Caught in a punishing recession that just won’t end, many Americans must
think they’ve been transported back to the 1930s. Meanwhile, U.S.
labour laws are heading even further back in time. Emboldened
Republicans in several states are trying to dismantle the last remaining
features of New Deal labour law (as codified in the 1935 Wagner Act).
In the public sector, this crusade includes measures (such those in
Wisconsin) that in essence ban unions and collective bargaining
altogether. In the private sector, the favoured tool is the so-called
right-to-work law. Pioneered by southern Dixiecrats who always hated the
New Deal, these laws ban the union security and dues collection
provisions that constitute the core of North American “majority
unionism.” Workers make a majority decision (by signing cards or voting
in an election) to form a union. The union is required to bargain on
behalf of everyone in the bargaining unit. But without the power to
collect dues, clearly the union cannot survive. Unions are thus
effectively prohibited; indeed, in right-to-work states, private-sector
unionism is virtually non-existent.
Fueled by economic desperation and beggar-thy-neighbour competition for investment, the practice has been creeping north – reaching Indiana earlier this year. In fact, just a day after Indiana enacted the law, Caterpillar closed its locomotive plant in London, Ont., shifting some production to that state. (Right-to-work wasn’t the only lure: huge subsidies and Buy American rules also helped.)
It was inevitable this back-to-the-future trend in U.S. labour law would spill over into Canada. Three provincial political parties have already proposed U.S.-style right-to-work laws for Canada. Alberta’s Wildrose Alliance and the Saskatchewan Party led the way. Last week, Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives jumped on the bandwagon, with leader Tim Hudak now endorsing right-to-work laws for that province.
For this agenda to be taken on by Conservatives in Canada’s industrial heartland is a remarkable (and, for unionists, worrisome) development. This is, after all, the party of Bill Davis, who actively promoted unions as a tool to reduce inequality and enhance the well-being of common folk. In contrast, Mr. Hudak’s policy paper blames labour laws (not corporate greed or flawed foreign investment rules) for the debacle in London, implicitly endorsing Caterpillar’s position that Canadians must cut their wages in half or face even more job losses.
Fueled by economic desperation and beggar-thy-neighbour competition for investment, the practice has been creeping north – reaching Indiana earlier this year. In fact, just a day after Indiana enacted the law, Caterpillar closed its locomotive plant in London, Ont., shifting some production to that state. (Right-to-work wasn’t the only lure: huge subsidies and Buy American rules also helped.)
It was inevitable this back-to-the-future trend in U.S. labour law would spill over into Canada. Three provincial political parties have already proposed U.S.-style right-to-work laws for Canada. Alberta’s Wildrose Alliance and the Saskatchewan Party led the way. Last week, Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives jumped on the bandwagon, with leader Tim Hudak now endorsing right-to-work laws for that province.
For this agenda to be taken on by Conservatives in Canada’s industrial heartland is a remarkable (and, for unionists, worrisome) development. This is, after all, the party of Bill Davis, who actively promoted unions as a tool to reduce inequality and enhance the well-being of common folk. In contrast, Mr. Hudak’s policy paper blames labour laws (not corporate greed or flawed foreign investment rules) for the debacle in London, implicitly endorsing Caterpillar’s position that Canadians must cut their wages in half or face even more job losses.
Continue reading here.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.