"Right to Work" in Canada ... thanks to PSAC's political stunt?

[Edward Campbell]

Quote from: Haletown on 2012-09-04, 14:27:41
Why PSAC is such a great Union, one that all Canadians can love respect and support.

" Largest union of federal employees endorses Parti Québécois as best suited to represent interests of its members"

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Largest+union+federal+employees+endorses+Parti+Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois+best+suited+represent+interests+members/7183831/story.html

Yep! And people wonder why Stephen Harper "hates" them? They manage to shoot themselves in the foot yet again ... public 'service' unions remind me of Abba Eban's description of the Palestinians: they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

And now this - a proposal for a US style "right to work" law aimed at PSAC - according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisoons of he Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tory-mp-calls-for-new-rules-that-would-allow-public-servants-to-opt-out-of-union-dues/article4522932/

Tory MP calls for new rules that would allow public servants to opt out of union dues

BILL CURRY
OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
Published Thursday, Sep. 06 2012

n Ottawa-area Conservative MP says Canada’s largest union of federal public servants shouldn’t have endorsed separatist parties during the Quebec election and is calling for new rules allowing members to opt out of paying dues.

The proposal from MP Pierre Poilievre is similar to “right-to-work” legislation that has been adopted by more than 20 U.S. states, provoking heated debate and resistance from unions.

“I cannot imagine how it could possibly be in the interests of a Canadian public servant for the union to back a separatist party,” Mr. Poilievre said in an interview. “And yet that is precisely what PSAC has done.”

A day before Tuesday’s Quebec election, the National Capital Region branch of the Public Service Alliance of Canada announced the results of its assessment of the Quebec parties “on the basis of their positions on workers’ and citizens’ rights, public services and unions.”

Based on that criteria, it ranked the Parti Québécois first, Québec Solidaire (which also supports a sovereign Quebec) second, followed by the Liberal Party and the Coalition Avenir Québec.

The union said the parties’ positions on national unity were not considered as part of the ranking. It was not the first time PSAC has endorsed sovereigntist parties, both provincially and federally.

Mr. Poilievre says he’s heard directly from public servants who are not happy with how PSAC manages its union dues.

As the parliamentary secretary to the transport minister, Mr. Poilievre is not allowed to introduce private members’ bills. However, he said he will campaign behind the scenes to see if another MP – or possibly the government – would consider legislation allowing federally regulated workers to opt out of union dues. He noted that the vast majority of unionized workers in Canada are provincially regulated and would not be affected by any federal change.

“We have the freedom to associate, not the obligation to associate,” he said. “There’s no other freedom that we consider to be an obligation. Freedom of religion is not an obligation to be religious.… People should be free to decide whether or not they want to be part of a union.”

The principle of mandatory union dues in Canada dates back to the 1940s, when Supreme Court Justice Ivan Rand was appointed as an arbitrator to end a Ford strike in Windsor. The ensuing “Rand formula” has largely prevailed ever since, establishing the principle that employers must deduct union dues from all workers.

University of Manitoba law professor Debra Parkes says a law as proposed by Mr. Poilievre would certainly face a legal challenge, but in her assessment of related cases, it’s not clear how the courts would rule.

“It’s a big piece of our labour law system because of the problem of free riders,” she said, noting that workers who refused to pay union dues would still benefit from collective bargaining. “It’s politically a very difficult issue and one that most governments haven’t wanted to take on.”

Robin Benson, the national president of PSAC, said in a statement that PSAC members have the opportunity to vote on how their dues are spent.

“Mr. Poilievre is raising this issue now to distract from the fact that he and his government have been cutting valuable public services and good jobs without being transparent to Canadians,” she said.

I doubt this will come forth as government sponsored legislation because, I think, it potentially distracts from the Prime Minister's core agenda. But it could come forward as a private member's bill, winning the 'lottery' that is how such bills are chosen, and then I suspect it would receive unanimous Conservative support and pass.

One thing you can say about Pierre Poilievre: he sure doesn't miss an opportunity, does he?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Nope,...but I can't say I blame him.

I've had disagreement's with my union in the past, but nothing that was a dealbreaker. However, if they ever came out and said what PSAC said then I would be taking advantage of this bill......

 

[brihard]

Frig, this is the first tha tI heard of PSAC supporting the PQ. I'm by no means an anti-union type, but if they're going to support a separatist party, screw 'em. 

I'll cautiously throw my support behind this kind of law.

 

[dapaterson]

As someone governed by the Rand formula (and the Supreme Court ruling on the topic, Lavigne v OPSEU) who pays dues to PSAC, this would be great.

Another option would be to open up the religious objection clause.  Right now, if you have a religious objection you can donate to a mutually agreeable charity instead of paying union dues.  Expanding that to permit anyone who objects to redirect to charity would work.  Indeed, it might be a better COA - who could possibly object to encouraging charitable donations?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The leadership of the union and of the Labour Congress of Canada, are extreme left wing/wannabe commies. They really don't give a shit what the rank and file think. Most union members are to busy at work and in their everyday lives to pay attention to the union management and the stupid stuff they do. Leaving the management free to muck around in the mud with free money.

