Signs Harper Is Gearing Up to Declare War on Unions

Tory tweets, convention chatter and looming legislation hint at what may be coming, say labour advocates.

By Tom Sandborn, Today, TheTyee.ca

“Just wrapped up a meeting with several staff members, at midnight. Good thing they’re not unionized!”

Federal Conservative Employment Minister Jason Kenney’s tweet was the object of some derision on social media in the early hours of Nov. 19. Although quickly deleted, the tweet’s sentiment hit a deep nerve for some trade unionists across the country — particularly those already worried about what the federal Conservatives have in mind for labour legislation in Canada.

A set of non-binding resolutions was adopted earlier this month at the federal Conservative party convention in Calgary. The resolutions include a call on government to reduce wage and benefit levels for civil servants. The resolutions also call for stripping unions of the right to use member dues to support social policy campaigns and other expenditures not part of a set of narrowly-defined workplace issues.

The resolutions, in addition to clauses in Bill C-4, the omnibus budget bill currently before Parliament, aren’t merely expressions of Conservative anti-labour sentiment; according to trade unionists and labour advocates, they signal a growing war on Canadian workers.

For one, trade unionists argue because Tony Clement, Conservative cabinet heavyweight and president of the Treasury Board, supported a resolution at the convention that calls for public-sector wage and benefit roll-backs, it suggests that the Harper majority government may be inclined to implement them.

“We’re not here to buy labour peace through caving in to every single public-sector union boss’s demands,” Clement told The Globe and Mail at the Calgary convention. “We’re not here to do that. We’re here to represent the taxpayer.”

Bob Jackson, vice president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, describes Conservative actions on labour as “an all-out declaration of war on unions, coming from the highest levels of the party.” Jackson traveled to Calgary to participate in a union-sponsored demonstration outside the Calgary Stampede Grounds where the convention took place.

“We have never encountered this level of animosity and ill will from the government before,” Jackson said in an interview. “They want to get rid of us and to strip away things we have maintained for decades.”

Fears over labour gain roll backs

Hassan Yussuff, secretary treasurer of the Canadian Labour Congress, shares Jackson’s concerns about a turn to more anti-labour confrontations by the government. Yussuff said he thinks Minister Clement is “fixated” on rolling back gains that organized labour has won over the past half century.

Yussuff expressed particular concern about provisions in Bill C-4, the latest signature government omnibus budget bill, that would strip away rights from public-sector workers to refuse unsafe work. He also raised concerns about Bill C-4’s reduction of independent federal work-site safety inspections.

As well, Yussuff highlighted language in the bill that would allow the government to unilaterally define workers as “essential” during a labour dispute, a definition that has previously been negotiated between the employer and public-sector workers.

This power could conceivably allow government to define workers in a particular job setting as essential, rendering strike action impossible.

Simon Fraser University professor Marjorie Griffin-Cohen is also concerned about the Conservatives’ get tough approach to labour, as evidenced both in the Calgary resolutions and the provisions of Bill C-4. In particular, she said the right of unions to use member dues in social policy campaigns is important.

“If trade unions were not active in encouraging governments to deal in fair ways with labour issues, they would be derelict in their support of labour,” Griffin-Cohen told The Tyee via email.

“Corporate spokespeople, of course, are really objecting to labour uniting on political issues — they would much rather every individual work organization deal with their mighty power all by themselves,” she added.

Resolutions ‘not an attack on labour’: CPC activist

If the Harper government is declaring war on organized labour in Canada, John Mortimer has no apparent objections.

Mortimer, president of the Labour Watch Association and a board member of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation, is a prominent spokesperson for Canadian conservatism who ran for Parliament in 2000 for the Canadian Alliance.

“Unionization doesn’t belong in the public sector,” Mortimer said, adding that he does not endorse any specific party because of his role in the taxpayers’ federation.

Mortimer said that Canada is the only country in the world in which unions can collect compulsory dues and spend part of what is collected to campaign on broad social issues like poverty, minimum wage levels and environmental protection.

“Look at what the Canadian Autoworkers did not so long ago. They used auto workers’ dues to bring Saint [David] Suzuki to a meeting to tell the members their industry was ‘disgusting’,” he said. “I have no issue if a union wants to donate to a party or to promote a cause, but they shouldn’t be able to use mandatory dues collected from all of their members to make those donations.”

