In Defense of the Government
I’ve seen a couple of comments floating around the Internet that make me think my post yesterday might have been misinterpreted.
I wasn’t intending to criticize the government for what I perceive to be its strategy of inaction in dealing with the YRT strike, or to suggest politicians are smugly sitting idle, safe in the knowledge that elections are far away. I really think nothing
is the best thing for the regional and provincial governments to be doing right now. And I’m pleased it’s turned out politicians are somewhat sheltered from public outcry at the moment, as it will give them the leeway to do what they consider best for the Region in the long term even if it causes some additional pain here and now.
Everything I can think of that the government might do strikes me as counterproductive, handing power over to the union, or politically impossible to begin with. Here are my responses to some of the demands I’ve seen from others.
The government should pass back-to-work legislation to end the strike.
This has already been called for by three Conservative MPPs representing parts of York Region, and the response from the Labour Minister was that it is not being considered. I’ve heard rumblings that suggest at least one of the MPPs involved, Frank Klees, is still working on making this happen, so perhaps we will yet see a bill introduced. The Liberals have a minority government at the moment which makes me think it’s possible the Conservatives could get it passed.
If this is what you want, bear in mind the Ontario legislature is not in session until November 21st. It will not end the strike this week.
If your thinking is that back-to-work legislation will punish the drivers, I want to point out that this legislation appears to be what the union wants. What back-to-work legislation normally does is mandate both parties submit to binding arbitration, which is precisely what the union called for itself last week. The benefit to the union is that arbitration is likely to grant it concessions beyond what it is able to negotiate with the contractors directly. (And to be clear, it is the taxpayers and the riders—you and I—who will be forced to pay for those concessions.) It might also help validate to the public the notion that the government is whom the union should be dealing with during a strike, which is something the union would like us to believe as part of its attack on privatization.
The government should fire the drivers and replace them with people who want to work.
Firing striking workers is forbidden by Canadian law, as is hiring workers to replace them. If the government forced the contractors to do either of these things it would be viewed as an impingement on workers’ rights and the outrage and protests would span the country. The political cost would be enormous. This is not going to happen.
The contractors have failed to provide the service they promised. The Region should cancel their contracts.
I’m always surprised by this line of reasoning because it is not the contractors who have gone on strike. Rather, it is the drivers who are failing
to provide service at the moment. And we cannot simply cancel their contract
(see above).
Though I don’t believe we have access to the agreements between the Region and the contractors, I would be very surprised if they didn’t specify procedures for both sides during labour disputes. So it is not necessarily true the contractors have broken any promises, even as the strike continues. (Incidentally, according to the Region contractors are not being paid during the strike, so it is also not as though they are profiting while riders suffer.)
Frankly, I’m amazed by the hostility I’ve seen directed at the contractors. The contractors appear to have been acting in good faith this whole time and still want to continue negotiations, which is the normal process for resolving a strike. It is the union who is trying to do an end-run around the whole thing, breaking off talks with vague
explanations and constantly calling for the government to enter the dispute. Cancelling the contracts would be punishing the side that is actually playing by the rules, not the side that is demanding the rules be changed to their liking.
The government should make public transit in York Region an essential service, like it is in Toronto.
This has been called for by the same MPPs calling for back-to-work legislation. Essential-service designation can only come from the provincial government, so again there is no hope of seeing it before next week.
It seems reasonable transit should be an essential service and this will probably get a lot of discussion once the strike ends. But here again, I’ve seen comments that suggest essential-service designation is something the union is hoping for. I’m not sure yet why this would be the case, except perhaps that losing the right to strike grants them additional power in some other area. So ending the strike this way might be granting a victory to the union, which could have long-term repercussions for the Region. I’ll elaborate on that in a later post.
What else do you think the government should be doing to end the strike? Post a comment below and let me know.
[...] The bill seems so unlikely to pass it’s tempting to view the whole thing as a public-relations stunt on the Conservatives’ part. Back-to-work legislation normally results in just the kind of binding arbitration the union wants and from which it is likely to benefit. This seems like an odd thing for Conservative politicians to support, but perhaps they are doing so precisely because they are confident the bill has no hope of passing. By simply introducing it, they will have won goodwill from their constituents and possibly dulled the roar of riders accusing politicians of doing nothing. [...]