VIII) Alternatives to Conventional Arbitration A) Expedited Arbitration B) Grievance Mediation C) Preventive Mediation D) Emerging Trends in Grievance Arbitration IX) Grievances and Industrial Conflict: The Bigger Picture Chapter Summary I) Grievances and Their Significance (pp. 327–8)

While most media attention focuses on strikes, grievances are an equally important if less dramatic form of industrial conflict. A high grievance rate in an organization is often a sign of an unhealthy labour–management relationship and may be an indication of declining productivity, as well.

What is a grievance?

Strictly speaking, a grievance is an allegation that one or more provisions of the collective agreement have been violated. Grievances are most often filed by the union, though management grievances are not unknown. When management grievances are filed, they most often result from an illegal work stoppage by the union.

Function and significance of grievances The most important function of the grievance process is to provide a forum for the resolution of disputes arising out of the collective agreement. This is particularly important in Canada because under Canadian legislation, mid-term strikes are illegal.

The grievance process also provides a system of industrial jurisprudence under which individuals can seek redress without fear of reprisal from their superiors. Beyond that, the process can provide a forum for supplementary negotiations over items left vague in the agreement and can serve as a political mechanism for resolving intraorganizational conflict within both union and management sides.

II) Types of Grievances (pp. 328–9)

An individual grievance involves the application of the agreement to one member. A group grievance results from a combination of similar individual grievances seeking a common redress (i.e., a group of workers alleging failure to receive overtime pay for work done after regular hours). A policy grievance involves a question of the agreement's general application or interpretation. Such a grievance might be initiated over a large-scale restructuring or organizational change or a change in the pension plan.

The Denison Mines case (in the text at pp. 375–380) describes an individual grievance.

The case is designed to illustrate the importance of progressive discipline, a concept we'll be discussing in a later section.

.

98

III) Grievance Procedures (p. 333)

Most grievance procedures have three or four steps; the one outlined in the text at p. 381 (Table 12.1) would be quite typical. Almost all grievance procedures stipulate an initial, oral discussion between the aggrieved worker and his or her immediate supervisor.

Where such a discussion is not successful in resolving the problem, the grievance will then be reduced to writing and submitted to the superior of the worker's immediate supervisor. A common feature is a semi-official "extra step" in which senior management and union officials meet on a regular basis to review cases pending arbitration; in some cases, this meeting is incorporated as an official stage of the procedure.

IV) Issues Most Commonly Grieved (p. 334)

Discharge and discipline are the issues most commonly grieved by unions. Seniority, overtime, job postings, health and safety, and the performance of bargaining unit work by supervisors are other commonly grieved issues. Dishonesty, poor work performance, insubordination, poor attendance, abuse of alcohol, failure to get along, and union activity are the seven types of behaviour most likely to lead to dismissal.

V) The Arbitration Process (pp. 334–37)

Panels vs. single arbitrators Arbitration decisions are made either by single arbitrators or three-person panels. If a three-person panel is used, the union and management each select one member, and the agreed-upon third party neutral serves as chairperson. Though growing recognition of the extra costs and delays attached to panels has led many parties to switch to single arbitrators, a large number of organizations continue to rely on the panels.

The arbitration hearing Arbitration hearings are normally held in neutral settings, such as hotel rooms. Though these hearings involve many features of court trials, such as formal opening and closing statements and the calling and cross-examination of witnesses, they are less formal than trials in that arbitrators can generally accept any evidence they consider proper, whether or not that evidence would be admissible in court. Also, badgering of witnesses in crossexamination is generally frowned upon. In most cases, the level of proof required is that of a "balance of probabilities," which means that the side bearing the burden of proof must establish that its version of events is likelier to be true. However, in discharge cases, a higher standard of proof, that of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, is required, and the onus is normally on employers to prove that the employee in question should indeed be discharged.

Enforcement Most labour acts lay out a procedure for enforcing arbitration awards where either party refuses to comply. In Ontario, the award may be filed in the General Division of the Ontario Court and enforced in the same way as any other court judgement, through contempt proceedings for continued non-compliance.

.

99

Judicial review of awards In general—and in marked contrast to the U.S., where judicial review is commonplace— Canadian jurisdictions are reluctant to use the courts to overturn arbitrators' awards. A number of provinces attempt to limit judicial review of arbitration awards through a privative clause, an example being Sec. 101 of B.C.'s labour act, which provides that except as noted in the act, any arbitration award or decision is final and not open to question or review in a court on any grounds whatever. Where reviews are granted, they are rarely based on the arbitrator's interpretation of the collective agreement. Appeals are more likely to be granted where the arbitrator has made a jurisdictional error, shown bias, denied a party a fair hearing, or made an incorrect interpretation of a common law or statutory provision lying outside his or her "core area of expertise."

VI) Arbitration Outcomes (pp. 337–9)

To date, there has been no single, comprehensive study on all aspects of arbitration outcomes. There have been more limited studies seeking to relate arbitration outcomes to such factors as arbitrator characteristics, grievor characteristics, the type of issue raised, and the use of legal counsel by the two parties. The evidence has thus far been relatively inconclusive as to whether arbitrator and grievor characteristics such as age, gender, and education significantly affect arbitration outcomes. A much more significant issue may be the extent to which women, non-lawyers, and younger people find it possible to enter the profession, given that various studies have found that the majority of arbitrators are middle-aged males with law degrees.

Discharge cases Discharge cases are particularly important in IR because their impact both on individual workers and on organizations can be so dramatic. In general, except in the case of extremely serious offenses such as sabotage or theft, arbitrators expect employers to have employed progressive discipline prior to discharging an employee. This means that employees should have been subjected to gradually but steadily increasing penalties for each succeeding offense and should also have been informed of the consequences of their continued misbehaviour at every stage along the way. In cases involving absenteeism or alcohol or drug abuse, employers are generally expected to have offered employees a chance to rehabilitate themselves, normally through referral to counselling or an employee assistance program.

Discharge cases have been the subject of two major studies, by George Adams (1978) and Peter Barnacle (1991). Overall, these studies found that the grievor's previous disciplinary record, particularly with respect to the issue for which he or she was being discharged, was of greater importance than the type of offense allegedly committed. This finding points strongly toward the heavy use made by arbitrators of progressive discipline in determining the appropriate penalty in any given case. Another key finding from the Adams study is that the longer it took arbitrators to hear cases, the less likely a grievor was to be reinstated or receive any back pay. Such a finding lends support to the notion that expedited arbitration systems can be of benefit to workers and unions.

.

100

Use of legal counsel The use of legal counsel in arbitration cases has frequently been cited as the cause of delays in those cases. However, various studies have found that while lawyers appear to make little difference to arbitration outcomes when neither party uses them or when both do, when one party uses them but the other does not, the party using them is a good deal more likely to win the case.

Lawyers as arbitrators Various studies have found relatively little difference in outcomes between cases heard by lawyers and those heard by arbitrators from other backgrounds, such as economics or IR. The major difference found by Barnacle was that lawyers gave somewhat longer suspensions in cases where employees were reinstated but not fully exonerated.

Other outcomes A number of studies have found that grievances are rarely settled at the middle stage of internal grievance procedures. This suggests that the middle stages might well be replaced by grievance mediation. Another study found that grievances were more likely to be granted in organizations with a positive IR climate than in those with a negative one.

VII) Criticisms of Conventional Arbitration (pp. 339–41)

There is now a substantial literature on the failings of the conventional arbitration process. Most of the criticisms have centred on the time delays, costs, and legalism of the process, which many feel have led to a lack of accessibility.

Time Delays A number of studies reviewed by Thornicroft and Eden have found delays of eight to twelve months between the action inspiring the grievance and the issuing of the arbitration award to be most common. At Canada Post, delays of more than a year have been the norm and delays of more than two years are not uncommon. In addition to being grossly unfair to the worker involved, such lengthy delays are often the cause of serious labour–management conflict of the type which can lead to both legal and illegal work stoppages.

Costs The costs of most arbitration hearings now run into four figures, and sometimes into five.

The costs of legal counsel and arbitrators have threatened to make arbitration the exclusive preserve of large unions and employers with the resources to afford it, and may be a factor explaining the recent trend toward mergers of smaller unions.

Legalism Arbitration hearings all too often get bogged down in technical legal arguments, rather than addressing the merits of the case at issue. When arbitration awards are finally issued, their extensive reliance on precedents often makes them difficult for anyone but a lawyer to understand, in addition to adding to the time delays and costs of the process.

.

101

The expanding scope of arbitration to include employment standards and human rights statutes only exacerbates this trend.

Accessibility Taken together, the time delays, costs, and legalism have meant that few cases—probably less than 2% of the total—ever get taken through to arbitration. The result is that many grievors, including some with very legitimate complaints, never manage to obtain a hearing for their cases.

VIII) Alternatives to Conventional Arbitration (pp. 341–51)

Expedited arbitration The purpose of expedited arbitration systems, which may be either private or public, is to speed up the arbitration process and reduce its costs. Among the most effective ways of achieving these objectives are use of a single arbitrator rather than a panel, use of a standing umpire to eliminate dickering over the choice of an arbitrator, elimination of unproductive steps of the grievance procedure, strict adherence to time deadlines in any remaining steps, and agreeing not to use legal counsel at hearings. Most expedited systems also simplify procedural requirements, as by allowing oral decisions in straightforward cases, reducing the use of precedents, and/or requiring short written decisions very soon after the hearing. Expedited arbitration is particularly effective when combined with grievance mediation (discussed in the next section).

Grievance mediation While expedited arbitration seeks to speed up the arbitration process, the purpose of grievance mediation is to reduce the number of grievances sent through to arbitration, by using a third-party neutral to help the parties resolve the problem themselves. A side benefit is that using mediation rather than arbitration to resolve grievances can help the parties develop problem-solving skills that can later be applied to other areas of their relationship. A typical mediation process is described in the text at p. 343-4. Various studies have found grievance mediation extraordinarily effective in reducing the number of cases sent to arbitration—often by as much as 80 to 90 percent. This translates into substantial cash savings for unions and management organizations alike.

Preventive mediation The purpose of preventive mediation is to improve labour–management relationships so that problems can be handled proactively, as they arise, before ever becoming formal grievances. A key principle of all Canadian preventive mediation programs is that they are purely voluntary. The federal program includes six components: establishing a labour–management committee, negotiation skills training, committee effectiveness training, relationship by objectives, grievance mediation, and facilitation. Other programs include joint supervisor-steward training in collective agreement administration. While there has thus far been little in the way of formal evaluation of the various preventive mediation programs, anecdotal evidence suggests that the programs have been effective and have found favour with both management and unions.

.

102

Emerging Trends in Grievance Arbitration The grievance arbitration process has been growing more complicated as arbitrators are expected to apply an increasingly broad range of statues and fashion an equally broad range of remedies.

The Duty to Accommodate: Human Rights legislation is one area of adding to the complexity facing arbitrators. Under the concept of “constructive” or “systemic” discrimination, workplace rules and collective agreement provisions can be found discriminatory, regardless of their intent, if they have a disproportionate effect on an individual employee due to the employee’s status as a member of a protected group.

Both unions and employers are required to accommodate affected employees up to the point of “undue hardship.” This requirement extends to proactive measures such as the creation of different work schedules, or the redesign of jobs to enable them to be preformed more easily. For example, in the case of innocent absenteeism, an employer’s limit of the duty to accommodate is reached when there is little or no prospect that the employee will be able to perform stated job duties in the foreseeable future.

Application of External Statues: In addition to duty to accommodate cases, other broad human rights provisions are expected to be applied to labour relations disputes. In the Parry Sound case of 2003 the employer dismissed a woman returning from maternity leave, citing its right in the collective agreement to dismiss an employee during the probationary period. The Supreme Court of Canada eventually upheld the arbitrator’s decision that the employee should be reinstated, since the dismissal violated the employee’s protection from discrimination on the basis of family status under the Human Rights Code.