Vancouver lawyer and Conservative Party activist Scott Lamb, a member of the party’s national council, said there was broad party support at the Calgary convention for the labour-related resolutions. He disagrees with critics who characterize them as a “war.”

“That’s not fair. We are a grassroots party,” he said in an interview. “Those resolutions came from all across the country. They were not an attack on labour.”

The business-friendly Fraser Institute recently weighed in on public sector wages in an April report that suggested public-sector workers have, on average, a 12 per cent better wage level than comparable workers in the private sector, with most of the difference due to the higher level of unionization in the public sector.

The tone of the Institute’s report suggests that it would be better for public employees to have their wages reduced than for private sector workers to earn more in order to address this disparity.

‘Social unionism’ under threat?

Since 1946, after an influential arbitration ruling by Justice Ivan Rand in an auto industry dispute, Canadian labour law has permitted unions to collect dues from all workers in a bargaining unit, whether they choose to join the union or not.

This led to government and the courts allowing unions to use dues not only for narrow job site issues, but also for campaigns, such as the BC Federation of Labour’s long-standing push to increase the minimum wage in British Columbia.

In the early 1990s, for example, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Lavigne v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union that “the state objectives in compelling the payment of union dues which can be used to assist causes unrelated to collective bargaining are to enable unions to participate in the broader political, economic and social debates in society, and to contribute to democracy in the workplace.

“These objectives are rationally connected to the means chosen to advance them, that is the requirement that all members of a unionized workplace contribute to union coffers without any guarantee as to how their contributions will be used,” the judgment continues. “An opting-out formula could seriously undermine the unions’ financial base and the spirit of solidarity so important to the emotional and symbolic underpinnings of unionism.”

Unionization in the Canadian private sector is down from 30 per cent in 1997, to 18 per cent last year in both Canada and B.C. Public-sector unionization is just over 70 per cent, even after a 4.7 percent reduction in that sector over the same period — a reduction created mainly by the contracting out of public services to for-profit providers whose workers are often not unionized.

If the recent Tory convention resolutions ever make it into Canadian law, trade unionists worry the kind of “social unionism” described in the Lavigne case will become illegal, and union membership could continue to shrink across the country.  [Tyee]

Ottawa bargained in bad faith with striking diplomats, labour board rules

The Public Service Labour Relations Board ruled Friday that the federal government has been bargaining in bad faith with its striking diplomats

Treasury Board President Tony Clement agreed to binding arbitration but then insisted on a series of preconditions, including taking the union’s key demand for wage parity off the table.

Sean Kilpatrick / THE CANADIAN PRESS file photo  Treasury Board President Tony Clement agreed to binding arbitration but then insisted on a series of preconditions, including taking the union’s key demand for wage parity off the table.

By: Mike Blanchfield The Canadian Press, Published on Fri Sep 13 2013

OTTAWA—The Public Service Labour Relations Board ruled Friday that the federal government has been bargaining in bad faith with its striking diplomats.

Treasury Board violated the Public Service Labour Relations Act by imposing conditions in advance on binding arbitration, the ruling stated.

But in its 27-page decision, the board does not impose a remedy in the long-running saga that universities and tourism groups say has deprived foreign students and travellers from getting the visas they need to come to Canada.

The decision urges Treasury Board and the 1,350-member Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers to go back to bargaining to break the impasse.

“I conclude that the respondent engaged in bad faith bargaining in its approach,” the ruling stated.

“I do not believe that it is conducive to good labour relations to order parties to participate in final and binding determination when such arbitration is voluntary in the first place,” it added.

“I encourage the parties to be guided by my comments in this decision and to renew their attempts at arriving at mutually agreeable conditions.”

The union asked Treasury Board in July to consent to binding arbitration.

Treasury Board President Tony Clement agreed but then insisted on a series of preconditions, including taking the union’s key demand for wage parity off the table.

The foreign service staff want wage parity with their counterparts in other federal departments, who they say make as much as $14,000 more doing similar work.

“It was an impossibility for the complainant to put forward its argument concerning wage parity, which it held throughout the negotiation process,” Friday’s ruling said.

“The respondent’s conditions required the complainant to abandon the position it’s held throughout the negotiations.”

Therefore, the process of going into arbitration “would be moot,” the ruling stated.

