Collective Bargaining Is Now A Right

Abbott did not respond directly to questions about union calls for an immediate meeting and a moratorium on contracting out and layoffs, but his spokesperson sent an e-mail with this statement from the Minister: <p><i>"Government understood Bill 29 to be legal and constitutional under the jurisprudence prevailing at the time the bill was passed. Since the Supreme Court has now set out a new legal framework, government will need to study the decision, take some time to review the implications and determine how we will go forward.</p> "We are obviously disappointed that the Supreme Court has reversed several of its own previous decisions in arriving at this decision. We based the legislation on the rules of the day, and now it seems those have changed.<p>"Bill 29 was designed to put patients first by improving the ability of health authorities to allocate resources where they are needed...."</i></p>A couple of things:<p>1] The minister is trying to cover his behind, so his government won't have to do anything retroactively;<p>2] He makes mention of "allocating resources where they are needed", which in doublespeak means profits (that don't serve the healthcare system at all -- in spite of Arnold's comments about privatization);</p>3] As long as we live under a system in which the individual's voice is but a plaintive one crying in the wilderness, and <u>might means right</u> (so that two is seen as more important than one, and so on and so forth), then we necessarily must make due with representatives in order to present goals common to the so-called masses. This means we need unions to counter the "government - industrial complex".</p>Having said that however, the role of unions is going to have to change, if they want to "stay in business":<p> -- Unions will have to begin policing their memberships and setting standards of performance, to weed out the deadwood. Moreover, <b>they will have to be seen</b> to be doing that.</p> -- The BHR (Buzz Hargrove Reaction) to maintaining union jobs by excluding competition is old school. Unions are going to have to see that business gets done on a competitive scale.</p> -- Unions are going to have to realize that, with rapidly changing technologies, jobs are only secure if there is a need for them.<p> -- Unions are going to have to retrain their memberships when jobs become redundant. Perhaps unions are going to have to function as job placement agencies for their memberships. Unions will have to be seen as representing employees who are capable of performing the tasks needed by employers.</p> <p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

Another thing for unions to remember: When a contract is over, it is OVER. Realistically this means that any and all provisions of the old contract are subject to negotiation.

Of course unions and members think that contract negotiations are like climbing a stair case, ie. the new contract builds on the old one. This is wishful thinking, and when times are tough and money is tight all things are up for grabs by either side.

H.F. Wolff

"Of course unions and members think that contract negotiations are like climbing a stair case, ie. the new contract builds on the old one. This is wishful thinking, and when times are tough and money is tight all things are up for grabs by either side."<br />
<br />
<br />
Not the union guys I know <br />
all they ever do is play catch up. The rest of your thought are based on mythology to wit:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.rense.com/general23/gold.htm">http://www.rense.com/general23/gold.htm</a><br />
<br />
<br />
Once we can get our heads around the fact that inflation manipulated by these same wonderous folks of the Kharazic <br />
Persuasion <br />
but that's as close as i can get to that topic <br />
<br />
Anti -unionism is in and anti capitalism is out <br />
and every body gets fucked<br />
You too<br />
<br />
<br />
<p>---<br>"Those who understand Higher Wisdom do not speak in an ordinary manner.<br />
Those who speak in an ordinary manner do not grasp Higher Knowledge.<br />
<br />
<br />
Lao-tzu, Orie

<blockquote> When a contract is over, it is OVER </blockquote> I can go along with this. It would be sort of like the way the US orginally organized its military at the beginning of things. A soldier signed on for a specific duration, and when that time was up, he packed up his stuff and went home - or renogotiated. It didn't matter if they were in the middle of a war or not. Created a bit of challenge for the generals, who had to consider this, especially in laying seige, or a campaign of long duration. <p>I think a similar condition would keep both sides of an agreement more "finely tuned". Initially, I thought that the termination of an contract would mean either that the business would shut down until a new agreement was reached, or that the employment positions would be up for grabs.</p>But, just because a union contract expires, doesn't mean the worker's status as an employee becomes null-and-void. (S)he would still be employed by the company, but the job conditions and remunerations wouldn't be known. It would also mean that union dues couldn't be paid, because there would be no salary to base them on.<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

<blockquote> Not the union guys I know all they ever do is play catch up </blockquote>As long as governments are part of the government/industrial complex, the proverbial "dice" are loaded against workers.<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

>The court suspended the effect of its decision for one year to give the province time to pass acceptable legislation.<

In other words, the government has been given a year to enact a new law to do exactly the same thing. Cancel contracts at a flip of the switch. Should the Liberals be ousted, I wonder if they would expect any contract they made, to become null and void.


---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

"The rest of your thought are based on mythology to wit:"

Not myth but 50 years of observation.