Tort-Based Claims: An Ontario Court of Appeal ruling in the Giorno v. Pappas case that a workplace defamation incident could have been brought as a workplace health and safety grievance under the collective agreement has brought hitherto “private” conflicts into the realm of labour relations jurisdiction. The implications of this are in turn complex—arbitrators’ case loads have increased in number and complexity, but their “tool kits” for fashioning appropriate remedies has increased also, including the ability to award “damages” and the removal of supervisors from the workplace if they have been found to have harassed subordinates.

Lower Standards for Judicial Review: While courts have been generally reluctant to overturn arbitrators’ decisions, using the “patently unreasonable” standard (especially in jurisdictions where there is a privative clause in a jurisdiction’s labour legislation), there are some cases where courts have used a lower standard of “unreasonable.” While such a lowering of the standard for judicial review seems confined to provinces like Alberta that have relatively weak privative clauses, more arbitration awards in the future may be subject to judicial review.

Workplace Violence: Canada has among the world’s highest rates of workplace violence and harassment, and arbitrators are taking a harder stance on incidents of violence or threats in the workplace, including those made indirectly in email messages between employees regarding a supervisor.

.

103

IX) Grievances and Industrial Conflict: The Bigger Picture (pp. 351–2)

Canadian policy-makers have developed a broad range of innovative new dispute settlement mechanisms to reduce the negative impacts of grievances. These include expedited arbitration, grievance mediation, and preventive mediation, all of which were discussed in the previous sections. While these mechanisms have contributed significantly to reducing workplace conflict, major sources of conflict remain unaddressed. One such source relates to unions’ “ownership” of the grievance process.

Another has to do with the all-too-frequent use of the grievance process for political purposes. I argue that it may well be that in the Canadian IR system, where the grievance process must serve as a vehicle for individual workplace, group, and in some cases collective voice, that process is simply asked to do too much. Employers and unions may respond to increasing arbitral scope by writing language that specifically exempts from arbitration certain types of work-related misconduct not directly related to the collective agreement, like defamation. Another possibility might be developing a second-tier tribunal in some ways akin to Small Claims Court, which could handle relatively minor grievances without the formalities required in current arbitration hearings.

Answers to Case Questions 1) Opinions will vary, but the determination of what is mutually acceptable to both parties will spur debate.

2) Students will come up with examples here from their own experiences.

3) Student opinions will vary, but the focus should be the period after the harassment training. Given the history between Ms. M and the grievor in Dec 2000 after the training, the grievor should have known that his actions on April 11 would be unwelcome by Ms. M. 4) In both incidents post the training period, Ms. M reported the incident immediately.

Prior to the training, she did not report the incidents.

5) Management’s response to the December incidents was arguably weak. Coming on the heels of the training, the incidents with Ms. M. and the Ms. Bernatchez, taken together, should have produced a stronger response from management. A suspension of the grievor at that time might have prevented any further incidents.

6) Answers will vary according to student experience.

7) Mitigating circumstances include those raised by the union in this case (length of service, contrition, disciplinary record). Other circumstances that might be considered by an arbitrator would include the impact of the discipline on the grievor, and the likelihood the conduct will be repeated in the future if the grievor is reinstated. The arbitrator may also consider the actions of management concerning the incidents in December, 2000, and substitute a lesser penalty than dismissal for the reason that the prior actions attracting no lasting discipline.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) Experiential question.

.

104

2) To workers: protection against arbitrary management behaviour, and also a “voice” when management takes action that is contrary to fundamental rights. To unions: the primary means of acting on negotiated rights while a collective agreement is in force, and a "weapon" they can use against management (i.e., filing large numbers of grievances to protest slow negotiations) and a channel for communication with management. For firms: a channel for communication with unions and a source of information about flawed personnel practices the resolution of which may actually increase productivity.

The drawbacks to the system of grievance arbitration are the cost and growing complexity of the issues addressed, for both parties. For management also, there is a “chilling effect” whereby the threat of a grievance immobilizes some managers from acting on problems in the workplace. The benefits include the increased communication and productivity that can result from dealing with issues in the workplace, and by retaining workers who have an avenue for redress versus the alternative, which is to quit and find work elsewhere or to remain unhappily with the employer.

3) Factors include internal grievance processes that are unnecessarily long and complex; the continuing use of three-person panels (in many organizations), the lack of alternative forums to reduce the burden on the arbitration process, and the use of legal counsel at arbitration hearings (and occasionally in the ‘back rooms’ earlier in the grievance process).

4) Described thoroughly in text (see Table 12.1 p. 333).

5) Described thoroughly in text. The main thing to be aware of is that, though it has some things in common with a court trial, an arbitration hearing is a good deal less formal, particularly as regards the admissibility of various kinds of evidence.

6) The most important factor is the grievor's previous record, particularly with regard to the issue for which he or she has been dismissed. This is (somewhat surprisingly) of greater importance than the offense for which the person has been discharged (i.e., there's more difference between reinstatement rates for people with a clean record and those with a previous suspension for the same offense than there is between those discharged for dishonesty and those discharged for union activity). (Note: This is important to emphasize in class. Like a number of other things about the arbitration process, it seems quite counter-intuitive).

7) Expedited arbitration—to speed up the arbitration process and reduce its costs. Works by using a single arbitrator and simplifying procedural requirements; often involves a standing umpire who can hear a number of cases in a day or two.

Grievance mediation—to prevent grievances from being taken through to arbitration.

The mediator works with the parties to help them hammer out the issue themselves.

Preventive mediation—to improve the overall union–management relationship and bring things to the point where problems are solved proactively, as they occur, before they ever become formal grievances.

Labour–management committees of various kinds can also serve as proactive problemsolving mechanisms. Such committees may be of a general nature or may apply specifically to one type of issue (i.e., technological change).

.

105

8) Sexual harassment cases invariably have an element of “he said/she said” to them— there are often no witnesses to the alleged harassment so it is difficult to verify exactly what occurred. Other problems include differing interpretations of what is acceptable conduct in different work environments, and whether the conduct in question was “mutually acceptable.” A clearly stated policy on sexual harassment, that is regularly communicated with training sessions as required, will help to prevent incidents and assist the parties in handling cases when they occur.

9) Experiential question.

10) ADR processes will reduce grievances where the parties are motivated to use them (note that the process is voluntary and either party can withdraw at any time during the process). Both parties must be working on improving the labour/management relationship, or already enjoy a high level of mutual trust, in order for ADR to be successful. In the IKO case, the ADR process has certain advantages in that the grievor and Ms. M. could confront each other in a ‘safe’ environment (each supported and with no prejudice to either side if the attempted resolution does not work). If the harassment is really caused by a lack of understanding by the grievor about what constitutes acceptable behaviour, the ADR process may be the kind of ‘learning experience’ that results in behavioural change. The costs of ADR for the parties are substantially less than an arbitrated decision.

.

106

Chapter 13: Industrial Relations Around the World Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to discuss IR developments in other countries, in both the developed and developing world. The chapter begins by examining some traditional IR models. It then considers the special situation of the developing world, where in many cases large segments of the population don’t even participate in the formal labour force as such. Special emphasis is placed on the growth of informal workers’ associations and informal associations of micro-entrepreneurs, and on the relationships some of these associations have formed with more formal bodies in their own countries, and with unions and other organizations in developed countries. The chapter concludes with a brief consideration of the question of whether traditional IR terminology and methodology can usefully be applied to the developing world.

Chapter Outline I) Introduction: A New Way of Looking at IR II) A Traditional IR Model A) Unfree Systems B) Partially Free Systems C) Free Systems III) Forces for Change A) Globalization B) Regional Economic Integration C) Coordinated Bargaining Efforts D) Growing Importance of Managers and Employers E) Precarious Employment F) Declining Union Representation G) Decentralization of Bargaining Structures H) Liberalization of Former Soviet Bloc IR Systems IV) New Strategies for a New World Order A) Unions V) Workers Associations VI) Associations of Micro-Entrepreneurs VIII) Summary

.

107

Chapter Summary Introduction: A New Way of Looking at IR (pp. 356–7)

While the Canadian economy and IR system have been changing significantly in recent years, particularly insofar as there has been a shift in the balance of power toward workers and employers, Canada has by no means been alone in experiencing such changes. The changes have been particularly severe in developing countries, where they have often been aggravated by extreme poverty, crushing debt loads, disease, or political instability. In many cases in the developing world, a majority of the adult population may not even be in the formal labour force as such. Such developments pose serious questions as to the adequacy of our traditional IR tools. Understanding the situation of workers in the developing world will require a new and broader conception of what IR is.

It will also require an appreciation of the role played by a broader range of actors than we are used to studying in IR. A Traditional IR Model (pp. 357–62)

Before looking at recent changes in international IR, we should consider a more traditional model. Traditionally, IR systems were divided into three groups: unfree, partially free, and free. Unfree systems were those in which unions had no effective role to play, either because they were banned outright (as in Germany and Japan during World War II) or because they had been subsumed into the central state apparatus (as in the case of the former Soviet Union). Partially free systems, most often found in the developing countries of Asia and Africa or in Latin America, allowed unions and labour centrals some freedom of manoeuvre, but would generally limit that freedom in the interest of promoting economic growth. Legislation, outright repression, and cooptation of union leaders into the government have been but three of the means used by these systems to control their labour movements.

Free systems are those in which, with some limitations, unions are able to function effectively and independent of the government as advocates for workers. Unfree systems can further be divided into decentralized, centralized, and hybrid systems. In decentralized systems, most bargaining is conducted at the enterprise or workplace level.

Government involvement in the economy and IR system is generally limited, and most economic outcomes are determined by market forces. Unions’ major activity is collective bargaining; their involvement in politics tends to be somewhat limited. Union density rates in such systems are generally low to moderate, and the labour movement does not normally play an important role in the formation of national social and economic policy. The U.S. and Canada are prime examples of decentralized systems.

Centralized IR systems feature significant government involvement in the economy and IR system. In such systems, bargaining is often conducted at industry or even state/provincial or national levels. One consequence is that negotiators tend to be more expert. Another is greater likelihood of government intervention should impasse be reached, because so much more is at stake. In centralized systems, unions generally place heavy emphasis on political action, seeking first to elect a sympathetic labour or social democratic government and then once that government is in power, to persuade it to enact policies favourable to workers and unions. Centralized systems are generally

.

108

marked by less wage dispersion than decentralized ones, as well as by lower levels of industrial conflict, inflation and unemployment.

A number of systems have some features of centralized and some of decentralized ones, and thus do not readily fall into either camp. These systems, which we have labelled hybrids, include those of Japan, Australia, and Quebec.

Forces for Change (pp. 363–77)

Few of the traditional IR systems we have just described have remained entirely intact; many have changed beyond recognition. In some cases, change has been driven by major political upheaval (the end of apartheid in South Africa or the break-up of the former Soviet bloc). More often, though, it has resulted from a combination of macroeconomic and local political forces, with the former coming to assume an increasingly prominent role.

Globalization Arguably the greatest single force driving change in national IR systems has been the globalization of the world’s economy. This far-reaching phenomenon has left in its wake a world characterized by fewer steady, full-time jobs, more precarious employment, declining labour force participation in the developing world, weaker national governments with reduced ability to regulate their domestic economies and IR systems, and reduced union membership rates. Globalization has also led to smaller public sectors and the widespread devolution of bargaining from the national or industry to the enterprise or workplace level. Individual firms, on the other hand, have significantly increased their autonomy in recent years. The past two decades have been marked by an increase in the influence both of large multinationals and small-to-medium sized enterprises (SMEs). The result of these trends has been a decline in the role played by formal employers’ associations.

Regional economic integration Closely related to globalization is the trend toward economic integration within specified geographic regions of the world. Over the years, a number of different patterns of regional economic integration have emerged, the aim being to promote liberalized trade within those regions. The two most important of these, for our purposes, are the North American Free Trade Zone and the European Union (EU).

The growth of free trade in North America has been associated with increased unemployment, widespread deindustrialization, increased precariousness of employment, and the weakening of Canada’s medical care program and social safety net. While it is possible that some or even all of these changes might have taken place in the absence of the free trade agreements, at best they are hardly evidence that the agreements have benefited the country.

