I was talking to a friend about this the other day. I really can’t understand how back to work legislation is a thing (I realize that’s not quite what happened here but it could have). What’s stopping the workers from simply continuing to strike? Will they arrest ~7200 people? What’s the point of organization if management/the government can just say “nope, you’re done, go back to work”?
Well, that’s very much an option. When the Educational Assistants went on strike in Ontario, there was legislation to have them end the strike. The law allowed the government to fine each worker $4,000 for each day they continued to strike. The EAs shot back with: we don’t have any money, which is why we’re looking for double digit increases, so we’re going to continue to stike anyways.
Long story short: it was highly effective.
There’s some lessons learned here and the biggest take-away is that if the law is going to hang out a union if they stop picketing while considering a deal, then resumption of any type of work until a ratified CA is off the table forevermore.
Removed by mod
What really forced Ford to back off was the solidarity almost every single union in the province showed when that legislation was passed. Strike votes across unions where being held (even with unions that endorsed him) and if he stuck his guns the whole province would of shut down with a general strike.
I think the bigger take here is that we need all unions standing up for each other, and be willing to show solidarity where it matters most
They’ll start with the union leaders, and work their way down until the organization is broken enough that everybody goes back to work.
We are returning to the times where illegal strikes needed to happen to win our rights. If they’re going to violate our right by making the strike illegal, then fuck them. We should strike anyways and win that right back, just like we had to in the bad old days.
I don’t really agree with the degree of doom predicted by the article.
The crux of the matter seems to be that once the workers went back to work they needed to give 72 hours notice to walk off again. That maybe a mistake by the Board, but hardly a calamity. They put in notice and walk off again. At worse, it stretches the length of the negotiations by 72 hours. In this case, it did not.
If this is how the labour boards are going to interpret the laws, then the most likely outcome is that unions are going to stay off work until a tentative deal is accepted and ratified by the members. Why risk having to put in another 72 hours of notice?
Is this good for the workers? No.
Is this good for the employer? No.
So maybe they have an agreement that no notice is necessary to go back to the picket lines if they return to work before ratification.
I don’t see any greater threat to worker rights here.
