Child Labour: Hammerchild - ITUC

The Grand Double Standard

There's an article in today's Regina Leader-Post that reports on an 18-year-old cashier who has been found guilty of fraud for giving customers a break at the till of a local Wal-Mart. In other words the young worker stole from his employer. (see: Cashier to pay Wal-Mart back)

The employee will spend the next two years paying back $2,500 to the biggest company on the planet.

Meanwhile, a couple of years ago an employer (Poverino's Restaurant) was found guilty of stealing over $62,000 from approximately 130 young workers, and the owners are getting off scott-free. (see: Wage Theft in Saskatchewan)

And the Brad Wall government is doing nothing about it. Talk about a double standard.

Brad Wall government refuses to let public attend 'public hearings'

The video below is a clip from the opening of the Sask. Party government's public hearings into proposed changes to the Construction Industry Labour Relations Act (Bill 80). During this video, Sask. Party members on the Standing Committee on Human Services of the provincial legislature repeated refuse to open up the hearings in a larger venue to accommodate larger delegations of public citizens.

Despite rational, reasonable, and common sense proposals being put forward by NDP opposition MLA, Cam Broten to provide a larger venue for the hearings, the Sask. Party MLA members of the committee repeatedly vote down allowing the public to participate in the public hearings.

Job Security - The Real Thing

Job Security - The Real Thing
On Strike against Coke in Saskatoon

.

"Save our CEOs" - Teaser for Michael Moore's new film

Brad Wall government gives Saskatchewan (and Canada) an international black eye

Yesterday, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) released it's Annual Survey of violations of trade union rights. Canada has been cited due to the actions of the Brad Wall Sask Party government for it's attacks against workers rights contained in Bills 5 & 6.

It is a dubious distinction indeed to be cited in the same publication as the likes of countries such as: Colombia, Burma, Belarus, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Swaziland, Iran, Pakistan and the Philippines where trade union leaders are routinely murdered or imprisoned for defending workers' rights.

You can read the report on Saskatchewan which opens as follows:

Province of Saskatchewan: In May 2008, Bill 5 (The Public Services Essential Services Act) and Bill 6 (The Trade Union Amendment Act, 2008) were adopted, reducing the bargaining rights of a union or weakening the right of workers to organise. read more here.....

For more information and to view the full report visit the ITUC Website.

.

See the SFL News Release here: ITUC condemns Wall government.

Unions and international standards

There's a very interesting article on the StraightGoods website by Dr. Roy J. Adams about Canadian labour laws in the context of international standards. It can be found by clicking here.... and is reproduced below:

Unions and international standards

Supreme Court constitutionalized unions but Canadian laws have yet to follow.

Dateline: Monday, June 08, 2009

by Roy J Adams

Two years after the landmark Supreme Court decision that constitutionalized the right to organize and to bargain collectively, not much has changed. Contrary to what might be expected, neither federal nor provincial governments have moved to bring their legislation into line with the international standards against which the SCC judged them.

Instead, governments have put forth legislation that seems likely to be found contrary to the decision. As well, one recent case is almost certainly contrary to international standards and another, if upheld, will thoroughly shake confidence in long standing Canadian approaches to labour law.

Some 70 percent of Canadian workers have no effective say in their conditions of work, due to current laws.

Until two years ago collective bargaining in Canada was, at best, a statutory right, given or taken away by current laws. Its status would vary with the change of political tides. Then came the 2007 BC Health Services case, where the Supreme Court lavishly praised the capacity of collective bargaining to strengthen the Charter values of freedom, democracy, equality, autonomy and dignity.

Although the Supreme Court did not pronounce on the right to strike in its 2007 decision, it did say that Canadian workers should be able to rely on standards that Canada has committed to in the international arena. The right to strike is clearly considered in international human rights law to be an essential element of the right to bargain collectively.

However, to the best of my knowledge, no Canadian government has loosened strike restrictions that offend international law. Instead, in apparent defiance of the Supreme Court, two Canadian governments have gone in the opposite direction.

