Union leader charges Opposition is playing politics in labour relations recommendations
Labour reform is needed in Ontario but not necessarily in the manner proposed by the province’s Progressive Conservatives in a recently released white paper, says Sid Ryan, president of the Ontario Labour Federation.
“They’re trying to couch this as a policy paper under the guise of creating a more ‘flexible’ workforce,” he says. “It’s not.”
The proposals would allow employees in a unionized workplace the option of not becoming a union member or paying union dues. The reforms would also see unions, not employers, collect those dues, and amend the province’s labour laws to allow a secret ballot in all certification votes. Unions would also be obliged to disclose how much money they take in and where they spend it.
Tory leader Tim Hudak argues the reforms are necessary to make the province more attractive to investment.
Ryan questions how these changes would accomplish that goal.
“How does knowing how a union spends its money, for example, create one single job?” he asks.
The white paper also calls for an end to closed tendering for unionized firms only in the public sector and suggests private companies be allowed to compete with the Workplace Safety Insurance Board (WSIB) to provide workplace insurance coverage.
These proposals are applauded by Benjamin Dachis, a senior policy analyst with the C.D. Howe Institute in Toronto.
Earlier this year, the institute released a research paper suggesting the province faces a $19.7 billion unfunded liability at the WSIB.
It’s something the province is attempting to address following a recent review of the insurance board’s funding, Dachis notes, but believes more could be done.
As for open tendering, government contracting generally needs to be made a lot easier and competitive, he says, adding the current system is expensive and too protective of unions.
However, the white paper proposals are broad and miss a key issue for Canada, Dachis says.
“This battle is painted as union versus non-union, public versus private,” he says. “It misses what the Scandinavian countries have proven to be adept at: competition.”
Countries such as Denmark and Sweden are “hot beds” of government contracting and highly unionized, Dachis says.
However, there’s a higher degree of competition because unions are not monopolies within industries, he says. He would like to see Canada take a similar approach.
Ryan also hopes politicians in Ontario will look to Europe for guidance on labour reform. The unionization rate in Denmark is 95 per cent and unions play a larger role overall in the workplace by controlling things such as training and workers’ compensation, he says.
“There’s a huge difference,” Ryan says. “I’d love to see the same respect for unions here. In this country and in the U.S., it’s a completely different model. It’s adversarial.”
Meanwhile, any labour reforms in Ontario should take a broader look at anything that restricts competition, Dachis says.
Legislation such as Bill 77, currently in second reading, works against that principle, he says. The proposed law would require any government service contract with an existing union to be carried over to a new employer.
It’s a bill the OFL is lobbying in favour of because it will make it easier for workers to form a union, Ryan says.
The white paper also misses some of the more narrow issues that need addressing, such as reinstatement rights that entitle workers to return to their position after a strike, Dachis says.
Research by the C.D. Howe Institute shows reinstatement rights have “one of the biggest effects on labour relations in Canada” because they increase the incentive for workers to hold out for higher wages and eventually strike, he says. His research found that reinstatement rights legislation increased strike length by 50 per cent.
Likewise, he would have preferred to see more detail in the proposals on issues such as decertification and alternatives for workers dissatisfied with their unions or union leadership.
Overall, however, Dachis hopes the white paper prompts a discussion around labour law reform in Ontario.
Ryan, meanwhile, questions why such drastic reforms are being touted when less than two per cent of labour disputes end in strikes.
“There’s nothing good in this paper. It’s likely to be a wedge issue in the next election,” he says. “My concern now is that the Liberals will get skittish (as a minority government) and start making reforms.”
