|
May 2, 2019
Quebec Minister
of Labour Intervenes on
Behalf of Global Monopoly
Alcoa and
Government Reject
Negotiations with Locked-Out
ABI Workers
ABI workers take their demands to National Assembly in Quebec City,
Energy March,
March 27, 2019. (Metallos)
• Unacceptable
Move
by
Government
to
Impose
Concessions
Demanded by
Alcoa on ABI Workers
• Alcoa and Quebec Government Work in Tandem to
Attack Workers' Rights
• False Concessions and Real Concessions
Strike at Glencore's
Brunswick Smelter in Belledune, New Brunswick
• Workers Stand Up for Their Rights and Dignity
The Fight for Working
Conditions in Health Care Acceptable to Those Who
Do the Work
• Nurses Step Up Their Fight Against Mandatory
Overtime and Other
Pressing Issues
April 28 Day of
Mourning
• Mourn for the Dead, Fight for the Living
• Under-Reporting of Job-Related Injuries and
Deaths - Nick Lin
• Day of Mourning -- Photos
Read and Subscribe to
TML Weekly
• Coverage of May Day and the Fight to Defend
Public Health Care in Ontario
Quebec Minister of Labour Intervenes on
Behalf of Global Monopoly
The Quebec Minister of Labour has presented an
Alcoa/government settlement proposal and demand for union members'
acceptance as a way to end the stalemate in the current unjust lockout
of ABI smelter workers. This demand for acceptance of what has been
unacceptable for 16 months once again reveals the government's refusal
to
intervene to bring an end to the lockout in a way workers can accept
with dignity.
 Right from the beginning of
the lockout, workers have asked and are still asking the government to
put pressure on the owners to negotiate with the workers to arrive at a
collective agreement that they deem acceptable or at least pressure the
owners to accept binding arbitration. The union has even proposed
arbitration as a last resort to break
the deadlock.
Why does the Legault government, and its Minister, find
unthinkable and unpalatable the idea that ABI workers should have the
right to negotiate their working conditions or at least submit their
demands and concerns to an arbitrator? From the beginning, none of the
offers of the Alcoa cartel have been a result of negotiations with USW
Local
9700. The proposals to settle and end the lockout, including the
current joint one from Alcoa and the government have been the negation
of negotiations. Nothing in their proposals comes from workers speaking
out about their conditions, their concerns and their just claim to the
immense wealth they produce. How then can the government consider
the already rejected proposal as a solution to the impasse? The
proposal is a negation of the right of workers and their elected
representatives to negotiate a collective agreement; the unilateral
government/Alcoa proposal is a backroom deal to silence the voice of
the workers, a voice that resounded loudly at their March 11 meeting
and vote.
Minister Boulet's demand for a vote on something workers and their
representatives had no role in preparing means he does not respect the
voice of the workers. He does not respect their right to have their
union representatives negotiate an agreement, which the workers could
then discuss and decide with their vote whether to support it or not.
Quebec Minister of Labour, Employment and Social
Solidarity Jean Boulet submitted a settlement proposal and back-to-work
protocol on April 17 to the management of Aluminerie de
Bécancour Inc. (ABI) and USW Local 9700 representing ABI
workers. Boulet presented his proposal knowing full well that ABI
workers had massively
rejected an almost identical one only weeks before. One could surmise
from this that the Quebec government is engaged in an information war
against the smelter workers on behalf of Alcoa, and seeks to excuse its
unwillingness to force the monopoly to pay Hydro-Québec for its
contracted electricity during the long lockout and come to a
negotiated settlement with workers agreeable to them.
 With this deceptive
manoeuvre the government appears in partnership with Alcoa and its
unjust 16-month lockout to force concessions on workers that would
destroy their union and seriously undermine the well-being of their
community. The deceit surrounding the government settlement proposal
was quickly confirmed a few days later with
ABI management's acceptance of it as a "framework" to reach a final
agreement to end the lockout and restart the plant.
USW Local 9700 denounced the settlement proposal as a
"copy-and-paste of the last employer's offer rejected by our members"
on March 11. Similar to Alcoa's offer, Local 9700 found the
government's proposal an unacceptable attack on the main issues of
organization of work, working hours, the pension plan, respect for
seniority, the use of
subcontracting and the abolition of jobs. The union said it would
inform its members of the content of the proposal but would not hold a
general meeting to vote on something already rejected by an 82 per cent
vote at a meeting with a turnout of 90 per cent of members.