 

[exuberance]

“I cannot imagine how it could possibly be in the interests of a Canadian public servant for the union to back a separatist party,” Mr. Poilievre said in an interview. “And yet that is precisely what PSAC has done.”

A day before Tuesday’s Quebec election, the National Capital Region branch of the Public Service Alliance of Canada announced the results of its assessment of the Quebec parties “on the basis of their positions on workers’ and citizens’ rights, public services and unions.”
Based on that criteria, it ranked the Parti Québécois first, Québec Solidaire (which also supports a sovereign Quebec) second, followed by the Liberal Party and the Coalition Avenir Québec.

According to PSAC the Bloc is better for Quebec workers, that's great to hear, why exactly would they be better for the workers than any other party?  What are the details, what does their policy have that the others don't? 

Lets forget about the fact that the bloc want to separate and see what they have to offer the hard working Canadians.  Then steal those ideas, make them our own and once that's finished continue to ostracize the separatists and their supporters...

I'm all for unions.  I love the fact that a large group of workers can get together and stick up for their selves.  Unless I'm directly benefiting from taking advantage of others, I'm siding with the unions everytime. Sorry.

 

[exuberance]

Frig, this is the first tha tI heard of PSAC supporting the PQ. I'm by no means an anti-union type, but if they're going to support a separatist party, screw 'em. 

I'll cautiously throw my support behind this kind of law.

Their assessment showed that the bloc's labour policies were the best for the worker.  I think that's the issue worth focussing on. 
but instead its just too easy to hear the word "bloc" and start freaking out.  "OMFG they want to separate, rah rah rah...  What was the issue again? they want to separate? PSAC wants to separate from canada, OMFG.  lets abolish unions...." it's madness.

PSAC is looking out for the hard working Canadains, they saw that the bloc has something to offer them.  big deal.  big.. effing deal... Does it mean they're twisting their arms to vote for separation during a referendum? I don't think so.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

As someone governed by the Rand formula (and the Supreme Court ruling on the topic, Lavigne v OPSEU) who pays dues to PSAC, this would be great.

Another option would be to open up the religious objection clause.  Right now, if you have a religious objection you can donate to a mutually agreeable charity instead of paying union dues.  Expanding that to permit anyone who objects to redirect to charity would work.  Indeed, it might be a better COA - who could possibly object to encouraging charitable donations?

I think we have a winner.............as long as the employee realizes that, although he would still get the same pay, benefits, raises, etc, he/she would not be entitled to representation should a "matter" come up.  Fair is fair................

 

[Haletown]

I'm all for unions.  I love the fact that a large group of workers can get together and stick up for their selves.  Unless I'm directly benefiting from taking advantage of others, I'm siding with the unions everytime. Sorry.

I have nothing against free unions.

Closed shop unions, especially in the Public Sector are a perfect example of an anti democratic, anti free choice and anti human rights as there is in Canada.

A truly disgusting abomination of everything that we should cherish as free citizens in a free country. 

Forcing people to pay off a union just so they can work is right out of the Commissar's handbook.    I am truly encouraged that Poilievre is focusing on this.

We need it all across Canada, in every province at all levels of government.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Closed shop unions, especially in the Public Sector are a perfect example of an anti democratic, anti free choice and anti human rights as there is in Canada.

Leave it to somebody to derail the thread with mindless stupidity.......

 

[Edward Campbell]

According to PSAC the Bloc is better for Quebec workers, that's great to hear, why exactly would they be better for the workers than any other party?  What are the details, what does their policy have that the others don't? 

Lets forget about the fact that the bloc want to separate and see what they have to offer the hard working Canadians.  Then steal those ideas, make them our own and once that's finished continue to ostracize the separatists and their supporters...

I'm all for unions.  I love the fact that a large group of workers can get together and stick up for their selves.  Unless I'm directly benefiting from taking advantage of others, I'm siding with the unions everytime. Sorry.

I would have changed the second highlighted sentence to read: "I love the fact that a large group of workers can get together and set the fair price of their labour in the free market." That is the most important role of unions; it is an absolutely vital service - effective and efficient capitalism depends upon knowing and using the values of all inputs in order to set a fair price and profit margin. Labour is a significant input to most enterprises so the fair price of labour needs to be set ... in the free market, without coercion by employers, goons, governments or courts.

I have no difficulty with organized labour being involved in politics. While I thought the prairie populists of the old CCF were sold a bill of goods by David Lewis and the Canadian Labour Congress in 1960, the NDP is, of course, a wholly legitimate political movement; so is the PQ. But Canadian labour is not aligned with any party ~ witness Buzz Hargrove's alliance with the Liberals and now Robyn Benson's flirtation with the PQ. The Canadian Labour movement is against Canadian Conservatives and, therefore, "for" anyone else who opposes the Conservatives - "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," and all that. In other words, Canadian Labour is anti the Conservatives but not "for" anything identifiable: that's a pretty weak piss poor political position.