The EU, which was launched in 1950, is the world’s oldest system of regional integration. While it traditionally favoured economic integration over the harmonization of social issues, it has done much more with the latter than have the countries bound by the North American Free Trade Agreement. Also, adjustment processes resulting from integration have generally been less painful in the EU than under NAFTA because the

.

109

disparities between member countries are less in the EU. Recent trends, however, show increased competition between firms within the EU, and multinationals in particular have been successful in gaining concessions from unions concerning Saturday work and overtime premiums.

Coordinated Bargaining Efforts In the EU there are mechanisms in place that allow for EU-wide collective bargaining, and the establishment of works councils in multinational enterprises employing more than 1000 employees with at least 150 in each of two member states. The European Trades Union Congress has become a respected player in social and economic policy formation. But it is by no means clear that the nascent “European” IR system will allow unions to make up the ground they have lost through the “hollowing out” of national IR systems subsequent to European integration.

Growing Importance of Management and Employers There are three important trends associated with the growing importance of management and employers. First is the growing use of progressive human resources management policies such as profit sharing schemes, merit-based pay, direct communication with workers, and TQM, which tend to increase workers’ identification with management and lessen the desire to form or maintain unions. Second is the decline in industry sector bargaining brought about by two forces: the growing importance of a small- and mediumsized enterprises (SMEs) sector which tends to be less likely to join sectoral industry associations dominated by larger companies, less likely to be unionized than larger companies; and by a growing number of large, highly diversified firms that work in networks. Third, the growing importance of employers has transferred into an unwillingness of government to intervene through policy in national IR systems for fear of a “capital strike,” leaving unions without a political partner.

Precarious Employment There has been a general decline in full time employment associated with higher levels of global competition, as firms try and manage down their labour costs in the same way as other “inventory.” Just in time labour means more part time work and more split shift work to cover peak demands. In industrialized countries, the labour force participation rate has been dropping, with a corresponding increase in employment in the “informal” sector of the economy (working in unregulated conditions for family or self-employed).

Another employment trend is the increase in the number of hours worked per week for those employed full time.

Declining Union Representation Overall the most recent period shows a continuation of the previous (1980–95) period’s pattern of declining membership rates in some countries and stable rates in others.

Notable declines in union density in Germany and the UK, countries that have had a social democratic governments, signals a diminished influence of unions on social policy as even social democratic governments have moved distinctly towards capital-friendly economic policies. In Australia and New Zealand, governments directly reducing the size of the public sector, and replacing collective bargaining with a system of individual

.

110

contracts. Privatization of previously state-owned corporations in the former Soviet bloc countries had a similar effect.

Decentralization of Bargaining Structures Traditional centralized bargaining structures prevalent through much of Europe have been challenged by a growing importance of bargaining at the level of the firm. This trend is a significant force in the decline of union influence since employer associations tend to support sector-wide collective bargaining agreements. Works councils have also grown in importance throughout Europe as well. Overall the evidence suggests decentralization of bargaining is likely to lead to weaker labour movements and an overall decline in workers’ ability to solve workplace problems collectively.

Liberalization of Former Soviet Bloc IR Systems The transformation from a planned economy to a market economy has significantly altered the IR systems of former Soviet bloc countries. Typically each has experienced a period of tri-partite agreements that were aimed at keeping the economy moving in the face of sector-and economy-wide strikes, and enabling a transformation of the economy.

In most cases the tripartite agreements between labour, government, and employers have been replaced by firm-level bargaining.

New Strategies for a New World Order (pp. 377–82)

Unions As employment has declined in the sectors of the economy once highly unionized, unions have adapted by looking to areas of the economy with low levels of unionization such as private services sector, which tends to be dominated by female employment, part time workers, and younger workers. Organizing employees in the private services sector, including smaller employers, has been met with significant resistance by employers.

Even in a country like Canada, with strong (by global standards) protections for workers’ right to organize unions, it is very difficult to form unions due to high servicing costs and the difficulty in maintaining support in workplaces dominated by high turnover rates.

There have been some successes however. In Canada, the CAW has made major inroads in services, even representing nine Starbucks outlets in Vancouver. The Steelworkers now represent security guards and hotel/restaurant workers. Experiences in other countries has shown that different organizing models should be tried (SEIU’s “Justice for Janitors city-wide campaigns, for example).

Unions have also begun offering innovative benefits to members to try and maintain membership, including “affinity” credit cards, union-owned travel agencies and retirement homes.

In the face of global competition unions must ultimately strive to conclude transnational collective agreements that protect labour standards from falling victim to competitive forces. So far, such agreements have eluded the international union movement.

However, unions have organized internationally to campaign to end child labour and to conduct other issue-oriented publicity campaigns.

.

111

Workers’ Associations Workers in the growing “informal sector” face many barriers to organization, including the diversity of their employment status which make it difficult for them to find common cause; the fact that family or ethnic loyalties are often more important than working class solidarity; and the small size and instability of informal sector units. Another major factor is the blurring of the usual “employer/employee” distinction; however, workers’ associations do exist, made up largely of self-employed workers or micro-entrepreneurs, such as the rickshaw-pullers’ union in Nagpur, India. In a few instances, informal associations have succeeded in bringing about change at the national political level One such case involves the Philippines’ network of homeworkers associations (PATAMBA), which was invited to take part in a National Tripartite Conference, resulting eventually in improvements in homeworkers’ legal status and working conditions.

Associations of Micro-Entrepreneurs Small-scale entrepreneurs throughout the developing world face special difficulties, including lack of marketable skills, lack of access to capital and credit, low levels of literacy, and lack of access to training and technology. Like workers’ associations, micro-entrepreneurs’ associations may operate on a trade, neighbourhood, or area basis, and may link up with larger, more established employers’ associations or trade bodies to obtain assistance.

Summary (p. 386)

Our world-wide review of IR systems and economic and working conditions suggests that in most of the developing world, workers face problems of a different and far greater order of magnitude than those generally faced in the developing world. In the latter, industrial citizenship (including the right to join unions and go on strike) remains restricted in many cases. While this is certainly true in the developing world, as well, there workers face restrictions on what we might call their economic citizenship, which may be defined as the ability, given a reasonable degree of effort, to hold paid employment in the formal labour force. Rural poverty levels of 30 to 80 percent throughout most of Asia and Latin America and much of Asia, together with a recent sharp decline in formal sector participation (see Tables 13.5 and 13.6), attest to the developing world’s severe and growing “economic citizenship” crisis.

While our traditional IR tools explain much about the world of work in developing countries, there is also much that these tools do not explain. In order, therefore, to understand the full range of employment relationships in developing countries, industrial relationists must add to their traditional toolkits an understanding of economic, community, and regional developments. Without these additional tools, their analysis will of necessity be limited to the more fortunate members of society, and will therefore be of little value from a practical perspective.

.

112

Questions for Discussion 1) Experiential.

2) In unfree systems, unions are either banned outright or given no meaningful role to play. In free systems, they are allowed (with some restrictions) to function as bodies independent of the government advocating for workers. In partially free systems (common in much of the developing world), they have some freedom (especially on paper), but in practice that freedom is often limited through outright repression or the cooptation of union leaders into the government.

3) In centralized systems, bargaining is normally conducted at the industry, state/provincial, or even national level; thus there are relatively few sets of negotiations being carried out, but each affects a large number of workers. Such systems normally feature significant government involvement in the economy and IR system. Often unions’ main function is to get a sympathetic (labour or social democratic) government elected, and then to ensure that once elected, that government enacts policies of benefit to working people. In decentralized systems, economic outcomes are determined mainly by market forces, and collective bargaining is normally conducted at the level of the individual workplace. There are thus large numbers of negotiations being carried out, each affecting a relatively small number of people. Governments intervene far less in the economy and IR system than they do under centralized arrangements. The U.S., Canada, and Britain are major examples of decentralized systems. Sweden, Germany, and Austria are examples of centralized systems.

4) Within Canada, Quebec is distinctive for the extent to which its governments will intervene in the economy and IR system, and for the important role they give the labour movement in determining social and economic policy. IR is taken much more seriously in Quebec than in the rest of Canada—read Le Devoir some time and you will see serious coverage of labour issues other than strikes, sometimes on the front page. Beyond that, the single most distinctive feature of Quebec’s IR system is the decree system, whereby certain terms of collective agreements (mostly monetary ones) can be extended to nonunionized firms operating in the same sector. Other distinctive features include the important role played by employers’ associations, multiple labour federations (a legacy of the confessional unions), the province’s tendency to use tripartite social agreements (or social contracts), and, at least until now, its substitution of a Labour Court system for the more usual labour board. Will Quebec retain these distinctive features? Anybody’s guess. So far the system has been surprisingly resilient. Now, however, it is faced with a new challenge—the first solidly right-wing party (Action democratique) that the province has seen in over 30 years. If this party, which in the past has been known to support ideas such as a flat-rate income tax, takes power or has a share in a coalition government, all bets are off.

5) As noted in this chapter and in Ch. 2, the agreements appear to have greatly increased competition within the Canadian economy, leading to less security of employment, longer hours for those remaining, and a weakening of the country’s social safety net. (It is not entirely clear how many of these effects can be attributed directly to the trade agreements, since other developments pulling the economy in the same direction, such as a major recession, were taking place at the same time). The effect has been particularly

.

113

hard on low-wage industries like the garment industry because these industries compete primarily on the basis of price, and Canada is facing competition from countries, especially in Asia, which do not have the equivalent of our minimum wage laws. There may, therefore, be no realistic way for Canada to retain such industries under full free trade.

6) This has happened in many different ways (as noted in the text at pp. 414–5). Notably, the growing power of multinationals has reduced unions’ ability to influence national policy, and governments’ ability to pursue an ‘independent’ economic policy. Firms which don’t like the policies of a government can move, or threaten to move. Usually the mere threat of relocation is enough to bring the government “into line.” Also, employers’ associations, which for the most part believed in maintaining good relations with unions, have been weakened, in part because of a growth in small and medium-sized enterprises.

There is less support for collective bargaining, and more for “go-it-alone” human resource strategies imposed by firms. Growth in SMEs has also been associated with lower union density rates. Finally, multinationals have begun to compare the performance of their affiliates, with an eye to “disciplining” the bargaining behaviour of local management and work forces. In a number of cases, the threat of closure or relocation has caused the employer to extract major concessions from unions.

7) Pretty much covered in the text. In developed countries, precariousness has mainly taken the form of reduced security of employment, that is, a reduction in the proportion of regular full-time jobs with benefits, and an increase in short-term, temporary, or contractual arrangements offering few or sometimes no benefits. In developing countries, particularly over the past 15 years or so, precariousness has taken the form of a major reduction in employment or even participation in the formal sector (see Tables 13.5 and 13.6).

8) Among other things, because concerted employer anti-union initiatives tend to fare less well against united labour movements, and because labour movements in centralized systems generally have significantly more ability to influence national policy on issues such as taxation and hours of work. Where labour movements are united politically and focus many of their efforts at the political level, it is harder (though still far from impossible) for governments to bring in anti-union legislation which would weaken the labour movement.

9) Because of the fear of a “capital strike”—the flight of companies, particularly multinational ones, from countries pursuing such policies. So long as there are other countries willing to take in the multinationals, there is no solution to this problem. The only solution would be for all governments, or at least all governments in a given region, to agree not to engage in a bidding war for the multinationals. The evidence to date suggests there is little likelihood of this happening.

10) (In large measure, this question is a judgement call). The amount of support such associations can provide depends in part on the type of legislation in place in any given country. For example, in Latin American countries such as Peru and Brazil where selfemployed workers are allowed to join unions, there may be great potential for informal associations. In any kind of worker mobilization, the golden rule is “Strength in numbers,” so any organization that gets people together is likely to help them improve

.