The union said Friday it was waiting for Treasury Board to return to the negotiations with a revised offer.

“The time has come for the government to change tack,” union president Tim Edwards said in a statement.

“Our offer to take this dispute to binding arbitration without paralyzing preconditions still stands.”

Treasury Board had yet to issue a statement as of Friday afternoon.

The union which has been without a contract since mid-2011, has been staging rotating walkouts at more than a dozen foreign missions. It has targeted the foreign travel of cabinet ministers and the processing of visas for potential visitors to Canada.

NDP foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar urged the government to get back to the table and bargain in good faith.

“The Conservative government’s bad faith handling of the labour dispute with Canada’s diplomats is hurting the country’s economy and our image abroad. It has hurt our communities and undermined the important work of our diplomats,” Dewar said in a statement.

“Instead of trying to discredit our diplomats, I call on Tony Clement to get back to the negotiation table and resolve this dispute through good faith bargaining.”

Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade : Trans-Pacific Partnership Members Advance Negotiations in Brunei

08/30/2013 | 12:33pm US/Eastern   http://www.4-traders.com

Opening new markets and creating new sources of prosperity the Harper government’s focus as Canada continues to play important role in negotiations 

August 30, 2013 – The Honourable Ed Fast, Minister of International Trade, today marked the conclusion of the 19th round of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations, which took place in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei, from August 22 to 30, 2013. Minister Fast was in Brunei last week to participate in a meeting of all TPP trade ministers.

“Opening new markets and creating good jobs, economic growth and greater prosperity for Canadian workers and families is why our government is pursuing deeper trade and investment ties in the fast-growing and dynamic Asia-Pacific region,” said Minister Fast. “The TPP negotiations are a key pillar of our government’s pro-trade plan, and I am pleased that Canada is playing a constructive and important role as we work to advance our interests and conclude an ambitious agreement in a timely manner.”

During the 19th round, negotiators built on the progress made to date in several areas, including on goods market access, rules of origin, investment, services, financial services, temporary entry, intellectual property, government procurement and environment.

Officials also wrapped up a technical meeting on labour provisions, which was held in Ottawa from August 26 to 29, 2013.

Twelve countries are currently participating in the TPP negotiations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam. Canada formally joined the negotiations on October 8, 2012.

The TPP market represents more than 792 million people and a combined GDP of $27.5 trillion-more than 38 percent of the world’s economy. An ambitious agreement that greatly reduces barriers to trade will benefit workers and families in every region of Canada by providing greater access for Canadian exporters to large, dynamic and fast-growing markets. And as Canada is at the international forefront of trade liberalization, the TPP will also improve Canada’s international competitiveness by solidifying our participation in lucrative trading blocs with fast-growing economies.

For more information, please visit Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement Negotiations.

For further information, media representatives may contact:

Rudy Husny
Press Secretary
Office of the Honourable Ed Fast
Minister of International Trade
613-992-7332
rudy.husny@international.gc.ca

C.E.T.A: “Final Push” In September

By Terry Wilson      August 21, 2013    http://canadianawareness.org

Canadian trade minister Ed Fast says negotiations with the Europe Union are re-launching early next month in a final push to complete a comprehensive deal, adding all that is needed is a “little flexibility” on both sides.

“Early in September we will be re-engaging and there’s no reason to believe that with a little bit of flexibility on both sides that we can’t resolve the remaining outstanding issues,” Fast said “There’s only a very small handful of outstanding issues and we’re trying to bring some creative approaches to try to bridge those gaps.”

He gave no specifics but sources have said the major stumbling blocks include the EU’s reluctance to allow more access for Canadian beef and pork, outstanding issues on drug patents, financial services and provincial procurements.

“We’re getting very close,” Fast said in a telephone interview from Brunei, where the minister was engaged in two other trade liberalizing initiatives with the 10-nation ASEAN pact and the 12-country TransPacific Partnership. Source: theglobeandmail.com

Never heard of C.E.T.A (Comprehensive economic trade agreement)? Here are two great video’s that show what it will do for Canada.

 

 

It is a well know fact that the European Union was started with trade agreements. We now are seeing this on a global scale, ushering in globalization.

Nafta, then the SPP agreement, and now the North American Security Perimeter Deal will become facets of the North American trading block (similar to the EU). The same is/has been done in other regions of the world (Asian Pacific Union, African Union, etc.). The “deals” like C.E.T.A and the TPP. Will be the global “trade” regulations between the Unions.