In words that best describe the content of the
government's unhelpful proposal, President of USW Local 9700
Clément Masse spoke to Workers' Forum following the
March 11 membership meeting and vote to reject Alcoa's similar offer
and back-to-work protocol:
"The workers said that this is not a negotiated
agreement and accepting such an agreement is like saying you do not
have a union anymore, that the employer can do whatever it wants. The
offer that the employer presented shows a lack of respect for us and it
is the same as regards the back-to-work protocol. We have built our
union and we
have built our contracts over the years, and we do not agree that we
should lose everything because the employer wants to smash the union.
That is what came out of the interventions at the mic; that we are
still able to stand up and will not accept just anything even after 14
months. It is not true that the employer can impose its way of doing
things on us. They will have to sit down and negotiate and show respect
for the workers. The workers have also targeted the energy deal with
Alcoa that is hurting us and doing nothing but prolonging the conflict."
Masse reiterated this sentiment in a statement issued by
the ABI workers on the evening of March 11:
"The offer represented a series of take-backs by the
company. ABI has refused to negotiate, it has refused to accept
third-party arbitration. It just wanted to impose its will, counting on
fatigue from its 14-month lockout. The answer from our members is
clear: it didn't work. The members don't want to go back on their
knees. Alcoa
disrespects our Labour Code by negotiating in bad faith, it
disrespects Quebeckers by making them pay for its lockout, it
disrespects workers by closing the door on negotiation as well as
arbitration. The government of Quebec must intervene. The imbalance of
power is unacceptable and the behaviour of this multinational is
unacceptable."
In mass membership meeting March 11, 2019 the workers massively reject
Alcoa's offer and back-to-work protocol, one almost identical to that
which the Quebec government is pushing.
(Metallos)
Instead of standing with Quebec working people in
solidarity against an unjust attack by a powerful global oligopoly,
Quebec Minister of Labour Jean Boulet is engaged in a sideshow to
attack locked-out ABI smelter workers of USW Local 9700 in
Bécancour. Boulet is scurrying all over the place declaring his
"disappointment" that the
union will not present the Alcoa/government proposal for capitulation
to a general membership meeting and hold a vote on it.
Boulet likewise refuses to acknowledge that the workers
massively voted against a similar proposal on March 11. Boulet is
engaging in a campaign to portray the union in a negative light, even
declaring it undemocratic for not taking the Alcoa/government proposal
back to the membership for a vote. In doing so, Boulet seeks to gloss
over his
government's refusal to make Alcoa live up to its contract with Quebec
Hydro to pay for its bloc of energy during the lockout or pressure the
global company into negotiating a settlement or accepting arbitration.
Boulet wants workers to vote again on something they
already rejected. In doing so he dismisses the strong stand of union
members in defending their rights in their vote and words of March 11,
when members declared openly and in great numbers that Alcoa, despite
its pumped up global power and dictatorial behaviour, would have to
respect
their rights and negotiate a collective agreement agreeable to workers
or submit the conflict to arbitration.
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.
Strike at Glencore's Brunswick Smelter in
Belledune, New Brunswick
In the early evening of April 24, the 281 production and
maintenance workers at the Glencore Brunswick smelter in Belledune, New
Brunswick went on strike. The workers launched their strike to defend
themselves against the concessionary demands of the Glencore mining and
metallurgical monopoly. The smelter workers are members of
United Steelworkers' Local 7085.
The workers met on April 4 and 5 to discuss the
situation and decide on a course of action with participation at close
to 100 per cent. Ninety-six per cent voted to withdraw their capacity
to work beginning April 24 at 6 pm. When workers for the dayshift
arrived the morning before the evening strike, company officials
forcibly prevented them
from entering the plant under the hoax that the security and safety of
operations was threatened.
Two days later, the Court of Queen's Bench of New
Brunswick on behalf of the Glencore oligarchs issued a court order
limiting the number of picketers to six at the entrances or exits of
the smelter and at any other geographical location in New Brunswick
where Glencore conducts business. The court also ordered the workers
not to obstruct in
any way any movement of employees, customers, suppliers and others to
and from the plant or to "harass" them including a prohibition of
taking photographs. The court further ordered workers not to in any
way obstruct the movement of rail cars to and from the plant, which
employs in total 450 people.