114

their situation. This is particularly true with respect to general political mobilization. On the other hand, as the book notes at p. 433, there are many barriers to informal units, including their small size and insecurity, their lack of access to credit and sometimes even basic amenities like running water, and the blurring of the usual employer-employee distinction in many developing countries. In addition, these organizations often operate on the fringes of if not outside the law. Merger probably isn’t a realistic strategy most of the time because the two types of organizations have different agendas. The growth of the informal sector threatens unions’ bargaining power and the rights and conditions of workers regularly employed in the formal sector. As well, at a time when the unions’ own membership is declining, the added burden of having to support informal sector workers may simply be too great. In general, the strategy of forming long-term alliances between unions and informal associations (see p. 435) is probably a better idea than outright merger.

11) A judgement call—and an interesting debate topic. Possibilities could include the formation of genuinely international unions (not the U.S.-dominated bodies that call themselves that) or coalitions around specific issues (work hours, the abolition of child labour, human rights). On the other hand, it’s important to recognize the legal, cultural, and logistical barriers to genuine internationalization. In this connection, bodies like the European Trade Union Congress (ETUC) bear close observation.

.

115

Chapter 14: Key Themes and Issues Chapter Overview The purpose of this chapter is to take a broader look at where the Canadian IR system as a whole has been going, and where it may be headed in the years to come. The chapter focuses on five key themes that raise critical issues of public labour policy. These themes are the impending demographic crisis, the increasingly precarious nature of work, the continuing lack of meaningful representation, the continuing crisis in the public sector, and threats to public health and safety in the workplace, community and home. It features a look at those themes and at some important findings related to each, as well as a discussion of policy suggestions arising out of each theme. The chapter closes with a discussion of areas where further IR research appears most urgently needed.

Chapter Outline I) Key Themes and Findings A) The Demographic Crisis B) Precarious Employment C) Special Problems Facing Immigrants D) Lack of Meaningful Representation E) Overloaded Conflict Resolution System II) Policy Suggestions and Proposals for Action III) Suggestions for Further Research Chapter Summary I) Key Themes (pp. 392–8)

The Demographic Crisis The first of the five key themes is the impending demographic crisis in the workplace resulting from the impending retirement of large numbers of workers. All across the economy, the workforce is aging, leading to the likelihood of major shortages, particularly of skilled professional and technical workers. The crisis is likely to be most severe in the public sector, where the work force is older than average and few retirees were replaced during the financial crises of the 1990s. In addition to skills shortages, particularly in health care, a possible consequence could be an “unprecedented crunch” on the pension and health-care systems.

.

116

Precarious Employment The increasingly precarious nature of work has important implications for all the actors in the IR system. Despite the improvements the economy has seen over the past five years, there are still many workers who enjoy little real job security, or who are forced to hold temporary or part-time jobs because they cannot find full-time ones. Another symptom of this problem is the continuing high level of overtime, much of it unpaid. A growing lack of job security, low pay, minimal benefits, and irregular hours are particularly prevalent in the private service sector, which has been a major source of new Canadian jobs in recent years.

Special Problems Facing Immigrants Highly skilled immigrants often have difficulty finding employment commensurate with their skills and abilities. While Canada is facing a shortage of professional medical personnel, foreign trained doctors and nurses are not allowed to practice until they have satisfied provincial boards they have the requisite skills. The vetting of credentials is an important safeguard in the health system, but the length of time required prevents many qualified foreign-trained professionals from being employed. Generally, the unemployment rate for immigrants is much higher than for Canadians with equivalent levels of educational attainment, and the gap widens with higher levels of education.

Lack of Meaningful Representation Related to the precarious nature of work is the continued, even growing lack of meaningful representation for many workers. In the private sector, many provinces continue to exclude various groups from unionization rights despite the Charter. In the public sector, the improved economy has not stopped governments from continuing to restrict workers’ rights. The continuing crisis in the public sector (our fourth theme) is related both to the demographic crisis and to the continuing lack of meaningful representation for workers. The first half of 2002 has seen massive levels of public sector labour conflict, particularly in Ontario. Restrictions imposed by governments have included back-to-work legislation, imposition of collective agreement terms, and (in Ontario) virtual imposition of the terms of public sector arbitration awards.

Overloaded Conflict Resolution System The role that arbitrators play in the adjudication of workplace disputes has expanded significantly. The grievance/arbitration process is now a “one stop shopping” centre for any workplace-related dispute. This has led to an increased number of disputes going to arbitration, and to an increase in the length and complexity of the arbitrations themselves, and to higher costs for the parties. At some point, justice delayed becomes justice denied, and the uncertainty of the disposition of a grievance at arbitration affects both the union and the employer in their day to day interactions and in negotiations.

II) Policy Suggestions and Proposals for Action (pp. 398–403)

Demographic Crisis Abolish mandatory retirement to ease the effects of the demographic crisis and allow those who want to continue working past normal retirement age to do so.

.

117

Precarious Employment Introduce pro-rating of employment benefits (including pensions) for part-time employees, and experience rating of EI premiums. The effect of offering benefits to part time workers will be to add some job security and increase the rewards available to part time workers as had been implemented in Saskatchewan. By making it more expensive for employers to lay workers off, the government would encourage them to find more creative means of addressing economic difficulties.

Special Problems Facing Immigrants Rigorously enforce minimum employment standards, removal of unnecessary barriers to professional employment, and linguistic training. Too often immigrants are found working in unsafe jobs at wages below minimum standards. Minimum standards need to be enforced in every jurisdiction. At the same time, all unnecessary barriers to the employment of immigrant professionals should be removed to enable immigrants to make their contribution to Canadian society. Programs for linguistic training need to be adequate to meet the need for the number of immigrants coming to Canada.

Lack of Meaningful Representation End exclusions from unionization rights of all groups other than management or confidential IR personnel, and eliminate certification votes. There is no longer (if there ever was) any policy rationale for excluding workers other than those whose inclusion in the union would pose a clear conflict of interests. Certification votes allow employers to influence the decisions of employees concerning union representation; certification should be on the basis of cards signed alone unless the wishes of employees are unclear.

Overloaded Conflict Resolution System Some alternate forms of conflict resolution need to be tried to take the load off of arbitrators. An expedited process for simple disputes, a “small claims court” type of forum, or arbitrators assigned to specific types of disputes might help to streamline the disputes resolution process.

IV) Suggestions for Further Research (pp. 403–4)

The following are some of the issues that appear to me to be in need of further research.

I’m certain that many readers of this book could come up with their own, equally valid research areas.

• Ways to keep older workers with scarce skills on the job; •

How to assimilate recent immigrants more effectively into the Canadian workplace;

•

How to improve the situation of employees engaged in part-time work and other non-traditional work forms;

•

The effects of provincial exclusion and union certification policies on union membership in Canada; and

.

118

•

The effects of expanded arbitral jurisdiction on the speed and cost of conflict resolution.

Answers to Discussion Questions 1) A judgement call. Some other possibilities might include the changing role of women in the workplace; the future of pay and employment equity under globalization; forms of worker representation other than certified unions; the future of work.

2) The answer to this question will hinge to a great degree on what the “baby boom” generation does as they collectively hit retirement age (the leading edge is now over 60).

If the “boomers” generally retire and do not remain in the workforce at all, then they will tend to be replaced by full-time, full-year workers as they leave. However, if they choose to remain in the labour force they will likely choose part-time, part-year, or other alternative work options including self employment. Another major force will be continued advances in technology that enable alternate work arrangements.

3) Immigration is a critical issue in Canada because of the demographic crisis.

Historically Canada has not trained sufficient numbers of skilled workers needed for industry and has relied on ‘importing’ sufficient numbers of these workers. The impending demographic crisis will again require large numbers of immigrants to help keep our economy going. The challenge for unions will be to organize immigrants who do not have a familiarity with unions in Canada and where there may be a number of barriers to participation in unions based on language, cultural attitudes, etc.

4) Once again, a judgement call. The issues listed under the first question might be used here, as well.

5) Totally a judgement call.

.

119

Appendix 1: Video Cases and Questions Video Case 1: Wal-Mart: King of the World?

Wal-Mart, the "King of big box retailing" and the "reigning giant of modern merchandising," did not become the largest retailer in the world by leaving things to chance. Rather, the company, which was started by Sam Walton in 1962 with one store in Rogers, Arkansas, grew by focusing on its mandate: low prices. By 2005, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. had grown into an international retailing empire employing over 1.6 million 'associates' in over 5000 stores and wholesale clubs in 15 countries with annual sales revenue in excess of $285 billion.

Despite the fact that Wal-Mart's commitment to its "Always Low Prices" business strategy requires it to vigilantly control costs, including labour costs, Wal-Mart avows a "continued allegiance to Sam Walton's lifelong belief that our people make the difference" (Wal-Mart Annual Report, 2005:2). The company contends that one of the most important keys to its success is that it treats its 'people' with respect and provides competitive wages and good benefits. In recent years, however, this corporate tenet has been challenged repeatedly by employee lawsuits alleging a wide range of violations including denying employees pay for regular or overtime hours by forcing them to work 'off the clock', preventing workers from taking rest and lunch breaks, violating health and safety regulations, sexual harassment, and discrimination on a variety of grounds such as gender and disability. Wal-Mart has also been taken to task for wages many claim are below subsistence levels and subsidized by taxpayers since the vast majority of Wal-Mart employees can't afford health insurance and must rely on Medicaid.

Wal-Mart's most notorious battles with its 'associates', however, are over their attempts to unionize. Wal-Mart contends that since it treats its employees so well, they have no need for a union and stands by this belief in spite of being the recipient of hundreds of union certification applications. These applications, Wal-Mart argues, do not reflect the true wishes of their 'associates' but rather are the result of union intimidation and coercion. On this basis, the company aggressively challenges any and all union organizing attempts.

Their zero-tolerance approach includes training all managers in methods designed to deter union applications as their 'first line of defense' and providing them a hot line to alert head office should any signs of union activity be detected. At the first hints of an organizing drive, a special team is dispatched from head office in Bentonville, Arkansas to implement a union-busting campaign that often includes video surveillance, interrogating employees, and firing suspected union supporters. It seems there is little Wal-Mart will not do to avoid a union, including closing profitable stores to avoid any union gaining a foothold.

Canadian Wal-Mart employees are not immune to the company's union-busting campaigns, although many of their more aggressive tactics are constrained by labour laws that are both stricter and more strictly enforced than in the United States. One of the early - and surprisingly tame - battles was waged in Thompson, Manitoba, in 2003. The store,

.

120

which opened in the mid 1990s, is the largest store in the area and draws customers from hundreds of kilometres around. The area is one with a long history of and support for unionism, a factor that may have contributed to the fact that 40 percent of the Thompson store employees signed union membership cards indicating their support for the recognition of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) as the union representing store employees. In Manitoba, however, unless at least 65 percent of employees sign union membership cards, a secret-ballot vote is required before a union can be certified. As this video begins, in June, 2003, that critical vote is only a few days away and both the UFCW and the Wal-Mart employees who support the union are working hard to ensure a strong show of support.

The union and employees, who have been working energetically since April, hope that the upcoming vote will result in the only unionized Wal-Mart store in North America.

The first battle to unionize a Canadian Wal-Mart was waged in Windsor, where the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) responded to Wal-Mart's repeated unfair labour practices by certifying the UFCW, making the Windsor store the first unionized WalMart in the world. The Board held that the actions and statements of several Wal-Mart managers intimidated employees and caused them to approach the union certification vote with the idea that a vote in support of the union would mean the store would be closed and they would lose their jobs. Therefore, even though fewer than 50 percent of employees voted in favour of unionization, the Board utilized a section of the Ontario Labour Relations Act to impose certification on the store. Unfortunately, for the union and its supporters, after Wal-Mart refused to sign a first collective agreement and fought the certification all the way to the Supreme Court, the union was eventually decertified.

Another nasty battle, waged in Quesnel, British Columbia, was also unsuccessful. Thus, the union and workers in Thompson hope this store will "be the domino that knocks over a giant." In order to avoid Wal-Mart's usual anti-union campaign, organizers in Thompson have kept a low profile, phoning and visiting employees at their homes.

