Simon South

Happy new year! I hope 2012 is off to a good start for you and you were able to make a smooth transition back to work this morning.

Of course, anyone who relies on public transit in York Region for their commute would have been disappointed to discover the transit strike is still going on. We are now on day 72 of limited transit service and, although there has been a fair bit of activity in the last couple of weeks, it seems a resolution to the strike is no closer to arriving than it was at the start.

Here’s a quick rundown of what’s happened since my last post about the strike:

• On December 15th the Region announced it would use the tax money saved by keeping the buses parked to provide a month of free transit whenever service resumes. Although some people questioned whether this was the best use of the money, it occurred to me this has the benefit of providing a buffer between passengers and drivers once they are back on the job—probably a good thing considering the anger many passengers will be feeling.

• Shortly before Christmas there were two meetings between contractors and the union locals. On the 21st, First Transit met with Local 1587; on the 23rd, Veolia met with Local 113. Neither meeting was productive, with (predictably) each side accusing the other of not cooperating.

• Also shortly before Christmas, the union announced it would be taking a break from picketing over the holidays. I’m sure I saw a headline to that effect, though I can’t find a source now. Perhaps the announcement was retracted because at the same time the Region announced it would seek an injunction from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice against practices it described as unlawful picketing by union members.

  The timing was impeccable, as it would appear the picketing ended as soon as the Region sought an injunction—as though the picketing had been illegal all along, and the Region brought an end to it. That’s not true. However, the Superior Court did approve the injunction, imposing guidelines on how union members will be allowed to picket at transit terminals and elsewhere.

• On January 1st higher transit fares came into effect, raising the adult cash fare by twenty-five cents to $3.50. It should be noted the fare raise was approved by Council before the union went on strike, though this is little comfort for disgruntled riders who see prices going up while the available service goes down.

• First Transit announced that as a result of the strike it will be temporarily laying off some of its administrative staff effective today. Much is said about the needs of the drivers, but we should remember the private companies to which transit operations are contracted are themselves staffed by ordinary workers who are trying to hold down a job and provide for their family and they, too, are affected by the strike.

I’ll have more to say about these things over the next week or so. I doubt there’ll be much other strike-related news to write about, since each of the sides in the dispute seems to be more deeply entrenched than ever. None of them appears to have much incentive to back down at this point. It feels like we’re simply waiting to see who blinks first.

Here in the eighth week of the York Region transit strike the war on passengers rages, with what appears to be a series of roaming picket lines set up by union members this morning. The Region has warned of major YRT service delays and apparently two bus routes were shut down altogether.

Yesterday (day 50 of the strike, a milestone I regretfully missed noting) saw another occupation in the morning, with union members boarding buses on both the 99 and 77 lines to prevent their use by ordinary riders. The first time we saw this stunt Local 1587 members seemed eager to pin the blame on their brothers and sisters in Local 113. This time, though, both groups were out and proudly harassing commuters:

Striking members of ATU Local 1587 and Local 113 occupied several YRT buses on Monday morning. About 200 workers boarded the 99 northbound and southbound buses, preventing other passengers from boarding.

We’re doing it in a peaceful fashion… for about two to three hours, Tsuji said.

The article tells us Terry Tsuji is part of the Local 1587 bargaining unit, so we can assume its involvement comes from a high level. A fine show of solidarity, I must say. We can safely assume drivers of both locals are now in full support of these ugly tactics, regardless of what they say—otherwise they would have undoubtedly left the union at this point. These are, after all, grown adults we are talking about.

It’s unclear to me what the union has to gain at this point by picketing the riders so aggressively. Its leaders have said several times the purpose is to anger riders into pressuring Council to intervene, but it’s hard to see that happening now. Not only has Council formally declared they will not get involved, the Ontario Legislature is in recess until late February, putting any sort of back-to-work legislation two months away at least (barring an emergency session of the Legislature being called, I suppose). If the purpose were simply to show the union’s ongoing discontent, it could just as easily do that picketing outside its employers’ buildings. How can we interpret the union’s current actions as anything but a deliberate attack on the people it not only claims to serve but whom will be on the hook for funding the lofty new wages and benefits its members are seeking?

On Monday the transit strike in York Region will have lasted seven full weeks. There are still few signs of progress.

