Morning all:
Last Article (smile). While I'm here, thought this would be of interest to Members, assuming it hasn't already been discussed. IF this is "old news", just alert Mods, and someone will delete it: Here you go:
By ROB GILLIES, Associated Press – 58 minutes ago
-
TORONTO (AP) — Canada plans to introduce legislation to force striking Canadian Pacific Railway workers back to their jobs after talks stalled over the weekend, the country's labor minister said Monday, saying the freight service shutdown at Canada's second largest railway is hurting the economy.
Locomotive engineers and conductors went on strike Wednesday, shutting down freight service along nearly 14,900 miles (24,000 kilometers) of track in Canada and the U.S.
Labor Minister Lisa Raitt on Monday called Canadian Pacific Railway the backbone of the country's economy, and she has said she would force strikers back to work if necessary.
The railway and the union said talks broke off Sunday with little hope of resumption.
The back-to-work legislation would be introduced Monday, and the strikers could be ordered to work this week.
Raitt noted that Canadian Pacific Railway moves $50 billion worth of freight each year, including more than half of Canada's potash, wheat and coal. The Mining Association of Canada has expressed "grave concern" about the strike's impact.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government has cited potential economic damage in the past for preventing or ending strikes at Air Canada and Canada Post.
Opposition parties said the government is undermining the right to collective bargaining.
Major points of contention in the latest strike are pensions, certain work rules and fatigue management.
The strike has come amid big changes at the railway. Earlier this month, Canadian Pacific appointed an interim chief executive after chief executive Fred Green announced his departure, ending a monthslong battle that pitted New York activist investor Bill Ackman against a board of directors stocked with Canadian business titans.
The railroad also elected a new board of 16 directors, including seven backed by Ackman, whose Pershing Square Capital Management fund is Canadian Pacific's largest shareholder with about 14 percent of the company's stock.
No shock. According to the Harper government, every work stoppage will bring down Canada's economy and needs to be stopped with legislation. I am actually distressed Canadian economic health is this fragile
Strikes are pointless now.
RmSasquatch wrote:
Strikes aren't pointless. They're just illegal, apparently.
effiecan wrote:
I wonder what the effect of bleeding canada of its wealth by pumping billions of dollars into other countries economies has on Canada's economy?
Seems like Harper simply does not like the little guy and loves to help out the big guy
Members of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) recently marched on Parliament Hill donning 'Stephen Harper Hates Me' T-shirts.
While 'hate' is probably too strong of a word, they might just be on to something.
On Monday, Labour Minister Lisa Raitt willtable back-to-work legislation in the House of Commons to end a six-day strike by 4,800 Canadian Pacific workers.
This is hardly the first time the Conservative government has intervened in a high profile labour dispute involving unions. Much to the chagrin of 'big labour,' the Tories have introduced six other such bills since forming the government in 2006.
To add fuel to the labour fire, the government is also in the midst of cutting 29,600 public sector union jobs between now and 2015.
Some union leaders have dubbed these events: 'Harper's war on labour.'
If it is a war, the Harper government appears to have the hammer.
Unions, at this point in time, don't have a lot of power in Canada.
In July, shortly after the Harper government ordered Canada Post employees back to work, John Gordon, national president of the PSAC, said his union would oppose any effort by the Harper government to restrict labour rights by staging a four-year campaign to defeat the governing Conservatives.
"[The legislation] tells me there's going to be trouble on the labour front during this four-year term, and I think [the Harper government] has a plan to strip collective bargaining powers of unions," he told Bloomberg Business News.
At the time, Gordon had proposed a summer long public relations campaign against Conservative MPs, but that failed to materialize in any meaningful way.
Earlier this month, PSAC added a 26 cent a month 'tax' to members' union dues to boost the union's war chest for political action campaigns. The fund's success remains to be seen.
A general national strike is always a possibility, but, in Canada, such an action would put individual workers and their unions at significant risk for engaging in strike action that is not legally mandated or determined.
The only battle the unions can hope to win is the battle of public opinion.
But according to Tasha Kheiriddin, of the National Post, in these tough economic times, even the public believes unions are self-interested and outdated.
"In tough economic times, it's hard to feel a lot of solidarity with our more organized brothers and sisters," she wrote in a recent article.
"This isn't the early 1900s: Most unionized workers are not toiling in collapsing coal mines, or living in leaky company housing, or suffering any more than non-unionized workers are. Yet union jobs command an estimated 7.7 per cent premium, even after controlling for employee and workplace characteristics.
"According to Statistics Canada, in 2010 the average unionized full-time worker pulled in $26.71 per hour, vs. $22.71 for his or her non-union counterparts."
With statistics like those, you're not going to find many union sympathizers in the crowd.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/unions-powerless-harper-governmen t-anti-labour-stance-193336410.html
Fine. Harper clearly wants a labour war. We should all stand up and give him one to remember. A general strike is a great place to start.
We have a plant with 1500 people that will be out of work if they don't start shiping in the next week.
They supply all of industry, it is a massive problem without these guys running.
Fast427SC wrote:
(...)
That little bit there really highlight's the labour movement's biggest challenge.
People would rather see union wages fall to match theirs, rather than see their wages rise to match the union's.
It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad - "I'd rather tear others down to my level than see myself rise" is just an incredibly depressing philosophy to have.
And yet somehow, that attitude has won, and the public popularity of unions sits somewhere down at the level normally reserved for communicable social diseases.
Hmm
It does completely defeat the point of collective bargaining if the owners know that they never, ever have to negotiate in good faith to end the strike.
It does force the whole issue to arbitration which is probably where most of them belong in the first place.
HOWEVER
the attack on the arbitrators has already begun. The Right Honorable Lisa Raitt has already by-passed the normal selection process in the CUPW action by appointing an arbitrator out of the blue. He later resigned after which the court ruled he was unacceptable anyway.
supsens wrote:
Then your plant, and any others in the same boat, should be ramping up pressure on CP to settle and get back to business.
My guess is that CP never had any intention of bargaining in good faith, and simply waited for our corporate boot licking government to do what they do.
Sad really.
HockeyHippy wrote:
They control the message. The corporations.
That's why it makes me laugh every time people decry the "Left leaning media"
Like you say, if it wasn't so terribly pathetic, it would be funny.
Groover wrote:
Ya, that was funny. I like that you're paying attention Groover!
koymenella wrote:
He is paid to pay attention. A non union wage I must say
Terrible, keep the government out of the workplace. Let workers enjoy the right to strike, and let employers enjoy the right to run their business however they wish and fire workers for not showing up to work.
Here is an idea that I thought was interesting. (heard on the radio this morning)
Forcing an end to a strike could benefit the union members.
There are two sides during a strike. What happens when the company is under financial stress, how exactly do they get consessions from the union if they can't get the union to cave? All the union has to do is wait until legislation is enacted that brings in an arbitrator to settle midway. This prevents the company from remaining competitive.
So while it may appear that legislation workds for the benefit of the company, it is not always the case. Just pointing out the other side of the coin.