Nonetheless, as the vote approaches, the union is nervous about the company's apparent lack of response. Despite the fact that Wal-Mart feels Manitoba's labour laws put the company at a disadvantage because they place strict limits on employer communications with employees during an organizing drive, the company union-busting team of managers, lawyers, and consultants has yet to launch their customary, aggressive campaign.

Union supporters and organizers are confused by Wal-Mart's relative inactivity and find themselves waiting for "the other shoe to drop." This drive is crucial not just for WalMart but also for the UFCW since a large proportion of their membership work in Safeway and other large grocers. Wal-Mart's plans to expand into the grocery market will place downward pressure on wages and working conditions throughout the industry and threaten the union's hard-fought gains. The Thompson organizing drive is a pivotal domino and, given the high stakes, Wal-Mart's uncharacteristic inactivity seems inexplicable. As voting day approaches, tension mounts, and a "Vote No to the Union," leaflet is circulated; however, it appears to be the responsibility of anti-union employees,

.

121

with no input from the company. In fact, the only statement Wal-Mart has made is to confirm that it will not close the Thompson store, regardless of the outcome of the vote.

Finally, on the day of the vote, Wal-Mart makes its big move. It claims that the CBC, filming for the National, compromised the fairness of the secret-ballot vote by filming workers entering the store and by conducting an employee interview in the Wal-Mart parking lot, within view of the store. The company claims that any employee who overhead the interview may have been influenced. As it happens, the interview was of a vocal anti-union employee, but nonetheless, Wal-Mart relies on this as justification to refuse to sign a routine document attesting to the fairness of the voting procedure. The company's complaint is not, this time, with the union. Rather, they contend that CBC has violated the returning officer's rules and since the votes can't even be counted until the fair-vote certificate is signed, the ballot box must be sealed and must remain that way until the issue is resolved by the Manitoba Labour Board. Understandably, the UFCW organizers are frustrated. What appeared to be a clean campaign was stymied yet again by stall tactics.

Video Source: The National, August 7, 2003, Running Time: 18:13 Additional Sources: Wal-Mart 2005 Annual Report; www.walmartfacts.com; www. walmartstores.com; www.refresher.com/!walton.html; www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/03/ma_276_01.html; www.walmartworkerscanada.com; www.ufcw.ca/justice_at_wal_mart.cgi Questions: 1. In August, 2003, the votes were finally counted and revealed that employees voted 61-54 against union representation. The UFCW contends the results would have been different if company surveillance cameras had not discouraged 27 employees from even casting ballots. Wal-Mart contends this vote provides further evidence that its associates choose not to be represented by a union. With whom do you agree? Why? 2. Since this video was filmed, the UFCW/Wal-Mart battle has been waged at several other Canadian locations. However, as of March, 2006, while employees at many locations have voted in favour of unionization, none have yet managed to conclude a first collective agreement. Yet, employer resistance is only one factor albeit an important one - contributing to the complexity and difficulty of organizing a union at Wal-Mart. What other factors make organizing in this industry, and particularly at this employer, so difficult?

.

122

Video Case 2: Made in Canada: The Labour behind the Label In recent years, consumers have increasingly used their spending power to pressure producers and employers to utilize environmentally responsible production processes or to abide by international labour and human rights conventions. The Body Shop pioneered the concept of socially responsible business practices with a commitment to community trade and human rights. Since then, companies all over the globe have jumped on the bandwagon. For example, The Gap responded to public pressure and allowed independent human-rights groups to monitor the working conditions in its factories in Central America. The Gap also produces annual Social Responsibility Reports, for which it has earned measured praise. Nike, on the other hand, continues to draw criticism despite its Corporate Responsibility Reports.

The garment industry has been targeted by both consumer groups and labour advocates as one where competitive pressures fuel the search for ever-cheaper production and result in particularly harsh working conditions. Especially in third-world countries, garment workers far too often toil for long hours, receiving piece-rates that equate to only a fraction of the prevailing minimum wage, if one even exists. These sweatshops, as they have become known, raise the ire of socially responsible consumers who often avoid purchasing any garment made in a third-world country for fear of perpetuating these practices. Rather, many socially responsible consumers favour garments made in North America, especially those made in Canada where minimum labour standards far exceed those normally provided for garment workers.

Unfortunately, the "Made in Canada" label does not certify compliance with prevailing labour laws and sweatshops are now disturbingly common in Canada. Especially in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, the main centres for the garment industry in Canada, sweatshops abound. Employing mainly immigrant workers who have few, if any, other job possibilities, production facilities in industrial strip malls or individual's homes pay workers pennies per piece to cut fabric, sew seams, or clip threads. More often than not, the piece-rate equates to well below minimum wage, sometimes as little as 40 cents per hour.

Most piece-rates are such that even the most productive worker cannot earn minimum wage. As workers gain experience and become more productive, the piece-rate is often adjusted making it even harder to approach minimum wage. Even where workers are not paid by the piece, they are often only compensated for a fraction of the hours they work and seldom paid overtime, regardless of how many hours they put in. Since enforcement of employment standards is complaint driven, employers avoid detection because employees are either unaware of their rights and how to enforce them or because they are afraid of reprisals.

Recognizing that workers' vulnerability is often a function of their available options, UNITE HERE, a union that represents workers in several industries including apparel and textile manufacturing, distribution and retail, offers language and skills training to garment workers in order to improve their chances of getting a job that pays at least the

.

123

minimum wage. Garment industry jobs, however, are disappearing in Canada.

International pressures have forced many Canadian garment manufacturers, even those who rely on sweatshops, to move their operations to lower-wage countries. Producers who remain in Canada face pressures to reduce their labour costs even further.

Recognizing that globalization and trade liberalization policies have resulted in profound deterioration of the conditions under which clothing is produced both in Canada and internationally, researchers have developed a number of recommended responses. For example, company and multi-company codes of conduct impose minimum standards on suppliers and their contractors. The Bay, whose Code of Conduct is considered one of the best, also monitors suppliers' production facilities both in Canada and abroad. Even the Bay admits, however, that monitoring is extremely difficult since most manufacturers employ multiple levels of contractors and subcontractors.

Another recommendation is for governments to require clothing labels to contain more information regarding where, and under what conditions, garments are produced. The Canadian federal government has also been urged to develop policies that will provide preferential treatment to foreign suppliers who prove their adherence to international labour conventions and domestic labour legislation. To improve their ability to detect and monitor standards in the Canadian garment industry, the federal government has been urged to reform employment standards legislation to allow third party complaints, provide a central registry for homeworkers, and make both retailers and manufacturers liable for their contractors' and sub-contractors' labour rights violations. Finally, reforms to collective bargaining legislation, such as broader-based bargaining and contract extension decrees, would allow more garment workers to access the benefits and protections of unionization (Yanz, Jeffcott, Ladd and Atlin, 1999).

Video Source: The National: Made in Canada, January 16, 2004, Running Time: 19:18 Additional Sources: www.unitehere.ca; www.unitehere.org; www.sweatshopwatch.org; www.cleanclothesconnection.org; Yanz, Linda, Bob Jeffcott, Deena Ladd, and Joan Atlin. Maquila Solidarity Network (Canada). (1999). Policy Options to Improve Standards for Women Garment Workers in Canada and Internationally. Status of Women Canada; Industry Canada maintains a website dedicated to corporate social responsibility that includes, among other things, "a report that analyses the self-assessed corporate social responsibility management practices of 53 large Canadian companies, and reviews the public reporting practices of Canada's 300 largest corporations" (www.conferenceboard.ca/GCSR/national-csr.htm).

Questions: 1. Before you purchase clothing, do you consider where it was made? In your opinion, what proportion of consumers avoids purchasing clothing that may have been produced in sweatshops?

.

124

2. You are the Vice President of Human Resources for a small but growing Canadian clothing retailer. Since most of your suppliers' factories are in North America your company had - until recently - assumed that their workers' terms and conditions of employment at least met prevailing minimum standards. Recent media reports suggest otherwise. Furthermore, many of your suppliers subcontract out parts of the production process and you fear conditions in the subcontractors' facilities are even worse. Given the looming public relations nightmare, your company has decided to begin developing a Code of Conduct for Suppliers. Using resources such as the internet collect information regarding what standards your company should rely upon in developing a Code of Conduct that will provide appropriate levels of protection for employees without imposing unrealistic standards upon suppliers.

Video Case 3: Air Up There In 2002 in Dryden, Ontario, the Weyerhauser Company, a large paper manufacturer, started construction on a project whose laudable objective was to reduce emissions.

Unfortunately, one of the project’s short-term effects was to increase emissions.

Moreover, if the wind happened to be from the southwest, those emissions would be blown back onto the site where employees were working.

It wasn’t long before workers started getting sick. Among the symptoms most commonly noted were headaches, dizziness, and nausea. Glen Drews, a contract electrician who also served as a health and safety representative, began keeping a detailed log of safety-related events on the construction site. Over the next two years or so, his logbook would become a very lengthy tome. Unfortunately, it would prove extremely difficult for Drews, who feared for his workmates’ safety as well his own, to make his concerns heard.

The company had agreed that when there were so many emissions in the air that visibility was seriously impaired, work could stop. Otherwise, employees were expected to keep working, wearing respirators if need be. At this point, the company thought it was the smell that was making people nauseous. But the respirator masks were heavy, hot, and generally very uncomfortable for people doing heavy physical work. As a result, most chose not to wear them. After consultations with the Ministry of Labour, the company decided that the respirators were adequate for emergencies.

By 2003, there was reason to believe that it was more than just the odour that was making Weyerhauser employees sick. That year, about 140 employees went to the local hospital’s emergency room. On one memorable day, 25 of them visited the ER. When the Weyerhauser employees arrived, recalls Dr. Mark Daumer, head of emergency in the local hospital, the whole emergency room smelled. In his view, the workers’ exposure to the emissions had certainly caused their short-term symptoms, and in some cases long-term ones as well.

.

125

Meanwhile, both the emissions and the struggle to be heard were taking their toll on Drews’ personal life, making him sick and putting his marriage at risk. At one point, he said he wanted to quit his job; his wife said he couldn’t afford to. He began suffering short-term memory loss. At certain times, his wife said, she didn’t even recognize him any more, because his behaviour was so changed from what it had been.

Still Drews didn’t stop his crusade. In 2003, he became a gas tester. He would regularly find higher levels of various gasses than the company did. “Perhaps this was because I calibrated my meter better,” he said. Among the gasses he found in the air was hydrogen sulphide.

Eventually there were so many complaints that Dr. Leon Genesof, chief physician for Ontario’s Ministry of Labour, visited the site. His conclusion was that hot ash in the air was irritating workers’ lungs and making them ill. The Labour Ministry issued certain directives following Dr. Genesof’s visit, directives that the company appears to have followed. Nonetheless, workers continued to become ill. In fact, they even continued to become ill after the air emissions project was completed in 2004. But only a few would speak out publicly about their safety concerns; most feared being labeled as ‘troublemakers’ by the industry.

Drews’ overall conclusion was, “There’s a system out there to protect us. It failed us, drastically.”

Then, in late 2004, he made contact with the Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers (OCOW), an organization funded by the provincial Workplace Safety Insurance Board. OCOW was sufficiently concerned by what Drews told them to send a team of doctors to Dryden and Thunder Bay to examine Weyerhauser employees and find out for themselves what the effects of the emissions had been on the workers. After examining some 350 workers, OCOW concluded that while further study was needed in some cases, the concentration of gasses in the air was sufficient to have made the workers sick, if they were exposed to enough of them over a long enough period of time. OCOW also found that a smaller number of workers had been exposed to a high level of toxic chemicals over a relatively short period of time.

This finding surely represents some measure of vindication for Drews, who has become a hero to many of his co-workers. For its part, Weyerhauser banned Drews from the site, declaring him a “disruptive influence.” At this writing, it isn’t clear what the long-term effects of exposure to the various emissions have been on the workers, many of whom have reported respiratory and neurological symptoms in addition to headaches, nausea, and dizziness.

.

126

Questions 1. What is the objective of health and safety legislation? (You may wish to reread part of Chapter 6 to answer this question). Does the Weyerhauser experience suggest that this objective is being met?