Another Try at Negotiating

David Fleischer’s article on YorkRegion.com from earlier this week was updated to report a meeting was held between First Canada and ATU Local 1587 on Tuesday. This would have been the first time members of the two sides have sat down together since Veolia’s meeting with Local 113 last month.

Unfortunately (but much as I predicted), the meeting on Tuesday did not go well. From an article in the Toronto Star:

But Local 1587 head Ray Doyle, who represents employees of York’s other two contracted bus providers, Miller and First Canada, said no talks are scheduled. He said a 20-minute meeting with a conciliator and First Canada earlier this week was a whole lot of hoopla about nothing.

They’re not moving from their position, Doyle said Thursday.

The same article tells us Veolia and Local 113 themselves are preparing to meet on Saturday. Will that session be any more productive?

Meanwhile, at Queen’s Park

Elsewhere there are good things happening for transit riders. On Wednesday Progressive Conservative MPP John O’Toole introduced a bill that would create a provincial tax credit for purchasers of transit passes, similar to the credit that exists at the federal level. From the bill’s text:

Public transit is an important public good for Ontario which must be promoted.

By encouraging people to use public transit, many benefits result. For instance, harmful greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and traffic congestion and gridlock are eased because fewer motorists will be on our province’s roads.

I look forward to seeing our own transit system restored so we can once again enjoy these benefits here in York Region.

I’m away today and will be unable to approve comments until sometime over the weekend. In the meantime, travel safely.

Yesterday saw the striking YRT drivers reveal a new tactic in their ongoing attack on transit users: At Richmond Hill Centre they began boarding the 99 line headed to Finch Station and occupied those buses for (I believe) the two hours a ticket normally lasts, making them difficult if not impossible for regular commuters to use. We’ve seen picketing every morning this week, just as the union promised, but before this nothing so aggressive as to attempt to deny service along an entire route.

Predictably, the response from riders was almost universally negative with many criticizing the union for its outrageous behaviour.

Following this I began to notice an interesting pattern in comments around the Internet. To my blog post yesterday about the occupation, a commenter using the alias YRT Driver wrote:

Please do not keep grouping all the drivers together. First off, there are 2 unions involved here.. 113 and 1587. It was Local 113 that was doing the occupy YRT movement this morning. I don’t even believe that 1587 was out there today at all! Each local and each group of drivers (with each contractor) all have different demands – which I won’t get into.

From a commenter named Adam posting on a CP24 story about the action yesterday:

I would just like to state that the drivers that are doing the riding strike and picketing at night even though their was already a picket during the day is the Local 113/Viva.

The YRT Drivers (Local 1587) Is not doing this. They are only picketing during the days. They did monday and Tuesday at Hill Center – though buses are detoured around there. – and they are not picketing today…

The drivers for the Local 1587 also have no clue where these people are getting the fact they want $30 an hour. they don’t. [York Region CEO] Bill Fisch said for some reason – must have been full of hot air – said they wanted parity with TTC they are not. They are asking for parity around York Region.

The notion of wage parity with other GTA workers doesn’t originate with Mr. Fisch; that was introduced by Local 113, as I am quite confident anyone as familiar with the strike as Adam would be aware. This is the very first time, nearly seven weeks into the strike, I’ve heard anyone claim the strikers are interested only in wage parity across the Region.

Incidentally, that CP24 article is itself careful to distinguish between the two locals, but there’s an indication it may have been told to do so:

After staging rallies and picket lines off an on during the seven-week strike, workers represented by Amalgamated Transit Union Local 113 crammed onto some YRT buses that haven’t been halted by the strike…

Employees represented by ATU Local 1587 don’t have any plans to picket Wednesday, officials told CP24.

Finally, this comment from a woman named Cate Cummings attached to the announcement on the Region’s Facebook page that the occupation of the buses had ended:

Seems Larry Kinnear and his local 113 did another assinine thing. I know for a fact that Ray Doyle and local 1587 had nothing to do with it.

All of this stands out to me because I have so rarely seen a distinction made between the two locals in articles and comments about the strike, outside the context of negotiations with specific contractors or quotes from individuals. Yesterday it felt like I was suddenly seeing this distinction made everywhere. And while I don’t know for a fact the comments above are from Local 1587 members, they don’t read to me like the sort of thing a typical rider would post. (How many ordinary people affected by the strike even know there are two separate locals involved?)

