Condemn Wynne's strike-breaking anti-teacher legislation!

Funny thread. Someone here pointed during the last election that there are plenty of ways to bust unions, other than "right to work" legislation. Even Tim Hudak knew this, seeing as he rejected the policy after toying with it well before the writ was dropped. One wonders what the Sid Ryan OFL fan boy club will come up with to justify their craven support for this reactionary government.

The teachers unions are basically being run as "essential services", with the government intervening at will to back up the board, while trying to pretend it does not have a financial interest in the outcome of the negotiations.

In related news, the OFL is still short three major Ontario unions, and still calls itself the "Ontario" Federation of Labour. the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU); Ontario Nurses Association (ONA) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

Is Sid Ryan out in November? Too late since he has promised to embroil us, yet again, in another "strategic voting" campaign, of the "Stop Hudak!" variety, except against Harper, and the federal election is before the OFL reselects leadership.

Quote:

“Mr. Ryan has two choices. Mend his ways or resign,” Thomas said in an email statement to the Star. He added later by phone: “I believe it (the OFL) is living on borrowed time already.”

There is nothing on the OFL site as of today because "big labour" is still dreaming about having a "seat at the table" so in terms of the Union leadership giving the NDP cues on how it should position itself without a partner in the labour movement there is no point of entry.

As I said during the election, the "strategic" gambit of backing Wynne put the labour movement out of position to resist the Liberal austerity agenda, going forward.

That is what is going on in Ontario. 

Still nothing here: http://ofl.ca/

Seems like only the NDP is offering any kind of resistance, such as they are able to do in the context of the majority Liberal government.

What does Labour expect when they vote for right-wing parties?

Yeah. Doesn't Labour understand that they should vote for the other self-interested, cynical political party who only pays them in lip service?

We need an SCC that will actually support the right to strike.

ETA: The OLB has ruled the strikes illegal.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-high-school-students-returning-to-class-after-strike-ruled-illegal-1.3089003

Never underestimate the ability of working people to vote against their own interests.

Catchfire wrote:

Rokossovsky wrote:

One wonders what the Sid Ryan OFL fan boy club will come up with to justify their craven support for this reactionary government.

The Sid Ryan OFL fan boy club (can I get a t-shirt?) did not support this reactionary government. It supported the last budget of the last legislative assembly of Ontario, in which the NDP held the balance of power. I wonder if they could have done anything to help the teachers then?

At any rate, I fail to see what your personal gripe against Sid Ryan (bless his soul) has anything to do with Wynne's attack on teachers. But blaming workers for getting assaulted is not what I'd call "on" in the Labour forum, Ithankeeverymuch.

Not sure if you get the picture. The OFL, which is an organization devoted to labour rights, and in particular the OSSTF, which is the relevant union that is a member, has yet to condemn either the OLRB ruling, or the proposed "back to work" legislation.

The OFL secretly condemns forcing teachers back to work. And Sid is in solidarity with them secretly as well. I guess the cat got Sid's tongue on protecting the right to strike in Ontario. But I am glad you stepped forward to explain his position, since he has failed to do so.

And yes indeed he supported the last budget and campaigned for the budget and all it entailed including privatization and sales of publicly owned assets to raise capital to leverage P3 infrastructure money so they can put unionized labour out of their jobs. All of that was most definitely what was in there.

They didn't have to put the continued assault on public education in the budget explicitly, since it was implied by the proposed austerity agenda and recent past behaviour incuding McGuinty's "pre-emptive" back to work legislation Bill 115, and the attack on local bargaining rights detailed by Bill 122, and the "two tiered" bargaining process.

Needless to say, the issues are likely far to complex for you to understand but Bill 122 claims that it "protects" local bargaining rights and the right to strike, but in reality made local strike action unlawful, since it conflicts with "provincial bargaining" that is under control of the provincial executive that colluded with Kathleen Wynne to create the "two tiered" bargaining system that ETFO president Sam Hammond claimed preserved local bargaining, and the right to strike.

Would it be too much to consider the possibility that the provincial executive that negotiated Bill 112 with the Wynne Liberals had a vested interest in centralizing control over the "uppity" locals and the members they represent by stripping them of their power to negotiate the full breadth of issues and hobbling their power to act locally?

