Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Given some union tactics in terms of getting people to sign up for a card, i think there should still be a certification vote to allow those card-holders to vote under secret ballot. Getting the card is one thing, voting is different - or at least it should be.

The unfair practices = remedial certification was certainly rare (and determined by the ALRB as an egregious stick), but again there should still be a vote. Also, it really turned some certification drives into a question of baiting a company into doing/saying the wrong thing while threatening the push for remedial legislation.

When did the ALRB determine that remedial certification was an “egregious stick”?

How can a Union “bait” a company into doing something illegal? Jedi mind trick?

A Union would have a pretty hard time threatening to apply for a remedial certification and an even more challenging time to get the ALRB to award one if an employer didn’t violate the code.

As for the need for a vote, since you are clearly knowledgeable in labour relations matters you must be aware that the employees could freely apply for decertification if they really didn’t want a Union representing them so I’m not understanding how you consider it to be a hardship.

You’re free to elaborate on the “tactics” that Unions use to “force” employees to sign and fill out a card with all of their personal information and pay the $2 fee which was required under the code, though I expect none of that would explain why employees wouldn’t contact the board once the notice of the application is posted in their workplace(which is required by law) to complain about the hypothetical tactics you’re claiming could be used. You’re also free to elaborate on how those tactics are more effective in influencing an employee than their employer’s threats/tactics to dissuade them from wanting to join a Union.

For big companies with their own LR specialists, or lawyers on speed-dial, its totally fine; but i have seen some small businesses get pushed around with the threat of remedial certification.

It would be a pretty idle threat if the employer didn’t actually violate the code, no?

I get the sense that you don’t think an employer should be able to violate the law by interfering with their employees when they consider unionizing, but at the same time you’re not really offering any alternative remedies that would prevent employers from doing just that. Instead you’re giving vague examples to argue why one of the only remedies that I’m sure you would agree actually deters employers from violating the law is “a bit much”.

In the end, the ALRB holding back the remedial certification rod was predictable and competent; but it could have been abused in some circumstances.

I think you’re contradicting yourself here. If the board only applied it rarely and when they felt that it was necessary what is leading you to expect that it would be abused? Unless you have an example of a board awarding a remedial certification when the employer wasn’t found guilty of violating the law I don’t think it’s a very plausible scenario.

Again, I didnt think these issues were egregious as they are found in other legislation in Canada; but, at the time, I thought it was a bit much (i was doing management-side labour work at the time as well )

Well in that case I hope that you’re just as willing to share examples of all of the steps you’ve seen employers take to not interfere in a Union organizing campaign once they are aware of one as you are to bring up hypothetical boogeyman scenarios to criticize laws meant to eliminate employer interference. If I had to guess I’d say the list of steps taken by employers to not interfere would be rather short.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Yoho

https://twitter.com/user/status/1580216885022367745

And what gives with that continual squint? You never see her any other way except squinting.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by redforever

And what gives with that continual squint? You never see her any other way except squinting.

She's trying to hide that she is so full of #### it's up to her eyeballs.

[undercoverbrother]

FFS she even makes Rick Bell look good

https://calgarysun.com/opinion/colum...ell-of-a-day-1

[Macman]

Originally Posted by redforever

And what gives with that continual squint? You never see her any other way except squinting.

I dunno, cause she’s happy? She is the premier now of one of the best provinces in the country. Powerful position and who wouldn’t gloat a little and be happy.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

FFS she even makes Rick Bell look good

https://calgarysun.com/opinion/colum...ell-of-a-day-1

The really shocking part is the comments(I know). But there are many denouncing her. In a Rick Bell column, at the Sun. This can't bode well.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The really shocking part is the comments(I know). But there are many denouncing her. In a Rick Bell column, at the Sun. This can't bode well.

That's actually the best news I've heard all day.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by nik-

Who are the people that actually support this trash heap of a politician? Ugh, she's so ####ing lame.



Enough with the hicks having so much say in our government imo.

The only reason the hicks have any say is because they buy party memberships and city people, Calgary puck members etc don't. We could all buy memberships and effect change but for whatever reason we don't. Myself included.

Edit. And it's not just 'hicks'. I'd bet there are many memberships sold to suburban 70 year olds.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by chedder

The only reason the hicks have any say is because they buy party memberships and city people, Calgary puck members etc don't. We could all buy memberships and effect change but for whatever reason we don't. Myself included.

Edit. And it's not just 'hicks'. I'd bet there are many memberships sold to suburban 70 year olds.

You can live in the suburbs and be a hick. The people that fall for this kind of politics from people like Smith are hicks.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by chedder

The only reason the hicks have any say is because they buy party memberships and city people, Calgary puck members etc don't. We could all buy memberships and effect change but for whatever reason we don't. Myself included.

Edit. And it's not just 'hicks'. I'd bet there are many memberships sold to suburban 70 year olds.

The only reason this moronocy contest matters is because 'we' blindly vote this party in every single time.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by chedder

The only reason the hicks have any say is because they buy party memberships and city people, Calgary puck members etc don't. We could all buy memberships and effect change but for whatever reason we don't. Myself included.

Edit. And it's not just 'hicks'. I'd bet there are many memberships sold to suburban 70 year olds.

Your call to action is valid for urbanites who actually identify as conservatives to prevent this, but for people like me who would require an extraordinary candidate to come around to consider voting for that party in any way, this is just a non starter

I'm kind of astonished that the premier can be ousted and an election isn't immediately called to fill the gap,but that's on me for being ignorant to how that political mechanism works

[Muta]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...z2M/edit#gid=0

Just a reminder that the above is a link to a document tracking all the decisions the UCP has made so far, in case you like self-torture want to go down that deplorable rabbit hole.

"BuT NoTleY's LiGhTbUlBs"

[Macman]

^ But Jason Kenney is gone now right, you can’t blame this all on Smith to be fair.

[powderjunkie]

Alberta Tories excuse Danielle Smith’s ignorance of history by reminding us she is a product of the education system they built
https://www.thebeaverton.com/2022/10...em-they-built/

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Macman

^ But Jason Kenney is gone now right, you can’t blame this all on Smith to be fair.

Who said I'm blaming it on Smith? I clearly stated this is the UCP - but, of which we can now add Danielle Smith's colossal verbal fumbles to... ALREADY.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Interesting strategy… wonder who falls for it

https://twitter.com/user/status/1580209409703444480

I can think of a few posters who will fall for it

[woob]

She used that "Trudeau, Singh, Notley coalition" tagline in a whole bunch of her speeches and interviews the past few days. She's going to beat that drum until election day. It's ridiculous, but it's going to absolutely get eaten up by the people it's intended for.

[Looch City]

Trudeau, Singh, Notley coalition

Trudeau, Singh, Notley

TSN

The Sports Network, a sports media company.

A main stream media company

MSM CONSPIRACY CONFIRMED = Trudeau, Singh, Notley !!1 DO NOT TRUST

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by woob

She used that "Trudeau, Singh, Notley coalition" tagline in a whole bunch of her speeches and interviews the past few days. She's going to beat that drum until election day. It's ridiculous, but it's going to absolutely get eaten up by the people it's intended for.

Yoho: “Golly gee did you hear that Notley joined the Trudeau-Singh coalition? Chickens are roosting!”

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Yoho

I present the next Provincial election wedge issue.

We’ll see as the science carbon tax narrative continues to unwind if people still have an appetite for it in 7months.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1580209409703444480

fyp.