The Canadian Way?
The role of labour in Canada’s prosperity
May 13, 2013
1
The Public Policy Forum is an independent, not-for-profit
organization dedicated to improving the quality of government
in Canada through enhanced dialogue among the public,
private and voluntary sectors. The Forum’s members, drawn
from business, federal, provincial and territorial governments,
the voluntary sector and organized labour, share a belief that
an efficient and effective public service is important in
ensuring Canada’s competitiveness abroad and quality of life
at home.
Established in 1987, the Forum has earned a reputation as a
trusted, nonpartisan facilitator, capable of bringing together a
wide range of stakeholders in productive dialogue. Its research
program provides a neutral base to inform collective decision
making. By promoting information sharing and greater links
between governments and other sectors, the Forum helps
ensure public policy in our country is dynamic, coordinated
and responsive to future challenges and opportunities.
© 2013, Public Policy Forum
1405-130 Albert St.
Ottawa, ON K1P 5G4
Tel: (613) 238-7160
Fax: (613) 238-7990
www.ppforum.ca
2|Page
Table of Contents
PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................... 4
MEETING AGENDA ......................................................................................... 6
PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................ 7
APPENDIX A: BIOGRAPHIES OF PARTICIPANTS ............................................... 8
APPENDIX B: SELECT BACKGROUND READINGS ........................................... 14
3|Page
Project Description
As an advocate for Canadian workers, labour unions have a long-standing history in Canada. From
the advent of Labour Day in the 1880s, to the Winnipeg General Strike, to the huge post-World
War II economic expansion, labour activists have had a notable role in shaping the Canadian
economy. As a result of these initiatives, workers profited from shorter work weeks, enhanced
benefits and pensions. More recently, however, decreasing union density, caused by declining jobs
in manufacturing and other heavily unionized industries, have shifted the profile of a typical union
worker. Today, it is public sector workers who are most likely to belong to a union.
Union membership in Canada peaked in 1982 at a rate of 38.6%. As of 2011, the rate of
unionization for both public and private sector stood at 29.7%. This percentage is a made up of
16.0% of private sectors employees who are members of unions, while the rate for public sector
employees is 71.4%.1 Many have suggested that this shift in the makeup of union membership
towards public sector employees changes the dynamics of the traditional goals of unions.
There is also evidence that a new generation of workers holds different perspectives on the role of
unions than did their parents or grandparents.
In 2009, the Public Policy Forum convened six workshops across the country with young Canadians
and select private and public sector employers to generate ideas on how to curb youth
outmigration and to help transform organizations into employers of choice. Our report, The Road
to Retention, highlights the key findings of these dialogues. Among other recommendations, youth
engaged in this dialogue suggested the need for the revitalization of unions in order to appeal to
younger workers.2
For members of Generation Y, unions may represent a loss of individuality and a reliance on
hierarchical structures that sometimes appear dated. If this image persists, the inability of unions
to attract and engage youth as new members could hold significant consequences. Some union
leaders recognize that unions need to overcome their reputation for rigidity.3 Presently, the
Canadian economy is experiencing both weak job creation and new workplace economics,
negatively impacting union membership.
There is nevertheless some promise that with the current demographic transition, the labour
movement can advance, renew and engage a new generation of workers who are currently having
difficulties finding good jobs.4
1
Sharanjit Uppal, “Unionization 2011,” Statistics Canada, February 14, 2012
Canada’s Public Policy Forum, The Road to Retention, June 25, 2010
3
Janet McFarland, “The weakening state of Canadian labour unions,” The Globe and Mail, September 2,
2012
4
“Unions on decline in private sector,” The Canadian Press, September 3, 2012
2
4|Page
As this transition unfolds in Canada, our neighbours to the south are engaged in a much more
intense dialogue on the future of unions. In Michigan and Wisconsin, tensions have increased as
legislators have tabled (and in the case of the former, passed) so-called right-to-work legislation (a
law that prevents unions from collecting dues from everyone in a bargaining unit), which
significantly impacts the union operating model. Proponents of such legislation, which now exists
in 24 American states, argue that it gives workers freedom of association and promotes job
creation, while opponents point out that it drains union funds and threatens their long-term
survival.
Bill C-377, passed in Ottawa in December 2012, has prompted some to suggest that American-style
labour regulations are now crossing our borders. However, while issues may share some
similarities in both countries, the Canadian tradition of collaborative and constructive dialogue
among labour unions, businesses and governments suggests there may be a different and better
approach.
In order to find solutions to the various challenges affecting Canada’s workforce, some leaders
have suggested bringing together sectors, including labour, business and government to develop
joint strategies.5 There has been little effort made in recent years, however, to convene all
stakeholders on this important area of public policy. The Public Policy Forum therefore proposes a
roundtable dialogue convening a select group of multisectoral leaders in Toronto on May 13, 2013.
The objective will be to advance discussion of the role of labour unions in Canada’s future
prosperity.
5
Janet McFarland, “The weakening state of Canadian labour unions,” The Globe and Mail, September 2,
2012
5|Page
Meeting Agenda
May 13, 2013, 6.00 pm-9.00 pm.
Venue: The University Club of Toronto, 380 University Avenue, Toronto, ON
The meeting will be an open discussion, chaired by the Forum’s President David Mitchell.
6:00pm
Refreshments
6:30pm
Dinner
Tour de Table
7:00pm
Open Discussion
8:30pm
Closing Remarks
Proposed Discussion Questions:
1. What are the current top policy priorities for Canadian unions?
2. How is demographic change impacting labour unions in Canada?
3. Is there a unique Canadian multi-sector approach to policy development in the context of
increased global competitiveness?
Project Deliverables
In addition to this briefing package, the project will include the following key components:

A roundtable discussion with approximately 15-20 senior, multisector leaders;

An outcomes report based on the roundtable discussion.
6|Page
Participants
Confirmed participants include:
Labour representatives:
o
Ken Georgetti, President, Canadian Labour Congress
o
Ken Lewenza, President, Canadian Auto Workers
o
Paul Moist, National President, CUPE
o
Ken Neumann, National Director, United Steelworkers
Public Service (former and current):
o
Yaprak Baltacioglu, Secretary, Treasury Board of Canada,
o
Shelly Jamieson, Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Partnership Against Cancer
o
Daniel Watson, Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board of Canada
Academic:
o
Carol Stephenson, Dean, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario
o
Charlotte Yates, Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences, McMaster University
Private sector:
o
Kevin Lynch, Vice-Chair, BMO Financial
o
Rory McAlpine, Vice-President, Government &Industry Relations, Maple Leaf Foods
o
Scott Morey, Vice-President, Labour Relations, Air Canada
Associations:
o
Jayson Myers, President, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
o
Susan Scotti, Senior Vice-President, Canadian Council of Chief Executives
Others:
o
Julie Cafley, Vice-President, Canada’s Public Policy Forum
o
Ken Delaney, Partner, Prism Economics and Analysis
o
Allan Gregg, Chairman, Harris/Decima Research
o
David Mitchell, President, Canada’s Public Policy Forum
7|Page
Appendix A: Biographies of Participants
Yaprak Baltacioglu - Secretary, Treasury Board of Canada
Yaprak Baltacioglu was appointed as Secretary of the Treasury Board on November 12, 2012.
She served as Deputy Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities between July 2009
and November 2012 and as Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Agri- Food Canada from March
2007 to June 2009. Prior to this she spent over four years at the Privy Council Office, first as
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet (Social Development Policy) and then as Deputy Secretary to
the Cabinet (Operations). In these roles, she provided advice and support to the Prime Minister
and Cabinet on the full range of government operations and domestic policy issues. Since joining
the public service in 1989, Yaprak has also worked at the Public Service Commission of Canada
and Environment Canada, the latter as both Director General for Strategic Policy and International
Relations. She graduated from Carleton University's School of Public Administration, where she
received a Master of Arts, as well as from Istanbul University, where she obtained a Bachelor of
Law degree.
Julie Cafley - Vice President, Canada’s Public Policy Forum
Julie Cafley joined Canada’s Public Policy Forum as Vice-President in August, 2010. Julie leads the
membership strategy for the Forum and also manages projects in the areas of public sector
governance and innovation, such as a series examining Aboriginal participation in major natural
resource opportunities, innovation in Canada’s natural resource sector, adult literacy and
essential skills and a project on youth civic engagement. She also has a keen interest in diversity
policies. She holds a Master's degree in Educational Administration from the University of Ottawa
(along with her BA and BEd) and is currently completing her PhD in Educational Leadership. Her
thesis focuses on higher education leadership through the lens of unfinished mandates of
Canadian university presidents. In 2012, she was chosen as one of the delegates for the Governor
General’s Canadian Leadership Conference. And, in 2010, she was honoured as one of the Ottawa
Business Journal's top 40 under forty for her business achievement, expertise and community
involvement.
Ken Delaney - Partner, Prism Economics and Analysis
Ken Delaney is a Partner at Prism Economics and Analysis. He is an accomplished management,
policy, and labour relations professional with significant experience in business, union and not for
profit environments. Prior to joining Prism he was the Executive Assistant to the National
Director of the Steelworkers Union. He also has ten years of experience managing a private
equity fund that invested in mid-sized Ontario based businesses, and has extensive experience
advocating public policy positions for the Steelworkers Union and other groups. He is also
currently the Executive Director of the Canadian Steel Trade and Employment Congress, a
member of the Public Policy Forum Board of Directors, and serves as Industry Liaison and Special
Advisor in the Faculty of Social Science at McMaster University. Ken has a B.A. and a B.Com from
the University of Windsor and an M.A. in Industrial Relations from Wayne State University.
8|Page
Ken Georgetti - President, Canadian Labour Congress
Ken Georgetti is now the longest-serving president since the Canadian Labour Congress was
established in 1956. Under Ken’s leadership, the CLC membership has grown by 750,000 new
union members to represent 3.3 million workers. First elected at age 46 in May 1999 as the
youngest president in the CLC’s history, Ken comes from a family of union activists in Trail,
B.C. Ken has helped modernize the operations of the CLC, ensuring labour is more representative
of the changing face of the workforce. Ken’s contributions to labour and the community have also
earned him the Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee Medal for Community Service and the
Commemorative Medal for the 125th Anniversary of the Confederation of Canada in recognition
of significant contribution to Canada, and the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal in 2012
that honours significant contributions and achievements by Canadians. In 2011, he was named a
Life Literacy Ambassador by ABC Life Literacy Canada.
Allan Gregg - Chairman, Harris/Decima Research
Allan Gregg is the Chairman of Harris -Decima Research, a company he founded over 30 years
ago that has now merged with the fastest growing research firm in the world. From 1979 through
1993 Allan was known as the official pollster of the Progressive Conservative Party. In 1995, he cofounded The Strategic Counsel, a research partnership he left in 2007. That year, he set out on his
own to form Allan Gregg Strategies, offering high-end, value added, research-based consulting
and communications advice to private and public sector clients. Allan is a pioneer in the
integration of consulting, public-opinion research, public affairs and communications. For 10
years, he was a regular participant on CBC’s “At Issue” panel on Thursday nights, and hosted the
popular TVO talk show – Allan Gregg In Conversation With — as well as a frequent contributor to
newspapers and magazines.
Allan is also an entrepreneur with diverse interests. He was one of the founding shareholders of
Canada’s children’s network, YTV, the Chairman of Toronto Film Festival the past Chair of the
Walrus Foundation (publisher of 2007 Magazine of the Year, “The Walrus”), and he serves on
General Motors of Canada’s Advisory Board and the Board of Zenn Motors.
In 2012, Allan was inducted into Canadian Marketing Hall of Legends and was appointed as an
Adjunct Professor at Carleton’s School of Public Affairs.
Shelly Jamieson - Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Partnership Against Cancer
Shelly Jamieson joined the Partnership in July 2012 as Chief Executive Officer. She brings strong
executive experience in the public and private sectors, primarily in healthcare, and a
demonstrated commitment to the importance of effective partnerships in achieving meaningful
outcomes. Most recently, Ms. Jamieson held Ontario’s highest-ranking civil servant role as
Secretary of Cabinet, Head of the Ontario Public Service and Clerk of the Executive Council. She
also served as Deputy Minister of Transportation for the province of Ontario. Roles previously
held by Ms. Jamieson include Vice-President of Operations and then President of Extendicare
Canada, a provider of long-term care; volunteer commissioner on the Health Services
Restructuring Commission; and Executive Director of the Ontario Nursing Home Association (now
the Ontario Long-Term Care Association). Early in her career, Ms. Jamieson ran her own research
and consulting firm specializing in geriatric care environments.