Although I’m definitely reaching here, I’m tempted to think Local 1587 realized what a bad PR move the occupy stunt was yesterday and has since been trying to distance itself from it. It may be concerned about the damage Local 113 has done to the public’s opinion of the strikers, or it may be worried that for some other reason the action could have an impact on negotiations with its employer. Judging from the comments by YRT Driver and Adam, it also seems interested in making sure the public realizes Local 113′s demands are not its own.

Whatever the reason, if my suspicions are correct, this could be a significant event. The union is normally very careful to present a unified front—solidarity is the term they use—and throughout this strike representatives from the two locals have spoken with a unified voice. If this is changing and one local is starting to doubt the other’s actions, it could signal an early end to the strike. If either local were motivated to settle with its employer early it could drastically weaken the other’s case and quickly lead to service being restored everywhere.

Then again, this could turn out to be nothing. There were apparently pickets at Richmond Hill Centre and the bus yard in Vaughan again this morning, but I’ve heard nothing about another occupy stunt. Perhaps Local 113 simply agreed it was not a wise move and we won’t hear about it again.

Today—day 45 of the York Region transit strike—saw a new tactic employed by the drivers against the public. After first picketing at Richmond Hill Centre this morning as they have done the last couple of days, the drivers began boarding the 99 bus headed to Finch Station, filling the buses so they couldn’t take regular passengers. For those not familiar with our transit system the 99 serves the southern end of Yonge Street, connecting York Region to Toronto, and is one of a few critical bus routes still operating. It has seen overcrowding since the strike began and the occupation of these buses—which, according to CP24, was intended to last for hours—would have made this morning’s commute impossible for many riders.

So the drivers have found a powerful new way of hurting their former passengers, and we are only halfway through the week. The union promised we would see picketing every morning. What could it have in store for tomorrow and Friday?

As maddening as this is, once again I urge everybody affected by these actions to stay calm and remain patient. The union is trying to anger you into demanding intervention from the regional government, whom it is desperately trying to get involved in negotiations against the councillors’ interest and our own. If you do this, you are proving to the union these picketing tactics work. And like the screaming child in the toy store who gets his way, this will only encourage more of the same behaviour down the road.

The Status of Negotiations

On Monday the Region announced the three contractors would be reaching out to the union in an attempt to resume negotiations, and it called for the striking drivers to return to work immediately while the two sides seek an agreement.

The union has responded, saying it is willing to return to the table but will remain on strike until an agreement is reached—or until the contractors give up and agree to arbitration instead, an alternative the union is, of course, still enthusiastically promoting.

Interestingly, both sides are accusing the other of having broken off negotiations first. From an article on YorkRegion.com Monday:

It’s kind of a ridiculous statement, Veolia spokesperson Val Michael said. We’ve been asking them all along to sit down and negotiate (and) we’re still ready.

From the union’s response, quoting Local 113 president Bob Kinnear:

We tried to resume negotiations weeks ago but were rebuffed by the employers, just so the record is clear on that point.

I’ve been assuming the contractors have been willing all this time to resume talks. Was I wrong? It’s against the contractors’ interests to agree to arbitration, but they’re also not getting paid while the buses are off the road. It seems natural they would have been eager to get discussions going again. What would they have been holding out for?

It’s likely the two sides have much different expectations for negotiations, though, which might explain the finger-pointing. The contractors already know how much money they’ll be receiving from the Region; their compensation is fixed once their contract is awarded. I understand that as a result, negotiating for them mostly involves adjusting the allocation of a fixed budget for labour among wages, benefits and whatever other compensation the drivers receive. They are simply changing how the compensation pie is divided up.

This is not what the union wants: It wants a bigger pie altogether, in order to bring the compensation for York Region drivers closer to that of drivers in the surrounding areas. Consequently, the union is likely to blow off (or describe as not serious) any offer from a contractor that doesn’t provide a significant increase overall. (We’ve been told it is demanding a 16% raise in wages this year, for instance.) But the contractors are equally unlikely to take seriously any request along these lines. In the meantime, both sides say the other just isn’t cooperating.

