It was a little longer than yes or no, but that's good.
Now, I do want to make a point. You said that if one party isn't making any money then the other party can't be making any money either. Realistically, an employee can go make money to subsidize their income, to support their family, and rightfully so. Obviously, they have to be able to do that in a strike or a lockout situation, have the freedom to do that.
The employer, under this legislation, wouldn't have that same alternative, so I take issue. You make the comment there, but I think you're implying that you would take away the rights of workers to actually go out and get employment by making that statement.