Canadian Lawyers, to me! (involves possible union busting)

[viper37]

No.

It means that once he signs a collective bargaining agreement he's stuck with it until the term expires - maybe three years, maybe five, maybe another amount.

Once that collective bargaining agreement is up, he's probably going to have to negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement with the same union he signed the previous one with unless it got decertified or replaced.

Can't vouch for sure, but in my line of work, the "collective bargaining agreement" (I use quotes, because "collective" is subjective, so is "bargainining" and so is "agreement" ), once the contract expire, it remains as it is until there's a new one "negotiated" or until there's a lock-out.  Strikes won't affect the previously government imposed -err I mean "negotiated in good faith" agreement, but last time there was a lock-out, we were free to pay the wages we wanted (though there was a part of the agreement that was valid, but construction is complicated here, we don't like simple things  )

[Jacob]

Yeah, true enough. I thought Yi was conflating "collective bargaining agreement" and "union" and wanted reinforce the difference, but I might have misread him.

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah, true enough. I thought Yi was conflating "collective bargaining agreement" and "union" and wanted reinforce the difference, but I might have misread him.

No, I meant union instead of collective bargaining agreement.

I guess what I was trying to get at is, if the union goes on strike while "negotiating" a new bargaining agreement, an employer who tried to hire strike breakers would be breaking a Canadian law, right?

[Barrister]

Yeah, true enough. I thought Yi was conflating "collective bargaining agreement" and "union" and wanted reinforce the difference, but I might have misread him.

No, I meant union instead of collective bargaining agreement.

I guess what I was trying to get at is, if the union goes on strike while "negotiating" a new bargaining agreement, an employer who tried to hire strike breakers would be breaking a Canadian law, right?

Depends on jurisdiction.  That might be so in Quebec, but not Alberta.  Employers can (and do) hire replacement workers.

[Camerus]

In the federal jurisdiction, there are also a number of stages (each with a specific set number of days) that unions and employers must go through before they are in a legal strike or lock-out position.  Stages include notice to bargain, government conciliation, a "cooling off period", holding  strike votes, etc.

Note as well that, unlike how I believe it is in the US or UK, strikes and lockouts are illegal during the life of a collective agreement.

The idea of this all, obviously, is to keep industrial peace while still maintaining the rights of organized labour.

[viper37]

No, I meant union instead of collective bargaining agreement.

I guess what I was trying to get at is, if the union goes on strike while "negotiating" a new bargaining agreement, an employer who tried to hire strike breakers would be breaking a Canadian law, right?

only for Quebec afaik, because strike-breakers are allowed at the federal level.