9|Page
Ken Lewenza - President, Canadian Auto Workers
Ken Lewenza is the first local union leader to be elected Canadian Auto Worker National President
in the union's history. He was re-elected president at the 9th Constitutional Convention held
in August, 2009. He is a rank-and-file leader and activist who has emphasized outreach within the
labour movement and the broader community during his terms as president of CAW Local 444
and CAW Council President. Ken has been a member of CAW Local 444 since he began working at
Chrysler Canada in 1972 at the age of 18. He held the positions of committeeperson, chairperson
and vice-president before taking on the role of Local 444 President in 1994.
He served as the Chair of the CAW Chrysler Master Bargaining Committee for the last five rounds
of Big Three bargaining. He was also a CAW National Executive Board member and the president
of CAW Council for the past 10 years. Ken has been involved with many community organizations.
In 2002, he was awarded the Charles E. Brooks Labour Community Award, a joint initiative of the
United Way and the Windsor and District Labour Council.
Kevin Lynch - Vice Chair, BMO Financial
The Honourable Kevin Lynch, P.C., O.C., PH.D, LL.D was appointed Vice Chair of BMO Financial
Group in early 2010. He began his career in 1976 as an economist with the Bank of Canada. In
Ottawa, he previously served as Deputy Minister of Industry and Deputy Minister of Finance. He
then served as Executive Director, the International Monetary Fund until early 2006, when he was
appointed the 20th Clerk of the Privy Council, Secretary to the Cabinet and Head of the Public
Service of Canada. In July 2009, after a long and distinguished career, Kevin retired from the
Government of Canada. He earned his BA from Mount Allison University, his Masters in
Economics from the University of Manchester and a doctorate in Economics from McMaster
University. Kevin also holds honourary degrees from seven Canadian universities.
He is also Chair of the Board of Governors of the University of Waterloo, and serves on several
other boards, including those of the Gairdner Foundation, the Perimeter Institute, U.K. Ditchley,
the Learning Partnership, the Samara Foundation, the Shannon School of Business and the
Accounting Standards Oversight Council. Kevin was made a Member of the Queen’s Privy Council
for Canada in 2009, and an Officer of the Order of Canada in 2011. He has been awarded the
Distinguished Alumni Award from McMaster University and the Queen’s Golden Jubilee Medal.
Rory McAlpine - Vice-President, Government & Industry Relations, Maple Leaf Food
Rory McAlpine is Vice-President, Government & Industry Relations of Maple Leaf Foods Inc.
Appointed to his current position in November 2005; Rory has more than 20 years of experience
in government, trade and agribusiness. Prior to joining Maple Leaf Foods, he was Deputy Minister
of the B.C Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, a position he held from 2002 to 2005.
Previously, Rory obtained significant experience with the Federal Government as Executive
Director and Director General, International Trade Policy Directorate; Director Grains and Oilseeds
Division; and Deputy Director Multilateral Trade with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. He was
also the former Executive Director of the National Farm Products Council, and was a Trade
Commissioner with the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, with postings in
Kuwait, Bangkok, Brussels, Edmonton and Ottawa. Rory represents Maple Leaf Foods on the
international affairs committees of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the association of
Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters. He holds a Master’s degree in Economics from the
University of St. Andrews in Scotland.
10 | P a g e
David Mitchell - President & CEO, Canada’s Public Policy Forum
David Mitchell is the President and CEO of Canada’s Public Policy Forum, which fosters
constructive dialogue to promote good governance and effective public service.
He has held diverse positions in the public, private and non-profit sectors. David has been a
legislative clerk in Saskatchewan, and an executive in the resource industries in western Canada.
He served as an elected member of the British Columbia Legislature, and also as a Vice President
at three Canadian universities: Simon Fraser, the University of Ottawa and Queen`s. A former
newspaper columnist and award winning author, he continues to provide commentary on
business and public affairs to both print and broadcast media. He has led the Public Policy Forum
for four years, extending its reach to become a more pan-Canadian organization. He strongly
believes that addressing our country`s most complex problems requires effective government, in
collaboration with leaders from all sectors.
Paul Moist - National President, Canadian Union of Public Employees
Paul Moist is national president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) – Canada’s
largest union with more than 620,000 members. A firm believer in the labour movement as a
force for social change, Paul has used his leadership to champion public services such as health
care, education and municipal services. He is a leading labour spokesperson on the economy and
trade issues. Paul has championed key political issues such as the need for senior levels of
government to address Canada’s growing municipal infrastructure deficit, and the need to
address retirement security for all Canadians. A CUPE member since 1975 as a City of Winnipeg
employee, Paul has worked for CUPE for 30 years, ten as a CUPE National Representative, ten as
president of CUPE Local 500 (Winnipeg Civic employees) and as National President since 2003.
A Vice-President of the Canadian Labour Congress, he also serves as a Governor of the Labour
College of Canada, and as a Director of SHARE (The Shareholder Association for Research and
Education). Paul is CUPE’s 5th National President and the first from Western Canada. In 2012 he
was honoured by the University of Manitoba’s Faculty of Arts Distinguished Alumni Award. He
also was awarded the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee medal for meritorious service to the
community.
Scott Morey - Vice-President, Labour Relations, Air Canada
Scott Morey was appointed Vice President, Labour Relations in January, 2007. He is responsible
for all Labour Relations activities throughout the Corporation, including leading labour
negotiations and related functions. To Air Canada, Scott brings 16 years of labour and employee
relations expertise from two of North America's largest manufacturing and distribution
companies. He most recently had oversight for the negotiation and administration of over 40
collective agreements involving several major, national unions at a large beverage distribution
company. He was previously involved in human resource administration including compensation
and the development of sustainable external partnerships with various related government
agencies at an automotive manufacturer. Scott holds a BA from Brock University and a Certificate
in Labour Relations from Queen's University. He also participated in the 2003 Duke of Edinburgh
Commonwealth Study Conference.
11 | P a g e
Jayson Myers - President & CEO, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
Jayson Myers is the President and CEO of Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, Canada's largest
industry and trade association. He is also the Chair of the Canadian Manufacturing Coalition, a
coalition of more than 48 industry associations that have come together to speak with a common
voice on priority issues for Canada's Manufacturing sector. Jayson is a well-known economic
commentator, and is widely published in the fields of Canadian and international economics,
technological and industrial change. As CME's Chief Economist, he led the association's
Manufacturing 20/20 initiative, the largest cross-country consultation ever convened by Canada's
business community on the future of manufacturing in Canada. He sits on special advisory
councils to the Minister for International Trade, the Minister of Industry, and the Canadian Border
Services Agency. Jayson is co-chair of the Work & Learning Knowledge Centre of the Canadian
Council on Learning. He is Vice Chair of both the Ontario Manufacturing Council and the Great
Lakes Manufacturing Council. He is a consultant on Canadian and international business affairs for
Oxford Analytica, an international consulting group based at Oxford University
Ken Neumann - National Director, United Steelworkers
A lifelong Steelworker, Ken Neumann has served as the United Steelworkers Canadian director
since 2004. Ken rose through the ranks as a local union activist in Saskatchewan and in 1977
became a USW staff representative in Regina. He was elected USW District 3 director in 1989 and
served in that capacity for 15 years. One of Ken's first achievements as National Director was his
instrumental role in the USW merger with the Industrial, Wood and Allied Workers of Canada in
2004. In 2010, Ken launched a National Organizing Project to give more Canadian workers a
collective voice in their workplaces. The USW has organized over 16,000 new members in Canada
since 2008.
Susan Scotti - Senior Vice-President, Canadian Council of Chief Executives
Susan Scotti joined the Canadian Council of Chief Executives in March, 2011 as the Senior Vice
President, Planning and Operations. In that capacity, she manages the daily operations of the
Council, including strategic planning, development of the Council’s policy priorities, oversight of
financial and human resource planning, as well as membership development and events planning.
Prior to joining the Council, Susan worked as an independent consultant in Ottawa focusing on
strategic planning, governance and organizational development from January, 2009 to March
2011. A former senior executive with the government of Canada for over 30 years, Susan was
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister with Human Resources and Skills Development Canada until
January, 2009. She has also held senior positions in the Ministries of Canadian Heritage,
Communications, Indian and Northern Affairs and the Privy Council Office where she has been
responsible for national policies and programs in areas as diverse as culture and broadcasting, the
integration and participation of ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, seniors, aboriginal
land claims and public pensions. Susan serves on a number of not-for-profit boards in Ottawa, and
is an active volunteer in her community.
12 | P a g e
Carol Stephenson - Dean, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario
Carol Stephenson spent many years in the Canadian telecom industry before joining The Richard
Ivey School of Business of Western University. She brings more than 30 years of progressive
experience in marketing, operations, strategic planning, technology development, and financial
management to one of Canada's premier business school. Carol currently serves on several
Boards for top Canadian companies and has served on several important Government
Committees. She is a Director of Intact Financial Services Corporation (formerly ING Canada);
Manitoba Telecom Services Inc.; Ballard Power Systems Inc.; and General Motors Company. Carol
was Chair of the Federal Government's Advisory Committee on Senior Level Retention and
Compensation and was Chair of the Ontario Research Fund Advisory Board. Her community
involvement includes membership on the Boards of Catalyst and Women on Boards. As Dean of
Ivey, Carol advances the practice of business management and leadership, to help create business
leaders who think globally, act strategically, and contribute to the societies in which they operate.
Daniel Watson - Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board of Canada
Daniel is a graduate of the University of British Columbia, (History and French Literature) and
started his career as a supervisor at a Canada Employment Centre for Students in East Vancouver.
He subsequently moved to the Policy and Research group of Saskatchewan's Department of
Education, Training and Employment, then to British Columbia's Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs,
where he was involved in all aspects of modern treaty negotiations. Daniel returned to the federal
government in 1999 as Director of Aboriginal and Territorial Relations at Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada (INAC) in Yellowknife. Two years later, he became Director General of the
Aboriginal Justice Directorate at Justice Canada in Ottawa. He was then appointed Assistant
Deputy Minister at Western Economic Diversification Canada in Saskatchewan in 2003, and Senior
Assistant Deputy Minister responsible for Policy and Strategic Direction at INAC in 2006. Daniel
returned to Western Diversification as Associate Deputy Minister in March 2009, and on July 16 of
that same year, was appointed Deputy Minister.
Charlotte Yates - Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences, McMaster University
Charlotte Yates is Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and a professor in the School of Labour
Studies and Department of Political Science at McMaster University. Her areas of research
include: union renewal in the Anglo-American democracies, union organizing in Canada and the
impact of membership recruitment on union strategy and diversity; political Interest
Intermediation; political economy of political parties and interest groups; organized labour and
the state and globalization and social cohesion amongst workers and how global economic forces
and changes filter through to impact on workers and their communities.
13 | P a g e
Appendix B: Select background readings
1. “Union Movement Needs to Engage Youth in Renewal,” excerpt from
The Road to Retention: youth perspectives on transforming
organizations into choice employers, Canada’s Public Policy Forum,
June 25, 2010
2. “Unionization rates in the first half of 2010 and 2011,” Statistics
Canada, February 14, 2012
3. “The weakening state of Canadian labour unions,” Janet Macfarland,
The Globe and Mail, September 2, 2012
4. "Unions on decline in private sector,” The Canadian Press, September
2, 2012
5. "Unions must share the blame for precarious employment," Konrad
Yakabuski, The Globe and Mail, February 28, 2013
6. “Do unions have a future?" Richard Littlemore, Report on Business
Magazine- The Globe and Mail, March 27, 2013
7. “Unions, Inc: Organised Labour,” The Economist, April 6, 2013
8. “Do Unions Still Matter to Young People?” Adam Carter, CBC News,
April 15, 2013
9. “Labour Right’s conference highlights union’s role in the fight for rights,
democracy,” John Bonnar, rabble.ca, April 14, 2013
10. “CAW-CEP Discussion Paper,” Jim Stanford, CAW/TCA Canada, January
26, 2012
14 | P a g e
1. Union Movement Needs to Engage Youth in Renewal
“Union Movement Needs to Engage Youth in Renewal excerpt from The Road to Retention:
youth perspectives on transforming organizations into choice employers, Canada’s Public Policy
Forum, June 25, 2010
http://www.ppforum.ca/sites/default/files/The_Road_to_Retention_EN_web.pdf
Organizational experts like Rafael Gomez and Noah Meltz argue that we are in a new era marked
by a general decline of the union movement due to the restructuring of the economy,
demographic changes, and changes in youth preference.