2. At no point in the video is it suggested that Weyerhauser broke the law. What does this suggest about the health and safety legislation in force at the time?

3. The video also says little about the role of the organization’s health and safety committee (aside from the role played by Glen Drews). What might a health and safety committee have done to improve matters at Weyerhauser?

4. Do you agree with Drews’ conclusion that “the system failed us drastically”?

5. What do you see as some long-term solutions to the kind of problems raised in this case?

Video Source: “Air Up There.” From The National, Feb. 3, 2005.

Note: This case will clearly be very useful in connection with Chapter 6 (Employment Legislation).

Video Case 4: Pension Promise As we noted in Chapter 5 (see pp. 144-5), bankruptcies have been an increasingly common feature of Canadian economic life. This has been particularly true for the steel industry. In Hamilton, Ontario, for example, half a dozen steel firms have gone under in recent years.

Such bankruptcies have proved devastating for steelworkers like Ray Vacaras and Tom Cuthbert, who put in decades of hard, dirty work only to see their hopes of a decent, comfortable retirement go up in smoke when the firms for which they worked went bellyup, leaving them with drastically reduced pensions. Tom, for example, was supposed to receive over $2200 a month after 35 years with Cold Metal Productions in Hamilton.

When Cold Metal declared bankruptcy a few years back, he saw his pension reduced to $960 a month, or well below half of what it should have been. “I got screwed,” he says, with classic understatement. Ray, a 27-year employee for the same company, saw his pension take a similar hit. The result was that Ray and Tom, by then both over 60, were forced to go back to work—at jobs paying far less than the ones they’d had at Cold Metal.

The two have reacted in different ways to the tragedy. Tom feels great anger—so much anger that he doesn’t even want to talk to former workmates. Ray’s reaction has been one

.

127

of depression. As his wife Marilyn reports, he would sit long hours without saying anything. “I think he felt that he had failed in some way,” she says.

Unfortunately, as Toronto pension lawyer Hugh O’Reilly notes, it has been far from a rare occurrence to see companies going bankrupt with underfunded pension plans. The problem, says O’Reilly, is that by underfunding the pension plan, by not making their contribution, “the employer has made employees into financiers.” But unlike other ‘financiers,’ such as banks or suppliers, these employees have had no say as to whether or not they would choose to be put into such a position. And that position has not been an enviable one. Up until now, workers seeking to recover back wages or to have pension payments continue as previously agreed have been last in bankrupt firms’ long list of creditors, after the tax collector, lenders, and even suppliers.

A private member’s bill, Bill C-281, introduced in 2004 by NDP MP Pat Martin of Winnipeg, would have gone a long way toward correcting the situation. This bill, which received second reading in May of 2005, amended the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to provide that moneys owed to workers or that were for their benefit would have been given first priority in the distribution of proceeds realized from bankruptcies. The bill would also have amended the Canada Business Corporations Act to provide a convenient way for former employees of bankrupt firms to press back wage claims against the firms’ directors.

Although C-281 appeared to have fairly broad support in the House of Commons, after passing second reading it was quietly shelved. The Liberal minority government then replaced it with a much weaker bill, C-55. In this bill, employees with back wage claims against bankrupt employers are given priority over other creditors (except for suppliers), but only up to a maximum of $2000. The bill also gives priority status to any unremitted employee pension plan contributions, and any unpaid employer contributions in respect of defined contribution pension plans. However, once again, these pension claims do not have priority over claims made by suppliers.

Before the January, 2006 election, the government agreed that this bill, which received Royal Assent in November of 2005, would not be proclaimed in force until June 30 of 2006, at the earliest. The new Conservative government has not thus far committed itself to proclaiming the bill in force; it is therefore not clear whether the bill will in fact come into force at any point in the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, the future is increasingly unclear for Ray Vacaras. Since losing his job with Cold Metal, he has lost a kidney to cancer. His wife Marilyn says, “I know what he’s thinking. . .that he’s not going to see any of his pension. And that’s not fair.”

Questions 1. Why are issues around payment of back wages and pensions of particular importance in today’s highly competitive international economy?

.

128

2. Why are these issues of particular importance given the demographics of today’s Canadian work force?

3. From a policy perspective, what are some arguments in favour of moving employees of bankrupt firms up to the head of the line of creditors?

4. From a policy perspective, what are some arguments against moving those employees up to the head of the line of creditors?

5. If you were a member of the federal cabinet, what solution or solutions would you advocate to the problems raised in this video?

Video Source: “Pension Promises.” From The National, Nov. 15, 2004.

Note: This case would be particularly useful in connection with either Chapter 2 (Management and the Economy) or Chapter 5 (Union Actions and Impacts).

.

129

Appendix II: Answers to Case Questions Case HS.1: CN Railway Case 1) Absolutely not (and in real life, it did not). The machinist is simply asserting his legal rights, and he is more than justified by the fact that he has already been injured attempting to work under the unsafe conditions. The employer's argument is ludicrous; there is no other reason why CN would have imposed the penalty.

2) I would have backed the worker up. The conditions are so bad that the company risks serious embarrassment and perhaps legal sanctions if it doesn't "clean up its act."

3) It is not clear from the case whose idea the disciplinary hearing was. Be that as it may, the foreman's behaviour was certainly not constructive. I would have serious concerns about his fitness for the job if I were a senior manager. I would call him into my office, reprimand him for his ignorance of the health and safety legislation, and then send him on a week-long health and safety course. Any further incidents of this kind would result in (at least) a reassignment or demotion. Among other things, the foreman is probably guilty of negligence for allowing the machinist's work area to deteriorate in his absence.

Given that there have been a number of previous safety incidents, the foreman's health and safety record may bear close examination.

4) While he has been perfectly within his rights throughout, he might find it safer, in future, to go through the union and/or the health and safety committee. (I am assuming that his job is unionized). The continuing unsafe conditions suggest that management is in need of some serious re-education around safety issues; the union may be able to ensure that it receives that re-education. The fact that he has filed several health and safety complaints in the past suggests that the company may be singling him out for this reason, given that his record is otherwise unblemished.

Case HR.1: Subway Sandwiches Case 1) The duty to accommodate means that employers must make special allowance for those who, because of their sex, religion, or some other factor that constitutes a prohibited ground of discrimination, cannot comply with legitimate business requirements. Since pregnancy is clearly related to sex, the duty to accommodate comes into play in this case. To fail to accommodate a pregnant woman would amount to gender discrimination.

2) The store management didn’t accommodate Ms. Mitchell at all. The manager wasn’t even willing to take one or two of Mitchell’s shifts for her. Without more information, it is difficult to say where the point of “undue hardship” might have come, but at the very least, the employer should have kept Mitchell’s job open for her until the end of EIsupported pregnancy and maternity leave (had she had a normal delivery) or for several

.

130

weeks after the miscarriage, to allow her to recover from this physical and emotional trauma.

3) This is an open-and-shut case. Mitchell was dismissed on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. The dismissal is therefore unjust, and she should either be reinstated or given compensation in lieu of reinstatement in the event she does not wish to return to the employer (which is quite likely). The human rights commission should also order a copy of its decision posted in the workplace, as a deterrent to prevent the employer from intimidating other female employees in the same way.

Case C.1: City of Toronto Case 1) This case is potentially of great significance because it addresses a situation which is becoming increasingly common: a union's application for certification of a largely parttime work force. The growth of part-time and other atypical forms of employment makes it likely that many union organizing efforts will be involving part-timers, especially in the private service sector.

2) Judgement call.

3) Bill 7 replaces the old card count with a "quickie" vote. The reason the vote must be conducted within five working days is to get an accurate measure of employees' true wishes regarding unionization while minimizing the possibility of employer interference with the process. Evidence from the U.S. suggests that the month-long election campaigns there often result in significant employer interference. The rate of union success in certification applications has gone down sharply in the U.S. since the card count was replaced by the vote in 1947.

4) Yes (as the chair did). To overturn the results of the vote would be to have conducted a vote but not counted it—something which, as the chair said in his decision, would be very bad for workplace relations. Second, the aim of Bill 7 is clear—to conduct certification votes quickly to minimize the possibility of employer interference. The type of detailed enumeration procedure sought by the employer would make it impossible to conduct a vote within five weeks, let alone five days. Third, there seems no reasonable way, given the fluidity of employment relationships, to determine who is on payroll at any given time. Things are changing so fast that by the time one had made the determination, the situation would have changed and the job would have to be done all over again. The only meaningful way to determine certification in such a case is on the basis of a majority of those voting.

As matters transpired, the union allowed the vote to be conducted using the employer's "expanded" voting list. This agreement eliminates a potentially strong argument in favour of the employer's position: that those not actually on payroll at the time would not have had the opportunity to vote. Clearly they did (though equally clearly, few chose to avail themselves of that opportunity).

.

131

5) One approach, and perhaps the only feasible one from this perspective, would be to conduct the vote during the summer, when the part-time labour force would be considerably larger. This said, there seems little reason why the union should have to wait six to eight months for a vote, which could cost the organizing drive its momentum.

6) The drawbacks of requiring a majority of the full bargaining unit are particularly apparent in a case like this, where there is considerable dispute as to who or how many should be included in the bargaining unit and many possible bargaining unit members would not have been on payroll. For that matter, many might not even be contemplating a return to work the following summer. Except for the odd pro- or anti-union diehard, there would be little reason for someone in such a position to have voted in the campaign.

Such discrepancies are less severe in a more 'normal' workplace setting involving fulltimers. But even there, people can be sick, on vacation, on training courses, out of the office on assignment. Etc. It seems inherently unfair that an abstention, especially an involuntary abstention resulting from unavoidable absence from work, should be counted as a vote against certification.

Case UL.1: Matrix Logistics Case 1) Overall, it appears that the company did everything it could to thwart the formation of the union.

2) I would rule that Lindsay’s speech in and of itself constituted an unfair labour practice.

Telling employees they should vote against a union extends far beyond the permissible limits of employer freedom of speech. The aim was clearly to intimidate employees into voting against certification, and indeed Lindsay’s speech appears to have had that effect.

The fact that he said employees could vote for the union in another six months if the company didn’t improve matters is of little relevance. Such a speech constitutes blatant interference with the formation of a union.

3) The company’s attitude about dust and the broken arm on the garbage compactor appears casual in the extreme. In my view, a health and safety complaint would have been fully warranted. Had the company done more to correct these safety problems, it might have been able to mount a stronger case against Conrad and Fleming.

4) “Time theft” resulting from employees’ taking time out to smoke is indeed a serious problem, since it may result in the loss of 10% or more of an employee’s productive working time. The problem here is that there were almost certainly many other smoking employees besides Conrad and Fleming; the company appears to have made no attempt to address these other employees’ “time theft.”

5) One approach would have been to engage in consultations with the union, perhaps using the joint labour–management committee. Another would have been to raise the issue in the joint health and safety committee (although the company’s attitude toward other health and safety issues does suggest that the health and safety committee isn’t

.

132

something it would take very seriously). A third approach would have been to write a detailed smoking policy, and then enforce it consistently. (Admittedly, this last would not be an easy thing to do, given that in all likelihood anywhere from a quarter to half or more of the employees would have been regular smokers. Nonetheless, if workers are going to be disciplined for smoking, the company needs to prove it is enforcing its smoking policy consistently. Given the history of anti-union behaviour which the company has exhibited, an arbitrator would need to see evidence that several other workers had been discharged under the policy; even then, the dismissal of a union activist for such a reason would likely have borne the taint of anti-union animus). Unless the company is prepared to ban all smoking on its grounds and premises, a policy that could well be unworkable from a practical perspective, there may not be a great deal it can do about the “time theft” issue.

I would have ruled, as the labour board did, that the dismissal of Conrad and Fleming constituted an unfair labour practice, as there was clear evidence that the company had been engaging in anti-union behaviour for some time, and no evidence that other employees had been disciplined for smoking. The fact that the company did nothing about the broken arm on the garbage compactor weakens its “time theft” case. If it were serious about “time theft,” it would at least have done something to prevent employees from having a perfectly legitimate work-related excuse to go outside and smoke on a regular basis.

