Saskatchewan government called on to make changes to open periods
Both the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour and the Christian Labour Association of Canada are raising concerns the Saskatchewan Employment Act will encourage union "raiding" and lead to increasingly disruptive labour campaigns.
The act — passed in May 2013 — condensed 12 previous pieces of labour legislation into one comprehensive law. Among the changes, the act extended open periods during which one union could attempt to displace another.
The unions are unhappy about the extension and asking the provincial government to address the issue at the same time it redrafts the Public Service Essential Services Act. The Supreme Court have given the Saskatchewan government one year to amend the public service act, saying it violates the constitutional right to strike and bargain collectively, as upheld in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Larry Hubich, president of the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour, said the extension of open periods encourages union “raiding.” “My view is that it’s an attempt to undermine workers’ security in the workplace and create instability with respect to workers’ rights. It’s about busting unions,” Hubich said. “Taken to its extreme, it could be a continuous open period. They’ve extended the open period but the legislation is so loose that you could drive a truck through it. Some might suggest that the open period is open-ended — there’s no end to it.”
Open periods
The specific requirements concerning open periods vary among provinces, but each labour relations act or code in Canada allows union members in a bargaining unit to change unions during a specific period of time, commonly known as the open period.
During the open period, another union can apply for certification for the group of employees covered by that particular collective agreement. To become certified, the incoming union must file an application for certification with the provincial labour relations board and satisfy the applicable minimum level of support among members.
And while some members of the labour community believe extended open periods will lead to increasingly protracted and disruptive workplace campaigns, others consider the change a welcome one.
Marilyn Braun-Pollon, prairie and agri-business vice-president for the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB), said unions have nothing to worry about so long as they provide good value to their members.
From an employer perspective, Braun-Pollon said, the simplification of the open period process can only be beneficial.
“We support the changes that simplify the process of decertification,” she said. “The former system of decertification was a complicated process and difficult for employees to understand. In fact, union members were often not aware that applications must be made during this open period. We support the changes to the act that simplified the process of decertification and believe union decertification should be as easy as certification.”
The CFIB has reported 74 per cent of Saskatchewan small business owners favour more balanced labour laws and the majority of CFIB Saskatchewan members believe unions should be required to hold annual certification elections in the province.
Ministry clarifications
The Ministry of Labour Relations and Workplace Safety — in a statement provided by Rikki Bot, executive director of communications
— clarified that the employment act simply expanded the open period to include those situations where a collective agreement had not yet been negotiated.
The open period for commencing to bargain a new or revised collective agreement remains unchanged at 60 to 30 days.
The open period changed by the employment act was the open period prior to the expiration of the collective agreement, which was expanded to 120 to 90 days.
“The intent of this open period being moved further from the expiry of the collective agreement,” the statement said, “was to encourage the parties to bargain a new collective agreement before the old agreement expires. "These changes were made in conjunction with a number of other changes to empower employees with the right to choose who will represent them as well as encourage parties to a collective agreement to achieve a negotiated solution wherever possible.”
The employment act was necessary, the ministry said, to modernize and streamline legislation so it reflected the current workplace and provided the flexibility needed to respond to future changes.
According to the statement, the various legislations addressed by the act had not been substantively reviewed since the early 1990s.
And while Saskatchewan’s government is currently reviewing the Supreme Court decision with respect to the constitutionality of the right to strike, the ministry said there has been no decision as to whether amendments to the employment act will be made or what those amendments might be.
2 acts to look at
Hubich, however, said changes to the act must be examined alongside the Public Service Essential Services Act.
“You can’t look at these changes in a vacuum,” he said. “In my view, Saskatchewan has gone from a jurisdiction in Canada that had some of the best labour legislation in the country to a jurisdiction that has got the worst labour legislation in the country.”
Rather than streamlining labour legislation, the employment act has actually made things worse, he said, adding workers and employers both have difficulty navigating such a dense document.
Much like the extension of the open period, this was a deliberate attempt to undermine workers’ rights to freedom of association, said Hubich.
“All of it has been undermining workers’ rights… The reason that the government has made these changes ideological.”
