The Rants of Issachar

I had an interesting discussion last weekend on a new blog I found.

The initial post was on the TTC strike in Toronto which led to a general discussion on unions. After my comment, L-girl who describes herself as a progressive said that she found it "refreshing" that a conservative would say that unions are necessary. The implication being that it's unusual for conservatives to think this.

So that's the starting point of this post. It may be a rambling one, but it's my blog. :)


My original statement was this:

Unions are necessary if only for the threat that workers could unionize. If unions went the way of the dodo, employees in Canada for be fine only very, very briefly. Their are definitely employers who would treat employees with respect even without the threat of strikes or unions. But they'd be driven out of business by the less ethical who would be able to undercut them. (And guess who everyone would have to work for then?)

That's still a good summary of what I think. Unions are necessary.

This is not to say that unions are universally good or that I like everything about BC labour laws. I think that in some respects our labour laws are far too pro-union.


For example, the rules governing how a company can become unionized. It should be very simple. If most employees vote for a union then unionize, if most employees don't, then don't unionize. (And the criteria for employees getting rid of their union should be the same). And obviously it has to be a secret ballot.

But that isn't what the law says in BC.

Businesses can be unionized simply by getting a majority of employees to sign a card supporting the union. Think about this for a moment. You "win the election" simply by getting the majority to sign a card. The possibilities for abuse are obvious. Firstly, to vote against the union you need to do so by telling the union promoter that you don't want a union. Secondly, one can easily see a worker signing a card just to make the organizer go away. Would that be a fair way to elect a government? No secret ballot there either. Turn it around for a moment. Would it be a good idea if management could get rid of a union by approaching employees one at a time and asking them to sign an "anti-union card"?

The purpose of these union cards should simply be to act as a petition. If you get enough signatures, then you have a secret ballot vote on unionization. (The names on the "petition" stay between the labour board and the union of course, the employer has no need to know).

But again, that's not what the law in BC says, but if you say that we need to change this law, thus making it harder for unions to sign up new businesses you are portrayed as anti-union.


There are also unjust restrictions on how an employer can argue against a union. An employer can't say to their employees that a union is not in their interest and then explain why. That qualifies as "creating a hostile environment", and if the employer is deemed to have created such a thing, the labour board can impose a union without having any vote by the employees at all. Again, how fair is that for the employees? They can only be told the advantages of unionization. Their employer can't tell them the disadvantages.



The other problem I have with unions is forced membership. Once a business is unionized, no employee can refuse to join the union without losing their job. Again, how fair is that? I remember something my great-Aunt Helen said about unions. She was a teacher and she believed that it was ethically wrong to strike. (I don't agree, but it's a legitimate stance). I'm not sure how she felt about joining a union, but unions have pretty severe penalties for members who refuse to join a strike. Ultimately such people can lose their jobs. She now has a school named in her honour, but today's labour laws would require her to choose between her ethics and her job. That's just not right.

Now on a practical level I can see why the labour enforces membership on all employees at a unionized business. The dirty tricks an unethical employer could employ without such a law are rather obvious. But we should not lose sight of the fact that the labour code enforces an injustice, even if it is necessary to do so.


I haven't got to what I think of strikes yet, but it's after noon and I want to go outside. I'll get around to posting that part later...