Case A.1: Fording Coal Case 1) The ban was imposed for safety reasons. The company didn't want people operating potentially dangerous equipment while using cell phones. Whether or not this was justified is a bit of a judgement call. In principle, I, personally, approve of the ban.

However, the company's position seems less credible given the lack of a ban on contractors' cell phones, the rigidity with regard to health and safety representatives, and the fact that the company appears to have made it difficult for people to use other types of phones, as well.

2) This seems a bit of a stretch (especially in the case of the union stewards), though not totally without foundation. Perhaps the company could provide cell phones (on its premises)which stewards or safety representatives could use to conduct legitimate business.

3) I would have been forced to agree with the company's position and deny the grievance (as the arbitrator in fact did). Though the company has not been very tactful, or even totally credible, in its cellular phone policy, the policy does involve a legitimate exercise of management rights.

4) It could not, because an arbitrator has no jurisdiction over what outside contractors do.

This might be a relevant consideration for a health and safety adjudicator, however.

.

133

5) A judgement call, but I personally don't think this the wisest way to proceed. One approach would be to try work the issue out in the general labour–management or health and safety committee, at least as regards safety representatives (whose case for using the cellular phones is, I think, stronger). If that didn't work, then I would approach the health and safety branch of the labour ministry and claim interference with the safety representatives' ability to do their job. There is enough evidence in the case to suggest that their ability to do their job has been interfered with due to the company's policy and ad hoc actions regarding workplace phones. Perhaps then some sort of accommodation could be worked out. The case for stewards is much weaker.

Case A.2: City Consumers’ Co-Op Case 1) The employer’s policy seems like a formula for disaster. On the one hand, the ‘new’ policy under which the grievor was denied permission to change a shift for a dental appointment can work real hardship because of its rigidity. On the other hand, the policy appears to have been most inconsistently enforced. Perhaps a policy requiring a certain amount of notice or compelling the worker wanting to change the shift to find a substitute would have been more reasonable.

2) Although more evidence is needed to answer this question fully, I am inclined to think not. The grievor would understandably have been shocked to learn that actions that had drawn no more than a slap on the wrist (if that) when others had engaged in them were causing the employer to terminate her. And conducting a termination interview over the telephone strikes me as ill-advised, to say the least (see next question). This said, the grievor’s attitude is certainly unsatisfactory and does warrant discipline.

3) In Browne’s case, I would only have used the telephone to summon the grievor to a personal interview, and that interview would not have been a termination interview.

Rather, I would have used the interview to attempt to find out what the employee’s problems were, to offer her assistance through an employee assistance program or some other form of counseling, and to inform her of the consequences should her attendance continue to be spotty. Progressive discipline must be used in such cases.

4) Most employees aren’t absent for no reason. After considering the grievor’s attendance record, which certainly seems to be quite bad, I would have called her in for an interview to try to determine what her problems were, and to offer her any help possible in resolving those problems.

5) Neither the company’s policy on shift changes nor its handling of the case in question is at all acceptable. The policy was enforced totally haphazardly, and there was no attempt to apply progressive discipline to the grievor’s case. I would have imposed a brief suspension (five days maximum) based entirely on the grievor’s insubordination, and directed the employer to refer her to an employee assistance program to deal with the problems leading to her repeated absenteeism. I might also have suggested that the company redraft its shift change policy, to make it fairer and more consistent.

.

134

Case A.3: Delta Toronto East Hotel Case 1) For reasons explained very clearly in the final paragraph of the case. Essentially, to deny the right of representation while the employer is still considering its action means that the right is denied forever.

2) The employee did not waive his right to representation prior to his termination. Clause 12.6 of the collective agreement stipulates that should an employee not wish union representation, he or she must sign a waiver. Otherwise, the employee should be considered as having retained the right to union representation.

3) It is extremely difficult to envisage such a case. About the only such situation I can imagine would be one where the employee’s continued presence on the premises posed imminent physical danger to others (i.e., the employee had gone berserk or was threatening others with a weapon) and no union representative could be found. In general, such cases would be those which would also justify the immediate arrest and detention of the individual in question.

4) By granting employees the right to union representation provided for in the agreement.

(Actually, I must admit I worded the question in the book wrong. The question should have addressed the employer’s ability to sustain the dismissal at arbitration. Most unions would still be obliged to take the dismissal grievance to arbitration, but assuming the employee had received appropriate representation, the case could well become a winnable one for the employer, although we would need to know more about the employee’s record to assert this with certainty in the present case).

5) As the final paragraph in the case suggests, the arbitrator has little choice other than to overturn the dismissal, regardless of the substantive merits of the case.

.

135

Appendix III: Sample Exams Final Exam (undergraduate course) Time: 3 Hours Aids allowed: None General Directions This examination contains four parts. Be sure that you use separate exam booklets for Parts I and II (Section I) and Parts III and IV (Section II). Be sure, as well, that you follow suggested time allocations for each section, and that you double-space all answers.

Those failing to use separate exam booklets for each section or failing to double-space may lose marks. Be sure to return your test paper along with your exam booklets.

Note that, as in the mid-term, point form is acceptable for Parts I and II (definitions) and short answer questions, but is not acceptable for final answers to essay questions in Parts III and IV. However, I do recommend that you write a brief point form outline for each essay question you answer.

Within each part of the exam, unless otherwise indicated all questions are weighted equally. Each definition is thus worth 1.5%, and each short answer question, 3%.

SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS AND SHORT ANSWERS Part I: Definitions (20 minutes, 12%) Define any eight of the following terms. You may do so in a few words, a phrase, or a sentence, so long as you convey the full meaning of the term. Point form is allowed on this section of the exam. Examples: anti-scab bill. A bill which bars firms on strike from hiring workers to replace the strikers. Yellow-dog contract. A contract which requires workers, as a condition of employment, to pledge not to join a union, or to resign their membership if they have already joined. Scab: A strikebreaker.

1) business unionism 2) grievance mediation 3) PC 1003 4) express dismissal 5) Quebec Federation of Labour (QFL) 6) designation of essential employees (under public service labour legislation) 7)bona fide occupational qualification 8) indirect union wage effect 9) internal system (health and safety) 10) expedited arbitration

.

136

Part II: Short Answers (18%, 30 minutes) Answer any six of the following questions as clearly and concisely as you can. Normally it should be possible to do so within one to three sentences. Do not spend too long on each question; however, do answer all aspects of each question. Once again, point form is permitted for questions in this part of the exam.

1) a) Explain briefly why the notion of a settlement zone (in negotiations) is not always applicable. b) List at least two issues to which the notion of a settlement zone would not apply.

2) What were some problems with the association-consultation approach formerly used by federal public servants?

3) List some important differences in provincial labour relations legislation.

4) List at least three functions of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC). Is collective bargaining with employers one of those functions?

5) a) Explain briefly the problem with using height and weight tests as qualifications for police officers? b) What was the rationale for using such tests? c) What’s a fairer and more effective way of achieving the same objective?

6) Nicholas Q. Knucklehead, business agent for the United Brickheads of Amerika, comes to the bargaining table after slamming the door, pounding his fist on the table, and screaming: "All right, you suits! We want a ten percent pay raise, a fifteen percent increase in our pensions, stronger tech change protection and fresh paper towels in the washrooms. If we don't get all of that, we're hitting the bricks at eight o'clock next Monday morning!" Comment on Nicholas' negotiating strategy. Is he the one you would choose to represent you at the table?

7) List at least three factors underlying the growth of the labour movement during the early postwar period (1945-1960).

8) a) Why are worker refusals to contain work in settings they believe unsafe far more common in unionized than in non-unionized establishments? b) What would be a way of providing non-unionized workers greater protection in such cases.

9) Explain why you do, or do not, think the exclusion of management personnel and farmworkers from unionization rights in Ontario to be equally justified.

10) a) Explain why unions prefer a card count rather than a vote as a means of establishing certification. b) Which method do you think fairer, and why?

.

137

SECTION 2: CASE AND ESSAYS Part III: Case (65 minutes, 35%) Read the following case, and then answer the questions which appear at the end of it.

You may answer the questions separately or as a connected essay—whichever you prefer.

But do write complete sentences and paragraphs, please. Point markings are indicated after each question.

Arbitration Case between HERE, Local 75 and Delta Toronto East Hotel (Note: This case appears in the text as Case A.3 at pp. 459-463; therefore I won't reprint it here).

Questions 1) What is the principle of progressive discipline, and why is it important in industrial relations? (10) 2) What are some situations in which the principle of progressive discipline does not apply? (5) 3) If you were the arbitrator, what factors would you take into account in deciding what penalty to impose on Mr. Watson-Wright, and to what extent do you think progressive discipline would apply? (10) 4) What would your ruling be in this case, and why? (10) Part IV: Essays (65 minutes, 35%) Write a coherent and well-organized essay on one and only one of the following topics.

Be sure to back up generalizations with specific facts. Point-form is not acceptable for final answers to essay questions. Complete sentences and paragraphs, please. However, I do advise that you take five minutes to write a brief point-form outline of your essay.

This may help you, especially in cases where you are unable to finish.

To the extent possible, answer all aspects of the question.

1) "Most strikes are about more than just money." Discuss, using specific illustrations from the coursepack and from our class discussions. You may agree, disagree, or take a middle position.

2) Compare and contrast Canadian labour relations legislation and Canadian employment legislation, broadly defined. In your answer, consider the subjects

.

138

covered by both kinds of legislation, as well as the overall approach taken by each.

Be sure to address possible areas of complementarity as well as difference.

3) In the early years of this century, the Carpenters' Union signed a collective agreement containing only about eight brief clauses. Today, many collective agreements run 50 to 75 pages, or even longer; most have a great deal of legalistic language; some are so difficult to understand that even shop stewards and IR managers sometimes have trouble figuring out what a particular provision means. Discuss the reasons for the evolution of Canadian collective agreements. At the end of your essay, indicate whether or not you think this evolution has been healthy.

4) Write an essay in which you discuss the evolution of Canadian labour relations legislation from 1870 through 1967. Use at least four specific pieces of legislation as examples, and explain how these laws did or did not help promote union growth.

Your essay should also discuss the economic and political contexts in which the legislation was enacted.

Extra Credit (2%) List two important recent developments on the labour scene and the reasons for their significance.

.

139

Mid-Term Exam, undergraduate course Time allowed: 1 1/2 hours Aids allowed: None General Instructions

Read the test over completely before starting to write. Answer all questions and, to the extent possible, all aspects of each question. Be sure to follow the suggested time allocations at the top of each section. Note that point-form is acceptable for sections 1 and 2 (definitions and short-answer questions) but not for section 3 (the mini-essays).

Note also that within each section, all questions are weighted equally, except as otherwise noted; for example, each definition in Sec. 1 is worth 3%.

It is imperative that you double-space all answers, especially essay questions, to allow room for comments.

SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS (15 MINUTES, 15%) Define any five of the following terms as precisely as you can. You may do so in a few words or a phrase or two, so long as you show me that you understand the meaning of the term in question. Examples: Scab. A strikebreaker. Grievance. An allegation that the collective agreement has been violated.

1. direct union wage impact 2. structural unemployment 3. institutional perspective on IR 4. union replacement strategy 5. Knights of Labour 6. competitive labour market.

SECTION 2: SHORT-ANSWERS (30 MINUTES, 25%) Answer any four of the following questions as precisely as you can. Once again, pointform is OK for this section. You should be able to answer most of these questions in 2-3 sentences (or the equivalent in point-form).

1) Explain briefly why many union members prefer to take a substantial portion of their total compensation package in the form of fringe benefits, such as pensions. Explain also why firms likewise tend to prefer such an arrangement.

2) Explain briefly how passage of PC 1003 changed the character of the organized Canadian labour movement. In your answer, indicate as well some groups who were not affected by passage of this legislation.

.

140

3) Why did the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act (IDI Act) not have a very significant effect on union membership growth?

4) What have been some of unions’ most significant impacts on Canadian society as a whole?

