A Tale of Two Countries: G.M. in Canada and Colombia

Corporations have, shall we say, a rather checkered history in dealing with the workers who make possible their profits, often viewing them as disposable commodities to be chewed up and then spit out.

As contract talks with the Big Three automakers get underway, CAW president Ken Lewenza has issued this warning:

Canada's 24,000 auto workers deserve to share in the gains the auto makers have made since 2009 when a multi-million dollar government bailout and worker concessions helped keep a struggling industry in business, he said.

“The companies have profited because of our members' sacrifices. They have no economic or ethical right to demand further concessions,” Lewenza told a press conference Tuesday at the Sheraton Hotel in downtown Toronto.

Of course, the big hammer the automakers wield is the threat of relocating their operations to jurisdictions where labour costs are lower, and workers are deemed 'expendable'.

Places like Colombia, where on-the-job-injury results in dismissal.

But the workers there are not going "quietly into that good night."

Nine days into a hunger strike in which he has sewn shut his mouth, Jorge Parra, a former worker for General Motors in Colombia, says his condition is deteriorating. “I have terrible pains in my stomach, my lips are swollen and sore, and I am having problems sleeping,” he says. “But I will not give up.”

The 35-year-old is one of a group of men who say they were fired after suffering severe workplace injuries at GM’s Bogota factory, Colmotores, and have taken drastic action to demand compensation.

After protesting for a year outside the United States embassy with no results, four of the ex-workers sewed shut their mouths on August 1, followed by another three men a week later. More will undergo the procedure every week until their complaints are answered, they say.

Debased

It is the only word that seems remotely appropriate to describe the view of human nature implicit in this article, published in the National Post, dealing with the Pope's butler, Paolo Gabriele, the man who leaked embarrassing documents to the media with the intent of exposing Vatican corruption he hopes public scrutiny will ensure an end to.

In other words, the man acted out of conscience; his integrity wouldn't allow him to continue to be a party to concealment of wrongdoing.

If you read through the article, however, towards the end you might be unsettled to learn that the butler's integrity is seen as fit fodder for psychological examination.

I guess because it truly seems to be a rare phenomenon these days, it is considered a potential abnormality.

Our American Cousins?

One can't help but wonder if Harper's police force has been giving lessons to their American cousins in stifling free speech at right-wing political rallies.

Would I Lie To You?

Faith can be a marvelous thing, one that people take strength from as they go about their daily lives. One meaning of faith, as offered by Oxford Dictionaries online, encapsulates this idea:

strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.

However, there is another definition of faith that is not necessarily so benign:

complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

It is this second definition of faith that many would have us place in the integrity and purpose of unfettered capitalism, usually accompanied by the mantra that private enterprise is always more efficient and productive than public ownership/direction/influence. I suppose for some, that faith does take on religious dimensions and fervour if we listen to some well-known right-wing ranters. (I'll let you fill in the blanks here.)

My theological reflections were prompted by a couple of stories I read in the morning newspapers, one in The Toronto Star and the other in The Hamilton Spectator.

The first story, Watchdog orders Brampton to reveal details of huge contract, revolves around a massive downtown redevelopment project, the financial details of which both the citizens and the councillors have been denied access to up to now.

Councillors and residents have tried unsuccessfully for more than a year to learn more about the pricing of the winning bid by Dominus Construction, which could cost taxpayers more than half a billion dollars for all three phases. Only the first phase was approved by council last August, at a construction cost of $94 million for a nine-storey building, parking and a two-storey expansion of city hall.

Brampton resident Chris Bejnar was one of many who tried to get details about the Dominus bid, one of only two considered by the city for the project. He asked city staff for the exact square footage of each part of the project and the cost per square foot, but was denied. He then filed a freedom of information request, but it was also denied.

Finally, he appealed to the Ontario Information and Privacy Commission. In her decision, dated July 31, adjudicator Cathy Hamilton writes: “In my view, the city has provided speculative, unsupported assertions of economic and financial harms in the event the information in the record is disclosed. The suggestion that disclosure will place a chill over (bidders) when they consider participating in future (bids) and that future bids will be higher as a result of disclosure is self-serving” and unsubstantiated, she concludes.

