Union side.

Why Should Canada Post Employees Strike?

by

Canada Post is in the news again.  The crown corporation is facing the potential of another labour disruption by its postal workers. Over the past 50 years, Canada Post has experienced approximately 20 work stoppages (strike or lockout) with the last action ending in arbitrated back-to-work legislation in 2011.  Due to this troubled labour history and the impact of the disruption of services to Canadians, the corporation has been declared an essential service. This means that the federal government can, once again, enact legislation that forces postal workers back to their jobs if there is a strike.

Global News provides us with a summary of the issues facing Canada Post and its workers at the bargaining table.

Forcing unionized employees back to work when they are exercising their reasonable and legitimate rights, is not something that governments implement lightly. Declaring Canada Post an essential service came as a result of the significant and direct financial impact on Canadians when the mail was not being delivered. In the not too distant past, thousands of Canadians were reliant on supplemental or basic incomes in the form of paper cheques which were issued by the federal government. When the mail was not being delivered, low-income and senior Canadians did not receive these cheques or the funds they needed in order to survive. While current technology has allowed for direct deposits and online banking, not all Canadians have access to these resources. In the event of a strike by postal workers, some Canadians may continue to be at risk, which may result in a repeat of back-to-work legislation in order to protect vulnerable Canadians.

Having said all of this, the impact of technology has also changed how Canadians use the services of Canada Post. Most Canadians do use electronic options such as e-mail and social media to order to communicate and share information.  The days of buying stamps in order to post a letter writing are dwindling quickly. Further, there are numerous delivery services available to Canadian consumers as alternatives to Canada Post, such as Fedex, Purolator, or UPS.

Why then would postal workers choose to go on strike in the face of legislative restrictions and an ever-decreasing amount of consumer demand?  As noted in the article, a strike vote does not necessarily mean that there will be a strike. A strike vote does send a clear message to the employer that the workers are serious about their demands and that they are willing to take the risks that come from the potential of strike action. Hopefully, both parties will see the benefit of continuing their discussions at the bargaining table rather than fighting it out through the picket line.

Time will tell how this particular set of negotiations works its way through to a successful conclusion.

In the meantime, it may be a good idea to check the mail, just in case.

Discussion Questions:

  1. How would a strike by Canada Post impact you as a customer?
  2. If you were negotiating for the union, what leverage do you have at the bargaining table and how would you use it?
  3. If you were negotiating for the employer, how far would you go to avoid strike action? What items would you offer to the Union in order to settle this contract?

Meeting Matters

by

In any effective labour-management strategy, the need for powerful communication between the parties is paramount. Organizations use the tool of the labour-management committee process and structure in order to achieve this need.

Labour-management committee meetings are typically ascribed in a collective agreement. The process as outlined in the language of the collective agreement may include:

  • the timing of meetings
  • where the meetings will take place
  • how many representatives are designated for both employer and union side

The purpose of the labour-management committee process is usually defined so as to promote and pursue harmonious relations between the parties through these meetings in order to ensure effective communication.

As we know through our industrial relations studies, the collective agreement is the employment contract between two parties – the employer and the union representing a particular group of employees. Both parties must abide by the specific language in the collective agreement. Otherwise, the contract (in the form of the collective agreement) has been violated.

Labour-management committee meetings are supposed to enable the union and the employer to check in with each other on common issues, identify common concerns and, hopefully, work through to solutions in a constructive way from a problem-solving perspective.

In theory, all of this should be implemented smoothly given the commitment by both parties to abide by the collective agreement. Reality, however, offers a different perspective for our consideration.

In an article published by the Queen’s University Center for Industrial Relations, Gary Furlong explores the mutual dynamics of some of the power struggles and communication issues that are typical in the real-world experience of labour-management processes.

Click here to read the article

As noted in this article, while it assesses the challenges from both an employer and union perspective, the focus is on how the employer’s actions impact the labour relationship.

From the union side the perspective is, not surprisingly, a bit different.

A recently published article by rankandfile.ca offers a view of the labour-management process from the union side. The article itself is clear through its title ‘How to Act Like a Union on a Labour Management Committee’.

Click here to read the article

This article provides us with an excellent perspective on how the union views itself as the collective entity through the consistent application of solidarity, always. It provides us with the understanding that the labour-management committee process is to be used as an extension of the collective bargaining process.

Also, it identifies that even the seating arrangements during a labour-management meeting must honour the single voice and the identity of the union as one collective source. To try to separate union members during a meeting through seating arrangements is not an acceptable practice as it is perceived as unequal treatment. The only equal parties in a labour management meeting are the entity of the employer and the entity of the union – not individuals who may speak from multiple, self-reflective perspectives.

Does this approach ascribed to the union fly in the face of harmonious relations between the parties? Not necessarily.

Understanding the other side is the first step in the development of effective relationships. Implementing that understanding remains the challenge for us all.

Discussion Questions:

  1. How can the Human Resources role facilitate effective labour-management communication?
  2. Do you agree with the perception that seating arrangements matter in a meeting setting? Why or why not?
  3. As the employer representative in a labour-management committee meeting, how will you respond to the collective approach described in the union-side article?
  4. Why is the need to ensure that committee meetings are extensions of the collective bargaining process important to the union? How can this approach be used effectively by the employer?