The United Steelworkers is an international trade union with over 280,000 members in Canada. Approximately 15,000 of these members work in Canada's federal jurisdiction.
Steelworkers are men and women of every social, cultural and ethnic background in every industry and job. In the federal jurisdiction, our members work in trucking, railways, courier delivery, banking, airlines, airport security, shipping, ferry service, and communications.
We are pleased to have this opportunity to make these submissions as part of the process of improving the Canada Labour Code to prohibit the use of replacement workers during labour disputes in the federal jurisdiction. This advances the Steelworkers struggle for dignity, respect and equality for its members, and improves the working lives for all working people in Canada.
The Canada Labour Code. Canadian labour law has long recognized and given effect to a right to strike. A union's right to bring economic pressure to bear on employers by a collective withdrawal of the labour of its members in order to support its contract demands is a fundamental right in our democratic society. Under the Canada Labour Code, the right to strike is a fundamental part of a comprehensive code of rights and obligations which governs labour relations in the federal jurisdiction.
The Canada Labour Code grants unions the right to collectively bargain and then administer and enforce collective agreements on behalf of their memberships. The union's right to collectively bargain is carefully balanced with a duty to represent its members fairly. The trade off for being exclusive bargaining agent is that unions are legally bound to provide fair representation to all of the employees in the bargaining unit they represent. The Code permits bargaining unit employees, in certain circumstances, to decertify their union or eliminate its bargaining agency status. This serves as an additional check and balance against the union's authority. The Code contains additional and comprehensive prohibitions on employer and union unfair labour practices, before certification, during organizing campaigns, for the duration of collective agreements, and in connection with strikes and lockouts.
The right to strike. The economic "balance of power" between employers and unions at the outset of a strike is affected by factors both parties are entitled to consider as the union determines whether to engage in a strike and the employer determines whether to maintain positions which may result in a strike. The union typically gauges its support and predicts its ability to succeed in a strike situation by conducting a strike vote among its members. This is a fundamental and democratic measure of the union's support and it demonstrates the willingness and ability of the bargaining unit to sustain economic pressure. The employer engages in a similar exercise to measure its ability to withstand a strike. Again, as with other aspects of the union's role as bargaining agent, the union's right to strike is carefully circumscribed by the provisions of the Code. A balance between the rights and obligations of the parties to the bargaining relationship is achieved.
Why replacement workers must be banned.
Replacement workers are strangers to the bargaining relationship. They are not part of the union's bargaining unit. They do not participate in collective bargaining. They do not vote in the strike vote. As such, the mere introduction of replacement workers in and of itself upsets the balance of power that the parties establish and measure at the outset of a strike. But in addition to that, the introduction of replacement workers has been linked by researchers to a variety of negative outcomes. These outcomes include greater picket line violence and longer strikes. Furthermore, a Princeton University study at a Bridgestone/Firestone plant in Decatur in the mid 1990s considered whether a long contentious strike and the hiring of replacement workers was linked to the production of defective tires. That study concluded that labour strife in the plant closely coincided with lower product quality.
The research described above accurately reflects our Union's experience with replacement workers. When replacement workers are introduced into a strike, they come into direct contact with the picketers and other union members who continue to support the strike. In our experience, this contact is provocative and disruptive. It is often relied upon by employers to demoralize the union's membership.
In these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that the presence of replacement workers escalates the number of picket line incidents and results in greater violence on the line. The escalation of picket line incidents and violence undermines the rule of law.
The use of replacement workers unfairly distorts the economic power balance in a strike situation, and it weighs heavily against any union which chooses to exercise its right to strike. There is no legitimate basis for permitting the employer to use replacement workers in the context of a system of labour relations which recognizes that the relationship must be determined by the parties to the agreement and not threatened, undermined or even destroyed by strangers.
The use of replacement workers upsets the balance which is otherwise sought to be achieved by the extensive and detailed code of conduct that is regulated through our labour laws.
In conclusion, our Union welcomes any amendment to the Code which establishes the basis for a fairer system of dispute resolution. We believe that the Code is long overdue for changes which make it clear that the right of employers to use replacement workers during a strike is effectively limited.
We welcome the changes in Bill C-257, which are clearly directed at eliminating the unfairness inherent in a system that permits an employer to continue to operate during a strike. The Steelworkers supports the Bill and applauds the work of its political allies in Parliament.
Thank you.