During the summer and fall of 2007 a minority Nova Scotia Tory government threatened legislation extending the ban on health care worker strikes. The initiative proved to be so unpopular that the government never brought forth the promised legislation, so its constitutionality was not tested.

In Saskatchewan, however, the right-leaning Saskatchewan Party did pass legislation in 2008 restricting public sector workers right to strike. The law has been challenged by the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour and is now before the courts.

In Canada, our well-established approach to bargaining structure (which union bargains for which workers with which employer) has been to legislate it. Typically an established union applies to a labour relations board to become the exclusive agent of a coherent group of employees such as all production workers in a factory or all clerks in a retail store. When the labour board issues an order certifying the union, a bargaining unit is created.

Internationally, however, the standards call for unions and employers to negotiate their own structure. Indeed, one of the pillars of international law with respect to the right to organize is that any group of workers may form a union or association and, through it, negotiate with relevant employers.

International standards say that employers have a responsibility to recognize and bargain in good faith with such unions even if those unions have not signed up the majority of the relevant workers.

This approach opens up the possibility that employers may encourage independent non-statutory unions in hopes that they will be weaker than certified unions operating with the support of government legislation.

Fearing this effect, many established unions are not keen on the non-statutory option. But neither are many employers, because they may find themselves faced with incompatible demands from several minority unions.

In a 2008 case concerning agricultural workers, the Ontario Court of Appeal issued a decision ordering the Ontario government to institute certification legislation for agricultural workers that would, contrary to international law, eradicate the possibility of minority unionism.

That decision produced a remarkable reaction which indicates how little international standards are understood in Canada and how strong the current patterns of behaviour are.

Apparently unaware of the courts insult to international human rights standards, the United Food and Commercial Workers — one of four unions actively promoting the notion of labour rights as human rights — was delighted with the decision because it would allow the union to use its traditional organizing techniques to target factory farms. In response to the decision, the corporate farm lobby pressured the Ontario government to appeal the decision. And that's what it did.

So here we have an employer lobby pushing for a decision consistent with international standards, versus a union know for championing human rights that is, in this case, cheering a decision that offends human rights.

Another instance that demonstrates the clash between legislated and non-statutory certification occurred in Québec.

There, the government recently decided that there were too many bargaining units in the public sector and reorganized and simplified them by legislation. Unions negatively affected by this initiative appealed the employers actions, claiming an infringement of their freedom of association. A Quebec Court agreed with them and told the government to back off.

If the Quebec decision stands, governments may have to rethink their approach to legislating bargaining structure — but probably not too much. Majoritarian certification is acceptable under international standards, so long as workers and their employers are able to organize and bargain in other formats if they choose to do so.

Although not forbidden, historically non-statutory bargaining arrangements have been given essentially no legal support in Canada. But even with some legal backing, non-statutory bargaining may not catch on because of the psychological and cultural commitment that our industrial relations actors have to our current procedures.

For example, both international standards and the language used by the Supreme Court in recent decisions indicate that public sector employers have a direct constitutional responsibility to recognize and bargain with unions of their own employees regardless of their employees status under labour law.

In Ontario, college part-timers, excluded from the relevant legislation, formed an association and began to push to be recognized. But instead of seeking to negotiate a tailor-made procedure as international law says they are entitled to, they instead sought to be included under legislation that embodied traditional Canadian principles of majoritarianism, legislatively imposed structure and exclusive representation.

As things now stand, some 70 percent of Canadian workers have no effective say in the establishment of their conditions of work. For those workers our traditional approach to labour legislation is not working. The best chance that they have of acquiring the democracy, freedom, equality, autonomy and dignity enhancing benefits of collective bargaining is full acceptance by all concerned of both the spirit and letter of international human rights law. But cultural patterns, once firmly established, have a way of persisting. It remains to be seen whether activist courts can break those patterns.

