How far will Ottawa go?

Have whole groups of workers in Canada effectively lost the right to strike? Just how far is Prime Minister Harper’s newly minted Conservative majority government prepared to go in siding with employers against employees to thwart strikes that inconvenience the public? And what will that mean for labour relations at a time when the economy is at risk and employers and workers alike have a common interest in getting along?

These are troubling questions raised by the government’s recent heavy-handed moves to block strikes at Air Canada and Canada Post. In both cases the Tories have flexed their muscles by weighing in on the side of employers, instead of persuading the parties to get back to the bargaining table.

In Air Canada’s case, Labour Minister Lisa Raitt has tried to frustrate a legal strike by 6,800 flight attendants (who have been without a contract for more than six months) by taking the dispute to the Canada Industrial Relations Board for review. That move was a bid to head off a potential work stoppage as early as Thursday. Raitt sought the board’s ruling on what, if any, services have to be maintained to prevent danger to the safety or the health of the public.

Just what threat to health or safety Raitt envisages, beyond a spasm of air rage, is hard to discern. Critics saw the move as a cynical time-buying exercise until the House of Commons resumes sitting next week after the Thanksgiving break, at which point the Tories can introduce back-to-work legislation. Labour analysts suggest the back-to-work threat helped to radicalize the flight attendants. They rejected two deals negotiated by their union, and may see compulsory arbitration as the best option.

In Canada Post’s case Ottawa passed legislation in June that forced postal workers back to work after the Crown corporation locked them out after a series of rotating strikes. The union is challenging the constitutionality of the move.

In both instances the Conservatives cited the fragile economy and inconvenience to the public as reasons for interfering in the collective bargaining process. Many anxious air travellers and postal service users no doubt cheered them on. Who wants to be stranded at a foreign airport, or have cheques and other mail go undelivered?

It’s also impossible not to sympathize with management at Air Canada and Canada Post. They are struggling to maintain and grow thin profit margins in a highly competitive marketplace, in a difficult economy. Air Canada negotiated not one but two agreements in good faith, which flight attendants refused to ratify.

But where does the government intend to draw the line? Canada Post is a Crown corporation. Air Canada is a private company, albeit a federally regulated one. Who’s next? All of Canada’s 4.2 million unionized workers, including a lot of federal employees, contribute to the “fragile economy.” Will many more feel Ottawa’s heavy hand if they try to invoke their right to withhold labour during negotiations?

The risk of the government poisoning the labour climate is real. Rather than threaten back-to-work legislation whenever there’s a dispute, and risk radicalizing workers who may resort to wildcat strikes, work-to-rule campaigns or other ways to press their demands, Raitt should use the leverage she has to get both sides talking again in cases where there’s a real threat to the nation’s well-being. Apart from that, she should let negotiations run their course.

Origin
Source: Toronto Star