Sure Sounds Like Union-Busting To Me

Call it what you will, anything that circumvents union rights is odious, and it appears to have happened to Hamilton, Ontario. Independent television station station CHCH, a mainstay of the community for over 60 years, summarily fired all of its employees on Friday and filed for bankruptcy, despite the fact that its parent company, Channel Zero, is in good financial health. It then rehired less than half of the staff over the weekend under a new management company that in what appears to be a blatant case of contract-flipping, a practice that Pearson Airport seems to have popularized in recent years.

The Hamilton Spectator reported the following:

Nearly 130 full-time and almost 40 part-time employees of CHCH were left jobless Friday in the wake of Channel 11 Limited Partnership's stunning bankruptcy announcement.

Channel 11 LP, a subsidiary of Channel Zero, provided the news content to CHCH TV for the parent company and employed the on-air news personalities, producers and camera operators.

The bankrupt company listed nearly $4.5 million in liabilities versus just $60,000 in assets.

The largest liability, which was not secured, was about $1.6 million owed to the employees, which likely represents unpaid severance.

Shortly after the bankruptcy announcement, a privately held numbered company separate from Channel Zero offered 58 full-time jobs and 23 part-time jobs to some of the former CHCH news employees.

Many of the terminated, however, are not going gently into that good night. Long-time reporter Lauran Sabourin had this to say:

"We were told that Channel 11 was declaring bankruptcy and that our jobs were terminated," said Sabourin. "I was expecting that because we both [she and her cameraman] had seniority and are part of Unifor (their union), we would be protected because Dwight and I have been there for a number of years."

When she asked about the seniority, she was told that because this is a bankruptcy, the usual seniority rights do not apply.

And when she asked about severance, she was told once again that because this is a bankruptcy, if anyone wanted severance they would have to apply for it, but with a long list of creditors, employees usually end up near the bottom of that list.

Sabourin said 58 employees were made an offer by the company to work, but neither her or Penner were part of that group.

What appears to have happened, she adds, is that all the employees of the company were terminated under the bankruptcy rules, a separate company has been set up and they have rehired some of the former employees.

"I never expected something like this. I always thought that I would leave CH on my own terms," said Sabourin. "I never expected to be kicked to the curb like this. I loved working in Niagara and have loved the people here.

Long-time weatherman, Matt Hayes, who you will see in the clip below, offered this:

"It happens. But I think the thing that really stung in all that was there is no severance. And, you know, especially at this time of year, that's really hard."

Is there a smoking gun in all of this? While station owners deny it, it would seem that there is evidence of a coldly-crafted scheme to do an end-run around the union:

A leaked email by a CHCH TV account manager suggests that a subsidiary company was taken into bankruptcy Friday to help the television station avoid its contractual obligations to unionized employees under the collective bargaining agreement.

The email, apparently sent to a prospective advertising client by Kathleen Marks, stated "we just needed to disband the previous company and form a new one where changes could be made, free from old Union employees and their demands and free from carry-over debt of CanWest."

Will the terminated employees see any form of justice? Given the many loopholes that current labour laws allow in Ontario, my guess is that the prospects for redress are very dim indeed.

On Tim Hudak's Evangelical Political Fervour

Crazed clerics are not the only ones possessed of an evangelical fervour. Young Tim Hudak, leader (at least for now) of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party, is well-known for wanting to bring back some of that old-time religion in the form of union-bashing and dismantlement, something he likes to describe eupehmistically as workplace democracy.

Happily, the agenda clumsily yet avidly embraced by Mr. Hudak and his federal brethren is transparent to many, as the following Star letter makes clear:

Re: A Conservative banner you won’t see, Aug. 10

Susan Delacourt misses the point. While home ownership is the dream of all middle-class and would-be middle-class Canadians, the changes to tougher mortgage restrictions by the Conservative government is not the problem. The problem is that fiscal Conservatives like Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mayor Rob Ford, not to mention the wanabee premier Tim Hudak, bash unions and are thereby responsible for the loss of middle class and fair wage jobs.

In the name of fiscal responsibility we have seen in the last decade the radical decline of good paying employment. Unions protect not only their members but, by raising the bar on wages and benefits, also protect non-members. But, these fiscal elites bash unions and give jobs to the minimum-wage-paying private for profit sector.

