The Conservative
government’s budget bill introduces sweeping reforms that could severely weaken
federal public service unions as they gear up for an upcoming round of contract
negotiations over sick leave and disability.
The scope and breadth of changes
the government is proposing to the Public Service Labour Relations Act came as
a complete surprise to union officials, who were poring over the implications
of the reforms tabled in the second budget implementation bill tabled Tuesday.
They claim it will completely change the ground rules for collective bargaining
in the public service.
Ron Cochrane, a longtime
negotiator and the current co-chair of the union-management National Joint
Council, said he has never seen such profound changes. He also said Treasury
Board president Tony Clement has never indicated to unions that he felt such
changes were necessary to manage labour relations.
“This bill removes any semblance
of fairness in collective bargaining. He (Clement) has taken every caution to
make sure that no matter what happens, he will win. He has stacked the deck in
his favour and that is unheard of in labour relations anywhere.
“And it will be pretty hard to
fight an employer that stacks the deck against you ... This has become a game
of cards where (unions) don’t get any cards. The employer holds the deck.”
In a statement emailed Tuesday
evening, Clement’s office said the amendments to the Labour Relations Act will
streamline practices, save money and “ensure the public service is affordable
modern and high-performing.”
“Our Government will sit at a
bargaining table on behalf of the taxpayer where the rules are fair and
balanced,” said the email.
The most worrisome reform
revolves around the right to arbitration as a way to settle contract disputes.
The government intends to only allow arbitration if both parties — Treasury
Board and the unions — agree. If they don’t agree, conciliation and a possible
strike are the only other alternatives for unions to settle labour disputes.
At the same time, however, the
government has reserved the “exclusive” right to decide which jobs will be
designated “essential,” which means employees in those jobs can’t strike.
Employees in bargaining groups where the government has designated 80 per cent
to be essential will be allowed to seek arbitration to settle impasses.
The government defended its
unfettered right to decide what work should be essential because they are
“accountable” to Canadians, not the unions.
“A democratically elected
government should have the right to identify what Canadians consider ‘essential
services,” said Clement’s office in an email.
Under existing rules, the union
and government negotiate the number of employees who are considered essential.
If they can’t agree, the matter is turned over to the Public Service Labour
Relations Board to decide which jobs will be considered essential in the event
of a strike.
Cochrane said the changes seem to
also allow the government to designate more employees essential during a strike
if it finds the strike is having an impact on government operations.
Unions say it appears the
government is forcing the most militant unions — such as those representing the
customs officers and prison guards — to go to arbitration while forcing the
non-militant unions to go on strike to settle a contract dispute.
“We’re just shocked,” said Gary
Corbett, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada.
“It appears to be so anti-union, and the biggest question we have is why do
they want to have more strikes? Isn’t arbitration all about finding solutions
without disruption?”
In fact, the implementation
bill’s tabling came as the Treasury Board reached a tentative deal Tuesday with
the union representing 8,700 border guards and others workers at the Canada
Border Services Agency, ending a tense and drawn-out dispute that many
predicted was headed for a strike.
The two were at an impasse over
the Customs and Immigration Union’s demand that they were entitled to similar
pay and working conditions as prison guards who did similar work. The
compromise settlement gave customs officers the same 5.2 per cent wage increase
that all public servants got in addition to the much-disputed $1,750 annual
payment that prison guards receive.
That settlement marks the last of
the 27 contracts to be settled with 17 unions in the current round of
bargaining that began in 2011, leaving the government a clean slate as it gears
up for the next round in 2014 to replace sick leave with a new short-term
disability plan.
What seems to have baffled unions
about the reforms is why the government wants to limit binding arbitration as a
way to resolve impasses. Most governments offer arbitration so contract
disputes can be settled without disrupting the delivery of programs and
services to Canadians. Many public servants aren’t comfortable with withdrawing
their services.
Under the existing rules, unions
have two options to resolve contract disputes, and they must select one before
they start contract negotiations. They can pick conciliation and the
possibility of a strike, or they can opt for binding arbitration. Most federal
unions pick arbitration.
The government is also amending
the factors that conciliators and arbitrators can consider when making an award
or report. It wants the primary considerations for any settlement to consider
the economy or the country’s fiscal situation and whether the government faces
a problem recruiting or attracting employees at the existing salaries.
The legislation also makes clear
that government’s compensation policy must be in line with the private sector.
At the same time, it eliminates the pay analysis and research mandate of the
Public Service Labour Relations Board to monitor wages in the public and
private sector.
The PSLRB is in the midst of one
of its largest compensation studies, comparing the total compensation of public
servants in 79 benchmark jobs with those who are working in similar jobs in the
private sector and broader public sector. Its first results are expected next
summer.
Treasury Board recently sought
bids from consultants to conduct its own comparative compensation studies,
which will be done over the next four years.
Lisa Blais, president of the
Association of Justice Counsel, said the reforms will gut the legislation and
undermine free collective bargaining, and she suspects will lead to a
constitutional challenge.
“We know the core of this is to
ensure zero per cent opposition to this government, and public service unions
or umbrella organizations that unions belong to have been leading the charge …
So this is about shutting down opposition and weakening unions and their
voice.”
The government is also taking
steps to streamline the recourse process for grievances and staffing
complaints. Discrimination cases now handled by the Canadian Human Rights
Commission will be handled by the Public Service Labour Relations Board.
It also calls for the merger of
the Public Service Staffing Tribunal and the creation of a Public Service
Labour Relations Board to form a new Public Service Labour Relations and
Employment Board.
“This bill represents a
far-reaching attack on public service workers and the unions that represent
them,” said Robyn Benson, president of the largest union, the Public Service
Alliance of Canada.
“The government is upsetting the
balance of labour relations, and is showing a callous disregard for due
process, health and safety, and the collective bargaining rights of every
single public service employee. The collective bargaining rights and the
protections of workers who face discrimination, who do dangerous work, or who
are treated unfairly will be undermined by the proposals in this bill.”
By KATHRYN MAY, OTTAWA CITIZEN October
22, 2013
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