As is the case with almost every membership based institution, unions, too, are in need of
revitalization, with youth being the obvious source of renewal and regeneration. To sustain their
membership, unions need to attract young workers as a source of “new blood” and new ideas –
something the Canadian Labour Congress says is a challenge. One participant commented that
“very few people of our generation would go through slogging their entire life for a long-term
pension payout.”
The Canadian economy has shifted from an industrial manufacturing economy to a knowledge
economy in which “ideas are currency and collaboration is vital.” Within that context, participants
shared the view that “unions are not proponents of individuality.” They acknowledge and respect
the history of the union movement, but wondered how unions would “fit in this new world.” Their
views support a recent DEMOS study indicating that competencies and skills needed in the
knowledge economy – creativity, innovation, flexibility and multitasking – are not nurtured or
cultivated in unionized environments.
For Generation Y, unions represent a loss of individuality and collective negotiations do not
resonate with them. Due to the hierarchical structure of unions, the “workplace voice” is likely to
be an older worker with seniority.20 As such, most union policy is aimed at providing benefits that
are valued by older workers, such as health insurance, seniority rights, pensions, subsidized early
retirement programs and the like. Participants shared the view that their preferences may be put
aside in favour of the preferences of an older workforce. As a result, unions are seldom attractive
to Generation Y.
In an era of networked organizations and creative capital, participants felt that the union
emphasis on seniority, collective negotiations without performance pay, dues and fees, onerous
grievance procedures, outdated communication, technology, and management strategies all
make unions unattractive to an emerging generation. If the union movement in Canada is to
sustain its membership and attract a new generation of workers, participants said they would
need to “genuinely engage youth in renewal.”
15 | P a g e
2.
Unionization rates in the first half of 2010 and 2011
Statistics Canada, February 14, 2012
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2011004/article/11579-eng.htm
Average paid employment (employees) during the first half of 2011 was 14.5 million, an increase
of 249,000 over the same period a year earlier (Table 1). The number of unionized employees also
increased, by 80,000 (to 4.3 million). However, since union membership rose slightly more rapidly
than employment, the unionization rate edged up from 29.6% in 2010 to 29.7% in 2011.
As women experienced disproportionately more gains in unionized jobs, their unionization rate
rose to 31.1%. The unionization rate for men remained constant at 28.2%. As a result, the gap in
the rates between men and women widened further in 2011.
Gains in unionized jobs were mainly part-time jobs. Unionization among full-time workers
remained steady at 31.1%, while the unionization rate of part-time workers rose to 23.6% in 2011.
The unionization rate for permanent employees decreased to 29.9%. However, it increased to
28.0% for those in non-permanent jobs. Between 2010 and 2011, the unionization rate slipped in
large (100 employees or more) and small (fewer than 20 employees) firms, but rose slightly for
those with 20 to 99 employees.
The provincial picture was mixed (Chart A). Five provinces recorded increases in their unionization
rate, Nova Scotia recording the largest increase. By contrast, unionization decreased in Prince
Edward Island, Manitoba and Alberta.
Changes in unionization rates varied across industries. Notable declines were observed in public
administration and information and cultural industries. Notable increases occurred in agriculture,
and in utilities. (Chart B).
Changes in the unionization rate also varied across 10 major occupational groups (Chart C).
Unionization declined most in sales and services, and in natural and applied sicences. Conversely,
it rose notably in occupations unique to processing, manufacturing and utilities. Changes in the
unionization rate were more modest among other major occupational categories.
Finally, the number of employees who were not union members but were covered by a collective
agreement averaged 295,000 in the first half of 2011, an increase from last year’s total of
288,000.
2010 annual averages
Approximately 4.2 million employees (29.5%) belonged to a union in 2010 and another 293,000
(2.0%) were covered by a collective agreement (Table 2).
16 | P a g e
The public sector, which consisted of government, Crown corporations, and publicly funded
schools or hospitals, had 71.4% of its employees belonging to a union. This was more than four
times the rate for the private sector (16.0%).
Approximately one-third of full-time employees belonged to a union, compared with just under
one-fourth of the part-time. Also, 30.0% of permanent employees were union members,
compared with 26.2% of the non-permanent.
Unionization rates also varied by age group with 36.3% of those aged 45 to 54 being members of
a union as compared to 14.3% of those aged 15 to 24. High unionization rates were also found
among those with a university degree (33.7%) or a post-secondary certificate or diploma (33.2%);
in Newfoundland and Labrador (37.3%) and in Quebec (36.0%); as well as in public administration
(68.7%), educational services (66.7%), and utilities (64.7%); and health care occupations (61.3%).
Low unionization rates were recorded in Alberta (22.6%); in agriculture (2.8%) and professional,
scientific and technical services (4.5%); and in wholesale occupations.(5.2%).
Differences between the sexes
For the seventh year in a row, the unionization rate for women in 2010 surpassed that of men
(30.8% versus 28.2%). The gap widened slightly by 0.1 percentage points, as compared to that in
2009. Among men, part-time employees had a much lower rate than full-time employees (18.3%
versus 29.5%). Among women, the gap was narrower (25.1% versus 32.8%) (data not shown).
The unionization rate for women in the public sector (73.2%) exceeded that of men (68.5%),
reflecting women’s presence in public administration, and in teaching and health positions.
However, in the private sector, only 12.5% of women were unionized, compared with 19.0% of
men. The lower rate among women reflected their predominance in sales and several service
occupations.
A higher-than-average rate was recorded among men with a post-secondary certificate or
diploma (33.0%). For women, the highest rate was among those with a university degree (39.5%),
reflecting unionization in occupations like health care and teaching.
Among those in permanent positions, the rate for men (28.7%) was lower than that for women
(31.3%). The gap was slightly more among those in non-permanent positions, (27.6% for women
versus 24.8% for men).
Average earnings and usual hours
Earnings are generally higher in unionized as compared to non-unionized jobs. Factors other than
collective bargaining provisions contribute to this. These include varying distributions of unionized
employees by age, sex, job tenure, industry, occupation, firm size, and geographical location. The
effects of these factors are not examined here. However, unionized workers and jobs clearly have
characteristics associated with higher earnings. For example, unionization is higher for older
workers, those with more education, those with long tenure, and those in larger workplaces. Still,
17 | P a g e
a wage premium exists, which, after controlling for employee and workplace characteristics, has
been estimated at 7.7% (Fang and Verma 2002).
Average hourly earnings of unionized workers were higher than those of non-unionized workers
in 2010 (Table 3). This held true for both full-time employees ($26.72 versus $22.71) and parttimers ($22.09 versus $14.02). Unionized part-time employees not only had higher hourly
earnings, but they also worked more (19.1 hours versus 16.7). This led to a larger gap in weekly
earnings ($427.26 versus $240.39).
On average, full-time unionized women earned 95% as much per hour as their male counterparts.
In contrast, those working part-time earned 8% more.
Wage settlements, inflation and labour disputes
The wage rate increase in 2010 was lower as compared to that in the previous year (1.8% versus
2.4%) (Table 4). In 2010 the increase in wages was equal to the rate of inflation. For the first time
in 5 years, the wage gain in the private sector exceeded that in the public sector (2.1% versus
1.6%). This trend continued in the first three months of 2011 whereby the gains stood at 2.2% in
the private sector and 1.2% in the public sector.
Annual statistics on strikes, lockouts and person-days lost are affected by several factors,
including collective bargaining timetables, size of the unions involved, strike or lockout duration,
and state of the economy. The number of collective agreements up for renewal in a year
determines the potential for industrial disputes. Union size and strike or lockout duration
determine the number of person-days lost. The state of the economy influences the likelihood of
an industrial dispute, given that one is legally possible. The proportion of estimated working time
lost due to strikes and lockouts decreased to 0.01% in 2011 from 0.03% in 2010.
Data sources
Information on union membership, density and coverage by various socio-demographic
characteristics, including earnings, are from the Labour Force Survey. Further details can be
obtained from Marc Lévesque, Labour Statistics Division, Statistics Canada at 613-951-4090. Data
on strikes, lockouts and workdays lost, and those on major wage settlements were supplied by
Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC). Further information on these
statistics may be obtained from Client services, Workplace Information Directorate, HRSDC at 1800-567-6866.
18 | P a g e
3.
The weakening state of Canadian labour unions
Janet Macfarland, The Globe and Mail, September 2, 2012
http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MTY5NjIzNTU%3D
Although four million Canadians are members of unions, organized labour is nonetheless facing
shrinking coverage across Canada's work force. Unions are coping with growing pressure from
employers and governments to accept wage freezes and reduced benefits, while they are also
being asked to become active partners in boosting company productivity and improving work
processes.
Labour leaders are confronting growing hostility about their role from both governments and
broad swaths of the non-unionized public. In this difficult and complex climate, we talked to
leaders in labour, business and education about their take on the challenges and new roles facing
unions this Labour Day.
Ken Georgetti
President of the Canadian Labour Congress
Ken Georgetti doesn't like to say that unions are shrinking as a proportion of Canada's work force.
Instead, the head of the CLC – an umbrella group for unions representing 3.3 million Canadian
workers – prefers to say the work force "is growing faster than we're organizing."
But the more optimistic spin cannot change the fact that 17.4 per cent of private-sector workers
in Canada belonged to unions in 2011, down from 21.3 per cent in 1997, offering telling evidence
of a long, slow decline in the scope and power of unions over the past 15 years. Mr. Georgetti is
far from defeated, however, blaming the slide on the fact that large manufacturers in Canada
have slashed jobs over the past decade – almost all of them unionized positions – while neweconomy jobs in sectors such as technology and professional services are much less likely to be
union positions.
He is optimistic there is room for unions to grow in new sectors, especially if workers grow more
discontented with slowing wage growth, growing income disparity and declining public services.
"The desire to join unions is not any lower than it was before, but it's much more of a challenge to
organize a work force of 30 or 40 people than one of 500 or 600," he says.
And he believes there is strong evidence to sell the merits of unions to employees who have no
experience with unionization and are skeptical about what it can accomplish. "This is how I sell
the union movement," Mr. Georgetti says. "Do you want your kids to earn $600,000 more in their
lifetime? And if the answer is 'yes,' then all they have to do is join a union. The union advantage
will give the average worker in Canada $600,000 more in cash – that's not benefits, just wages –
over their lifetime."
He acknowledges, however, that unions have to overcome "outdated" public perceptions that
they create rigid work forces where strict job classifications allow little flexibility and seniority
trumps skill and work accomplishments. "I think there's been an image challenge that the right
19 | P a g e
wing, to this point, has had better success with than we have," he says. "We have to spend some
time on that issue, no doubt about it."
Ken Lewenza
National president of the Canadian Auto Workers union
No "myth" about unions appears to rile Ken Lewenza more than the perception that unionized
workers are inflexible and uncreative. The head of the 200,000-member CAW jumps to the
defence of his members, arguing they deal daily with demands to expand their skills, learn new
technologies and adapt to growing automation.
"If you talk to someone who has never worked in a union facility, they actually think workers have
their hands tied," he says. "They talk like it's the fifties or the sixties and you have these airtight
roles and an electrician can't fix a water fountain without a pipe fitter. It's ridiculous to hear these
kinds of comments." Mr. Lewenza argues unions today are being forced by economics and global
competitiveness to focus on the same issues of productivity as employers.
"If somebody would have said in 1940 or 1950, 'Is the union concerned with productivity,' the
answer would have been 'no,'" he says. "That wasn't our priority ... But today we know that a
productive work force is normally rewarded better than a non-productive work force."
And if unions need proof, he says companies now come to them armed with reams of data about
workload and output, creating a far different dynamic in negotiations.
"Everything is a statistic today, like the data that's provided today about lost time from work, or
productivity per square footage. Even a custodial worker – a janitor – is measured on the square
footage of the average person cleaning the average amount of dirt."
Mr. Lewenza's hope for the future of the labour movement is that it can reach out to the people
most frustrated by Canada's shift into "a low-wage, insecurity economy," including young people
and new graduates who are having difficulty finding good jobs.
Paul Moist
National President of CUPE
It's a difficult time to head a public-sector union as governments throughout Canada look to slash
budgets, but Paul Moist says government workers shouldn't have to pay for a global economic
crisis reducing government revenues. "I don't think public-employee costs caused this, but we're
in the post-recession, pay-down-the-deficit era that puts a strain on the public sector," he says.
