My name is Jacques Dénommé and I am the Vice-President of the Communications Division at CUPE-Québec. Our division includes many of the workers who come under federal jurisdiction within CUPE. We represent people who work for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, TVA, Global, TQS, the NFB, Vidéotron, Cogeco, and so on. So we are very much involved as employees who come under the federal labour code.
This morning, I want to speak to you more as a worker and union representative at Vidéotron. In this capacity, I have been involved in six or seven rounds of bargaining as a member of the executive, and during my time, most of these negotiations had a good outcome. They produced positive results for the workers and for the company.
However, there were two difficult periods which led to disputes. In the early 1990s there were two labour disputes, one involving a union whose certification had not been merged with ours at the time. One year later, there was another labour dispute having to do with our certification.
I would like to describe the context for you. This was a key period in cable television—it was the end of what was described as the monopoly. The company had to make some fairly significant adjustments, and as a result bargaining became quite difficult. Some significant changes had to be made in the way in which the work was organized, and people had to work within that context. At the same time, we had to ensure that the transition would occur in the context of acceptable job security for the members of our union. There was one difficult round of bargaining that led to a labour dispute.
This labour dispute, which lasted nine weeks, ultimately produced a good result. The power struggle was about economic considerations for both the company and the workers. Finally, some wisdom was displayed and people started to speak together about finding solutions that would be attractive to the company and to the employees as well. We continued along these lines and managed to develop productive, positive labour relations. It did take some time. Any labour dispute results in some bad mood for some time, that is to be expected. But at least we were able to build some excellent labour relations. The workers felt they were involved in the development of the company. Their contribution and their appreciation were very clear.
It was a very different matter at the time of the 2002 dispute, with which everyone is familiar. This dispute lasted close to a year and was incredibly bitter. The difference between these two strikes involved the use of strikebreakers.
In the first case, there were no strikebreakers. The company operated using its non-unionized employees and its management staff. We know that labour disputes are never easy for those who stay inside, for those who are outside, and also for clients. However, within this power struggle, the two sides come to a better understanding and to improved dialogue.
During the 2002 dispute, there were many strikebreakers, and they crossed the picket lines with their little fingers raised. There was provocation on all sides and clashes between strikebreakers and our employees. There was so much bitterness. Even after four years, there is still so much bad blood that we are having trouble getting over this and restoring more harmonious labour relations. Despite our efforts to turn the page and to move forward, the bitterness remains, so much so that we wonder how we will get through the upcoming negotiations. I think the reason for this needs to be considered.
The return to work after a labour dispute is another important consideration. Imagine workers who have been on the picket line every day and the people crossing their lines and giving them the finger and driving out with their truck to do their job, etc. Once the dispute is over, when these people go back to work, the employer hires a few of the strike breakers who then become their colleagues. They have to share the same premises with these people. That makes for an unbearable atmosphere within the company I do not think it is productive for anyone.
Moreover, when these workers come back, they get all the negative feedback from clients who suffered for a year because of the dispute. People were really furious with the company and vented their frustration at the expense of the employees who were coming back to work. So there was double frustration.
I think it took some time before any trust between clients and the company was restored. Furthermore, management and the employees of the company are still working on building that today. So I do not think our system benefits at all from an experience of this type.