Thursday, October 13, 2011
Supporting The Right To Strike
Since winning a majority government government in the spring, the Conservative government has twice intervened in labour disputes to end or prevent work stoppages. First it was the post office, now Air Canada. Personally I support the right of workers to strike, just as I support the right of the employer to hire replacement workers. Let them strike and allow them to exercise their democratic right to walk away from their jobs. Then hire new workers at a significantly lower price to replace them. The "essential service" continues and we don't deny the workers their right to strike. Let the collective bargaining process take as many years as needed to reach a fair contract. Problem solved.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If there is a right to strike there must also be a right to work, and a right to pay or not pay union dues.
ReplyDeleteAny chance all this intervention is payback for all the money unions spend on ads and campaigns.
I wonder if the majority of union members have any idea of what their union bosses do, or where their money goes. And how many actually vote on any contract or attend meetings.
Both major strikes that were forced to end had a few things in common. First, they are both poorly run organizations. Their track records on performance and employee attitude are dismal to say the least.
ReplyDeleteBoth of these organizations and their employees should have been forced to suffer the wrath of the consumer market place. That is the only way they will learn that they must earn business.
Unfortunately, Our government continues to listen to the LR mandarins who have no idea what the market place is all about.
I am not at all convinced that our government is open to conservative ideas or long term LR solutions. Much easier to go along with the same old, same old... crap!
"Then hire new workers at a significantly lower price to replace them."
ReplyDeleteThat might work in a line of work where the workforce is comprised of unskilled workers but that cannot apply in all domains.
Also, while I don't pretend to know the Minister of Labour's motivation, I doubt it's simply "payback." My conservative POV, which I assume Ms. Raitt shares, tells me it's preferable to keep working while trying to negotiate a contract acceptable to both labour & management, drawing regular pay rather than being out on the sidewalk not drawing my pay, and in the end, whatever salary increase I may eventually get will probably be swallowed up by the salary I lose while out on strike.
IMO, the "payback" angle is yet another label hung on the Conservatives by the anti-Harper faction, which includes most media and of course union bosses.
Harper is not a laisez faire free market guy. This is pure fascism to not let the 2 sides bargain. Harper can't keep his nose out of free enterprise.
ReplyDeleteGabby, I would disagree that flight attendants, post office workers, or garbage picker uppers are skilled labour. You could hire a chimpanzee to do many government jobs.
ReplyDeleteIceman, it takes quite a bit of training to become a flight attendant; I know, as I once worked for Transport Canada.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp12295-menu-1341.htm
I do not think public servants should be forced to pay union dues, and unions should not be allowed to contribute to political campaigns, nor force people to strike if they do not want to nor prevent people in other unions from accessing the workplace.
I'm sure it takes years of training to pour me a Pepsi...
ReplyDeleteI am repeatedly amazed by reading this blog at how unpragmatic it really is. It is really just a forum for saying unkind things about other groups in our society. For instance flight attendants who who feel are as qualified as chimpanzees. But then as the Conservative party has constantly taken an anti democratic stand, and democracy is based on the value and worth of every individual, I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that you don't value people at all, beyond what they can do for you at the least cost. I really can't determine what you DO value from reading your posts. You seem to really focus on the things you don't value. Do you value the ability of all Canadians to receive health care regardless of their ability to pay? Do you value free quality education for all children in Canada, regardless of their ability to pay? Do you value a reasonable pension for all Canadian retirees? Do you value the dignity and worth of every human being? If so why, if not why not? -Ian Edgar
ReplyDeleteIf it makes you feel any better anonymous, I removed the word "moderate" from my header (even though I am a pro choice, pro gay, agnostic). Pragmatic means dealing with matters from a practical point of view, and I'm sure we differ on what we define as "practical". Do beware my frequent use of sarcasm, but then again, I'm not a real journalist and have never claimed to be. This is a personal online diary of my thoughts and opinions, with my bias stated at the top of the page.
ReplyDeleteMy name is Ian Edgar. I'm not expecting you to be a real journalist. You didn't answer my questions however, and I would be very intersted to hear them.
ReplyDelete