To protect the jobs of public servants, Canada's largest union, representing 618,000 public-sector
workers, has urged union locals to become partners and even innovators in the search for better
work processes. "I still maintain the best job security for a CUPE member is the efficiency of the
work force," Mr. Moist says. "For example, the way we serve patients at bedsides in hospitals
bears no resemblance with what existed with orderlies 20 or 25 years ago. All that has been done
without fanfare between the parties. This doesn't make the news."
20 | P a g e
Mr. Moist argues the best way to find solutions to Canada's looming work-force problems –
notably chronic unemployment in some sectors and a shortage of workers in other areas – is to
bring labour, business and government together to develop joint strategies.
Yet with several key planning councils losing funding from the Harper government, he says venues
for such dialogue are disappearing.
"We need some more tables to talk about things like retirement issues for all Canadians and
labour-force development issues," he says. "I think the country badly needs that, but I don't see it
being imminent with the current crowd in charge."
Peter Birnie
President of Wabi Iron and Steel Corp.
Peter Birnie doesn't spend much time thinking about working with a unionized labour force at his
New Liskeard, Ont., manufacturing plant, where workers are represented by the United
Steelworkers Union. Instead, he says his worries are the same as those running non-union plants:
how to compete with global competition and the rapid pace of change in every industry sector.
"In a unionized environment there are some work rules and there's a more rigid job-classification
process, but in every work environment, whether it's unionized or non-unionized, it really comes
down to individuals," he says. "Some people have an inability to change faster than other people,
and I think that's really the fundamental issue."
Workers and their unions, he says, have no choice but to accept the new need for flexibility and
lifelong learning in the workplace, although he says it is undeniably stressful for older workers
with less formal education. "The pace of change may slow or speed up, but it's not going
backwards to where we were. So our ability to absorb change is going to continue to be an
important aspect of all our careers. And I think we're all going to have to understand that it's not a
choice that any one person may choose, but it's actually fundamental in the sense that, like it or
not, it's going to happen."
The president of Wabi, which makes mining equipment such as mining cages and ore loading
systems, adds he has been impressed by the extent to which union leaders understand the
current work and economic environment."It would be a terrible mistake on the part of a business
manager to think that labour doesn't understand, or that they're not watching the news," he says.
It would be naive to argue unions won't struggle with the new environment, he adds, "but at the
end of the day it really becomes an issue of survival, and I think there's a new reality emerging."
Jayson Myers
President of the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
The message from business today is that companies need employees – and their unions – to be
more flexible, says Jayson Myers, who heads Canada's largest industry and trade association.
"What I see today is that a lot of newer companies in particular, they need flexibility and they
really do not want to see themselves in a situation where they have to deal with a bureaucratized
work force," says the head of the CME, which represents companies that account for 82 per cent
of Canada's manufacturing production.
21 | P a g e
While the best unions are at the progressive forefront of helping adapt to change, he says, others
"are reactionary and stand out there and impede change."
Mr. Myers says a major challenge for labour unions is helping workers understand that the old
"pick and play" system of hiring is dead, which means adapting to a new reality in which
companies can no longer pick workers to fill narrowly defined jobs.
"That's an old way of thinking and an old work-force culture," he says. "Today it is really about
bringing skills to bear, but also about solving problems, being flexible, doing various jobs,
multitasking. That requires a very different type of business culture."
Many of the conditions that led to the formation of unions 40 or 50 years ago – such as unsafe
work environments – no longer exist, he argues, and unions must now deal with new issues,
including the need for companies to attract new kinds of workers in new areas even as they
downsize workers in other areas. "The situation is so fluid today that the expectation from
business today is that the labour movement and organized labour needs to be as flexible," he
says. "I don't want to classify all unions as regressive. I think there are some very progressive
unions out there. And many unions are at the forefront of not only representing workers but also
helping business find the workers they need."
Charlotte Yates
Dean of Social Sciences at McMaster University
Labour specialist Charlotte Yates believes the union movement needs a clearer strategy to hold
on to past gains and win back lost influence. The key task, she says, is to regain public support in
an era when many Canadians think union members have excessive entitlements or union leaders
have unrealistic expectations.
While unions used to have more input in politics – at least with left-leaning parties – their role in
the public realm has diminished and it has led to an erosion of popular support for union causes,
Prof. Yates says. "Unions have forfeited a lot of the ground they once held in terms of political and
policy ideas," she says. "They need to have a concerted political strategy, because they cannot
win at the collective bargaining table on their own. There has to be a more concerted political and
social strategy that starts articulating alternatives and talks about the need for governments to
play a role."
How can they win public support? Prof. Yates says unions need to advocate broadly on issues that
affect all workers, especially low-income workers who lack a voice. Otherwise, she says many in
the public look at labour-union members with resentment. "Labour becomes vulnerable when
they speak for their small group," she says. "If you also pick up on issues that resonate more
broadly, I think that holds hope for strengthening the position of unions."
On the other hand, she also warns companies that they need to be careful not to excessively
exploit their advantage in a period of economic weakness because they will risk doing significant
damage not only to employee loyalty, but to company productivity. "There's lots of evidence to
suggest that if you treat people badly then, yes, they will leave, but they will also tend to be less
productive. We know that."
22 | P a g e
4.
Unions on decline in private sector
The Canadian Press, September 2, 2012
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/09/02/unions-labour-canada-decline.html
Labour historian Mark Leier has an interesting perspective this Labour Day weekend on anti-union
rhetoric and the prospect of a post-unionized Canadian economy. The labour-friendly academic at
Vancouver's Simon Fraser University recalls combing the archives of the Globe and Mail as he
researched attitudes toward organized labour. "'Unions were useful in the past, but they're not
useful now,"' Leier recites from memory. "I found editorials from 1900 saying that!"
Figures from Statistics Canada suggest the labour movement in Canada is in a 30-year decline.
And while numbers have stabilized in recent years, organized labour is surviving but not thriving
— and anchored disproportionately in the public sector. Just under 30 per cent of the workforce
— some 4.3 million employees — was unionized in 2011, a slight increase both in percentage and
absolute numbers over 2010.
71% of public sphere unionized
But the public sector, including civil servants, Crown corporations, schools and hospitals,
dominated. More than 71 per cent of the public sphere was unionized, while in the private sector
that number plummets to 16 per cent.
"We've actually seen that unionized workers' salaries over the last number of years have sort of
lagged non-unionized workers."—Karla Thorpe, Conference Board of Canada
Karla Thorpe, who handles industrial relations research for the Conference Board of Canada, says
the national workforce unionization rate masks a distinct trend. "We have been seeing a decline
in unionization within the private sector, but that's been offset by the level of unionization in the
public sector — and growing employment in the public sector," Thorpe said in an interview.
However with governments at all levels in Canada currently reining in deficits, Thorpe says publicsector unions aren't likely to keep growing. She anticipates declining unionization rates overall in
coming years.
Moreover, private-sector growth is occurring in areas that traditionally have not been heavily
organized, such as the service sector. Smaller employers scattered at locations across the country
are far more difficult to organize than large industries employing thousands of people in a single
plant. Thorpe even hints at a post-union environment.
'Big battles have been won'
"We have seen in the feminist movement and in the union movement that some of those big
battles have been won," she said. "Where there were concerns generations ago about health and
safety in the workplace, a lot of those elements are now embedded in regulations that govern
employers and apply to all workplaces, whether unionized or not."
Rough year for unions
In a year that opened with Rio Tinto Alcan locking out 800 workers in Alma, Que.; Caterpillar
locking out workers in London, Ont., before closing shop; federal interventions in Air Canada and
CP Rail labour disputes; and Ontario's provincial government cracking down on teachers' unions,
23 | P a g e
organized labour is having a rough go. "It's difficult to know whether or not what we've seen so
far this year is a sign of the times and maybe a more fundamental shift in union-management
relations," said Karla Thorpe, who handles industrial relations research for the Conference Board
of Canada. But she predicts a tough road ahead as governments put the squeeze on public-sector
unions and the private sector continues to prove barren ground.
Pro-labour advocates say that while some union-fought gains are part of the economic fabric —
such as working hours, human rights protections, health and safety — others are unravelling.
"While we may not have dark satanic mills like we think of in the 19th century, in fact workers'
conditions have been essentially on the decline for quite some time," said Leier. Working wages,
in particular, have barely kept pace with inflation.
The Canadian Labour Congress has compiled numbers it says show a "union advantage" that
amounts to a lifetime earnings gain of more than $500,000 for unionized versus non-unionized
workers. "I think that in itself is a compelling enough story, never mind the rest of the benefits
that come with unionization like an adequate pension on retirement, and a proper medical and
dental plan," CLC president Ken Georgetti said in an interview.
Thorpe has another take. She acknowledges the challenges in comparing salary groups, but says
Conference Board tracking of collective agreements shows "they've barely kept up with the pace
of inflation." "We've actually seen that unionized workers' salaries over the last number of years
have sort of lagged non-unionized workers."
Negative media about unions
It's a contentious point, given the growth of non-unionized, low-wage service industry jobs, but it
highlights structural changes in an economy where good-paying industrial jobs have been
disappearing in favour of high-skill, high-wage sectors and low-wage ghettos.
Georgetti chooses to see the restructuring of the economy as an opportunity for a renewal of
organized labour. "There's always going to be a lag between the creation of new jobs and new
economies and the rate of unionization."
Georgetti says people who have to organize their own workplace have a higher degree of
appreciation for a union's value. "Today's union members largely were hired into their unionized
jobs. Most of them didn't have to struggle to unionize." He said current union members have to
be constantly reminded of the benefits "because the airwaves are filled with negative media
about unions, about union bosses and the effect of unionization." Georgetti points to a recent
Canadian Taxpayers Federation release that highlighted federal public-service pensions and
contrasted them with most workers' lack of pension provisions. The gist of the advocacy group
was that public-service pensions should be scaled back.
Resentment of unions
"That's not a very smart argument, frankly," said the labour leader. "They're trying to turn the
advantage into resentment." And resentment of unions is a reality.
Public Response, a pro-labour, left-of-centre public relations firm in Ottawa, conducted an online
survey last month that found a significant majority, 61 per cent, believe unions do "a good job of
protecting their members' jobs." But opinion among the 2,099 respondents was far more divided
on whether "gains made by unions for their members also improve the lives of other Canadians."
24 | P a g e
Some 46 per cent agreed and 42 per cent disagreed. Significantly, 21 per cent strongly disagreed,
outstripping the 15 per cent who felt strongly that unions benefit society generally.
The poll results speak to a narrative that unions are self-interested and that gains for organized
labour are a detriment to the economy as a whole.
"It's an argument that's been given voice by a lot of powerful organizations and I think people are
starting to believe it," said Morna Ballantyne, labour analyst for Public Response. Ballantyne says
unions gained clout by demonstrating they were the champions of both unionized and nonunionized labour, leveraging gains that benefited all workers. "We have some lessons to learn
from history," she said, pointing approvingly to current efforts by major unions such as the CLC
that advocate for improvements to the Canada Pension Plan.
25 | P a g e
5.
Unions must share the blame for precarious employment
Konrad Yakabuski, The Globe and Mail, Feb. 28 2013
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/unions-must-share-the-blame-for-precariousemployment/article9129832/
Could it be that the middle class was a late 20th-century fluke of history? For a few fleeting
decades, almost anyone with an average IQ and education could reasonably expect to count on a
decent job and pension. In the past few years, that assumption has gone out the window.
The new reality is the growing polarization in the labour market between insecure, lower-wage
jobs and secure, upper-income ones. The proportion of workers in “precarious” employment is
ballooning everywhere. Even before the crisis, companies in Europe had essentially stopped
offering full-time jobs with benefits. Temporary contracts are now the norm.
Increasingly, this is true in Canada, too. Companies and governments alike refuse to take on
permanent employees eligible for full benefits. They are resorting to temps or contracting out
services. This flexibility suits employers. But it is not usually a great deal for the workers.
University of London professor Guy Standing has popularized a term for this burgeoning new class
of insecure workers. Borrowing from the French, he calls them the “precariat.” And he warns they
are a growing political problem, owing to their “anger, anomie, anxiety and alienation.”
“This makes [for] a very dangerous situation,” Prof. Standing warns. He advocates more
“redistribution to address this grotesque inequality.”
The authors of a new study on the proliferation of precarious employment in the Greater Toronto
Area and Hamilton come to largely the same conclusion about what needs to be done for the
nearly 40 per cent of workers in the region who, according to the study’s generous estimate, now
find themselves in insecure jobs.
The study – prepared by McMaster University professor Wayne Lewchuk and funded by the
United Way Toronto and a federal granting agency – makes several reasonable suggestions, such
as improving access to child care and training programs and boosting income support for lowwage workers. Overall, however, the report reads like a policy paper from the Canadian Labour
Congress.
