False Concessions and Real Concessions
Quebec Minister of Labour Jean Boulet claims that with
his proposal to settle the lockout at ABI, he demands concessions from
both sides. Similar to what Alcoa has been saying all along, Boulet
contends concessions from both sides without the give-and-take of
discussions and negotiations make the proposal fair, balanced and
worthy of
support.
Working people must remember that none of the company or
government concessions much less the various proposals ever arose from
negotiations with union representatives of the ABI workers. In a
negotiated collective agreement such give-and-take would form part of
the negotiations. Simply to inform the world of a final settlement and
demand workers vote on it because both sides have supposedly made
concessions means that the government and company have no intention of
any give and take let alone serious negotiations respecting the rights
of workers and their representatives to find a solution to their
differences.
Radio-Canada says it received a copy and the Minister
himself describes some of its aspects. Making the proposal public and
subject to speculation is a form of information war to force through
something that is unacceptable and a negation of negotiations and the
rights of workers.
Outside any forum with workers for serious negotiations,
Boulet talks publicly of two concessions he asks of the owners. First,
the minister wants ABI management to drop its $19 million damage
grievance against USW Local 9700 and its officers. The grievance filed
long ago accuses the union and members of alleged sabotage of
operations
in the plant during the months leading to the lockout in January 2018.
To consider the withdrawal of this false grievance
concocted by management as a concession during negotiations for a
collective agreement is completely fraudulent. The union has long
pointed out that the company made no reference to any alleged acts of
sabotage at the time they are said to have occurred. Management
complaints over the
safety and security of plant operations and alleged threats of sabotage
during contract negotiations have become commonplace propaganda and
lame excuses to justify lockouts. For the grievance for damages to be
removed is not a concession but rather a change in tactics. A
withdrawal in no way affects Alcoa's concessionary demands on working
conditions and workers' security and union rights. The withdrawal of
this grievance has not even been raised as a demand by the union in all
its attempts to have talks with the company. Besides, common practice
upon the completion of negotiations is that both parties renounce their
lawsuits as part of the negotiated settlement. Minister Boulet
admitted as much, saying to the press: "When I wrote the back-to-work
protocol, that was one of the concessions I asked the company to do and
I told them: when we make a back-to-work protocol we start afresh, do
away with all the legal recourse that was done before or during the
conflict, directly or indirectly related to the conflict."
The second company concession as defined by the Minister
is a modification of the unilateral back-to-work protocol that the
cartel sought to impose, which workers rejected with contempt at their
March 11 mass meeting and vote. According to the Minister, the
reinstatement of workers will now be done in six months instead of 10.
The union has already denounced 10 or six months before
reinstatement as unprecedented and wholly unacceptable. It only took
two months to reinstate all ABI workers after their 2004 strike. In
addition, the time frame in the proposed back to work protocol whether
six or 10 months remains conditional on what the owners themselves
consider as safe conditions. Also, according to Clément Masse,
President of USW Local 9700, the settlement proposal speaks of a "goal"
of reintegration and faster restarting of activities, and not an
"obligation." For the Minister to suggest a change from 10 to six
months is a concession on the part of the company, while the overall
unilateral
imposition of a most backward back-to-work protocol has already been
universally denounced, is to engage in hypocrisy and propaganda to
impose a government endorsed company dictate that undermines the rights
of workers and their dignity.
The real concessions demanded in the here and now from
even before the lockout are those the global oligarchs want from the
workers affecting all aspects of their life at work and in retirement.
In fact, the entire episode of non-negotiations has been a series of
unilateral dictates for concessions and final offers from ABI
management. During
these non-negotiations, ABI workers have not been able to present their
demands to defend their working conditions as they exist today let
alone improve them. Their effort from the beginning was to preserve
what they have. Masse said the union would even have agreed to simply
renew the collective agreement as it stands.
From the beginning of their effort for a new collective
agreement, the workers asked for the elimination of certain company
concessionary demands or at least their reduction in scope. Such is the
case with regard to the abolition of unionized positions for example.
The government suggests union opposition to concessions is not that at
all but
new demands put forward by the union that would undermine Alcoa's
global competitiveness and risk closure of the plant.
The union says a professor of labour relations at the
University of Quebec at Trois-Rivières, who has read the
government settlement proposal, says the Minister is concerned with
Alcoa's global competitiveness and even added new wording to the
settlement proposal that would further facilitate the outsourcing of
jobs so as to eliminate regular
union jobs and undermine working conditions at the plant.
The Quebec government is pursuing an unacceptable
campaign against aluminum workers on behalf of a global power. It
refuses to uphold its duty as government to defend the well-being and
security of its own people. This disastrous path further accentuates
disequilibrium between oligopolies such as Alcoa and their workers,
communities and
the society in which these global behemoths operate. In a cowardly
gesture, the government is offering Quebec and its people on a silver
platter to these global supranational private interests instead of
defending the workers and the people by restricting the power of these
oligopolies and working to establish equilibrium that serves the people
in an
atmosphere approved and controlled by them.
This article was published in
Number 16 - May 2, 2019
Article Link:
False Concessions and Real Concessions
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
