Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi
Are you feeling pretty dismayed?
I’m just kidding powdrejunkie but I couldn’t resist. 
The bolded here is the important piece that a lot of people don’t seem to fully understand. Even teachers and other Union members.
Unions by law have a duty to fairly represent their members. Members engaging in an illegal strike would give their employers just cause for termination. So to avoid any liability for misrepresentation they’re not going to ask their members to participate in an illegal strike without first making them aware of all of the potential repercussions. Once their members realize that they could lose their jobs you’re almost certainly going to see a meaningful drop off in support for that kind of strike action. Support could also be hampered by the charges and legal costs the Union risks facing for the unfair labour practices associated with engaging in an illegal strike, as it could cost a significant amount of money that their members may not be in favour of spending. There are likely some cases where they could even bankrupt locals.
This is why it is so crucial to have the general public supporting Unions. When the government knows voters won’t forgive them for allowing a strike like that to occur and putting tens of thousands of workers at risk of losing their jobs for doing the right thing the government is going to be inclined to avoid doing so or to fix it quickly if they end up in that position. When private businesses know that customers won’t support them if they fire employees for partaking in this type of collective action they are less likely to do so and more likely to put pressure on the government to fix the problem so that their business isn’t affected. Win/win.
When Unions know that voters and customers have their backs they have more leverage to take on these fights with because the lower the risk of job loss the higher the likelihood is that members would be willing to roll the dice.
So if you really want this to happen you’d be best served by starting a public petition stating that the signees will support unions in their fight by committing to not buy products from any businesses that fire employees for supporting this fight and to vote out the UCP if they don’t fix both this problem and the labour code they gutted.
Or you can keep complaining online about Unions getting your hopes up and not doing enough for you in the end…despite someone warning you to not get your hopes up in the first place  |
Yes I am feeling pretty dismayed - I'm not sure this actually was a positive step forward, because they showed their hand that they envision 'a joyous day or two' or protest...sometime in the 'weeks or months' to come. If I'm the UCP, I'm not feeling concerned about this response at all.
I also think it was probably a mistake to make their boldest 'soundbite' statements so overtly political. Which might sound silly, but isn't that pretty presumptuous on behalf of their members? It's odd to me that they seemed reluctant to make stronger statements about a general strike because they want to run it by membership, but had no problem getting pretty darn specific about toppling the government and attacking Smith. Not that I disagree with any of that personally, but I'm guessing there are plenty of union members who voted UCP and will continue to do so...nevermind the general public. Too much preaching to the converted...IMO it would have been much better to really drill down on the NWC situation
But I am impressed with your crystal ball to know that this "unprecedented response" was going to be a damp squib. It's also an unprecedented opportunity to improve broad support for unions...plenty of keyboard warriors like me think they're pissing it away...but maybe the less politically engaged will somehow see it differently?