“Providing more opportunities to join unions and form other types of collective representation
may lead to more secure employment relationships,” says the report, which also suggests giving
workers the ability to negotiate collective agreements at “the sectoral or occupational level”
rather than only at the firm level.
If anything, however, expanding union power in its current form would lead to even more
precarious jobs and unemployment. Ask the hordes of recent teaching graduates who can’t get
work because existing union contracts are driving provincial governments deep into the hole. Or
ask aspiring auto workers who watch jobs go south as the union here digs in its heels.
Oddly, the McMaster study ignores young people – it focuses only on insecure workers between
25 and 64 – even though youth unemployment and underemployment are arguably much bigger
26 | P a g e
problems. In January, fully 13.5 per cent of young workers were unemployed here, compared to
about 6 per cent of workers 25 and over. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development warned Canada last year about “the possible under-use of skills that are costly to
produce” as new postsecondary grads see their career prospects stymied.
Faced with iron-clad collective agreements, firms and governments string young workers along on
temporary contracts. Yet, the Canadian union movement still blames greedy multinational
corporations for the rise in insecure jobs, absolving itself of responsibility while erecting a firewall
around its shrinking membership.
To be sure, there has been movement. Ontario teachers will get conditional, rather than
automatic, inflation protection on their pensions. The Canadian Auto Workers has agreed to
lower wages for new hires, although the pay will rise to the full union rate after 10 years.
Even so, such “concessions” are minor relative to the scope of the problem.
The CAW’s refusal to agree to a permanent two-tier wage structure is one reason Canada’s share
of North American auto production and employment is expected to shrink over the next five years
– in spite of a costly taxpayer bailout in 2009. In the U.S., where the United Auto Workers has
signed off on permanently lower wages for new hires, jobs are booming and workers at the Big
Three are pocketing $780-million (U.S.) in profit-sharing cheques for 2012.
Canadian unions deserve a lot of credit for creating the middle class. But if they were truly
committed to preserving what’s left of it and shrinking the precariat, they would reconsider their
ostrich-like refusal to abandon a 1970s-style bargaining strategy. They just might become relevant
again.
27 | P a g e
6.
Do unions have a future?
Richard Littlemore, The Globe and Mail, March 27, 2013,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/do-unions-have-afuture/article10310754/
Membership is in decline. The strike weapon is useless. Even the working class is offside. So why
are young people still inspired to take up the union cause?
Daniel Bastien's original plan-the one that his parents liked-was to go straight to law school.
An acceptance letter already in hand, he only took the hotel server job to get him through the
summer. What he expected from the North York Novotel was a little over $10 an hour and some
pretty good tips. What he got was a different type of education than he'd ever imagined.
"It was shocking to see how disrespectfully the workers were treated," Bastien, who's now 27,
recalls. His conscience pricked, he got involved in a certification drive by the UNITE HERE union,
and started signing up co-workers. "I thought it was a good idea, a good cause, and that we'd be
done in three months and I could go on to law school."
But Bastien immediately "started getting written up a lot": Managers put a note in his file for
every imagined infraction, no matter how minor (for instance, if he punched out on the time clock
but didn't also sign out). A delegation from the union went to Novotel's human resources chief on
his behalf and pointed out the illegality of targeting union organizers. The write-ups stopped-but
Bastien's sympathy for the union was just warming up.
Five years later (and "much to the chagrin of my parents"), he's still trying to win respect for the
hospitality and restaurant workers who make up the ranks of UNITE HERE. And now it's gone from
a sideline to a full-time mission; last April, he moved from waiting tables to working for the union.
Bastien is not the likeliest union organizer. He is, he says, "no red-diaper baby." His father is a
dentist who emigrated from Haiti to Canada in the 1950s to escape the Duvalier dictatorship, his
mother an office manager from Belgium. "I was raised on stories of my grandfather's house being
sprayed with machine-gun fire, so I realize how lucky I am to be alive and in Canada. And I realize
that not everyone has that same luck." Which is to say that, unlike many of the recent immigrants
who make up the community of hotel employees, Bastien had choices about his occupation.
Or put it this way-if the union movement in Canada has a future, it will be thanks to employers
who piss off young people like Daniel Bastien.
The portents, of course, are decidedly to the contrary. Private-sector union "density"-the
proportion of workforce members who belong to a union in Canada-has collapsed. In 1984, it was
26%. Today, says a white paper by the soon-to-merge Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) and
Communications, Energy and Paperworkers (CEP), it's "17% and falling." (CEP represents
unionized workers at The Globe and Mail.)
28 | P a g e
Despite the numbers, union central gets huffy at suggestions of decline. "Our density is still higher
than most other countries," says Canadian Labour Congress president Ken Georgetti. And it's also
pretty close to what it was 10, 20, 30 or even 40 years ago.
But that's only because of this: While private-sector membership has fallen off a cliff, publicsector membership has climbed to a peak. Thus the overall unionization rate today (30.2% by a
federal government count) is not that far off from where it was (33.6%) in 1970. Public-sector
membership had hit 72% by the mid-'80s and has stayed in that range ever since.
It's not that unions have been doing a bad job in the private sector, says Georgetti. Polling
conducted by the CLC shows that more than 80% of members are satisfied with their union's
performance. Rather, the world has shifted beneath labour's feet. CEP president Dave Coles says
the problem is "de-industrialization," including both automation and the migration of jobs to
cheaper labour markets, in the United States and overseas. "Workers didn't run from the unions,"
Coles says. "Work has run away from the workers."
If the ability of employers to move manufacturing and clerical jobs across borders explains unions'
decline, it has also engendered other unhelpful changes. One is the wave of "right-to-work" laws
sweeping through the U.S., which has been echoed by anti-union measures and rhetoric in some
jurisdictions in Canada. Another is a serious souring of public sentiment. Members may see value
in their union cards, but for large swaths of the public, unions have a serious image problem:
They've gone from being the folks who brought you the weekend to being the folks who deny you
the services for which you pay your taxes.
Before the complexion of unionism went civil-servant, workers in the private sector tended to
aspire to union membership. But now, non-union members of the public are more likely to resent
union protections, especially when it seems that civil servants are getting fat (and retiring happy)
on taxes paid by the unorganized. The workforce is polarizing into a public-sector side that has
ample benefits, job security and pensions, and a private-sector side that does not.
These factors have cascaded into a crisis that at least some union leaders recognize as lifethreatening. "The trade union movement in Canada faces an enormous and historic moment of
truth," says a discussion paper that proposed the CEP/CAW tie-up. "If unions do not change, and
quickly, we will steadily follow U.S. unions into continuing decline."
The plan, as always with unions, has to do with organizing workers who aren't unionized. But
there's a broader game at play, too.
Last summer, as the sun set over a host of lightly burnt bodies on English Bay Beach, I watched as
Stephen Von Sychowski, chair of the British Columbia Federation of Labour's Young Workers'
Committee, brought a team of orange-vested activists to work the crowd at the Celebration of
Light, Vancouver's annual international fireworks competition.
Roughly 100,000 revellers had jammed onto the city's busiest patch of sand and grass for a party,
not a union rally. But Von Sychowski's team was undeterred. The boldest campaigners were both
young women: Bonnie Hammond, a bus-company employee and member of Canadian Auto
Workers Local 114, and Kassandra Cordero, who's on staff at the BC Federation of Labour. They
29 | P a g e
waded audaciously into the crowd, stepping between blankets, waving a clipboard and asking
who'd like to sign a petition to support "Grant's Law."
This is the figurative foot in the door. Grant De Patie was a 24-year-old Maple Ridge, B.C., gas
station attendant who was dragged to his death in 2005 after he challenged someone who was
driving off without having paid for $12.30 worth of gas. Most Vancouverites know the story; many
supported the law that was passed in De Patie's name setting strict rules for young people
working the graveyard shift in retail environments. And many more are upset now that the B.C.
government has backed away from the toughest provisions, once again allowing people to work
alone with scant protection.
The fireworks crowd divided into the uninterested and the enthused. In the search for signatures,
"It's unusual to be refused outright," says Von Sychowski. "It's not hard to support this issue."
While some people clearly didn't want to be hassled, a huge number called out, asking to sign the
petition. It seems that everyone who hasn't personally worked at a McDonald's or a 7-Eleven has
a friend or family member who has. And when any of these signatories showed more than a
passing interest, the campaigners started digging deeper.
It's a bait-and-switch, true, but a relatively benign one. Hammond's favourite conversation starter
is child labour. "Do you think it's legal for 12-year-olds to work in B.C.?" she asks. Most people
don't. But it is legal (with a parent's signature). And by the time Hammond has shared the details,
many young people have signed up to join EARN, the Employee Action & Rights Network-a labour
organization for the unorganized.
Von Sychowski, 28, was the founding chair of EARN, which the BC Federation of Labour developed
to bring young workers into the fold, even if on an informal basis. "We were already campaigning
on things like raising the minimum wage and increasing health and safety standards," Von
Sychowski says. "The idea was to create a network for non-union workers, to campaign on those
issues and to provide assistance in cases where people's rights had clearly been violated."
That's why Von Sychowski's team stands at SkyTrain stations or wades through fireworks crowds,
chatting up prospective EARN members. It's an exercise in building relationships. In response to a
suggestion that EARN looks like an old-fashioned loss leader, the free app that gets you hooked
on a new piece of software, Kassandra Cordero says, "Exactly. And joining an actual union would
be like getting 'the Premium Edition.'"
This kind of campaign-one that rises above a single group's grievance to champion concerns that
span society-would probably be a good idea in any moment. But for the union movement today, it
might be the best tactic left.
"The only way you can go on strike in this country today is if you're faster than Lisa Raitt," says
veteran B.C. labour operative Bill Tieleman. He's referring, of course, to the federal Conservative
Labour minister who in 2011 and 2012 set governmental speed records legislating CP Rail, Air
Canada and Canada Post employees back to work. "Labour relations today is based on the ability
to affect public opinion," Tieleman says. "It's no longer about withdrawal of service." Indeed,
Statistics Canada calculates that person-days lost to strikes and lockouts declined by almost 87%
between 1980 and 2010. Even in the labour stronghold of British Columbia, the once-militant BC
30 | P a g e
Federation of Labour has accepted a series of pre-emptive orders restricting strikes and job
actions.
Those who do strike do so at their peril, as the Canadian Union of Public Employees discovered in
Toronto. Public resentment over the garbage that piled up in parks during the 2009 strike helped
catapult the notorious Rob Ford into the mayor's chair. In an administration dogged by
controversy, one of Ford's clearest victories has been to contract out a large number of garbagecollecting jobs that had belonged to CUPE members. The public outcry over this was notable by its
absence.
So, the most successful unions have had to find other points of leverage. In Vancouver, for
example, UNITE HERE doesn't strike-or at least it hasn't struck a major hotel since 2000. And yet,
Local 40 president Jim Pearson says the union has concluded a series of agreements that have
improved the position of its members, all by using a very simple strategy. "All the companies we
deal with put a lot of energy into developing and protecting their brand," Pearson says. "So
anything we do that is damaging to that is very effective."
What UNITE HERE does is often akin to street theatre. It picks a hotel with a prominent location
and organizes weekly demonstrations. Room attendants take to the street, describing to
passersby-and reporters-the worst parts of their workdays. On one recent occasion, Local 40
invited some local politicians to "job shadow" attendants for a day. Pearson says the staff loved
the show-and the hotel hated it.
Not every campaign is given to that kind of staging. The 2006 strike at the Ekati diamond mine in
the Northwest Territories looked like one that could never be won, says Dave Thompson of the
Public Service Alliance of Canada. PSAC, while not a traditional "mining" union, is the biggest
union in the NWT and, Ekati workers gambled, their best hope for winning a first-contract fight
with the mine's owner, multinational giant BHP Billiton.
When it came time to walk off the job, "There was nowhere to even set up a picket line," says
Thompson, who worked on the campaign. The mine is 300 kilometres north of Yellowknife and,
for most of the year, can only be reached on the company plane. Employees also tended to fly in
from points all over the map, so again, there was no available choke point.
Ekati is also highly mechanized. Having organized 400 of the 1,200 employees and contractors,
PSAC still couldn't bring operations to a standstill.
And even if that had been possible, BHP could have easily waited the union out. Diamonds don't
rot in the ground and there is enough slack in the market to accommodate a decline in supply. So
the union wasn't surprised, after more than a year of trying to negotiate a contract, that it was
pushed to strike in early April, and was still not surprised when BHP hadn't budged by the
beginning of June.
