Union cracks down on workers with bad habits

International Boilermakers Union in Alberta adopts zero tolerance policy for poor worker behaviour

Union members who were shutting down work sites illegally, sleeping on the job and being disrespectful were giving the International Boilermakers Union in Alberta a bad name. The situation got worse, last fall, when members were banned from one worksite, and other major companies such as Suncor and Syncrude warned the union they would do the same.

But, in an unusual turn of events, union leadership got tough and decided to adopt a zero tolerance policy for poor worker behaviour. After receiving a number of letters from disgruntled employers about Lodge 146 in Fort McMurray, the union’s international vice-president, Richard Albright, took matters into his own hands.

“A majority of Lodge 146 boilermakers are honest, hard-working, skilled trades people,” Albright wrote in a letter to the union, obtained by the Edmonton Journal. “Unfortunately, a small group...are destroying your careers with their personal agendas of bad attitudes, late starts, early quits, poor productivity, absenteeism and job disruptions.”

Albright gave an ultimatum: workers better shape up or they’ll be out of a job.

The letter was an unusual step to take, said Dean Milton, business manager for Lodge 146. “I’m not aware of any time in our union or any other union for that matter where something like that happened.”

But the union felt compelled to make a strong statement, and Milton said it was a successful tactic.

When members realized the union’s reputation was on the line, and they might lose their jobs, they wanted to correct the situation, he said. Pride is what turned these workers around.

“Everybody was aware that despite the fact the majority of people were performing quite well, our performance was not as good as it should have been,” said Milton. It ends up chipping away at a craftsman’s pride.

So, it was back to work, attitudes changed and the union received letters of appreciation from employers.

Syncrude was so pleased it took out a full-page advertisement in the Edmonton Sun, thanking the boilermakers for their exceptional work. The completion of an expansion project at one of Syncrude’s coalmines was finished ahead of schedule, under budget and with a perfect safety record.

“The union took it upon themselves to take some very responsive action and address the issue. We’re really happy with the work, but it was really a result of sitting down and talking straight to one another,” said Syncrude spokesperson, Cherry Holand.

Last year, Syncrude met with union leadership to tackle the problems. This was after union members shut down the job at a Syncrude work site and the company lost a lot of money.

“Those members who had bad attitudes did take the work for granted. (Because of the short labour supply), workers thought, ‘If I get fired, I’ll just go to another job.’ Lack of consequences was definitely a factor,” Milton said. That’s why Albright’s letter hit home.

“Do not make the mistake of taking this matter lightly,” he wrote. “Pause for a moment and try and envisage your career and the viability of Lodge 146 with zero work in the Fort McMurray region.”

The union also implemented a new policy with strict guidelines. Since many workers were leaving jobs before the completion date, the policy states that any worker who is fired or fails to fulfill the job will get no union work for 15 days or until that specific job is finished.

“We’re trying to ensure we do finish our work so the client wants us back, but we’re trying to create some fairness for the people who go out and complete the job from beginning to end,” Milton said.

While some members were angry at the union’s harsh response, in a competitive market, the union has to look out for the client’s needs, said Milton. “We’ve always been motivated to do that because we’re in a service industry.”

Andrew Luchak, associate professor in the school of business at the University of Alberta, said the union had no choice but to take a stance. Job protection has always been a priority, especially when jobs are threatened for a large number of union members, the job protection function will prevail, he said.

“You can’t have the security of higher wages and jobs without all possible effort being made to encourage high performance,” Luchak said.

As for the argument the union is more attentive to the employer’s interests, Luchak doesn’t agree.

“The union was protecting the majority union membership, which would be tarnished by a bad reputation from the situation (if it wasn’t dealt with). So, those are the decisions leaders have to make and it’s for the good of the organization. That’s why the letter was written.”

To read the full story, login below.

Not a subscriber?

Start your subscription today!