Public sector unions in Canada were endowed, back in the '60s, with a "sweetheart" deal; public servants were, without doubt, relatively poorly paid but they had near iron clad job security. Because they were legislated into union, rather than having to 'fight,' in the free market, for a union, public servants got bargaining rights without having to surrender anything - something that never happened in the private sector. The result is that now, 50 years later, public servants are, broadly, better paid than their private sector confreres and they still have the old "iron rice bowl," solid, legally mandated job security. It's no wonder public service unions are disliked by their private sector counterparts.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

and they still have the old "iron rice bowl," solid, legally mandated job security.

Please show me where I have that....................if the Mike Harris folks weren't the modern day version of "The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight" I, nor any of my co-workers where we worked, would still be employed.

It must have been torture for Bob Runciman to sit in the same meetings with the idiots that surrounded Mr. Harris at the time...............

 

[dapaterson]

I think we have a winner.............as long as the employee realizes that, although he would still get the same pay, benefits, raises, etc, he/she would not be entitled to representation should a "matter" come up.  Fair is fair................

Given the ineffectiveness of much of the current PSAC, that's no great loss.  Trade in severance pay for increases that are less than inflation?  Check.  Change leave policies to favour length of service over operational requirements or performance?  Check.

I've been in a job notionally represented by PSAC for nearly four years.  I have yet to be contacted and offered membership.  I guess as long as they have my money they don't care.


And note that giving to charity is less beneficial (from an income tax perspective) than paying union dues.  Union dues are deducted from gross income, reducing tax payable.  Charitable donations are give a tax credit at varying levels, but are still counted in initial calculations of taxable income.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Please show me where I have that....................if the Mike Harris folks weren't the modern day version of "The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight" I, nor any of my co-workers where we worked, would still be employed.

It must have been torture for Bob Runciman to sit in the same meetings with the idiots that surrounded Mr. Harris at the time...............

We've debated this before. Your specific problems, in your specific circumstances, are as much a result of labour's unwillingness (or inability) to organize itself as they are to the actions and inactions of any particular regime, none of which, including Bob Rae's NDP government, were "union friendly."

See this for an up to date look at provincial government labour relations, especially this paragraph, on the first page:

The scope of Ontario’s broader public sector and the complexity of the labour relations environment is illustrated with a few statistics. As of October 25, 2010, there were 3,893 collective agreements covering 844,796 workers represented by no fewer than 79 unions. Some of the largest sectors are primary and secondary teachers (180,604 in five unions), school support workers (74,672 in 9 unions), Ontario Public Service (50,893 in 5 unions), hospital nurses (53,264 in two unions), hospital support workers (85,507 in 16 unions), nursing homes (48,466 in 20 unions), community services (34,337 in 26 unions), and municipal (70,289 in 11 unions) (Ontario Ministry of Labour, October 25 2010). This organizational diversity is further complicated by differing internal structures and political practices both between and within unions. Some unions have centralized decision-making structures, others less so. And politically, some unions have drifted closer toward the Ontario Liberals as a consequence of the decline of New Democratic electoral fortunes and the enduring threat posed by the populist Right Conservatives.

But I will repeat, confidently, that almost no private sector labour situation features a wage/job security model that is anywhere near as "good" (from the employee's perspective) as that enjoyed by most public sector workers, including correctional officers.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I agree,......but please don't tell me I have that "bowl" thingy when I do not.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

But I will repeat, confidently, that almost no private sector labour situation features a wage/job security model that is anywhere near as "good" (from the employee's perspective) as that enjoyed by most public sector workers, including correctional officers.

Ever see a company try to get rid of a CAW member the union wants to keep? That's job security.

There has also been a fair bit of downsizing in the Ontario PS already, but I guess people will just strike out at whatever they perceive to be a bigger slice of the pie than what they have.

Government workers are easy to pick on, whether people understand the issues or not.

 

[Haletown]

Leave it to somebody to derail the thread with mindless stupidity.......

You are welcome.  Still having that struggle with reality eh?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I'll let you help count the votes for my un-democratic local after the voting closes Sept. 19. I'm running for VP again, sure hope I don't have to start knee-capping people if what you believe is correct. :

 

[dapaterson]

I'll let you help count the votes for my un-democratic local after the voting closes Sept. 19. I'm running for VP again, sure hope I don't have to start knee-capping people if what you believe is correct. :

Kneecapping is sooo 1990s.

Today you just have to unFriend them on Facebook.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I have nothing against free unions.

Closed shop unions, especially in the Public Sector are a perfect example of an anti democratic, anti free choice and anti human rights as there is in Canada.

A truly disgusting abomination of everything that we should cherish as free citizens in a free country. 

Forcing people to pay off a union just so they can work is right out of the Commissar's handbook.    I am truly encouraged that Poilievre is focusing on this.

We need it all across Canada, in every province at all levels of government.

Your post is nothing more than hyperbole and misinformation.

Tone down the fantastical rhetoric if you want to discuss something valid.

Otherwise, please don't muddy the thread with personal and ignorant prejudices.