Its time for a fair deal for CUPE workers

GM to declare bankruptcy - The Real News

"GM bankruptcy restructuring puts risk on to workers; no vision for a green transportation system

Frank Hammer is a retired General Motors employee and former President and Chairman of Local 909 in Warren, MIchigan. He now organizes with the Auto Worker Caravan, an association of active and retired auto workers who advocate for workers demands in Washington." - The REAL News

Wage Theft in Saskatchewan

.
Coming up to 2 years ago, I posted a blog article entitled: Regina Restaurant Rips Off Workers.

It's a sorry tale of about how the owners of a restaurant called Poverino's Pasta Grill in Regina, Saskatchewan closed up their doors unannounced and left approximately 135 (most young and student) workers holding the bag and cheated out of over $62,000.00 in unpaid wages.

In other words, the owners of Poverino's Pasta Grill stole over $62,000 from a bunch of unsuspecting, trusting, and obviously vulnerable young workers.

So, in the 2 years since Poverino's closed the doors, and the nearly 2 years since they were found by the Department/Ministry of Labour to be guilty of violating the Saskatchewan Labour Standards Act and cheating the workers out of their wages. And since Poverino's has been ordered to pay the 62 grand to the workers, how much money do you think those 135 have received?

Well, according to my information, NOT A SINGLE NICKEL.

At a recent meeting with officials of the Ministry of Labour, I raised this matter again. I was attending a consultation meeting regarding the governments plans to reduce the minimum age of work to 15, in sectors including the notoriously bad "restaurant industry". I said I was skeptical and concerned that young workers would be protected because they aren't being adequately protected now. I questioned why individual workers should have the responsibility for enforcing the governments laws. Why is it necessary for a student to take an employer to court, in order for the employer to comply with the laws of the land? That's the government's job.

This past week, I received the response linked here. It confirms that employers can get away with theft by "positioning themselves in a 'judgment proof' environment".

What do you think would happen if one of those workers took $62,000 out of the cash registered and high-tailed it out of town? Do think the cops would be on the look-out? Do you think if they found the crook, that they'd arrest him and toss him in the slammer? You bet!

What we are witnessing in Saskatchewan is government sanctioned corporate theft. When is somebody in the government going to do something about it?

Canadians talk to Americans about health care - The Real News

"Canadians talk to Americans about health care

People from Toronto respond to a US advertising campaign about the Canadian health-care system.

While the debate over changes to the US health-care system continues, lobby groups are investing advertising dollars to get their point across. One such group, Conservatives for Patient's Rights has released an advertisement outlining Canadian dissatisfaction with government run health care. The Real News Network invited Torontonians to respond.

Join the health care conversation by clicking here..."

Olbermann: Limbaugh objecting to attention? WTF!?!

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Wall government labour policy opens the door to corporate bullies

Photo of protest by Greg Pender, StarPhoenix

You can thank the labour legislative policies of the Brad Wall Sask Party government for creating a climate where workers and their rights are treated with contempt.

More and more employers are flexing their new found muscles, and acting like thugs and bullies, since Wall and his 'business at any cost' team tilted the power balance even further against workers and in favour of the bosses.

In the meantime, the part-time minister in charge of the labour portfolio, Rob Norris, is luke warm when asked whether he would intervene to assist workers. This particular minister never seems to have any problem making excuses for the boss, or going to bat for corporations.

Maybe he can convince his boss to change the name of his portfolio to "The Ministry of Management".

From the Leader-Post:

.....The cab drivers allege one of the company's managers has verbally abused many of the Pakistani and other South Asian employees with racial slurs.

The company said the comments resulted from a misunderstanding from one manager.

Norris declined to say if the department will get involved if the dispute with United Cabs goes unresolved, but said the department will be available for questions.

"I made sure officials will be on hand," he said.

Department officials have already met with some drivers to discuss labour standards, added Norris.

The investigation will include input from United Cabs.

Check out the coverage in the Saskatoon StarPhoenix and Regina Leader-Post:

Cab drivers suspended following protest - StarPhoenix

Gov't investigating taxi driver suspensions - Leader-Post

.