Would a confessed long time Liberal like Hammond do such a thing?

As the OLRB decision demonstrates, in fact "local bargaining" and the "right to strike" are so enmeshed in legal complexity, teachers right to strike has been effectively outlawed.

Teachers now have been effectively made an "essential service" in anything but name, since they can not effectively strike, and without the benefit of being awarded the lavish contracts awarded to services designated as such.

Bravo Sam Hammond!

Same guy who whined about Bill 115, saying that he worked "day and night" to get McGuinty elected, and his hurt feelings.

I didn't realize the labour forum was only meant for congratulatory missives about the labour leadership, because they by benefit of their positions speak for "workers", and therefore to critique them is to "blame workers for getting assaulted".

I don't blame teachers for being "assaulted". I blame their hamfisted leaders for selling them out. Part of selling them out was colluding with the Liberals and supporting their election to a majority government. Is that clear?

Bringing to light the very fact that it is nearly impossible to cleanse "local bargaining issues" of "provincial bargaining issues", since they are inextricably linked, especially in the light of the fact that the Minister gets to determine precisely what terms are "local" and what terms are "central" to include anything that might "impact" the financial position of the Ministry of Education.

Bill 122, effectively brings an end to independent local bargaining and strike action, through Byzantinian legal process. There will always be a conflict at one level or another with a two teired system.

These workers can not write "we want smaller class sizes" on a picket sign while on strike because "class sizes" is a "provincial" not a "local" issue.

Not only is it the case that the Government gets to set the terms of what is negotiated locally and what is negotiated centrally, based on its financial interests, but it also gets to write the laws that determine the how teachers may bargain internal to their union, since the union is mandated into existence by provincial law.

That law also prohibits teachers from seeking other representation, and only the provincially mandated organizations are legally allowed to represent them. Teachers can not get rid of ETFO and OSSTF, and sign with another union, and are forced to deal with the organization as defined by the "Teachers Collective Bargaining Act", designed especially to hobble their rights.

These attempts to assert local strike actions by some OSSTF locals, are just the final hicupping bloody burbs of an organization that has essentially been bludgeoned to death, after being led down a back ally by a naive or complict leadership to be set upon by muggers.

What we see, is a situation where the defacto employer (the Ministry) also has general control over the internal structure of the union it negotiates with, while at the same time full control over the supposedly independent OPSBA negotiating team that the minister may fire at will if they are not doing what the province wants them to do.

It is not quite a case where the right hand is shaking hands with the left, but pretty close to it. Liberals do "China" very well.

Why doesn't Ontario have province-wide bargaining? Is ther history to this issue? Here in NB there is one CA applicable across the province.

NorthReport wrote:

What does Labour expect when they vote for right-wing parties?

From the perspective of someone poor, trust me, they're ALL right wing parties now.

Catchfire wrote:

Rokossovsky wrote:

Needless to say, the issues are likely far to complex for you to understand but

You're quite right. I can't really grasp what you are trying to say, Rokossovsky, but do dispense with the personal attacks, thanks.

I should clarify then. Too complex because you are not really interested in figuring the angles.

To simplify the Ontario labour movement is being taken apart piece by piece, and many well meaning people were duped into supporting positions that were contrary to the best interests of workers by self-serving labour bureaucrats who put political posturing and their own personal agenda ahead of those of the people who they represent, which is the membership.

There has been a great deal of overt, and tacit collusion with the Liberal Party, in particular in the teachers unions, and at the OFL, and today, as we see, the chickens are coming home to roost. Silence is not surprising given the promise of leaders like Sam Hammond" who silence the voice of labour by promising not to "bargain in the media", even though a wholesale assault on labour is underway from top to bottom.

In thier stead there is only one real voice articulating a defense of labour rights at this time, and that is the NDP. Now read this carefully for content, and try and free yourself of knee-jerk anti-NDP rejectionism and expand your understanding of the concrete issues involved:

Quote:

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath also blamed the Liberals' two-tier bargaining system for the strike, but called the government's attempt to hammer through back-to-work legislation “undemocratic.”

That "two-tier bargaining system" is the one introduced by Kathleen Wynne, in the form of Bill-122 and it was supported by the leadership of the teacher's federations at the time.