President of Local 7085 Bart Dempsey said the main
dispute with the company is on the issue of health and safety. Glencore
is demanding that the paid full-time position of the union co-chair of
the joint health and safety committee be transformed into a part-time
position. The full-time position was created after a strike in 1991,
when health
and safety was addressed.
President Dempsey told Workers' Forum, "They are
trying to get rid of our full-time safety rep. They are trying to get
rid of his office. That is a big key issue to the workers. There are a
lot of health and safety issues in a smelter like ours. We are working
with molten metal, high traffic equipment areas, overhead cranes, you
name it.
Plus all the chemicals you have to deal with. We've got a dangerous
workplace."
Workers on the picket lines told the media that under
Glencore's management the smelter has become an even more hazardous
workplace. In this situation, the workers say that having a full-time
union representative on site whom they can consult to determine whether
a job is safe to perform or not is important.
In a further attack on the right of workers to have a
prominent union presence at the workplace, Glencore wants to stop
paying for a full-time president of the local. In downgrading the union
presence, the company wants to pay only for a certain amount of hours
for the President to engage in union business outside of his regular
hours.
According to the union, Glencore also has concessionary
demands concerning the pension plans and benefits. The biggest hit for
workers in terms of the pension plans would be the elimination of the
voluntary early retirement plan, which allows members of the defined
benefits (DB) plan to retire before turning 65 with a certain number of
years worked and still receive their full pension. If the arrangement
is eliminated, DB plan members who choose to retire early would be
subject to a provincial regulation that reduces their pension amount by
six per cent per year ahead of when they are scheduled to retire. To
receive their full pension, they would have to work until they are 65,
no
matter how many years they have spent at the metal smelter, which
everyone knows takes an enormous toll on a worker's health.
The elimination of the current early retirement process
would be yet another hit for workers after the company forced a major
change to their pension plan during the previous negotiations. For the
current four-year contract, which took effect in 2015, the company shut
down the DB plan to employees with less than 12 years seniority at the
smelter and switched them over to an inferior defined contribution
arrangement.
Glencore also wants to reduce employees'
health, dental and drug coverage.
In response, the workers firmly demand the dignity and
respect they deserve for the hard work they do in the
lead/silver/copper smelter. Concessions on health and safety and
pensions are unacceptable. Signs on the picket line include: "Hands Off
Our Union Reps!"; "Hands Off Our Pensions!" and "Bullying Has to Stop!"
President Dempsey informed Workers' Forum that
since the signing of the last contract in 2014, Glencore has terminated
32 workers for various reasons, many of them under the inhumane legal
doctrine of "frustration of employment contract," which translates into
termination due to injury or illness of workers who are on long-term
disability. That is a trademark of Glencore's labour relations and is
what workers are aiming to stop with their strike, Dempsey said.
The Fight for Working Conditions in
Health Care Acceptable to
Those Who Do the Work
Quebec health care workers in Mauricie region participate in "No
Mandatory Overtime" day of action April 8, 2019. (FIQ)
Nurses across Canada are tackling the crisis in working
conditions in the health care sector. Those working conditions have a
deep impact on the health and safety of health care workers and on the
patients in their care. Nurses are demanding not words but deeds in
concrete measures from the government and administrations of the health
care
institutions to correct the situation. At this time, a major focus of
their actions is the opposition to mandatory overtime, which
governments and administrations have forced upon nurses as a constant
system of crisis management.
Quebec Interprofessional Health Federation (FIQ)
Some 76,000 nurses, licensed practical nurses,
respiratory therapists and clinical perfusionists, members of the
Quebec Interprofessional Health Federation (FIQ) held a successful "No
Mandatory Overtime" day of action on April 8. Members performed no
mandatory overtime during the day of action. According to the FIQ, the
successful action
without major incident proved that the health care system can operate
without mandatory overtime.
Shortly after they held their day of action, the FIQ
leadership held a meeting with the Quebec Minister of Health and Social
Services to push forward the nurses' demands for the upgrading of jobs.
This would mean for example upgrading jobs from two-day a week to a
certain stability with full time or four-day weeks. This would also be
accomplished without rotation of nurses where they are constantly moved
from one institution to another, possibly even over long distances.