If we are to preserve what is left of Canadian sovereignty and resist the coming corporate run world government that is being built up before our very eyes. We must (peacefully) fight against these agreements with everything that we have!

National Post editorial board: Shameful silence on Quebec’s xenophobia

    National Post Editorial Board   August 27, 2013

Why has one of Quebec's most prominent politicians not spoken out against the PQ's xenophobic plans?

NDP Federal Opposition Leader Tom Mulcair claims issue is moot, believing it’s against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Prime Minister Harper has been completely mute on the subject, the federal Conservatives believing it’s a debate for the provincial level to sort out.

Nearly a quarter century has passed since the RCMP decided it was no big deal for Baltej Singh Dhillon to serve while wearing his turban. Although the issue was passionately debated at the time, most Canadians quickly realized that a civil servant’s headgear hasn’t much to do with his job performance.

Yet all these years later, Pauline Marois’ provincial government in Quebec — along with many of her supporters, if polls are to be believed — still haven’t come to terms with this fact. The intolerant spirit behind the Parti Québécois’ proposed “Charter of Quebec Values” betrays the sort of sour antipathy toward religious symbols that the rest of the country said goobye to in the 1980s and ’90s.

According to a Journal de Montréal report last week, Ms. Marois’ government intends to pursue legislation such that “public employees, including civil servants, judges, police, doctors, nurses and teachers, would be forbidden from wearing ‘conspicuous’ religious symbols such as the Jewish kippa, the Muslim hijab and the Sikh turban.” It’s hard to say whether Ms. Marois is a genuine xenophobe looking to sanitize the province’s workforce in her own secularist Québécois image; or whether she is merely seeking to stir up her nativist base with an ugly wedge issue; or a little of both. But whatever her motivation, the legislation is an insult to Canadian values.

The idea that a teacher, daycare worker, transportation ministry clerk or nurse should have to choose between public service and a publicly visible symbol of his or her personal faith is counterproductive in every economic and social sense. You can’t help immigrants integrate by putting barriers between them and the public workforce. And when outraged emergency room surgeons and other sought-after professionals consider leaving the province rather than comply with a discriminatory law, theory again collides with reality. When you’re wheeled into the McGill University Health Centre in critical condition, do you want the best surgeon, or do you want the one who best conforms to some politician’s conception of “Quebec values”?

In the face of this demagoguery, it is heartening to see some prominent figures criticizing the idea. That includes federal Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, who suggested people were “laugh[ing] at Quebecers,” and renowned philosopher Charles Taylor, who called Ms. Marois’ plan “Putinesque.”

Unfortunately, NDP leader Tom Mulcair, consistent with his overall pattern of running scared from anything that might offend the lowest common denominator of Quebec public opinion, has refused to denounce Ms. Marois’ initiative. He broke his silence on the issue on Monday — but only to claim that the whole matter is moot, since the new law would be contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That’s an extraordinarily silly thing to say given that Ms. Marois would be only too pleased to trash the Charter if things came to that. (Even Coalition Avenir Quebec leader Francois Legault, who effectively holds the balance of power in Quebec’s minority legislature, says that he would urge the use of the Constitution’s notwithstanding clause to protect the sections of the Charter of Quebec Values that he supports.)

As for the federal Conservatives, they have been completely mute — except for a vague tweet last week from Jason Kenney. “It’s a debate that will occur at the provincial level,” was all the Prime Minister’s Office would say. Meanwhile, Andrew Bennett, appointed as Canada’s first “ambassador of religious freedom” by the Conservatives amid much fanfare, refused to comment — because he has eyes only for threats to religious freedom that take place outside Canada’s borders. So, if a law such as Ms. Marois’ were being enacted in, say, Rhode Island, his office would be all over it. In Quebec? Not so much.

This is becoming a farce. Both the NDP and Conservatives trumpet their concern for human rights. Yet here we have a clear case of a xenophobic provincial government trying to restrict the religious freedom of Canadian citizens, and the Prime Minister and leader of the opposition both do nothing but hum and haw. It is a pathetic display of political cowardice, and one that voters should remember, come the next election, when both men sing their well-rehearsed odes to “Canadian values.”

National Post