With the recent enactment of Bill 115, otherwise
known as the Putting Students First Act,
the Ontario Liberals officially joined the ranks of union detractors. The Act,
which came into effect on January 3, 2013 is retroactive to September 1, 2012
and will expire on August 31, 2014[1]. The Act eschews the collective bargaining
process and imposes new 2-year collective agreements on teachers in Ontario’s
public and secondary school systems. Unions
cannot strike whilst under a collective agreement. The Act, then, severely
restricts the rights of unions to strike in opposition to these statutory
impositions. It is pre-emptive back-to-work legislation and represents a
shameful abuse of power by the Ontario Liberals to circumvent the rights of
organized labour.
When the necessity of new contracts for the teachers
was looming, the government had two golden opportunities. Most obviously, the
situation presented the government with the chance to show respect for teachers’
unions and for organized labour generally. A less apparent but no less
important opportunity arising from the need for new teacher contracts was the
opportunity for the government to demonstrate diplomacy skills through good
faith negotiations that could yield agreements satisfactory to all sides.
was looming, the government had two golden opportunities. Most obviously, the
situation presented the government with the chance to show respect for teachers’
unions and for organized labour generally. A less apparent but no less
important opportunity arising from the need for new teacher contracts was the
opportunity for the government to demonstrate diplomacy skills through good
faith negotiations that could yield agreements satisfactory to all sides.
Unfortunately, these opportunities were not seized
and the governing Liberals chose to legislate new contracts for Ontario’s
teachers. These new contracts impose fresh hardships on Ontario’s teachers, not
least of which is the introduction of reductions to benefit packages, wage
freezes, and the reduction of allowable sick days.
and the governing Liberals chose to legislate new contracts for Ontario’s
teachers. These new contracts impose fresh hardships on Ontario’s teachers, not
least of which is the introduction of reductions to benefit packages, wage
freezes, and the reduction of allowable sick days.
Education Minister Laurel Broten has stated that the
statutory imposition of new contracts was a necessary tool to stop strikes and
combat the province’s $14.4 billion deficit[2]. However, there are already useful
tools in place to prevent strikes and the Act was not needed to achieve these
ends. Ivan Rand created the “Rand Formula” over 60 years ago expressly to avoid
strikes (the Rand Formula is discussed in more detail in our post from Dec.19,
2012). Rand understood that the best way to avoid strikes was to empower each
side of a labour dispute. He understood that power imbalances can lead to
abuses of power and foster acrimonious labour relations. The Rand Formula
respected the legitimacy of unions and employers, achieving a delicate balance
which enabled either side to enter into meaningful negotiations to protect
their interests. Through mutual agreement, unions and employers could reach
agreements acceptable to each side and thereby negate any need for strike or
lockout action.
statutory imposition of new contracts was a necessary tool to stop strikes and
combat the province’s $14.4 billion deficit[2]. However, there are already useful
tools in place to prevent strikes and the Act was not needed to achieve these
ends. Ivan Rand created the “Rand Formula” over 60 years ago expressly to avoid
strikes (the Rand Formula is discussed in more detail in our post from Dec.19,
2012). Rand understood that the best way to avoid strikes was to empower each
side of a labour dispute. He understood that power imbalances can lead to
abuses of power and foster acrimonious labour relations. The Rand Formula
respected the legitimacy of unions and employers, achieving a delicate balance
which enabled either side to enter into meaningful negotiations to protect
their interests. Through mutual agreement, unions and employers could reach
agreements acceptable to each side and thereby negate any need for strike or
lockout action.
Broten’s actions, however, ignore the practicality
of balancing the power of unions and employers and demonstrate a deficit in her
sensitivity to labour relations well below that displayed by Rand. Far from
Rand’s delicate solution to labour disputes, the Ontario Liberals have legislated
an uneven playing field in the governments favour and have shown the political
acumen of a totalitarian regime.
of balancing the power of unions and employers and demonstrate a deficit in her
sensitivity to labour relations well below that displayed by Rand. Far from
Rand’s delicate solution to labour disputes, the Ontario Liberals have legislated
an uneven playing field in the governments favour and have shown the political
acumen of a totalitarian regime.
The Act avoids strikes, not through negotiations,
but through active and coercive suppression of the right to strike. The
government has enacted these anti-strike measures in spite of the fact that the
right to bargain collectively and to strike are protected by the Charter. Charter considerations,
however, do not seem to influence Broten, who has stated that she was left with
no “reasonable” option but to use her authority under the Act to impose the new collective agreements
on all school boards that did not reach collective agreements on their own
accord as of Dec. 31, 2012[3]. The Charter
protected rights of the unions be damned.
but through active and coercive suppression of the right to strike. The
government has enacted these anti-strike measures in spite of the fact that the
right to bargain collectively and to strike are protected by the Charter. Charter considerations,
however, do not seem to influence Broten, who has stated that she was left with
no “reasonable” option but to use her authority under the Act to impose the new collective agreements
on all school boards that did not reach collective agreements on their own
accord as of Dec. 31, 2012[3]. The Charter
protected rights of the unions be damned.
As a gesture of “goodwill” the Liberals plan to
repeal the Act by the end of the month. Such repeal will not alter the newly
imposed contracts or the severe restrictions they place on the right of
teachers to strike. While it is heartening to know that the extraordinary
anti-labour powers afforded by the Act will expire in two years’ time, the
damage to goodwill between Ontario’s teachers’ unions and this government will
already have been done. For Broten to now present the intention to repeal the Act
as some sort of olive branch is disingenuous at best and is akin to offering
someone a Band-Aid after you’ve cut their arm off – it’s simply not good
enough.
repeal the Act by the end of the month. Such repeal will not alter the newly
imposed contracts or the severe restrictions they place on the right of
teachers to strike. While it is heartening to know that the extraordinary
anti-labour powers afforded by the Act will expire in two years’ time, the
damage to goodwill between Ontario’s teachers’ unions and this government will
already have been done. For Broten to now present the intention to repeal the Act
as some sort of olive branch is disingenuous at best and is akin to offering
someone a Band-Aid after you’ve cut their arm off – it’s simply not good
enough.
Teachers are trained to educate Canada’s youth, and
by almost any measure have done so with great care and skill. In blaming unions
for the escalating labour dispute, in restricting the right to strike, and in
imposing new collective agreements which, despite Broten’s assertions to the
contrary, are neither fair nor balanced one has to wonder what Broten is
teaching Ontario’s youth. If the lesson is that it is good and proper to
curtail constitutional rights rather than respect a process of meaningful
negotiation, or perhaps that dealing with financial deficits is more important
than recognizing democratic rights, then Broten is indeed an excellent teacher.
The only problem is that the teachers of Ontario are the ones with the lessons
actually worth learning.
by almost any measure have done so with great care and skill. In blaming unions
for the escalating labour dispute, in restricting the right to strike, and in
imposing new collective agreements which, despite Broten’s assertions to the
contrary, are neither fair nor balanced one has to wonder what Broten is
teaching Ontario’s youth. If the lesson is that it is good and proper to
curtail constitutional rights rather than respect a process of meaningful
negotiation, or perhaps that dealing with financial deficits is more important
than recognizing democratic rights, then Broten is indeed an excellent teacher.
The only problem is that the teachers of Ontario are the ones with the lessons
actually worth learning.