As another contributor to this forum stated: "Stop Feeding The Machine"!

Don't play their rigged games!

Don't pay interest to banks, and don't vote for ANY political party members.

As to unions; I believe that to give the right to strike to civil servants was one of the bigger bits of corruption foisted on the Canadian electorate. In private business there are checks and balances and if the arrangements get out of kilter the business will lose employees (wages too low) or the business goes bankrupt because its prices are too high (wages too high).

There are no such checks and balances in the civil service.

Personally when I believed to be underpaid I'd look for a better paying position. Never felt the need to have a third party speak for me or tell me what to do or not to do.

In the long distant past unions did some good. When Henry Ford came along and paid his workers what he did the feeling among business types was that his workers were OVERPAID and that he'd go bankrupt, or, that other businesses could not keep up.

Then came the unions into the auto business and, the rest as they say, is history. The north American auto companies are bankrupt and their unions want more. So sad too bad.

H.F Wolff

"But, just because a union contract expires, doesn't mean the worker's status as an employee becomes null-and-void."

Interesting concept!

Perhaps this might be the next step in union contracts. And why not?

In business 80% of the work is done by 20% of the employees. And when the contract is up the union negotiates and the business can say which employees are worth what to the company. And which (ex)employees are unacceptable to the company.

It would certainly get rid of the deadwood and seat warmers.

H.F. Wolff

H.F Wolff<br />
With all due respect. <br />
Your 50 years of observations differ vastly from mine, As does you position in the work force<br />
<br />
The working man has little in common with people of your skill level and as I recall you hold an engineering degree <br />
The Canadian work force I grew up with were lucky to have completed senior high school<br />
For you to compare these two distinct rungs on the labour ladder is a false dichotomy and for you to use it is insulting to say the least.<br />
Business has a united front and uses that front to keep wages down while granting themselves bonus’ stock options and God know what all.<br />
<br />
That you are able to negotiate a fair wage is commendable but in no way can be used as a yardstick for the working class.<br />
Acquaint your self with the Ludlow Massacre <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=Ludlow+Massacre&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7SUNA">http://www.google.com/search?q=Ludlow+Massacre&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7SUNA</a> <br />
Or any of several goon squad actions against the working class.<br />
Your one sided argument won’t wash with me or any other blue collar worker. <br />
<br />
<br />
<p>---<br>"Those who understand Higher Wisdom do not speak in an ordinary manner.<br />
Those who speak in an ordinary manner do not grasp Higher Knowledge.<br />
<br />
<br />
Lao-tzu, Orie

<blockquote> It would certainly get rid of the deadwood and seat warmers. </blockquote>Or it may create a preponderance of toadies.......pushing your 80:20 ratio into a more disparate range.<p>Axiom:</p>the larger a business is the less efficient each employee becomes.<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

