Madam Speaker, I would point out that I have been listening quietly to all of my colleagues who are talking and would ask that they extend the same courtesy to me when I am speaking and have decorum in the House of Commons.
I want to quote from something which I think would be instructive for all of us here. There is a saying that those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it. The title of this document is, “Postal Workers Organizing: A Look Across A Century”, 1900 to 2000. It says:
The first postal clerks' association was formed locally in Vancouver in 1911.
I am very proud to represent Vancouver Kingsway, the birthplace of the first postal clerks association. It goes on:
It soon added branches in the Atlantic, and by 1917, the Dominion Postal Clerks Association (DPCA) had branches across the country.
It describes the post office working conditions at the time:
When one looks at the working conditions prevailing during this period, it's no wonder the postal associations soon tired of begging and petitioning for improvements. Post office workers often work 60 to 70 hour work weeks with no overtime provisions.
If a train was late, postal clerks might have to come to work in the middle of the night. Letter carriers were forced to wait around until the mail was ready for delivery. At Christmas, the work day had no limit. And for this, they received very poor wages.
These circumstances came to a head in 1918, when FALC, after failing to convince the government to appoint a conciliation board to establish regulated collective agreement conditions, called a strike. It was strongest in the West, Toronto and Hamilton.
By the way we have fine representatives in those areas who continue to this day to fight for working people in this country.
The document goes on to say:
By the end of the 10-day strike, letter carriers, clerks, railway mail clerks and porters...were all on strike west of the Great Lakes.
The first national civil service strike ended with a huge victory. Postal workers won a 44-hour week, overtime pay, salary increases, no discrimination against strikers and a Civil Service Commission of Inquiry into working conditions at the Post Office.
Who today would quarrel with any of those victories?
That came from brave and courageous women and men who stood up to governments like this one, to people who would take away their right to strike, and look at what they were striking for: a 44-hour work week, overtime pay, rest between shifts.
Moving forward to 1965, the document says:
The year 1965 was a turning point, a defining moment in the history of post office workers. In July, the government--
--I think it was a Liberal government at that time--
--announced in proposed legislation a rejection of the right to strike for government workers and a wage increase of less than half of the union's bottom line.
A strike ensued which lasted for two weeks in Montreal and a shorter period in other locations.They were rotating strikes.
The immediate results of the strike included:
- wage increases
- no reprisals against strikers
- a Royal Commission into working conditions, headed by Judge Montpetit
- the inclusion of the right to strike in the new federal public sector labour legislation.
I would also point out that the leaders of all three postal workers brotherhood unions failing to back the strike lost their positions.
There has been some talk here about whether or not there is a right to strike. It is true there is no right to strike that is implicit in the freedom of association provision of the charter. However, it is true that under the Canada Labour Code trade unions that are certified or voluntarily recognized under that agreement who go through the legal provisions can put themselves into a legal strike position and when they do so, they are validly on strike. That is the case with CUPW today.
We are not arguing whether or not there is a theoretical juridical right to strike.