This means while it’s tempting to view this new call for negotiations as a sign of progress, it seems unlikely much will come of it. Mr. Kinnear shares my skepticism. As reported by Newstalk 1010:

Kinnear says he remains hopeful that a deal will be done, but that he’s not holding out hope a deal will be done soon.

Today marks the start of the seventh week of the transit strike in York Region. Amazingly, there has still been no real progress towards a resolution in this time.

Council Takes a Stand

Two weeks ago, a bill that would legislate the striking transit drivers back to work was introduced in the Ontario Legislature but failed to pass second reading. The Liberal government explained they could not support the bill in part because York Region Council had not yet asked the province to intervene.

On Friday, Council formally announced they will not be making this request. Instead, they are demanding the union return to the bargaining table and resume negotiations with its employers, which is the normal process for reaching an agreement.

This means we will not see the strike ended through back-to-work legislation. In fact Council has said it will not intervene in the dispute at all, answering the union’s calls for the government to get involved with a resounding no.

The Union Strikes Back

The union’s response to this has been to cause even more trouble for riders. Recall this quote from a CBC article last week:

Local union president Ray Doyle urged frustrated commuters to help them get the transit service back up and running by pressuring politicians to agree to meet them at the bargaining table.

One union organizer promised the disruptions were far from over.

We’re not just going to picket once in a blue moon. We’re going to be out there. There will be more disruption, it will escalate, he said.

The union has kept its promise. According to CityTV, union members set up picket lines at multiple sites this morning, including Finch Station and Richmond Hill Centre (both important transfer points for riders) and outside the bus yard in Vaughan. Riders were affected both ways: Not only were buses delayed leaving the yard by up to ten minutes each—twice as long as before—they were delayed again after reaching one of the two terminals. Apparently even certain GO routes were affected by the picketing.

Not only has the union made its picketing more disruptive, it has promised to picket every morning this week.

Remember that the purpose of all this is to recruit the public in the union’s attack on Council, just as Mr. Doyle is requesting. Once the union has the government at the table it will be able to wield much greater power over how its contracts are awarded, at a cost (possibly tremendous) to us taxpayers and riders. And I strongly believe this has been the union’s goal from the very start of this strike.

Thankfully, Council has made the decision not to intervene. What, then, is the union hoping to achieve by continuing to picket? Presumably it’s hoping a new groundswell of anger from the riders will force Council to change its mind. I think this is unlikely to happen, though. What is certain is that the picketing will cause a great deal of pain to riders in the interim.

I understand many are angry about the disruption to their commute, and it sounds as though things are going to get even worse over the next few days. But the best thing we can do right now is to be patient and try to wait this out. Placing an angry phone call to your councillor or MPP is what the union wants you to do. Do that and you are allowing yourself to be manipulated. The most effective way to bring the picketing to an end is to show the union it is having no effect.

The union, frustrated that it is not getting what it wants, has decided to lash out at the riders and taxpayers from whom it is demanding a 16% raise this year. Council has decided to stand up to this abuse and deny the union’s attempts at circumventing the normal bargaining process. Please support the councillors in doing this.

Today—day 39 of the York Region transit strike—saw more action from the union as members staged picket lines at Richmond Hill Centre and Bernard Terminal, as well as at the Region’s headquarters and its building at 50 High Tech Road in Richmond Hill. This is the second such action this week; Tuesday saw picketers outside the bus yard in Vaughan.

It seems the union may be starting to use other tactics as well to build up pressure on politicians. The sidebar to a YorkRegion.com article by David Fleischer reports Richmond Hill residents are receiving an automated phone call asking whether they believe regional councillors should be involved in settling the strike. If the respondent indicates yes, he or she is transferred to a councillor’s office line. Presumably this is the same call a commenter on my blog reported receiving a few days ago. Indications are it is the striking ATU locals that are behind this polling.

The union has made it very clear it wants politicians to become involved in negotiations, and we see how it is attempting to recruit the public to help it achieve this goal. As I wrote on Tuesday, we should think carefully before getting involved this way. Pressuring politicians to intervene may get the buses on the road sooner, yes, but there is reason to believe it is part of a larger strategy the union is executing that could shift the balance of power in its favour over the long term. And that could prove very costly for us taxpayers and riders.