<a href="http://www.pcdf.org/corprule/corporat.htm">http://www.pcdf.org/corprule/corporat.htm</a> <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Considered by many to be the "bible" of the emerging global Living Democracy Movement, When Corporations Rule the World has become a modern classic with a message that seems increasingly prophetic with each passing day. Its central message is a clear and unequivocal wake up call to humanity. The global economy has become like a malignant cancer, advancing the colonization of the planet's living spaces for the benefit of powerful corporations and financial institutions. It has turned these once useful institutions into instruments of a market tyranny that is destroying livelihoods, displacing people, and feeding on life in an insatiable quest for money. It forces us all to act in ways destructive of ourselves, our families, our communities, and nature. This destructive process is driven by a combination of institutional forces and an extremist ideology of corporate libertarianism that invokes the theories of Adam Smith and market economics to advance policies that systematically undermine both the market and democracy. <br />
Human survival depends on a community-based, people-centered alternative beyond the failed extremist ideologies of communism and capitalism. This alternative is already being created through the initiatives of millions of people around the world who are taking back control of their lives and communities to create places where people can live and grow in balance with the living earth. When Corporations Rule the World provides an agenda of national and global reforms by which we may reclaim our power to localize economies while globalizing consciousness. <br />
<a href="http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/25/006.html">http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/25/006.html</a> <br />
<br />
Review of Alex Carey, Taking the Risk out of Democracy: Propaganda in the US and Australia<br />
(University of NSW Press, 1995. 214 pp., $19.95) <br />
Reviewed by Alex McCutcheon in Green Left Weekly<br />
As Alex Carey sees it, "The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy''.<br />
<a href="http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:TzZ6c4q-pTEJ:www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.cgi%3Fpath%3D104241082357595+alex+carey&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3">http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:TzZ6c4q-pTEJ:www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.cgi%3Fpath%3D104241082357595+alex+carey&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3</a> <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Taking the Risk Out of Democracy opens<br />
with a discussion of Henry Wallace’s notion of<br />
"the century of the common man," a twentieth<br />
century American society ruled not by individual<br />
power or class privilege but by common consent.<br />
It is the "failure to move significantly" toward<br />
Wallace’s vision that concerns Carey, a failure he<br />
attributes "in important measure to the power of<br />
propaganda." Propaganda, he asserts, especially<br />
corporate propaganda, has been used to "control or<br />
deflect the purposes of the domestic electorate in a<br />
democratic country in the interests of privileged<br />
segments of that society" (p. 11).<br />
In Carey’s view, U.S. corporate propaganda<br />
emerged because of the growth of democracy<br />
(specifically, increased popular franchise and the<br />
union movement) and the growth of corporate<br />
power, which clashed to create a climate where<br />
business leaders perceived a need to protect<br />
corporate power against democracy. Thus they<br />
developed both internal and external programs that<br />
identified free enterprise with cherished values,<br />
and government and unions with tyranny and<br />
oppression--a Manichean juxtaposition he refers to<br />
as the Sacred and the Satanic. Business leaders<br />
also co-opted social science to aid their cause, and<br />
they exported their free enterprise campaigns to<br />
other countries, including Carey’s home, Australia.<br />
By taking corporate power out of the range of<br />
public discussion, Carey argues, propaganda has<br />
closed minds and society<br />
<br />
This bears repeating, By taking corporate power out of the range of<br />
public discussion, Carey argues, propaganda has<br />
closed minds and society<br />
I would hope that your is not another one of those closed mind I have to deal with but so far that seems to be the case. Please correct mr where you see my statements as and offing above as not being accurate <br />
Or are you posting here merely to amuse yourself on a topic that affects the worlds working classes<br />
<br />
You may be correct on the 80/20 split and if so it high time the executive offices that bloat industry were subject to sevier house cleaning<p>---<br>"Those who understand Higher Wisdom do not speak in an ordinary manner.<br />
Those who speak in an ordinary manner do not grasp Higher Knowledge.<br />
<br />
<br />
Lao-tzu, Orie

Diogenes,

You are right regarding my academic credentials, but....

After I graduated from high school I began my working career on the shop floor as a blue collar worker. Got my engineering degree much later as an adult student.

I have much sympathy for the blue collar worker, many (most?) of whom get bounced around through corporate executive decisions based on who-knows-what rationale. I back up my belief here with the treatment I received from the picketers during a long and bitter strike. I was one of the very few employees permitted to get to the office without impediment.

I have lived through enough corporate mergers to know that most are worth s**t and not for increased productivity or reduction in costs.

Having said all that, unions nowadays are nothing but another layer of bureaucracy for the worker to cope with. A bureaucracy with its own agenda and priorities, most of which do not coincide with the interests of the dues paying members: such behaviour is in the NATURE of political parties and bureaucracies!

Consequently, because I always considered myself as one of the 20%, I believed that I did not require a third party to represent my interests.

I am not just speaking of my own experience here; numerous other workers, shop and professional, which I have had the pleasure to deal with, fell into the 20% category and deserved much better treatment and/or pay. But the union agreement was such that the slackers and drones earned as much as the doers and achievers. I believe that this is the malaise that so hurts the western economies: Too many drones and hangers-on.

Apart from all this I do agree that corporate kleptocracy is rampant and hiding behind "free trade" and globalization, aided and abetted by the politicos, bribed or browbeaten by those-who-must-remain-unmentioned. Commerce must definitely be controlled through legislation, and made to obey the rules. But much legislation is nothing but chicanery, used to enrich....you get the idea. Hence my recurring mantra of who to vote and not to vote for.

My main contempt is reserved for the union of the civil service and those politicians that enabled and permitted this nonsense to go on. To wit: primary school teachers earning $70 or $80K per annum because they can hold the schools and parents for ransom.

That's my rant for today. Sorry for the rambling. Trust you had a nice weekend.

H.F. Wolff

Rantin's cool
And my fav style so here goes
Unions and Gov are both supportted by the same
slack-assed thing common to unions a politics
The blame lays squarely with the members of society and of unions

There ain't many who get a walk in the park and i'd rather see teachers get the numbers you cite that the donothin upper "managers
a city manager gets over a 100 grand a year in the berg I'm trapped in




---
"Those who understand Higher Wisdom do not speak in an ordinary manner.
Those who speak in an ordinary manner do not grasp Higher Knowledge.


Lao-tzu, Orie

If that is the case, then a new government could "rip up" the contracts for the 2010 "fun 'n' games", the Canada Line, the Sea-to-Sky Highway "improvements", and gosh know what else..........

---
"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."
-Max Planck