While you're at it check out this posting over on libcom.org: Cab drivers wildcat against management racism

Artists for Free Choice

These artists all oppose Brad Wall's vision of what Labour Laws should be:

www.artists4workerschoice.org

Could union ownership reshape auto? - The Real News

"Richard Wolff: Unions should convert their position as owners into active participation in making decisions."

Brad Wall government: puppets of Big Oil, Big Business

Check out the new posting over on the "Owls and Roosters Blog" entitled: Saskatchewan Party: Energy industry donations top $142,000 in 2008; $1.178 million since 1998.

Then read the April 20, 2009 Hansard from the Intergovernmental Affairs and Justice Committee when the Justice Minister (out of the blue), in defending the government's new Trespass Law, refers to protecting oil companies and oil well drilling. The full Hansard is linked here, and the specific Minister's comments appear at page 340 (PDF 34). Excerpted below:

Hon. Mr. Morgan: — I wasn’t privy to the discussions that were had within the municipalities when they put the . . . And I don’t think anything came out of the consultations that dealt specifically with that.

But if your question is would we as a government be willing to use that if there was a sit-in on private property where there was oil drilling taking place, I think the answer is yes. If there was a piece of property that was owned or leased by an oil company or an exploration company that had a lawful right to do that, and they asked people to leave, then it may well be something that might be used in that — subject of course to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and subject to the jurisprudence from the Supreme Court.

Mr. Nilson: — So is this an enhancement of the law then so that after this law is passed, then it will give more rights to oil companies and provincial government to deal with these particular kinds of protests that might arise?

Hon. Mr. Morgan: — I don’t look at it in terms of rights. I look at it in terms of we want to ensure that property owners or people that are in lawful use of their property continue to have that, and it’s an enforcement mechanism to ensure that those rights are protected..........

Olbermann: Is Colbert laughing with you or at you?

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Agri-biz at root of swine flu? - The Real News

Read more here....

While you're at it, check out this article on Wired Science: Swine Flu Ancestor Born on U.S. Factory Farms

Sask. Party government continues their reckless assault on Charter Rights

The Sask. Party government under the leadership of Brad Wall continues their reckless assault on the constitutional rights of the citizens of our province. Now they are trying to silence dissent. (see Bill 43)

Reminds me of the actions of some "tin-pot" dictatorship.

COPE 397 President, Garry Hamblin's letter to the editor about it (reproduced below) appears in the April 29, 2009 edition of the Regina Leader-Post:

Trespass law erodes rights

It was with rising concern that I read of the Saskatchewan Party's rejection of the amendment to Bill 43, The Trespass to Property Act, that recently passed in the legislature.

The Trespass Act (the first of its kind in Saskatchewan) will make it illegal for anyone to be on public property without the consent of the government. This will include persons who engage in demonstrations, protests and marches. Other provinces have similar laws, but Saskatchewan will be the only province where no exemption for peaceful demonstration or protest exists. This exemption was the subject of the amendment that the NDP opposition was trying to get accepted.

Justice Minister Don Morgan says the right to demonstrate exists whether spelled out in the Trespass Act or not, so no exemption is needed. If this is true, then why not simply spell these rights out as per the Manitoba legislation that the law is modeled on? The Manitoba law clearly sets out an exemption for peaceful demonstration, picketing and so on.

Saskatchewan's legislation tramples on the rights of every resident by curtailing their ability to gather in peaceful protest or demonstration if they so choose, without the permission of the prevailing government.

When governments take away the rights of citizens to peacefully demonstrate, one can only wonder what future legislation they are contemplating that they think residents won't like.

With issues such as nuclear power, changes in services offered by Crown corporations, privatization of public services and others looming, one doesn't have to speculate too hard.

Garry Hamblin, President, Canadian Office and Professional Employees Local 397.

Mesothelioma: The human face of an asbestos epidemic

"Mesothelioma is an incurable asbestos cancer. This short film was produced to raise awareness of the issues around mesothelioma. It includes interviews with people who have the disease. It was produced for Action Mesothelioma day on belhalf of Forum of Asbestos Victim Support Groups." - calderdaletv

http://www.asbestosforum.org/