A concrete agreement was reached whereby the Minster
pledged that the CEOs of health care establishments will soon call the
local unions together to begin the work of upgrading jobs so that
definite action plans can be worked out before summer. An agreement was
also reached to do a summation of the pilot projects regarding
nurse/patient
ratios that were carried out in a number of health departments of
various institutions across Quebec. The joint summation will determine
the parameters to be used for ratios to be deployed in institutions
where the need is particularly critical.
New Brunswick Nurses Union (NBNU) Addresses Mandatory
Overtime
NBNU is tackling the problem of the inability of nurses
to leave at the end of their scheduled shift. They are coerced into
working shifts as long as 24 hours under the pretext of "patient
abandonment." The result leads to an unsafe working environment and
unsafe patient care, which is unacceptable according to the nurses'
union.
NBNU is highlighting the fact that registered nurses
are governed by the Nurses Act and by the Code of Ethics for
Registered Nurses and the Nurses Association of New Brunswick (NANB),
as their licensing body. As registered professionals, nurses must be
allowed to exercise their judgement on their own fitness to practice.
The Code
says:
"Nurses maintain their fitness to practice. If they are
aware that they do not have the necessary physical, mental or emotional
capacity to practise safely and competently, they withdraw from the
provision of care after consulting with their employer. [...]"
Given the seriousness of the issue, NBNU has
collaborated with NANB to produce a safety package, which includes
Guidelines for working beyond scheduled shifts and a Letter addressing
their concerns, which reads:
"This letter confirms that on the following date:
_______, on the following unit/facility: _______ you, _______, my
supervisor, have requested that I, _______, remain on duty beyond my
scheduled shift. I have also notified you that, in my professional
opinion, I do not feel safe to practice beyond my scheduled shift due
to personal health
reasons (including fatigue), and I have requested that you make every
reasonable effort to find alternative relief.
"Please be advised that the Collective Agreement
governing my employment does not provide for mandatory overtime. Please
be further advised that practice guidelines of the Nurses Association
of New Brunswick provide that the following situations are not
considered abandonment: refusing to work extra hours or shifts beyond
the posted
work schedule when the nurse has given proper notice, and withdrawing
from care due to fitness to practice concerns (personal health issues,
including fatigue) with appropriate notice.
"Please confirm your decision in writing:
"Authorization to Leave
"I acknowledge that I have read and understood the
above, and that you have advised me that you do not feel safe to
practice during the extra hours that I have asked you to work. I will
find an alternative relief and allow you to leave work at _______.
"Signature of Supervisor
"OR
"Requirement to Work
"I acknowledge that I have read and understood the
above, and that you have advised me that, in your professional opinion,
you do not feel safe to practice during these extra hours.
Notwithstanding your professional opinion, I am nonetheless requiring
you to work from _______ to _______.
"Signature of Supervisor"
The letter is meant to counter the threats and pressure
exercised on nurses resulting in them not being able to leave at the
end of their shift.
Registered Nurses' Union Newfoundland & Labrador
(RNUNL)
RNUNL is waging a campaign to oppose insufficient nurse
staffing levels. The union points out that staffing problems are
leading nurses to be forced to work on occasion 24-hour shifts or five
shifts in a week that can extend to 16 to 20 hours of work or sometimes
up to seven 12-hour shifts in a row. This also leads to patients having
to be
flown out of the province to receive the care they need. RNUNL is
demanding the withdrawal of the implied rule that the health care
system is to function on the basis of the exhaustion and lack of safety
of nurses, which puts them at risk as well as endangering patients. The
union demands the immediate hiring of more nurses so that the sector
reaches adequate staffing levels.
April 28 Day of Mourning
As is done every year, this
year also the International Day of Mourning for workers killed and
injured on job sites was
observed across the country. As on every occasion, not only lives lost
in the past were
remembered and given the significance they deserve, but special
attention was paid to
commemorating the lives lost in the past year. The total figures for
2018 are not yet available,
however for 2017, the Association of Workers' Compensation Boards of
Canada reported 951
work-related deaths, up 46 from 2016. These deaths do not include
workers who are not
covered by the provincial workers' compensation systems, e.g., the
self-employed, domestic
helpers, banking employees and farmers.
 The injuries and deaths of
workers on the job include significant numbers caused by the
negligent policies of the federal and provincial governments in
eliminating regulations and
reporting of workplace injuries and deaths. This is a is a practice
linked to the neo-liberal anti-social offensive. In the name of
eliminating red tape, making Canada open for business and letting
nothing stand in the way of making private profit, a serious
deterioration of health and safety for workers ensues. Such is the
case of the three railway
workers who died in February, in the prime of their lives, because of
the aim of the railways
to increase their profit margins without regard for the human
factor/social consciousness.