On the Subject of Arbitration

Some time ago I linked to another article by Jeff Jacoby, a conservative op-ed columnist, on the subject of public-sector unions and the kind of binding arbitration the union is calling for in the YRT strike. Here’s a passage that stands out to me (emphasis mine):

As state and local governments have learned to their chagrin, once binding arbitration becomes part of the collective-bargaining process, it doesn’t facilitate compromise—it undermines it. Unions quickly figure out that they risk nothing by making extreme salary or benefit demands, rejecting reasonable counteroffers, and then waiting for the ensuing impasse to go to an arbitrator. How can they lose? They know that the arbitrator will almost never award public employees less than the government’s final offer.

Does this sound familiar? The letter from Miller Transit alleged Local 1587 was seeking a 16% raise for its members this year, a demand it could hardly have expected the contractor to agree to. And it’s often seemed to me neither of the striking locals was interested in making progress through negotiation, instead pursuing arbitration as their preferred solution rather than the solution of last resort. Is it possible the union never planned to negotiate in good faith, but has been trying to strong-arm us all into a resolution that favours itself at our own expense?

If so, does it make sense to say negotiations have failed?

This morning, transit riders attempting to commute using the 40% of the system still operating in York Region were again frustrated by union members picketing the bus yard in Vaughan. Buses were being held for five minutes each, which presumably resulted in the same hour-long delays riders experienced two weeks ago.

The union is promising to make this a regular occurrence. From the CBC:

Local union president Ray Doyle urged frustrated commuters to help them get the transit service back up and running by pressuring politicians to agree to meet them at the bargaining table.

One union organizer promised the disruptions were far from over.

We’re not just going to picket once in a blue moon. We’re going to be out there. There will be more disruption, it will escalate, he said.

The union’s strategy in all this is gradually becoming apparent to me, and it’s a strategy I understand has been used for some time by unions in the public sector. It’s also one the public-private transit model used in York Region has so far largely foiled, which is undoubtedly one of the main reasons the union is calling for that model to be abandoned.

Key to this strategy is the ability to influence labour policy through electioneering. Jeff Jacoby, a conservative op-ed columnist, has written a number of articles critical of public-sector unions. In What Public-Sector Unions have Wrought, he writes about the differences between collective bargaining in the private and public sectors. The most significant difference, he claims, is that unions in the public sector have the ability to reward and punish politicians—their own employers—through the use of political force. Quoting Roger Lowenstein in his book, While America Aged:

This is because public unions can organize politically and influence elections, which is to say, they can vote their bosses out of office. This gives them direct clout over the people who determine their benefits. By contrast, the [United Auto Workers], for all its muscle, cannot vote the CEO of General Motors out of a job.

Politicians thus face huge temptations to increase benefits. Even though this is costly in the long run, in the short run officeholders are rewarded at the ballot box.

The reason this has not worked well for the union in York Region—witness the comparatively low wages drivers are paid here—is the same reason it does not work for the UAW: Although union members and other York Region residents elect their councillors, none of us elected Veolia, Miller or First Transit, the private companies who operate the transit lines. Neither can we simply vote these companies out of office.

And this, I believe, is why it’s so important to union leaders that the Region join them at the bargaining table: Once the politicians are involved the union will be able to wield the force of public opinion against them to get what it wants, threatening any refusal to meet its demands with failure in the next election. So long as the union is forced to negotiate directly with the contractors, it is largely without this power.

But not completely. Already many people are blaming either regional Council or the provincial government for the strike having lasted this long. A letter to the editor recently published on YorkRegion.com is representative:

If YRT general manager Richard Leary cannot act to restore the service he’s paid to oversee, perhaps the region would do well to replace him… I have little doubt the taxpayers will be happy to replace many councillors come election time if the region doesn’t take action.

The Conservative MPPs who introduced back-to-work legislation last week clearly recognized an opportunity to wield this power for their party’s own ends. They’ve been very careful to pin the blame for the bill’s failure on the Liberal government. From a press release issued by MPP Peter Shurman, who introduced the bill in parliament:

As far as I am concerned the McGuinty Government’s vote against my Private Member’s Bill to end the York Region Transit strike says that they are not concerned about the personal and economic hardship that our residents are experiencing as a result of the labour disruption, said Shurman. I am disappointed that the Liberal government has treated York Region as a second class citizen and refused to give our residents the same protection against transit strikes that those living and working in the City of Toronto enjoy.