But everything changed on June 13. That's the day the union ran ads in The New York Times and
The Wall Street Journal decrying Canada's "dirty diamonds" and calling out BHP for using
strikebreakers. It was a direct attack on one of the Canadian mine's principal sales pitches: that its
sparkly products were untainted by human-rights abuses associated with diamonds from Africa.
31 | P a g e
The phone started ringing from around the world. Media from Antwerp, Israel, South Africa and
Singapore-"everywhere where somebody cares about diamonds"-were calling for interviews,
Thompson says. "We had an agreement in two weeks."
The best part for PSAC is that once the company understood the union had leverage, it came to
the table and has stayed there. "We've negotiated two new agreements since-and they're good
agreements," Thompson says.
Union leaders like Pearson recognize that "brand" cuts both ways-using it as a lever against
companies won't be of much use if the union's own brand is not up to snuff.
So, as a "56-year-old white guy," Pearson counts himself an imperfect labour spokesperson. Some
60% of the members of his UNITE HERE unit are women and nearly half belong to visible
minorities. "The next person in this job should more accurately reflect our membership," he says
flatly.
Pearson makes the argument for reasons of strategy as well as equity. "When it's me or [BC
Federation of Labour president] Jim Sinclair standing up defending labour, the public just turns
off," Pearson says. They just look like more well-fed white guys protecting their privilege. "It's a
lot harder to dismiss a hotel housekeeper who spends every day breaking her back changing
rooms."
Tieleman takes this branding discussion a step further, suggesting (to the horror of some in the
labour movement) that unions are themselves a kind of free-market entity. "Unions are in the
business of representing people," he says, stressing the word "business." Unions-the
organizations themselves-are part of what we now understand as "the service industry."
And to succeed-to get back on track-they have to be a "full-service" player, says the CLC's
Georgetti, who adds that union leaders can't just drop in at contract time: "You have to be
responsive to your members all the time. Otherwise, they just start looking at you like an
insurance company: 'I pay dues in case I get fired or there's a strike.'" And no one feels
particularly attached to their insurance company.
As for the other piece-the traditional job of organizing the unorganized-the labour movement's
targets are fairly obvious: white-collar workplaces and the service sector. PSAC illustrates the
point.
Like many public-sector unions, PSAC is fighting off retrenchment. Thompson, who is now an
organizer in B.C., says he spends much of his time defending contracts or trying to reorganize
workers whose jobs have been contracted out. The aggressive privatization at Vancouver
International Airport alone has created a revolving door through which he himself must keep
passing in an effort to reclaim members that PSAC thought it had already organized.
But while PSAC membership in B.C. has slipped, from 18,900 in 2009 to 17,900 in 2012, the
national count, at 180,000, is growing. This is largely because, over the last five years, PSAC has
added 20,000 members in the post-secondary education sector-post-doctoral researchers,
teaching and research assistants, support staff, part-time faculty and student employees.
32 | P a g e
One of the point people in that success is MaryAnne Laurico, who got involved as a student at
Queen's University in Kingston. Like Daniel Bastien, she wasn't born or raised a firebrand. A
Toronto-born PhD candidate, she was (like most graduate students) just trying to cover her tuition
and some of her expenses by working as a teaching assistant.
Depending on your point of view, TAs are either the luckiest or the most vulnerable members of a
big-university population. By distinguishing themselves as among the most promising undergrads,
they win the right to continue their studies and to perform relevant work-teaching in their chosen
field. For this, at Queen's, they get a funding package of $18,500.
Laurico says that if you were to ask most TAs what they thought of this deal (and she did, dozens
of times), their usual first reaction would be, "The working conditions are great!"
Still, in 2008, Laurico got caught up in a PSAC organizing drive. It was fun. There were big eventsbarbecues on campus-and the conversation was all about being part of what Laurico calls "this big
movement." But the campaign failed, as had every other TA organizing drive on the campus.
But by the time that happened, Laurico was no longer convinced that the working conditions
were all that fabulous. In 2009, she took a position as a PSAC organizer and kicked off a new drive.
On nights and weekends, in coffee shops, between library stacks or at kitchen tables in the
student ghetto, she interviewed TAs. Were their working conditions good? Yes. Had they ever
been bullied? Well, sometimes. Were they paid regularly? Not always. Had their contracts or
duties ever been changed mid-semester? Yes. Laurico and other organizers collected a host of
complaints, which they used to prepare "Rave Cards" identifying the most common grievances.
Then they distributed the cards to other TAs, finding an increasing number of willing takers.
Laurico presents the experience as both counterintuitive and inevitable. It was hard to build union
support among a population drawn overwhelmingly from the families of professionals and
managers-the upper-middle-class Canadians who typically send their progeny to prestigious
schools like Queen's. But as governments have squeezed funding to universities, and as
universities have grown more resolutely focused on the bottom line, the stress was bound to
concentrate somewhere.
Teaching assistants, whom Laurico describes as both "clients" and "employees" of the university,
were an obvious pressure point, a group of people who could be directed, by professors and
administrators alike, to pick up the slack. Queen's pushed and, through the efforts of Laurico and
others, a union finally found a way to push back. PSAC Local 901 was certified in 2010.
The second union target area is the service industry, a category that sprawls from hotel, retail,
food services, domestic and private-sector health care workers to administrative staff in the
financial industry. From an organizing perspective, there are two great things about the service
industry: It's the fastest-growing employment sector in the country; and in most cases, you can't
outsource the jobs to Mumbai.
If UNITE HERE is a master of 21st-century union tactics, it also recognizes that its success depends
on upholding the historic union role of fighting for the rights of the least privileged. In Toronto,
UNITE HERE Local 75 has been fighting the Novotel hotel chain, which has been resisting
33 | P a g e
unionization with mixed success. Novotel's efforts were sufficiently clumsy in its Mississauga
hotel, the next location over from Daniel Bastien's former workplace, that the Ontario Labour
Relations Board issued a highly unusual automatic certification last October, and ordered the
hotel to pay three years of back pay to Rekha Sharma, a young employee whom it had frozen out
after she got involved in the certification drive.
The Novotel where Bastien worked is still not organized, but the union is in it for the long haul.
"You can't start a drive and then walk away," he says. "We don't want to leave any workers
behind, especially those who have stuck their neck out."
From a union perspective, the hotel industry is actually a bright spot in the service industry.
Toronto hotels have a union density of 75%. Among the half-dozen unions involved, UNITE HERE
is the largest player, with 47 hotels in the GTA.
The result, Bastien argues, is that hotel employment in Toronto is pretty good overall. Most of the
jobs are full-time and "even the non-union hotels have to pay higher wages to stay competitive"
with the rates that have been won by UNITE HERE. Bastien has friends who work at hotels in
Alberta, where the picture is low-density, low wages, no benefits-and high turnover. Toronto, on
the other hand, has a comparatively stable workforce, an obvious fringe benefit for employers.
"Hotel jobs are good here," Bastien says. They pay enough that "you can raise a family. That's
what the union is fighting for."
If unions are to succeed beyond the hotel sector, however, they will have to make more gains not
only in the trenches-in the sometimes rough-and-tumble world where the likes of Bastien and
Laurico have set up shop-but also in the courts and legislatures of the country.
In the trenches, one of the issues is size: Traditional big employers are easy to organize and easy
to service. The CLC's Georgetti says that union density remains relatively high among employers
with 500 workers or more.
But those large employers are exactly the kind of manufacturing plants and resource-sector
processors that have been fleeing the country in large numbers. And among what's left over,
Georgetti says, "we have no density at all [with workplaces] under 40."
What's worse, a lot of the "small employers" are actually storefront retail operators that are
owned by huge, deep-pocketed (and frequently anti-organized labour) chains. So, labour has a big
challenge wrapped in a little package-or a host of little packages, because the low-paid, poorly
protected service workers at many of the largest employers are dispersed across hundreds, even
thousands, of locations.
Compared to their American cousins, Canadian unions have enjoyed a few successes in organizing
these workplaces, including at both McDonald's and Walmart. But those footholds have proven
difficult to hold. When a Quebec union organized a McDonald's in Montreal in 2000, the
franchisee responded by shutting it down. After Walmart saw workers at its Jonquière store
unionize in 2005-the first in North America to do so-the outcome was the same.
34 | P a g e
This is one of the challenges that precipitated the CEP-CAW merger-an ambitious effort to build a
union that is big enough to stand up to big, unco-operative employers. There are two issues here.
First, many of the companies that are in the business of fighting unions have deep pockets;
Walmart or McDonald's can wait out a small union in the course of a labour battle. Second, in the
rare event that a union actually organizes a small operation, it is expensive to service. A local with
just 12 or 15 members might consume the same amount of a business agent's time as one with 50
or 100 members. And low-wage employees can't be asked to contribute very much in union dues.
Even the union officials who don't want to think of themselves as "businesses" understand how
hard it is to maintain a union with that kind of a business model.
In both respects, the new union will be better positioned to take on large companies that have
proved to be such a difficult challenge, says the CEP's Dave Coles. "We still have big locals that
don't mind paying more than their share" to support brethren in a fight. And improving the ability
to organize small workplaces is "an absolute cornerstone of the new project," Coles adds. "We
have to make unions relevant in the community again"-a community concentrated in storefront
retail.
The other battlefield will most certainly be the courts and legislatures, where the pendulum has
been swinging away from union rights and toward restoring a freer hand to employers. The best
evidence of this arises mostly south of the border in the increasingly popular "right-to-work"
legislation that prohibits closed union shops or any labour contract that requires all workers to
pay union dues. These are now in force in at least 23 states-and those jurisdictions have been
attracting almost a third of all new manufacturing jobs.
In Canada, pro-management governments are backing away from legislation that had imposed
first contracts in cases where organizers had been able to get 50% (or sometimes more than 60%)
of employees to sign union cards. The new laws force the union to also clear the hurdle of a secret
ballot after the original organizing drive.
Labour leaders say that turns organizing into a contact sport. The problem, says BC Federation of
Labour president Jim Sinclair, is this: "How do you make it possible for people in small workplaces
to join a union? In 2013, it's not a right; it's a risk"-in part because it is so easy for employers to
fire and blacklist anyone who gets a pro-union reputation.
Traditionally, labour organizations have boasted unreservedly about what Georgetti calls the
"union advantage," which is most obviously defined by the gap between what you make in a
union job compared to a non-union job. On average, Georgetti says it is $7 an hour or $600,000
over a lifetime.
What may be more helpful for the movement's future is another face of the union advantage. A
recent Harvard University study showed that the decline of organized labour in the U.S. accounts
for between a fifth and a third of the yawning increase in income inequality that is one of the
country's most crippling problems.
35 | P a g e
For young activists, that shows what's at stake. "I'm concerned about the direction that Canada's
heading," says Bastien. "So many people my age are struggling for jobs, working contract-tocontract, or going to grad school to avoid the labour market. And that won't change until the
rebirth of the labour movement.
"We need good jobs you can build a life on."
36 | P a g e
7.
Unions, Inc: Organised Labour
The Economist, April 6th, 2013
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21575752-unions-are-trouble-some-arelearning-new-tricksfrom-bosses-unions-inc
CAPITALISM is struggling but organised labour shows no sign of profiting from its mistakes.
American union membership hit a 96-year low last year. In the rich countries of the Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the unionised proportion of paid workers
nudged down from a low base of 17.8% in 2008 to 17.5% in 2011 (the latest figures available). In
the large OECD economies most exposed to globalisation—America, Britain, Germany, France and
Japan—unions’ share of the workforce has dropped steadily to roughly half its level in 1980 (see
chart below).
In America membership has fallen furthest in “right-to-work” states (where unions cannot oblige
workers to join)—which now include even Michigan, a bastion of the United Autoworkers Union
and organised labour in general. In California, however, membership has remained roughly stable
since 1990 and grew by 110,000 in 2012. Blue-collar regions such as New York state, England’s
north-east and Quebec in Canada are still more heavily unionised than others. Since 1990
membership has steadily declined in Italy but fluctuated—at a much lower level—in Spain.
Richard Trumka, boss of the AFL-CIO, America’s labour federation, insists that union leaders will
not just “tidy up the offices, lock the doors and turn out the lights”. But he accepts that his
movement is in vertiginous decline: “the numbers give us all the proof we need.”
Unions face what is, in effect, a threat to their business model. One problem is costs. Organising
workforces is labour-intensive. Dues have to be high to cover fixed costs (particularly when these
are shared among a shrinking pool of members). If he earns $12 per hour, a member of America’s
largest private-sector union, the Teamsters, must pay $360 in annual fees, for example.
