Showing posts with label anti-labour legislation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-labour legislation. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Our Race to the Bottom

Rarely have I read a more accurate and succinct chronicle of what the last few decades have done to the people of this country. Enjoy, compliments of The Toronto Star:

Re: Credit cards main cause of high debt, Jan. 27

Growing up in Ontario in the 1960s I remember a good many of my friends’ fathers worked in the local steel mill. It was a typical job an immigrant would occupy — unionized, with a pension plan, health benefits, a decent wage that allowed the family to own a modest home, put food on the table, own a car, and even take a vacation once a year, or have a fishing boat in the driveway.

By the time the kids were grown, the house was paid off, and the parents were able to help the kids go to university or college. That lifestyle no longer exists for most people. Slowly, so that no one really noticed what was happening, over time the take home pay was not quite keeping up with the cost of things. For instance, 10 years after I bought my first car the equivalent car cost $10,000 more. My pay, which would have been considered a good middle-income wage, did not go up $10,000 in that same period.

So, to maintain a standard of life that their parents enjoyed, which they quite reasonably expected, people had to go into debt. People charged purchases to credit cards, big ticket items at first, but gradually it became necessary to use credit to buy essentials like groceries. People took on lines of credit from their bank, putting themselves into a perpetual state of indebtedness. The people lending the money got richer, the shareholders and executives of corporations got richer as the money they saved in wages went into their pockets instead.

The fatal blow to middle income came with globalization, when industry moved en masse to the Third World to exploit cheap labour. Ontario was hit hard as a good part of the economy used to be based on the production of goods. And now, you have a race to see who can offer the lowest wage. Many U.S. states have declared themselves “right to work” states, so that unions can be bypassed, and the desperate unemployed will work for ever lower wages. In Ontario, the governement waged war against unionized teachers. So, hard working Canadians, the ones lucky enough to have a steady job, have to either carry excessive debt, or do without.

And all of the money that was given back to corporations and the rich, as an incentive to invest back into the Canadian economy, turned out to be a nice bonus to the executives and shareholders, and it seems, the only inducement to operating in Canada, is a wage structure competitive to the Third World.

Sylvia Castellani, Bradford

Saturday, December 22, 2012

Some Star Readers Respond To Anti-Unionism

I have to confess that my last few blog posts have felt singularly uninspired. I therefore yield to one of my favourite sources for perceptive analysis, the readers of The Toronto Star, who offer a panoply of thoughts on the dangerous anti-unionism trend evident in Canada at both the federal and provincial levels. All offer some excellent insights, which you can read here, and I am reproducing just one below:

History teaches us that when politicians wield public anger against an identifiable group, the casualty list usually includes those who allow their anger to be manipulated.

As a puppet of financially obese global investors, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney smiled broadly when he announced new immigration laws to facilitate a “new skilled trades stream” of foreign workers. Like foreign seasonal agricultural workers, these “skilled trades workers” will be grateful to leave home and family for much of the year and earn a fraction of what Canadian unionized workers in these trades currently earn. What proof confirms a shortage of electricians in Canada?

In the U.S., President Barack Obama warns that “right-to-work” bills are really politically motivated “right to work for less money” legislation, while in Ontario, Tim Hudak vomits out “right to work” rhetoric in his role as the prophet of blind hated for public sector workers.

It may take a year or two for the angry public to realize it was their hatred of teachers and other public servants that empowered federal and provincial politicians to bargain away all well-paying public and private sector jobs. As with all major renovations to the social structure of societies, the angry 99 per cent will inevitably rise up against the 1 per cent, including against those politicians who fatten their personal or business bank accounts with the profits from right-to-work legislation.

The French Revolution and the follow-up Jacobin movement illustrate the destabilizing consequences of following politicians who use hate to advance their agenda. If the angry public were to actually listen to what the teachers and public servants are saying about the governments’ assault against democratic rights, Canada and Ontario may avert the most dangerous consequences of the revolution that is already underway.

