[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

But there is a positive element to vocally manifesting your approval to something - especially when it is contentious - rather than letting the undercurrent of fear, that so many employers are happy to diffuse, to be individually felt. 

Rambo fully agrees with you.  And all the FTQ leadership.

So long as union votes are "vocal" and people can be easily identified, union terror and intimidation will continue.  Just as with students union, where they re-pass the votes 2-3 times until they get the strike vote they want. Or they move it to a small room with insufficient place for everyone who wants to vote.

It's not like democracy can't be perverted.  And the last two years have shown us that, at least one major unions isn't too keen on democracy when it doesn't give the desired results.

[viper37]

Bullshit.  There are strong laws against an employer doing anything to dissuade an employee from joining a union.  If the labour board finds an employer is guilty of an unfair labour practice - such as this - then certification is automatic.

And I could reply "Bullshit. There are strong laws against union members doing anything to pressure employees into joining a union. If the labour board finds that accreditation cards have been been tampered with, then a secret vote is automatic". Which is how it is supposed to be done in Quebec.

as we have seen yesterday, this law will never be effective.  If they couldn't convict Rambo, I doubt they'll be able to convict anyone.  "Surprisingly" all of the witnesses testimony was rejected by the judge who sided with Gauthier.
It's official, there's no union intimidation in Quebec, it's all lies.

Where as... I can remember a few judgements against employers for anti-union practice.  Like this one:
http://lapresseaffaires.cyberpresse.ca/economie/commerce-de-detail/200909/23/01-904554-wal-mart-en-appellera-de-sa-condamnation.php

Or the public pressure against Wal-Mart or Couche-Tard.  Where's the public pressure against union intimidation?  Aside the bogus inquiry, I mean?  Anger is directed at the Liberal party, not the union. 

[viper37]

here's another inspiring tale of unionism in Quebec:
http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2012/03/23/la-ministre-ordonne-une-enquete

(Summary: workers pay 150-250$ cash each week to a union leader to have the right to work, or else they're thrown out of the site)

[Josephus]

That's not unionism though. That's just mob led extortion under another name.

[citizen k]

That's just mob led extortion under another name.

Which is borne out of the natural evolution of unionism.

[Ancient Demon]

Does that make the process of union accreditation exempt from problems? Of course not. But there is a positive element to vocally manifesting your approval to something - especially when it is contentious - rather than letting the undercurrent of fear, that so many employers are happy to diffuse, to be individually felt.

Perhaps I misunderstand, but are you implying that the secret ballot method is unfairly biased in favour of the employer? That employees are more subject to intimidation and fear under this method than the other?

[Josephus]

Ladies and gentlemen, Canada's new Leader of the Opposition and our next Dear Leader, prime minister.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1151416--ndp-leadership-thomas-mulcair-grabs-lead-in-first-ballot?bn=1

[crazy canuck]

Bullshit.  There are strong laws against an employer doing anything to dissuade an employee from joining a union.  If the labour board finds an employer is guilty of an unfair labour practice - such as this - then certification is automatic.

And I could reply "Bullshit. There are strong laws against union members doing anything to pressure employees into joining a union.

You could but you didnt because you would be wrong.

There are no laws which prohibit a union from convincing an employee from joining a union.   Indeed quite the reverse.  The law allows unions to have the freedom to communicate with any non union employee a union may wish to speak to for the purpose of convincing that employee to join the union so long as it is not done on the employers property.

It is the employer who is prohibited from attempting to persuade the employee not to join a union.

Both sides are prohibited from engaging in acts of coercion but that is little comfort to an employee who must disclose how they are voting both to the union and most importantly to his/her co-workers (some of whom will be actively organizing on behalf of the union).  One must have very large blinders to ignore the ramifications of that.

If the labour board finds that accreditation cards have been been tampered with, then a secret vote is automatic". Which is how it is supposed to be done in Quebec.

That is astounding to me.  Under Quebec law a union can illegally alter a vote and the only remedy is that a fair vote is then held?  Where is the decincentive to unions trying to cheat?  If they get caught the worst they get is a redo.  I suspect you may be missing other remedies in the legislation.

[crazy canuck]

Ladies and gentlemen, Canada's new Leader of the Opposition and our next Dear Leader, prime minister.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1151416--ndp-leadership-thomas-mulcair-grabs-lead-in-first-ballot?bn=1

I thought that was the best choice for them.  That is probably why I am now reading so many reports of NDP people leaving.   

[Barrister]

I passed the Wildrose bus this morning on my way to work.

Sadly they have removed the tire cleavage already.

[crazy canuck]

So much for their chance at electoral success.

[Neil]

So much for their chance at electoral success.

Maybe they can split the vote enough for a proper party to win.

[Jacob]

Maybe they can split the vote enough for a proper party to win.

I'm not up on the current state of Neilism in Albertan politics. What's a proper party in this context?

[Barrister]

Maybe they can split the vote enough for a proper party to win.

I'm not up on the current state of Neilism in Albertan politics. What's a proper party in this context?

I was wondering that myself.

[Josephus]

So much for their chance at electoral success.