The strategy is working; I am already seeing comments on Twitter from people saying they won’t be voting Liberal again.

The irony in all this is that it is the politicians these people are protesting who have so far been responsible for keeping the union’s power contained.

Now consider again this line from the CBC article quoted above:

Local union president Ray Doyle urged frustrated commuters to help them get the transit service back up and running by pressuring politicians to agree to meet them at the bargaining table.

Of course he did. This is a key part of the union’s strategy. Once it has politicians cowed with the threat of the loss of their seat the union will find it much easier to demand, and probably get, whatever it wants.

If this is not what you want, please stop calling for politicians to intervene in the strike. So far Council and the provincial government have successfully frustrated the union’s political aspirations by doing nothing. And if you are concerned about what the transit system might look like and what it might cost us once the union is in charge, please join me in allowing politicians to continue doing just that.

Yesterday saw the debate in the Ontario Legislature of the back-to-work bill introduced Wednesday by MPP Peter Shurman. It was defeated by vote, 37 to 67. All the Conservative MPPs in York Region voted for the bill; all the Liberal MPPs in the Region voted against it.

If you have the time and inclination, I recommend reading through the transcript of the debate in the hansard. Alternatively, David Fleischer has written a good summary for YorkRegion.com.

This time my predictions were correct: Not only did the bill die in second reading but—to nobody’s surprise, really—the Conservatives did indeed take the opportunity to politick against the Liberals. And not just them but regional Council, too. MPP Frank Klees:

I stand here with my colleagues and I say to the regional government of York region: You have failed the people who elected you. I stand here and I say that whether it is the union, who at least is saying, “Bring in an arbitrator so that we can resolve this”—we now have a Liberal government here, probably all four members who are representing people in York region, who are saying, along with the regional government, “We will wash our hands as well.” Shame on the people who are hearing on a day-to-day basis from the people who are suffering.

The Liberals’ position is that negotiations between the contractors and the union are still the best way towards a resolution, and that it would be inappropriate for the provincial government to intervene when Council has not yet requested it do so. MPP Helena Jaczek:

But we have been able to explain to our constituents exactly the process that is being undergone here. We on this side of the House—in this party—clearly believe in collective bargaining and negotiations in good faith as being the best way of settling this type of situation…

I not only respect my constituents, but I respect the duly elected members of regional council. They have not requested that our government move forward. They have not made the type of deputations that the city of Toronto did in the disruption of services from the TTC.

For their part, the NDP seemed to be generally in support of the bill, except for the part designating transit an essential service. MPP Gilles Bisson:

I’ll agree with the member who just spoke [Peter Shurman]. But I think what the member should have done is brought in a bill that deals with arbitration and back-to-work. I think if the member had done that, we probably would be in a position to be able to support that bill.

Not surprisingly, considering the NDP’s union backing, Mr. Bisson took the opportunity to repeat the ATU locals’ call for arbitration:

So there is an option that is open, and that option, I think the fair one, would have been to say that we need to have binding arbitration of some type in order to be able to get the parties to go before an arbitrator in order to settle this at the arbitration table. Will the union be totally happy with what an arbitrator has to say? No. Will the employer be completely happy with what the arbitrator has to say? No. But that’s what arbitration is all about. It’s about saying, What’s your position? What’s your position? and the arbitrator going away and saying, Okay, I’m going to look at this from both perspectives, and I’m going to find a saw-off somewhere in the middle. That’s what arbitration is all about.

Actually, there’s reason to expect the outcome of arbitration will be not quite as equitable as Mr. Bisson would have us believe.

Who Won?

I’m having a hard time figuring out who got what they wanted in this. Clearly not the riders who were hoping to see a legislated end to the strike, although perhaps that could still happen. I suppose the contractors are relieved not to have arbitration forced upon them, as they have the most to lose from that process. The rest is unclear to me.