Now that the attack on electricians, welders, and other private sector workers has begun, perhaps their cries for help will be heard.

Cindy Griese, Barrie

Saturday, July 7, 2012

Is This Really Negotiating?

While I have sometimes been critical of my former union, The Ontario Secondary Teachers Federation, both in this blog and my other one, I have always been a supporter and advocate of unions. I was particularly surprised and pleased that yesterday, in contrast to the Ontario English Catholic Teachers’ Association (OECTA) accepting a deal with the McGuinty government which sees the elimination of the retirement gratuity amongst other deep concessions, OSSTF's Ken Coran, along with three other union heads, refused to give up the fight.

In what would be regarded in normal times as a major concession, OSSTF has already offered a two year wage freeze, and modest cost of living salary increases in years three and four in exchange for protection of the retirement gratuity, something the McGuinty government has refused to consider.

Apparently the reason the Catholic union so blithely surrendered it is that it has been eliminated in the majority of their boards over the years. However, few understand why the gratuity is much more than a perk to teachers. Yes, it is true that we enjoy a defined benefit pension, but that is the only benefit that we take into retirement; there is no dental or health plan other than what retirees purchase for themselves. For example, mine costs over $3000 per year, and offers some coverage for drugs and dental, but with significant limitations. So essentially the gratuity, usually half a year's salary paid out upon retirement, covers that cost for about 10 years.

Now I realize even that is much more than many enjoy, but the fact is that private companies, especially those with unions, do provide health and dental benefits to its retirees, a fact often overlooked by those eager to denigrate unions and teachers.

And speaking of union-bashers, Heather Mallick, in today's Star, has what I regard as a rather simple-minded column in which she essentially argues for compromise/capitulation to McGuinty's demands, lest the recalcitrant unions bring down a fury of anti-unionism on their heads a la Tim Hudak and Wisconsin-like union-busting legislation.

While that may come, especially given the level of both public ignorance and antipathy regarding the vital role unions play in a healthy economy and political system, my attitude has and always will be the same:

Go down with a fight. There is honour in losing a battle, but little in waving the white flag.

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

The Source of Young Tim Hudak's Inspiration

I recently wrote a brief post on young Mr. Hudak's simple-minded and dysfunctional 'vision' for returning Ontario to its former industrial glory: gut the unions, a policy which, if ever enacted, would be disastrous for the men and women who currently enjoy workplace benefits, decent wages, and protection from arbitrary dismissal thanks to their unions.

In today's Globe, economist Jim Stanford offers some insights into the source of inspiration for the lad who would be premier, inspiration which sharply diverges from the traditional values held by Ontario's Progressive Conservatives before the advent of Hudak's hero and mentor, Mike Harris.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Are Canadians as Fed Up as the People in Ohio?

This past Tuesday, the voters in Ohio told their state legislature that they have had enough. In response to a law enacted with the help of the wealthy Koch Brothers that essentially stripped all collective bargaining rights from public-sector workers, and despite efforts by the wealthy right to suppress their voice, citizens got busy collecting signatures to put [that law] to the test of the ballot box. On Tuesday night, the people defeated the anti-worker law, Senate Bill 5, by a resounding 61 percent majority.

You can read the full story here, but the question I can't help asking myself is whether or not Canadians would have been so vigorous in their defense of workers' rights here. We seem to place as our highest priority our own convenience, and when labour disruptions loom, as they did last summer with the the postal workers and more recently with Air Canada flight attendants, there is nary a word of protest from the general public when the government acts unethically by either imposing a settlement, as it did with the posties, or prevents the attendants from striking a private company by referring the dispute to the Industrial Relations Board (on the flimsy pretext of health and safety concerns) that ultimately led to a binding arbitration contract, the same contract, by the way, that the attendants had already rejected.

Given the ability of our own government to stir up envy and resentment amongst those who are struggling, I don't doubt that we will see a broadening of the definition of 'essential service' in the future.

And that, despite the demagogic rhetoric of our government, will ultimately serve the interests of only a very narrow band of Canadians.