Members expect value in return: better rights, wages and working conditions. But unions are
finding it harder to provide these. Since 1995, for example, the wage premium for British union
members has fallen from 26% to 18%. That is partly because employers can threaten to move jobs
abroad. American data from the 1980s and 1990s, and more recent research in Germany, show a
correlation between foreign direct investment, outsourcing and lower union-wage premiums
The shift from manufacturing to services is another blow: workers who have honed a specific
welding technique have more bargaining power than generalist computer programmers or hotel
cleaners. Service workers are easy to replace when short-term contracts and casual work are
common. They are harder to enlist, too. When work and capital flow freely across borders, battles
against outsourcing put different national movements at odds. South Korean unionists threatened
to “wage a war” in January 2012 when General Motors touted a deal with a German union to
move production to Europe.
37 | P a g e
Culture is shifting too. Johan Jarvklo, the chief employee representative at Scania, a Swedish
vehicle manufacturer, says new employees used to join automatically, “but now the kids look at
the cost and ask: why?” In the past, if a new employee did not join the union, fellow workers
would shun him in the lunch break, he recalls. “But the younger generation is more
individualistic.” Many of Mr Jarvklo’s members are uncomfortable at modest union donations to
the Social Democratic Party; “so I refund them their contribution to the red team!” he exclaims,
whipping a coin out of his pocket.
Indeed, “post-material” identities—race,
gender, sexuality and age—make better
spurs for collective action than job, class
and workplace, says Michael Piore of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Labour-market “outsiders” such as women,
immigrants and the low-skilled have found
other political avenues. Tellingly, Barack
Obama’s second inauguration speech
nodded to them, but not to the unions. In
the debate on health-care reform, for
example, it was not labour but the apolitical
Families USA which was most influential.
Power to the people
Some unions, however, are adapting.
Scandinavian ones start with an advantage;
as in some other European countries, they
administer unemployment insurance. But they also shun the confrontational approach of unions
in places such as America. Mr Jarvklo’s thriving outfit, IF Metall, is one such example: its success
comes from “caring deeply about Scania’s competitiveness”, he declares. Indeed, 67.7% of
Swedish workers belonged to a union in 2011 (the same figure as in 1970)—one of the highest
levels in the OECD. Karl-Petter Thorwaldsson, president of the blue-collar labour organisation, LO,
is confident that it will rise in the coming years. He also plans to bring together Sweden’s
businesses and unions to reaffirm their commitment to co-operate, known as the Saltsjobaden
Agreement, on its 75th anniversary this year.
Sweden’s labour relations, says Christer Agren of Svenskt Naringsliv, the employers’ group, are a
competitive advantage. Unions understand the value of free trade and globalisation. Downsizing
rarely brings rows; even the more truculent unions are moving “in the right direction”.
That means appealing to a more consumerist audience. The fast-growing Unionen lets its whitecollar members opt in to any of a range of protections and benefits. It markets its services
through witty television adverts. It offers insurance and courses for members who want to be
38 | P a g e
retrained. It resolutely avoids party politics. Its success, reckons Mr Agren, is that it “stands
alongside its members, it doesn’t interpose itself between them and their employers.” Mr Jarvklo
praises this style, too, and trains his shop stewards to communicate with prospective and existing
members accordingly.
More than most, Sweden’s unions know the difference between protecting a fixed job and
protecting the long-term interests of their members. To keep Scania competitive in the economic
maelstrom of 2008, for example, IF Metall agreed to redundancies and “time banking” of
unworked hours which can be paid back when demand picks up. Erik Ljungberg, a senior vicepresident, says that unions help create an innovative environment. The firm made three trucks
per employee year 20 years ago. Steadily shaving seconds off production processes through
methods spread with the help of shop stewards has raised that to eight. Through such practices,
says Hakan Tribell of a free-market think-tank, Timbro, they have wisely made themselves
“indispensable”.
Unions also want to break into new markets, by recruiting labour-market “outsiders”. For
example, LO is working with the government and business to create training places for
unemployed youths. In return for paying a lower wage, employers will provide new recruits with
formal training, easing them into the workforce. In New York state, by contrast, a new attempt to
improve the pay of fast-food workers is led by community groups, not unions.
Even fans of the Swedish model concede that it is not perfect: the consensus between unions and
bosses can inhibit entrepreneurship. It relies on a costly welfare state to bridge social fissures. But
it works. The contrast between this happy picture and that of most other rich-country union
movements is striking. It shows that if unions want to prosper, they need a modern, consumerfriendly approach. As any good boss knows, that means following the customer, finding new
markets, offering choice and acknowledging that economic change will not just go away.
39 | P a g e
8.
Do Unions Still Matter to Young People?
Adam Carter, CBC News, April 15, 2013
http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/04/12/hamilton-ontario-young-peopleunions.html#pd_a_7037718
Unions haven't done a good job connecting with young workers and teaching them about their
rights in the workplace, labour activist Pablo Godoy says — and that has lead to young people
caring less about union activity compared to previous generations.
Now, union leadership must step up and connect with young people on their terms, so they can
fully grasp their rights as workers and understand where those rights came from, he says. But
some say even if they do, it won't matter —because young people are simply better off without
union representation altogether.
“I think unions are extremely relevant — but I don't think they are too present or prevalent when
it comes to young workers,” Godoy told CBC Hamilton. “It's not necessarily on their minds.”
Godoy is a national representative for the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) —
which at around 245,000 members is one of the largest in Canada. The latest UFCW estimate puts
35–40 per cent of its membership under the age of 30 — and at 27, Godoy is one of them. He
wears many hats within the organization, but the majority of his job centres around young worker
engagement.
He says that in large part, young people aren't as cognizant of the origins of worker's rights as
compared to their parents.
“Employers didn't sit around and say 'we should give workers time off, and vacations, and pay for
those vacations.' These things didn't arise naturally — they were fought for and were won by a
faction of workers,” Godoy said. “Somewhere along the line, I think we lost the communication
with young people when it came to informing them about where these things come from.”
“We started with a slate in which we had nothing and we had to gain these things. And if young
people were more aware of that, I think they would be more active and participatory when it
comes to protecting them.”
But do young people even equate things like benefits with a union? Kristina Michor, a 23-year-old
medical administrator, told CBC Hamilton she doesn't. She says most young workers aren't as
concerned with having union representation as their parents were.
“I know that growing up being in a union was a huge thing that my parents told me about,
because for them it meant security, a pension, etcetera,” she said. “But for myself and most of my
peers, a union is not an important thing to get. I value getting benefits from a job over being in a
union.”
40 | P a g e
Michor has worked in both union and non-union hospitals, and been part of a union. Currently
she's in a non-union job — and much happier because of it, she says.
“I actually get better perks for working in a non-union hospital — with better pay and frequent
raises, better benefits, more vacation and sick time, and no union dues to pay so I am keeping
even more of my salary,” Michor said. “I would also say I am happier at a non-union hospital
because I was hired onto a job that in a union hospital I would have very little chance of getting
into unless I had a lot of seniority behind me.”
“I also have more chances of advancement and moving around within the non-union hospital.”
'A pillar of the middle class'
But not all young people feel that way. Michael Borrelli, 31, lives in downtown Hamilton but
works in Toronto. He says that after 16 years in the workforce, he would choose a union shop
over a non-union gig every single time.
“Sixteen years as a worker with experience in both union and non-union environments have
turned me into an avowed unionist,” Borrelli said.
“Broadly speaking, unions represent the last pillar holding up the diminishing middle class in the
developed world. They bring together workers with common interests to fight to ensure that their
members aren't abused or mistreated, are paid fairly and appropriately for what they do.”
“But personally, unions represented the possibility of attaining a modest lifestyle where I could
buy a home, work a regular schedule that allows me to pursue my interests and raise a family,
and the ability to, one day, retire.”
The debate around the place of unions in the 21st century has become more and more divisive.
One needs to look little farther than the controversy that has erupted around right to work
legislation in the U.S. to see that the sentiment towards unions is not all favourable.
Michigan became the 24th U.S. state to instigate right-to-work laws in December. Right-to-work
laws ban requirements that non-union employees pay unions for negotiating contracts and other
services.
Supporters say the laws will give workers more choice and boost economic growth, but critics say
the real intent is to weaken organized labour by bleeding unions of money needed to bargain
effectively with management.
Workers as a threat
So why is the sentiment surrounding unions so divisive?
“Ideology, plain and simple,” Borelli said. “Workers who organize are a threat — mostly to profit
— and educating workers of their legal rights is similarly threatening. The same people who want
41 | P a g e
to stop workers from freely associating would cry bloody murder if they couldn't organize
themselves.”
And organization is something Godoy says young people are making great strides towards in
recent years. Even if it's not directly tied to unions, it signifies young people becoming more
engaged in their communities, which in turn bodes well for the labour movement. He points to
the Occupy movement and 2012's Quebec Student Strike as indicators that young people are
increasingly more interested in standing up for their rights.
He says the most dangerous thing that union leadership or employers could do is assume that
young people are just apathetic — that they don't care about their futures and will take whatever
is given to them, just to keep a job.
“We haven't historically done the best job talking to young people because we make the
assumption that they're apathetic,” Godoy said. “What we've learned as a union is that when you
open opportunities for young people to get involved — not in the ways that we want them to, but
in ways they'd like … then you are actually able to engage them a lot easier.”
Yes, that means social media campaigns — but more than anything, it means having young union
representatives interacting with young workers, Godoy says.
“You really have to do young worker to worker engagement,” he said. “They see a young face,
and they can relate to that.”
“Maybe it takes difficult circumstances for them to be pushed to a point where they realize, 'hey
— unions are pretty much our best friends when it comes to fighting our rights in the workplace.'”
42 | P a g e
9.
Labour Right’s conference highlights union’s role in the
fight for rights, democracy
John Bonnar, rabble.ca, April 14, 2013
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/johnbon/2013/04/labour-rights-conference-highlights-unionsrole-fight-rights-democrac
Almost 200 people gathered in Toronto at the end of March to discuss the establishment and
protection of labour laws in Canada and internationally as well as why unions matter in today’s
global economy. “Particularly in this day and age when we’re under such attack,” said James
Clancy, national president, NUPGE Canada.
Over the course of the conference, hosted by The Canadian Foundation for Labour Rights
(CFLR), a panel of experts spoke about the links between labour rights, democracy, equality and
social justice. “We share the belief that the union movement is one of the foundations of a just
and democratic society,” said Wayne Hanley, national president, UFCW Canada.
In the 20th century, the labour movement brought benefits to millions of workers through the
establishment of paid holidays, 40 hour work weeks, overtime pay, health and safety regulations
and a system that protected workers against exploitative employers. “The right to collective
bargaining was also fundamental to workplace equality.”
A fact millions of Canadians are still unaware of. “And that’s a serious problem for us,” said
Hanley. “Made even worse by the super rich elite and their corporate and media allies who are
winning the battle of messaging when it comes to the value and importance of unions in a fair and
just society.”
But unions are where the change will come from. “People know it as sort of an intuition that
inequality is damaging and socially corrosive,” said Richard Wilkinson, acclaimed U.K. author and
social epidemiologist. “When you look at the data it shows that that intuition is truer than I think
we ever recognized.”
As the gap between rich and poor grows, said Wilkinson, so too does the whole range of societal
problems. From 1976 onwards, the inequality gap in Canada has been growing steadily.
“As people got booted out of the labour market because of massive job loss, the gap grew
between the top and the bottom,” said Armine Yalnizyn, Senior Associate, Canadian Centre for
Policy Alternatives (CCPA).“But since the middle of the 1990’s, the people at the top increased
their income more rapidly.”And that, said Yalnizyn, is the source of the new income inequality.
How the top have benefitted more than anyone else.
From 1997 to 2007, the top 1 per cent took the biggest share of income growth - almost twice the
amount of the 1920’s. “That’s why we talk about the top 1 per cent and the 99 per cent,” said
Yalnizyn.
So does unionization reduce inequality? “Usually or almost always,” said Lars Osberg, Professor of
Economics, Dalhousie University.
43 | P a g e
“When union density is highest, it has huge role on the social wage. On a whole set of institutions
from minimum wage to regulation to wage norms throughout the spectrum of things affecting
inequality.”
But that requires good labour laws. “Labour laws provide significant protection to unions when
they’re organizing a workplace,” said Michael Lynk, Professor of Law, University of Western
Ontario. “It neutralizes employers and also protects employees from reprisal - when they’re
working well.”