Did the Conservative MPPs backing the bill get what they wanted? I’m struggling to reconcile the bill’s contents with what I know about conservative ideology. Like I said yesterday, it’s tempting to think it was never the MPPs’ intention to get the bill passed, but only to earn goodwill from their constituents and gain political ammunition against the Liberals (ahead of a non-confidence vote, perhaps?). If that’s not the case, I’m not sure what the MPPs’ motivation could have been.

Did the union get what it wanted? I don’t know if it wanted the bill passed or not. It would have forced the contractors to arbitration, which we know is something it does want. But it would also have made transit in York Region an essential service, and I’m not sure whether the union considers that good or bad. On the whole I think the bill’s defeat is most likely a disappointment for the union, as it is another opportunity missed to have arbitration imposed and the union remains stuck not wanting to resume negotiations but without a clear alternative.

Did the taxpayers benefit? Those who are following my blog know I’m against arbitration being imposed. My concerns are, first of all, that transit costs need to be managed carefully; and secondly, that a clear victory for the union in this strike might only encourage more of the same behaviour from it down the road. Whether you as a taxpayer consider the bill’s defeat a loss or not probably depends on what you feel it is worth paying to see the strike end at this point.

What’s Next?

I’m not sure what the next steps are here—I’m learning about this myself as I go along. Presumably the bill, as it existed, is now dead. My guess is it is still possible we may see a new bill introduced, perhaps one without the essential-services language other members objected to. We won’t know until next Monday at the earliest as the legislature is adjourned until then.

Mr. Shurman did note the legislature is only in session until December 8th, after which the MPPs are away on winter recess. That means if back-to-work legislation isn’t passed in the next two weeks we may not see any further debate on it until the legislature returns, late in February. Unless the union budges in that time it could be a very cold winter for transit riders.

As of today it has been a full month since the buses stopped running in York Region. Little progress has been made toward a resolution in this time. However, there have been two important events in the last day.

The ATU Pickets the Riders, Again

This morning (as I write this, in fact) union members are staging a huge picket line at Finch Station in Toronto, a busy terminal that serves as a transfer point for riders commuting to or from the Region. I imagine it is pure chaos down there.

The union claims the action is motivated in part by comments from York Region MPP Frank Klees regarding a lack of picketing. Ray Doyle, president of ATU Local 1587, is upfront about the union’s intention and the impact the picketing will have on riders:

We have generally avoided inconveniencing the travelling public with picket lines but that strategy seems to annoy Mr. Klees. No problem. We will correct that.

This sounds very petty to me. Also, the union’s last picket disrupted riders’ morning commute as well, causing delays of up to an hour or more. That is (by my reckoning) two of four such actions by the union that’s wound up punishing riders, making me question Mr. Doyle’s assertion it has generally avoided that type of behaviour.

Supposedly the picketing today is also meant to protest the refusal of the private bus contractors to end the strike immediately by agreeing to binding arbitration—the oft-repeated and disingenuous claim I wrote about on Monday. Naturally the union is silent on how it, too, has so far refused to end the strike. I particularly like this quote from Bob Kinnear, president of ATU Local 113:

It’s mysterious why not a single York Region politician is in favour of voluntary arbitration, which would end the strike, says Kinnear.

Readers of my blog might not find this quite so mysterious.

If you saw the picket line at Finch Station today, please post a comment below and tell us what the scene was like.

Meanwhile, in the Provincial Legislature

Many riders got their wish yesterday when back-to-work legislation was introduced in parliament by MPP Peter Shurman, one of the three Conservative York Region MPPs who promised this legislation some time ago. A transcript of the bill’s introduction is in the hansard.

Debate on the bill is scheduled for this afternoon, sometime after 1:00. You’ll be able to watch the proceedings live on the Web.

People have speculated on the likelihood of this bill passing and what purpose it might actually serve. The Liberal Labour Minister has said she will not support the bill, and while the Liberals have only a minority government the Conservatives do not have enough seats to pass the bill on their own. To do this they’d need cooperation from the NDP, and back-to-work legislation is not something I would normally expect that party to support.

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.

We’ll see what happens this afternoon but I expect the bill will die a quick death, followed by Conservatives capitalizing on the opportunity to lash out at the Liberals over their apparent failure to take action for Region residents.