The real culprit in the decline of the middle class and the smashing of their dreams is not changes to mortgage lending, but rather the overall decline of wages and salaries. The growth in wealth of the 1 per cent does not make for a sound economy. Unions are the major defence against the one-sided economy we now have.

If the middle class hopes to regain some of its vitality (and surely the entire country depends on this) then it’s time for union bashing to end. Conservatives like the prime minister and the mayor and Mr. Hudak believe that divide and conquer, by creating jealousy on the part of non-union workers of those lucky enough to be protected by group action, is the way to keep wealth in the hands of the few. That’s the secret agenda.

It’s really time the electorate woke up to this Machiavellian plan and took back their power.

Stephen L. Bloom, Toronto

That Man Behind the Curtain

While I strongly believe in being critical of unions when their behaviour warrants it, I am steadfast in my belief that they serve a vital role for the working person, which, essentially, is all of us, at least until retirement. I therefore must disagree with those who claim that the harsh measures about to be imposed by the McGuinty government of Ontario are somehow at least partly attributable to union intransigence.

In his Star column this morning, Martin Regg Cohn offers a good analysis of the politics motivating Mr. McGuinty as the legislature prepares to resume tomorrow to deal with something called the Putting Students First Act, a patently manipulative title confirming all that Mr. Orwell warned us about when he wrote his seminal essay Politics and the English Language.

While arguing that the legislation is little more than political theater designed to bolster the image of the Liberals, Cohn lays some of the blame at the feet of the federations that refused to negotiate. The problem with such a position, as I have previously argued, is the fact that the government never offered even the semblance of bargaining in good faith, essentially saying that the teacher groups had a choice: either accept the terms or have them legislated, the only flexibility being in how the stipulated savings would be effected, as seen in the OECTA deal that will now apparently form the basis of the legislation.

So what is my point here? Despite those who claim unions' intransigence has led to this pending legislation, from my perspective a capitulation to the gun put to their heads would have more seriously impaired faith in the efficacy of unions. To sell out its membership, as OECTA did by legitimizing a process that needlessly violates all good-faith concepts with which I am familiar, would have done far more damage than a steadfast refusal to return to the negotiating table.

And, of course, one thing the public needs to remember in this highly-charged political circus is the fact that a wage-freeze is something that teacher unions were amenable to almost from the beginning.

Just another one of those inconvenient truths, I guess, as Mr. McGuinty urges everyone to pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

What "Flexibility" Really Means

Reading the print version of the story I posted a link to yesterday regarding young Tim Hudak's latest attempt at formulating policy (a.k.a. union busting) got me thinking once more about how politicians misuse and debase language.

In what I guess in his world passes for bold and innovative thinking, young Tim would like union membership to no longer be mandatory and would outlaw the “forced paycheque contributions” unionized workers make to political causes.

Hudak said that “the more flexible the workplace, the greater demand there is going to be for workers.”

“If you have a flexible workplace where businesses can adjust to market conditions the more likely they’ll open up in that jurisdiction.”

I suspect the flexible workplace the callow Master Hudak has in mind would be filled with all kinds of perils for the newly enfranchised worker:

Young Tim's Latest Attempt At Policy-Making

Because, I guess, young Master Hudak believes in work-place democracy.

Can the workhouses be far behind?

More Good News For the Corporate Sector

While corporations continue the arduous task of union-busting and contract-gutting, their efforts are being amply rewarded. Not only has a beneficent and ideologically-driven Harper government cossetted them with a record-low tax rate, but the captains of industry who lead these voracious job-destroying entities are also prospering quite nicely thanks to compliant and obsequious boards. To put their good fortune into perspective, according to a report published Tuesday by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, by lunchtime today, Jan. 3, the highest-paid chief executives officers in Canada will have earned as much as the average Canadian makes in an entire year.

As announced in The Star today, while the majority of Canadian workers are struggling with either stagnant, eroding or minimum wages, in 2010 those toiling as corporate CEO's, regardless of company performance, garnered an average 27% increase in remuneration over the previous year, while by comparison, the average Canadian earned $44,366 that year, or 1.1 per cent more than in 2009.

I ardently await the renewal of the Occupy Movement.