Legislation delayed but Liberals promise new labour scheme by February
The Mounties are one step closer to collective bargaining. At the end of 2015, the Liberals announced the legislation granting the Royal Canadian Mounted Police the right to collective bargaining would be introduced at the end of February — nearly two months after the Supreme Court of Canada's deadline.
The Supreme Court had ruled in January 2015 that the Mounties would have the right to unionize and operate under a collective agreement. In its 6-1 decision, the Supreme Court determined the denial of the right to form a union and collectively bargain an employment agreement violated the RCMP’s right to freedom of association, which is guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
"As the minister responsible for the RCMP, I am pleased to announce that the government will soon be introducing a bill to respond to the Supreme Court of Canada’s January 2015 decision on the case," said Ralph Goodale, public safety minister.
"If passed, this bill would ensure that RCMP regular members and reservists can exercise their Charter-protected right to engage in collective bargaining by providing a labour relations framework that both respects the Supreme Court’s decision and reflects the operational policing environment of RCMP officers."
The RCMP, employed by the federal Treasury Board and public safety ministry, initially brought the issue to an Ontario courtroom in 2006.
Long time coming
This latest victory was a long time coming, according to Rob Creasser, spokesperson for the Mounted Police Professional Association of Canada in Vancouver, who said the decision left him "over the moon."
Though details of the legislation are scant, Creasser said the next hurdle will be to decide what the bargaining agent will be, and to hammer out a collective agreement.
His association will be vying for the bargaining agent position and needs the support of 50 per cent plus one of membership.
"Collective bargaining is all new stuff to the RCMP. It’s been available at other police forces in Canada for decades, and we want members to be informed about what collective bargaining actually means," he said.
Because of the sheer size of the national police force, negotiating a first collective agreement will likely come with challenges, Creasser said. A contract would probably mirror that of the Ontario Provincial Police, he said, because that force works in rural communities and large urban centres.
"Ours is going to be a very complicated document only because we do so many different things in so many different places," he said. "But you don’t diminish the right that every Canadian citizen has just because it’s going to be complicated."
Third-party arbitration
Under the proposed legislation, the RCMP and bargaining agent would undergo third-party binding arbitration as the dispute resolution process for bargaining impasses, with no right to strike.
Last year, the Supreme Court upheld a case brought forth by the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour concerning the right to strike, allowing almost all Canadians that ability, with the exception of emergency, police and fire workers, among others.
The RCMP would also have a single, national bargaining unit, and that agent’s primary mandate would be to represent its members. Commissioned officers, management and inspector ranks would be excluded from representation.
Finally, the Public Service Labour Relations Board would be the administrative tribunal for matters related to RCMP member collective bargaining, as well as any grievances that may crop up related to the collective agreement.
Though the Supreme Court gave the government one year to enact the legislation, the Liberal government has had to ask for an extension. It said the bill would be introduced no later than the end of February 2016.
"Engaging in collective bargaining is a Charter-protected right long since exercised by all other police forces in Canada. This bill would respect that right while recognizing the particular circumstances of the RCMP as a national police force," said Scott Brison, president of the Treasury Board.
Because the legislation is delayed, Creasser said there will be a brief period in which the RCMP’s staff relations association is dismantled and there will be an interim system until the bargaining unit chooses its representative.
Creasser said this would look something like a call centre where members can phone in with their concerns — between Jan. 16 and until the new legislation is passed at the end of February.
Room for interpretation
Because the Supreme Court judges stopped just shy of outright suggesting a union, it leaves room for interpretation as to what form the bargaining agent will take — such as a staff association, an
RCMP-led standalone union or even a third-party union, such as Unifor.
Though the national police force has had a staff association for some time, it yielded only tepid results, said Ann Frost, an associate professor at the Richard Ivey School of Business at Western University in London, Ont., who specializes in organizational behaviour.
"They’ve had a staff association that basically could meet with management and air grievances, and management had to listen in good faith — however you define that," she explained.
"There was no real power behind the staff association. It’s great to have a voice and make your concerns known to management, but when the final decision still rests with management — there’s not a lot of power behind that."
Creaser said the staff association and temporary call-in centres miss the mark as they are still run by management. What members need is a system run by them, for them, he said.
One obstacle is that his association is having trouble reaching the membership as the RCMP has prohibited meeting on the property and not provided internal employee email addresses.
"We need to get that message out that we’re available to fill that void," he said.
"We’d like 50 per cent plus one of the membership to choose us as the collective bargaining agent moving forward. It’s amazing that, in this day and age, that a membership of about 18,000 hasn’t heard of us. We’ve tried social media, Facebook, Twitter, we distribute information to personal email addresses.
"We don’t want a management system that has already been prohibited by the Supreme Court. This management group just doesn’t get it, they just don’t. It’s tough."