5) a) (4%) List some of the major features of coercive drive management. b) (2.25%) Explain very briefly why some of the more enlightened managers in the early part of this century came to realize that this style of management was not only inhumane, but bad for business.

6) What are some of the strategic options which a union must consider at the macro (global) level?

7) a) (2.5%) What are some arguments in favour of mandatory retirement at age 65? b) (2.5%) What are some arguments against it? c) (1.25%) At the end of the day, which position do you think more persuasive, and why?

8) Describe the two types of indirect union wage effect, and explain briefly why it doesn't make a great deal of sense to speak of a single, aggregate indirect union wage effect.

SECTION 3: ESSAYS (55 MINUTES, 60%) Answer one and only one of the following questions. Answer as thoroughly and precisely as you can; to the extent possible, answer all aspects of the question. Note that point-form is not acceptable for final answers to essay questions. Please use complete sentences and paragraphs. I do, however, recommend that you take five minutes at the beginning to write a brief point-form outline of the ground you intend to cover. This can help you greatly in organizing your answers; it can also help me be a little more generous in cases where you don’t have time to finish. BE SURE TO DOUBLE-SPACE!!!!

1) James McCambly, president of the Canadian Federation of Labour, has argued that "National and provincial labour organizations have no business tying themselves to political parties. To do so is not only an affront to their members, but it often hurts rather than enhances their ability to fight for labour causes." Discuss this statement in a well-organized essay. You may agree, disagree, or take a middle position. Try to draw on both recent evidence and older evidence (from the World War II period) in your answer where possible.

2) “Unions were needed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when wages were low and most managers abused their workers. Today,. unions have outlived their usefulness. Wages are much higher, workplaces are safe, and most managers treat their workers well.” Discuss, making specific reference to the readings and to our

.

141

class discussion on unions and their impacts and functions. You may agree, disagree, or take a middle position.

3) Write an essay in which you explain the reasons why, despite relatively similar economic experiences in Canada and the U.S., the two countries' union membership rates have diverged sharply in recent years. Do you expect this pattern of divergence to continue in the short-to-medium term?

4) You are the IR manager for a medium-sized manufacturing firm facing increased foreign competition. While you are still making decent profits, you have begun losing market share, and it's clearly important that you do something in the next year or two.

Your president has called you into his office to ask for your advice. You have two strategies available to you. One is a hard-nosed approach featuring plenty of layoffs, tough bargaining at the table, replacement of workers by machines, and perhaps relocation of part if not all of the operation to Mississippi. The other approach centres around a joint union–management productivity improvement scheme, featuring reduction of waste and unnecessary overtime, multi-skilling of workers, and a possible switch to self-directed work teams and adoption of group incentive pay schemes.

Your industry is 90% unionized. It is also highly concentrated. There are only six firms in all, and four firms account for over 90% of the business. The firm has had a tough but professional relationship with the union. Strike incidence and duration have been below average for the industry. Four years ago, you took a two-week strike—the longest in the firm's 60-year history. Since then, the previous president, a decent but unimaginative machine operator with Grade 11 who believed that his father had taught him everything he needed to know about running a union, has been replaced by a much younger professional woman, a job analyst with a master of industrial relations degree from a major Canadian school. After guiding the union through a tough set of negotiations without a strike, and with a pay raise and guarantee of job security, she was re-elected to a three-year term last year with 89% of the vote.

The previous president's position on union–management cooperation was one of genial skepticism. His usual line was, "I don't see any point in making trouble unnecessarily, but is it really the union's job to help manage the organization? Isn't that likely to put us in a position where we're held responsible for cleaning up the management's messes for them?" The current president actually took a graduate course in "new work organizations" as part of her master's program. Her position is that she will discuss and bring to her membership any suggestion which doesn't involve layoffs and isn't part of some scheme to "break the back of the organization or weaken our links with the company's workers."

Given these facts, which option do you recommend, and why? Be as thorough as you can in discussing all relevant aspects of the case. Although this isn't required, you may well wish to use the strategic choice theory in framing your answer to this question.

.

142

Final Exam (MBA course) Time allowed: 3 hours Aids allowed: None General Instructions

Read the test over completely before starting to write. Answer all questions and, to the extent possible, all aspects of each question. Be sure to follow the suggested time allocations at the top of each section. Note that point-form is acceptable for sections 1 (short-answer questions) but not for the rest of the exam. Note also that within each section, all questions are weighted equally, except as otherwise noted.

It is imperative that you double-space all answers, especially essay questions, to allow room for comments.

SECTION 1: SHORT-ANSWERS (30 MINUTES, 15%) Answer any six of the following questions as precisely as you can. Once again, pointform is OK for this section. You should be able to answer most of these questions in 2-3 sentences (or the equivalent in point-form).

1. Explain briefly why many union members prefer to take a substantial portion of their total compensation package in the form of fringe benefits, such as pensions.

Explain also why firms tend to prefer such an arrangement.

2. List at least four functions of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC). Is collective bargaining with employers among them?

3. What are some of the strategic options which a union must consider at the macro (global) level?

4. Explain briefly the reasons for the recent decline in formal labour force participation in developing countries. (Note: Instructors who haven’t taught the international chapter can susbstitute another question or simply omit this one).

5. Describe the two types of indirect union wage effect, and explain briefly why it doesn't make a great deal of sense to speak of a single, aggregate indirect union wage effect.

6. List some of the changed economic and political circumstances, as well as changes in the field of IR, that led to the development of a more managementoriented industrial relations in the late 1970s and early "80s.

.

143

7. List some of the reasons why many Canadian unions have been merging in recent years, and why many unions have been seeking members from occupations far removed from their traditional jurisdictions.

8. Nicholas Q. Knucklehead, business agent for the United Brickheads of Amerika, comes to the bargaining table after slamming the door, pounding his fist on the table, and screaming: "All right, you suits! We want a ten percent pay raise, a fifteen percent increase in our pensions, stronger tech change protection and fresh paper towels in the washrooms. If we don't get all of that, we're hitting the bricks at eight o'clock next Monday morning!" Comment on Nicholas' negotiating strategy. Is he the one you would choose to represent you at the table?

9. What were some of the problems with the association-consultation approach formerly used by federal government employees? What did the federal government finally do (in the mid-1960s) to help solve these problems?

10. a) Why are worker refusals to contain work in settings they believe unsafe far more common in unionized than in non-unionized establishments? b) What would be a way of providing non-unionized workers greater protection in such cases.

11. Explain why you do, or do not, think the exclusion of management personnel and farmworkers from unionization rights in Ontario to be equally justified.

12. Explain briefly the problem with using height and weight tests as qualifications for police officers. Then indicate a fairer and more objective way of achieving the same objective.

.

144

SECTION 2: CASE (60 MINUTES, 35%) Read the following case, and then answer the questions which appear at the end of it.

You may answer the questions separately or as a connected essay—whichever you prefer.

But do write complete sentences and paragraphs, please. Point markings are indicated after each question.

Arbitration Case between HERE, Local 75 and Delta Toronto East Hotel (Note: This case appears in the text as Case A.3 at pp. 459-463; therefore I won't reprint it here).

Questions 1. What is the principle of progressive discipline, and why is it important in industrial relations? (10) 2. What are some situations in which the principle of progressive discipline does not apply? (5) 3. If you were the arbitrator, what would your ruling be in this case? In your answer, please indicate the factors you would take into account in deciding what penalty to impose on Mr. Watson-Wright, and the extent to which you think progressive discipline would apply? (20) SECTION 3: ESSAYS 1 (45 MINUTES, 25%) Answer one and only one of the following questions. Point-form is not allowed for this part of the exam. Complete sentences and paragraphs, please. You should, however, take five minutes to write a brief point-form outline; this will not only help you organize your answer better, but may help me give you a few extra marks in the event that you don't finish.

Be sure that, to the extent possible, you answer all aspects of the question.

1) Write an essay in which you discuss the effects on Canadian union membership growth of at least four of the following pieces of labour legislation: Trade Union Act, IDI Act, Wagner Act, PC 1003, PSSRA. In your essay, be sure to take account of other economic, political, and social developments occurring at the same time the legislation in question was taking effect. Note: Simply summarizing the main provisions of the legislation is NOT good enough.

2) “Unions were needed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when wages were low and most managers abused their workers. Today,. unions have outlived their usefulness. Wages are much higher, workplaces are safe, and most managers treat their workers well.” Discuss, making specific reference to the readings and to our

.

145

class discussion on unions and their impacts and functions. You may agree, disagree, or take a middle position.

3) Write an essay in which you list and discuss your set of criteria for determining whether a union is operating democratically or not. You may draw on your own experiences as well as the class text and other literature in answering this question, but the answer should not consist only of war stories (however interesting).

4) Write an essay in which you explain the reasons why, despite relatively similar economic experiences in Canada and the U.S., the two countries' union membership rates have diverged sharply in recent years. Do you expect this pattern of divergence to continue in the short-to-medium term?

5) You are the IR manager for a medium-sized manufacturing firm facing increased foreign competition. While you are still making decent profits, you have begun losing market share, and it's clearly important that you do something in the next year or two.

Your president has called you into his office to ask for your advice. You have two strategies available to you. One is a hard-nosed approach featuring plenty of layoffs, tough bargaining at the table, replacement of workers by machines, and perhaps relocation of part if not all of the operation to Mississippi. The other approach centres around a joint union–management productivity improvement scheme, featuring reduction of waste and unnecessary overtime, multi-skilling of workers, and a possible switch to self-directed work teams and adoption of group incentive pay schemes.

Your industry is 90% unionized. It is also highly concentrated. There are only six firms in all, and four firms account for over 90% of the business. The firm has had a tough but professional relationship with the union. Strike incidence and duration have been below average for the industry. Four years ago, you took a two-week strike—the longest in the firm's 60-year history. Since then, the previous president, a decent but unimaginative machine operator with Grade 11 who believed that his father had taught him everything he needed to know about running a union, has been replaced by a much younger professional woman, a job analyst with a master of industrial relations degree from a major Canadian school. After guiding the union through a tough set of negotiations without a strike, and with a pay raise and guarantee of job security, she was re-elected to a three-year term last year with 89% of the vote.

The previous president's position on union–management cooperation was one of genial skepticism. His usual line was, "I don't see any point in making trouble unnecessarily, but is it really the union's job to help manage the organization? Isn't that likely to put us in a position where we're held responsible for cleaning up the management's messes for them?" The current president actually took a graduate course in "new work organizations" as part of her master's program. Her position is

.

146

that she will discuss and bring to her membership any suggestion which doesn't involve layoffs and isn't part of some scheme to "break the back of the organization or weaken our links with the company's workers."

Given these facts, which option do you recommend, and why? Be as thorough as you can in discussing all relevant aspects of the case.

Then assume that the previous president is still in charge, and that he was re-elected, three years ago, with just 55% of the vote. He has not yet indicated whether he will run for re-election, but his term is up in less than a year. How does your recommendation change in this case, and why?

Although this is not required, you may well find the strategic choice theory helpful in framing your answer to this question.

SECTION 4: ESSAYS 2 (45 MINUTES, 25%) Answer one and only question from this group.

1) To what extent do you think the collaborative model of labour–management relations proposed by the Fryer Committee offers a realistic chance of improving public sector labour relations? Be as detailed as you can in your answer, including some of the history of public sector labour relations as well as the current situation in this sector.

2) Discuss the changes in public labour policy you think are needed to ensure adequate representation of workers without hindering firms’ economic competitiveness.

3) “Employment (or employment standards) legislation is an excellent idea, but one which in practice has seldom if ever lived up to its potential.” Discuss, giving a full explanation of the reasons for your position. You may agree, disagree, or take a middle position.

4) Do you see industrial relations in the developing and developed worlds as converging (moving more closely together) or diverging (moving further apart)? Use as much evidence as you can from the text and your own understanding of international and comparative IR in framing your answer.

5) Write an essay in which you explain why public health and safety was chosen as a key theme for this edition of the textbook, and what the ramifications of this theme are for the IR system in Canada.

.

147