Despite the laws, unions continue to be under attack. “But the real instruments of accountability,”
said Nathalie Des Rosiers, General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association, “are what unions
have given to Canadian democracy.” In addition to organizing workers, unions have played a key
role in advocating on behalf of women’s, environmental, justice, poverty and aboriginal issues.
“Not only for the benefit of their own membership, but Canadians at large,” said Paul Champ,
Senior Partner, Champ and Associates. “Unions have taken a leading role in the passage and
enforcement of human rights legislation.”
So when unions are strong, everyone in society benefits.
“Particularly to protect, promote and advocate for the most vulnerable workers in our society,”
said Naveen Mehta, General Counsel, UFCW Canada. “Those individuals in groups that have been
forgotten and disregarded by the state.”
Temporary foreign workers or migrant workers. “Workers in the most precarious and vulnerable
situations,” said Mehta. “It is only trade unions that have the propensity and the ability to bring
these sisters and brothers in from the periphery.” Just one of the many challenges facing unions
today as they struggle to hold to the gains of the past while working towards a better future.
Like keeping workers safe.
“Some people still have the nerve to say that unions and our rights are no longer necessary,” said
Ken Georgetti, President, Canadian Labour Congress.
“The Globe and Mail published an editorial that said unions were good at one time but they’ve
outlived their usefulness.”
A sentiment echoed by many. “You hear it all the time,” said Georgetti. “But that Globe and Mail
editorial was said in 1886 and they’ve been saying it ever since.”
Ignoring the unions’ role in promoting democracy and fairness in the workplace. “Being unionized
at a young age provided me the ability to provide for my family,” said Georgetti. “To have a
decent wage and benefits.”
He bought a house and a car. Took his family on a vacation once a year. “That’s all we asked for,”
he said. “We thought it was great.”
But those were different times. A time when everyone knew that the way to get ahead was to
secure a union job. “And now it turned that aspiration into resentment,” said Georgetti. “That
why should you have what I don’t have, rather than I should have what you have.”
44 | P a g e
Turning unions into the problem rather than the solution. “So we have to turn that around,” he
said. “And that’s the challenge today.”
Most union members never had to organize their workplace. The union was already in place when
they were hired.The benefits. The pensions. The wages.
“It didn’t mean anything to me,” he said. “I took it for granted like most people did.”
By joining a union, said Georgetti, a worker can earn an extra $400,000 in their lifetime. And that
builds a better middle class with a more robust economy.
“But if our members don’t understand the arguments why a union is valued,” said Georgetti.
“Then how can the public understand the value.”
That’s the biggest challenge.
For example, there wasn’t a strike or a lockout in Manitoba last year. Yet 68 per cent of
Manitobans think the unions are on strike too much in their province. “So it means our message
isn’t getting through,” said Georgetti. “That the effectiveness of collective bargaining is missing its
mark.”
Messaging is critical.
“If you want the public to get it right on us,” said Georgetti. “We have to plan it, frame it and put
it out.That’s the challenge we all face.”
Research alone won’t sell the value of unions to the general public.
“We have to make sure that we give the public a view of our organizations that they deserve to
see and hear,” said Georgetti.
“Because once we do, those people will come onside.”
45 | P a g e
10. CAW-CEP Discussion Paper
Jim Stanford, CAW/TCA, January 26, 2012
http://caw.ca/assets/images/CAW_-_CEP_Discussion_Document-final.pdf
I: A Moment of Truth for Canadian Unions
After two decades of fighting mostly defensive battles against the pressures of globalization,
employer aggression, hostile government policy, and public cynicism, the trade union movement
in Canada faces an enormous and historic moment of truth.
These truths are well known:
 Continued erosion of union density, especially in the private sector (17% and falling).
 Failure of union organizing efforts to offset plant closures and keep up with labour force
growth.
 Decline in labour’s share of national wealth; stagnant or falling purchasing power for
working families.
 New levels of political hostility from right wing governments. Examples: Harper’s 3
interventions in free collective bargaining in 6 months; new anti-labour attacks expected
in Saskatchewan; attacks on CUPE contracts in Toronto; anti-labour laws in 20 US states.
 Aggressive attacks by global employers on key contract provisions, and the foundation of
unions. Examples: Vale and US Steel conflicts with USW.
 A dramatic generational change in the unions as union veterans retire, and unions face
new challenges in appealing to, organizing, and servicing young people.
 Growing negative public opinion of unions, and the view that unions are self-interested
and outdated.
 Paralysis and dysfunction of some (not all) labour centrals.
 Failure of the labour movement to date to significantly restructure and address issues of
too many unions (57 CLC affiliates), ability to initiate and lead powerful campaigns, and
lack of coordination and duplication of labour movement services and resources.
If unions do not change, and quickly, we will steadily follow U.S. unions into continuing decline.
Canadian private sector union density is already as low as it was when Reagan defeated the U.S.
air traffic controllers. We must reverse the erosion of our membership, our power, and our
prestige.
There is clearly opportunity for unions in the present moment, not just threats. Global capitalism
is proving itself incapable of righting itself, and we are likely at the beginning of a long period of
economic turmoil and stagnation. Public concern with inequality, and the excesses and
irresponsibility of the rich and corporate leaders, is growing – as reflected in the surprising
support for the Occupy movement. If unions can position themselves as a legitimate voice of this
discontent, and channel Canadians’ anger and worry in progressive and effective directions, we
could emerge from the current crisis stronger and more confident – just as unions emerged
stronger from the 1930s, thanks to innovation in organizing and bargaining strategies, and a
willingness to directly confront the political and economic failures of that daunting time.
46 | P a g e
II: For a new kind of Canadian unionism
In this worrisome context, the leaders of CAW and CEP recently met to discuss how the
labour movement must respond. They considered in particular the possible impact that a new
Canadian union could have in rebuilding the movement’s power and capacity to innovate.
It was agreed that the Canadian labour movement in 2011 needs revitalization, greater strength
and a new social influence. It was also agreed that Canadian labour, and each of our unions, will
undergo major changes in the period ahead as our economic and social conditions are
transformed. CEP and CAW have an opportunity now to lead and shape this change, rather than
waiting passively and having change forced upon us.
We believe there is a need for a new force in the Canadian labour movement, with the ability to
succeed and grow in a way that our present unions cannot. Such a new Canadian union could
open important opportunities to build on our traditions and past successes, and also to create a
new identity, a new presence, a new “brand,” and new power – for worker rights and social
change.
The purpose of a new union is not just to create a “bigger” organization. Other unions have tried
to do that, and the results were often discouraging. While there are important benefits from
becoming larger, reducing duplication, and capturing synergies in infrastructure and servicing, the
labour movement today needs more. The formation of a new union must be founded on a desire
and willingness to modernize our practices, to innovate with new models of organizing and
servicing, and to rebuild our image with workers.
Such a new union would have to speak to Canadians in a new way. It must reflect a dynamic,
sectoral and community-based workers’ movement that is more attractive and more relevant to
workers’ needs than our present day organizations. A new union must have a critical mass, and
the size and resources to win crucial struggles, organize successfully and wield political influence
as a social union. It must be willing and able to develop new methods of organizing and
representing workers in today’s precarious, hyper-flexible labour market. It would require
qualities, priorities and strategies that would overcome the economic, political, and cultural
adversities and obstacles that now stand in our way.
The qualities, priorities, and strategies of a new union must be the product of extensive dialogue
and debate and visioning. However, the following opportunities and principles for a new union
were mutually agreed in this opening discussion. The initial discussion also identified some of the
questions and challenges that be faced as we move forward.
III: Features and strategies for a new union to succeed
 While larger size alone is not sufficient reason to form a new union, there are some ways in
which “bigger IS better” for a new union:
o More membership.
o More visibility / credibility / influence with public, government, employers.
o More economic clout when needed.
o Larger strike fund for the “epic battles” with corporations that seem to be occurring
more often.
47 | P a g e

The formation of a new union would be an opportunity to build a “brand” image and visibility
for a new kind of national Canadian industrial unionism. This improved brand image will be
essential for attracting more individual workers to want to join a union:
o A new union will be defined not by who we are (eg. autoworkers, paperworkers, etc.)
but by what we think and what we do.
o The new union must be associated with the highest quality of representation for its
members (accountability, effectiveness, fighting capacity).
o A new union must preserve sector identities and structures (eg. Pattern contracts)
within the unified, diverse structure of the overall union.
 A new union may create a wave of change in Canadian labour, and attract other partners. A
new union should be open to all who share the vision of a stronger, larger, Canadian social
union.
 The new union can combine its resources and use them more efficiently in many areas:
o Economies of scale in research / education / legal services.
o Combined infrastructure (administration, buildings, etc.).
o Avoid duplication in servicing.
 A new union would use the opportunity of its founding to restructure its locals to provide a
stronger, more community-focused critical mass within each local:
o Amalgamations of smaller locals into larger community locals.

A new industrial union would aim to strengthen and expand its presence and critical mass in
key sectors of the economy:
o Revitalize and expand sector-based bargaining.
o Consolidate and strengthen sectoral councils & bargaining structures.
o Put more attention & resources into developing alternative economic development
visions for each sector.

A new union would define itself as a force fighting for all workers, not just its own members.
o Offer services and support to non-union workers engaged in struggles and conflicts.
o Put top priority, creativity, and resources into innovative campaigns to organize new
members.
o Develop more effective & sustainable ways of servicing small bargaining units.
o Use its amalgamated local structure to present a clear presence as the voice of workers
in each community, and engage regularly in local campaigns and struggles.
o In this way, the combined resources and higher profile of the new union is used to
build a genuinely new form of trade unionism: a unionism that is equated with the
broader fight of all workers for justice and security.
48 | P a g e

A new union would aim to spark a “culture shift” among staff and local union leadership, to
go beyond “servicing” and view their work as movement-building.
o More focus on organizing new units.
o More engagement with community campaigns & social unionism.

A new union would aim to strengthen the activity of the existing labour centrals (CLC and
provincial federations), one way or another:
o Inspire them and push them and embarrass them into a more forceful vision of action.
o Failing that, the new union must undertake to perform those broader “movement”
functions itself (by undertaking its own campaigns and other initiatives). This new union
will have better capacity to “do the job itself” – in a non-sectarian way, with the ultimate
goal of inspiring the rest of the labour movement into great activism.

A new union would aim to articulate a broader critique of the current socioeconomic system
(neoliberal capitalism), and position itself as fighting for long-run social and political change,
not just incremental economic progress for its members.

The new union’s organizational structure would reflect the different major ways in which
union members engage, including:
o Being able to organize and represent members in the workplace, including in small
bargaining units.
o The bargaining units are organized into larger local unions, which have critical mass
and resources to allow strong leadership development, engagement in the broader life
of the union, and an active community profile and presence.
o Within each community, the local unions have capacity to project a unified face and a
higher degree of involvement in local or regional campaigns, struggles, and politics.
o The union is also organized sectorally, using its critical mass to set industry-wide
standards and fight for alternative visions of sector economic development.
o The national union undertakes conventions, councils, and campaigns which engage and
unify all parts of the union.
o The new union would have the bargaining unit at its base, but interact with a larger,
public community, while preserving a strong sectoral identity, as represented in the
following diagram:
49 | P a g e
IV: Open Questions Facing a New Union
The discussion between CEP and CAW leaders identified a number of questions requiring further
discussion and consensus building.
 What is the best form of democratic engagement for members in different regions?
What kind of regional structures and representation are required?
 How can a new Canadian union provide representation and services to non-union workers?
 What is the new union’s approach to party politics? While each union agrees on the need for
labour political action and engagement in electoral and extra-parliamentary struggles, and
each union agrees that unions must make independent political decisions in the interest of
working people and their membership, there are differences in the current approach of CAW
and CEP. While CEP National Union is affiliated to the New Democratic Party, the CAW has no
official affiliation at the national level. How would a new union engage in national politics and
with the New Democratic Party?
50 | P a g e
V: Common Strengths of Two Great Unions.
CEP and CAW have several common features and strengths.







Canadian
Diverse private sector membership (though some public sector representation)
Strong servicing model
Strong sector identities and commitment to pattern bargaining
Bargaining committees own bargaining; all contracts ratified by secret ballot
Central commitment to social unionism, community engagement, political activism
Recognition of need for Quebec autonomy
Most significantly, based on the level of consensus reached by CAW and CEP leaders on the need
for a new Canadian union, we agree to share these views with the democratic leadership of our
respective unions for further discussion.
51 | P a g e
Notes
52 | P a g e
53 | P a g e
54 | P a g e
55 | P a g e