Here is Susan Swackhammer Vice-President of ETFO Executive arguing the case for Kathleen Wynne's attack on local barganining rights, during depositions for Bill 122 at the provincial legislature:

Quote:

By bringing a formal, legal framework to the process of provincial education sector bargaining, the bill represents an important step forward from the lack of clear rules and responsibilities that characterized the informal provincial discussions between the government and education unions under the provincial discussion table process.

Meanwhile, Dave Clegg, president of ETFO York Region local, had this to say:

Quote:

The record of legislated centralized education bargaining elsewhere in Canada is not one that should inspire confidence. The temptation for governments to tip the scales in their favour and to rely upon their legislative authority is well documented in the history of collective bargaining in the education sector in British Columbia. In a recent court decision, “The court has concluded that the government did not negotiate in good faith with the union after the Bill 28 decision. One of the problems was that the government representatives were preoccupied by another strategy. Their strategy was to put such pressure on the union that it would provoke a strike by the union. The government representatives thought this would give government the opportunity to gain political support for imposing legislation on the union.”

And then finally, CUPE Ontario President, Fred Hahn was equally dismissive:

Quote:

There are components of Bill 122 that reflect Bill 115 and we believe they must be altered in order to demonstrate true respect for free collective bargaining. This includes any inherent power the government would have given itself in the lead up to Bill 115, like unilateral demands that employees and employers must accept government parameters, for example.

[cut]

The bill should be amended so that the crown cannot unilaterally impose the term of the collective agreement. The term of a collective agreement should be determined only by the parties to that agreement by means of collective bargaining. That is a basic tenet of free collective bargaining.

So, sorry folks, the attack on teachers bargaining rights isn't merely some McGuinty era backwash, but the full on policy of the Wynne government that you wanted to win the election, and have consistently appologized for, despite the fact that the people who disagreed with you have been proven right, time and time again.

Yeah, yeah, I know: "Horwath made you do it".

Am I surprised that those still clinging to the tattered cloth of Wynne's alleged "progressiveness" are those furthest from Ontario? Not at all.

Delusional? What is with the personal attacks?

I was speaking to "folks" who were Wynne "apologists". Count yourself amongst them if you choose. They don't need to be named. I admit it is difficult it is to distinguish between "principled leftists" and "Liberal shills" among those who insisted on taking a microscope to every single utterance or position taken by the ONDP in search of "betrayal of principle", while accepting at face value the notion of Liberal "progressiveness", without complaint.

The Liberal platform was in fact openly reactionary.

Maybe some folks are trying to disassociate themselves from the political consequences of the line they took in the last election, given how badly it worked out. Is that you? I don't know. But as one teacher's local president observed to me shortly after the election, "this is really the worst possible outcome".

But yeah, it was all Andrea Horwath's fault. Don't you think this line is getting a little long in the tooth? Forget the fact that the general outline of the Wynne Liberal reactionary platform was laid out in the economic program they presented on May 1st 2013, in black and white.

If "left" critics of the ONDP, had any interest in doing more than bashing the ONDP for failure of principles, all that was required was for them to put as much energy and effort into analyzing the Liberal policy platform for content, as opposed to accepting at face value assertions by the OFL leadership that it was a "progressive" budget.

A simple question: Did you ever read this 'progressive' budget? If so, all, parts, or just quoted excerpts?

As for Bill 122 and the present dillema of teachers who theoretically have the right to strike, but in practice do not, because of the byzantine legal structure imposed on teachers contracts in the so called "Teachers Bargaining Act", special labour legislation written just for them, over and above the Labour Relations Act that was old hat long before the election because that was job one for Kathleen Wynne when she took over the helm of the party.

A fact that few people noticed probably because the provincial union reps were praising Wynne generally, and the legislation specifically as "a step forward", because they had already determined that they would throw their lot in with the Wynne government, when they supported her leadership bid, with an eye toward the next election. 

It's a sad day when labour union leadership campaigns to the right of the admitedly milqutoast center-left NDP.

Teachers are far less unpopular than you would think by reading the MSM. Despite the fact that they are vilified routinely, during the Bill 115 fiasco public support was in the 50% range.