Similarly, the rights of taxpayers and councillors to know the costs of public projects is being scrutinized in Hamilton regarding the rebuilding of Ivor Wynne Stadium for the Pan Am Games:

Councillors frustrated by stadium secrecy - Infrastructure Ontario keeping details under wraps

City staff were asking for council's approval to enter into discussions with Infrastructure Ontario to determine the “roles, relationships, joint and separate responsibilities, authorizations and obligations” for the Pam Am stadium.

According to the report, the capital cost for the stadium is $145.6 million. The operating costs for 2012 are $340,300. However, the staff report offered few details about how the costs and operating responsibilities of the stadium will be shared.

The story goes on to reveal that if councillors want that information from Infrastructure Ontario, they must sign confidentiality agreements. The 'explanation' for this secrecy?

Infrastructure Ontario has said that keeping details of the stadium proposals under wraps protects taxpayers by making sure developers are not unduly influenced by public scrutiny.

Secrecy about how taxpayers' dollars are being used, in order to protect developers?

For one of little faith in right-wing ideology, all I can say is thanks for the peak behind the curtain.

Because ....

.....some animals are more equal than others, I guess. At least that seems to be the message in McGuinty's Ontario.*

*Doctors, teachers, and most other public servants need not apply.

From A Star Reader

My sentiments exactly, Steve:

Re: A G20 cop’s close call, Aug. 10

I am a 59-year-old middle-class law-abiding person. That said, I cannot help but remark on the juxtaposition of the description of George Horton's “crimes” with the picture of police activity during the G20.

Horton is accused of wearing a disguise and mischief. The police officer in the picture accompanying the article has deliberately removed his name tag and any other identifying badges, is wearing a mask and is kicking the body of a protester. The police officer in question is clearly attempting to disguise himself in order to engage in mischief/misconduct. Until the police at both the individual and very senior level face discipline (beyond losing pay), I think it would be a gross miscarriage of justice for Horton to face jail time.

I have great sympathy for Staff Sgt. Graham Queen. He was, however, able to take refuge in a locked cruiser and was armed and able to defend himself. The same cannot be said for the people on the receiving end of a police boot.

Steve Morse, Cookstown

What Purpose Do We Serve?

Although I have written on this topic before, I think it merits a return visit, given the environmental disasters currently engulfing the world.

Were it within my power, I would legislate that all people in both elementary and high school, and in the world's corporate boardrooms, be required to watch nature documentaries on a regular basis. That way, they would quickly become disabused of the notion that we are somehow outside of or above nature, rather than simply a part of it.

Last night I watched one entitled, Big Sur: Wild California, featuring stunning images of the flora and fauna that area of the West Coast is famous for. And I was once more reminded, as I always am when watching such documentaries, of the interconnectedness of nature, and the delicate balance that exists when left unmolested.

For example, sharks are vital to our survival because of the role they play in protecting the oxygen-producing capacities of the oceans, and while last night's film did not deal with such dramatic realities, there was a very vivid if implicit reminder of how dangerous human activity can be to the earth's ecosystems. The sea otter, once almost wiped out thanks to trade in their furs, are quite fond of sea urchins. Sea urchins have a rather voracious capacity for kelp, underwater forests of which grow in the Pacific off of Big Sur. Were it not for the otters' presence, the urchins would have full reign, and the kelp would be no more. Just one small example of a truth that permeates the natural world.

This morning at breakfast, I was telling my wife about some of the nature arcana I gleaned from the video, stressing the delicate balance I have just referred to. I said that everything has a role to play, after which she asked rhetorically, "Then what role do humans play in this scheme of things?"

Sadly, the answer is all too clear. With our 'superior intelligence,' the destruction we have wrought in nature we are being reminded of on an almost daily basis.

And, as the meteorologists are fond of saying, "There is no relief in sight."

It is Sunday, and the sermon is now ended.