I may not know much about this CUPE strike, but what I do know is that it has gone too far.
Rhetoric and crafty statements by our leaders – both municipal and labour – may make great sensational news, however they resolve nothing leaving residents caught in the cross-fire.
The majority of CUPE strikers are peaceful – we can’t forget this.
As the saying goes, in every bushel, there are a few bad apples, whose actions, either alleged or real, are not representative of the majority.
While Mayor Francis professes his new found admiration for the democratic process, (Agreeing to binding, third-party arbitration would deny councillors a say and effectively rob more than 200,000 Windsor citizens of their democratic voice, said Francis), he overlooks a recent city council decision in Ottawa to send all collective bargaining disagreements to arbitration:
A motion to send all collective bargaining disagreements to an arbitrator breezed through council, without a single “no” vote.
Acting Mayor, Beacon Hill-Cyrville Ward Councillor, Michel Bellemare said the city is seeking “a more harmonious tone” in labour relations.
The way I see it, the Mayor and council have three choices.
1. Return to the bargaining table now.
I’m not interested in an “impasse.” I’m interested in our elected officials hammering out a deal no matter if it takes 50 or 200 hours of negotiating. Simply because a mediator says there is no movement is a cop-out in of itself. Bring your blankets and pillows; three weeks supply of food and negotiate – that’s what residents pay our leaders to do.
2. Take the last offer directly to the membership.
Stop “investigating your options.” The Mayor and council have been “investigating” their options with the DRIC process for months now in their border fight. Either do it, or move on.
3. Take it to binding arbitration.
Given the “impasse,” no matter how unpalatable it may be, if the city’s position is as water-tight as the Mayor claims, what is the Mayor and council worried about? Given the impasse, unless the above (no. 2) is undertaken, I see no other alternative.
What this strike is indicative of is a clear lack of leadership – on all accounts.
Gord Henderson wrote on May 2, 2009 that, “I’m told negotiations came tantalizing close to a made-in-Windsor settlement,” (And we can suspect who told him this), but blaming Sid Ryan for its alleged failure is also a cop-out.
Bring that “settlement” back then, whatever it was.
What this strike has turned into is a he-said, she-said, let’s get the public opinion on our side, media circus.
It’s time for our leaders, both municipal and labour, to rein it in because I fear, if the current propaganda war continues, someone will be seriously hurt or worse.
This is not a popularity contest.
This is about our community.
Check the egos at the door and get on with the business of getting our workers back to providing the services we pay for.
Chris Schnurr
Carol Kosowan LL.B., B.A. (Law), B.A. (Policy)
This has not been a good strike on any level; you are right. In fact, the behaviour on both sides is scarily reminiscent of the original strikes of 60 years ago. The ones which put the unions on the map in the first place. There was good reason and cause in those days.
The corporate culture was so devoid of social conscience back then that unions, set up and established by the people, played an important role in bringing dignity and respect to the working class. We should be, in many ways, thankful for that movement which brought us the lifestyle we have today.
Unfortunately, over the years, the core union did not evolve with changing times; their combative methods became more of a nuisance than anything else. Subsequent generations have been disconnected by time. The union’s expectation of blind entitlement did not put them in favourable light with the public at large. This is why they are losing this PR war. On the other hand we have a Mayor who is more interested in grinding his boot heel into the temple of workers in an earily similar style that was employed by the automotive bosses of the twenties and thirties.
This is also clearly wrong. The public is capricious as well.
Their new found forum for electronic commentary shows this. The vast majority of commenters argues from the single vantage of “We don’t have this so why should they?”
This is a very ignorant argument. It does nothing for the elevation and betterment of society as a whole.
You are right Chris. This thing has gone on too long and it is losing purpose. One way or another everyone has to get back to the table and take their lumps along the way. There is no win, win any more.
Even if the Mayor is successful in his bid to crush the union; even if he were to hold onto his chair for another term his tenure would become lame.
He has lost the good will and faith required from his civic employees. They don’t like him now and they will never give him their all.
On the other hand, the union has to come to realistic terms with respect to what they are asking for. Until they do, they are only impoverishing themselves. If all parties came close during their last round of talks then YES…that is where they have to pick up again.
This has been a useless battle. Too much damage has been done for a victory from any camp.
Everyone has to capitulate their losses and get back to work. That is the only healthy solution.
Your first mistake is having faith in “Leaders” as if they are somehow anointed with ‘expert’ skills in something or other. What good are leaders? Why do we need them? Why do we listen to them, especially when they are demonstrably, wrong? Leaders do not ‘lead’ per se, they follow, supposedly they follow will of the people, usually about 10 to 20 years behind the times. That’s why our national leaders are mostly crusty old white male fossils from a bygone era operating on the basis of obsolete notions and stupid ideas. That’s why we the sheeple always, ALWAYS, have to drag our ‘leaders’ into the modern era, not vice versa.
So-called ‘professionals’ are thought to represent precise, scientific thinking – this is what they are taught in universities. But this is simply not true, unless we are talking about hard sciences.
What particular skills does a union leader need? A big mouth? A natural bully? Being popular among ones cohort? Do you really believe popularity contests (election) equip a person for ‘leadership’??
I think your tin foil hat shorted out.
kirwoodderby: The City has essentially agreed to everything but wage increases and lifetime post-retirement benefits for new hires.
They have moved on post-retirement benefits in that new hires will receive benefits until age 65. I don’t see the City moving on this. This is their final offer on post-retirement benefits.
In terms of wages, the City is offering periodic payments over the life of the contract. These are not wage increases per se. There is room for negotiation here, but in the scheme of things, it’s a minor issue.
I would hardly call the above an attempt to “crush the union” on the Mayor’s part. Under the circumstances CUPE has been offered a very good contract. They should take it and get back to work. Council will have to work hard to win back their trust – and they should work hard to do that.
I agree that CUPE has to come to realistic terms. They are nowhere near that. The fact that after 4 days of negotiating, CUPE came back with an offer the included lifetime post-retirement benefits, wage increase AND job security during the contract shows how detached from reality they are.
just read Alan Halberstat’s blog and you will see why we can never agree to binding arbitration.
To V.C.
No argument from me that there was always a good offer on the table. The Mayor’s zeal with this issue is what seems fishy and disconnected. One gets the impression that he is trying to earn brownie points from the Feds. This thing looks like the trailer for a much grander federal scene. Perhaps CUPE National is the intended target. We’ll have to wait it out I guess.