Other very serious concerns this year are those of the truckers whose
long hours of work to make ends meet and deteriorating working
conditions have created problems that need immediate attention. Along
with this we see the battles being waged by health workers, teachers
and education workers who suffer tremendous stress-related health
issues as well as post-traumatic stress because working conditions are
untenable. The treatment by governments of injured workers is also
traumatic. Also of note is the stress related to contracting out,
privatization and restructuring in the public sector and throughout the
economy. Irregular work has now become a dangerous growing phenomenon
affecting 31 per cent of all workers who often find themselves racing
from job to job without stability or security of employment and any
organized defence of their rights to safe and healthy working
conditions. There is the Phoenix Pay System which has not worked
properly since it came into being in 2016, causing tremendous stress to
workers who cannot count on their remuneration reaching them in time to
pay their bills.
Thus the issue of health and safety has gone way beyond the workplace
where in the past it
could be dealt with by unions and labour law, at least in places with
unions and subject to
labour law. It has become a political issue which requires putting
decision-making in the
hands of those who the decisions affect as a matter of life itself, not
as a matter of
profit-making. In this regard, the workers' movement is grappling with
how workers can hold
companies to account when labour law no longer upholds a regime based
on notions of
fairness between the contending parties -- capital on one side and
labour on the other.
Meanwhile, governments overtly intervene in the economy to criminalize
opposition to
unacceptable dictate, claiming it harms the national interest.
However, most importantly, decision-making on the direction of the
economy and who it
serves must reside in the working people not the rich. It is
unconscionable that the working
people have no way to decide policy in their own name. At this time, a
main feature of the
situation is that workers have no reason to trust any of the political
parties which belong to a
cartel within which they compete to form party governments. The fact is
that working people
are subject to an electoral system where they are supposed to chose who
they will entrust to
act in their name. This alleged freedom of choice is what is called a
democracy, where one
gives people called representatives a proxy to act in their name. It is
a fraud with very serious
consequences including on the fronts of peoples' health and safety at
places of work.
The slogan "Mourn for the Dead, Fight for the Living" appropriately
guides the working
people on the occasion of the Day of Mourning, to identify and take up
the struggles that will
permit them to exercise control over their lives.
- Nick Lin -
|
Mobilizing for Ontario Injured Workers' Day
June 1
|
|
The official annual figures for job-related deaths in
Canada typically fall between 900 to 1,000, a number compiled from data
from workers' compensation agencies. The actual numbers are no doubt
higher as the numbers from the workers' compensation agencies leave
many workers out of the picture. A recent study points out
these deficiencies and underscores more than ever the need for working
people to empower themselves, so that their right to safe and healthy
working conditions can be realized in a meaningful way.
Their authors of the study state that their aim is to
broaden the discussion
about issues facing workers that contribute to illnesses and
death. The study, titled "Work-related deaths in Canada,"
published in November 2018 in Labour, the Journal of Canadian
Labour Studies, states in its abstract:
"This paper critically examines official statistics on
workplace fatalities in Canada. Each year the Association of Workers'
Compensation Boards of Canada reports on the number of workers who die
from a work-related injury or illness/disease. The problem, however, is
that these data report the number of deaths that were accepted for
compensation; it is not a system for tracking all work-related deaths.
Drawing from a range of data sources and employing a broad definition
of what constitutes death at work we attempt to generate a more
accurate estimate of the number of work-related fatalities in Canada.
In so doing our goal is not to produce a definitive number of annual
deaths at work -- an impossibility given the paucity of data sources --
but instead to challenge dominant ways of conceptualizing what
constitutes a work-related fatality and thus contribute to ongoing
efforts to raise academic, political, and public awareness about this
important issue. In this sense our goal is to question whether official
statistics
regarding workplace fatalities are complete when set against a broader
understanding of what constitutes death at work."[1]
The study points out that as a result of this limited
source of information, thousands of deaths are missing from
occupational health and safety
statistics, such as for workers not covered by a public workers'
compensation system, or deaths due to stress-induced suicides,
fatalities while commuting and
occupational diseases. Depending on the province, only 70 to 98 per
cent of
the workforce may be covered by a public workers' compensation system,
which works out to
more than two million workers in Canada whose injuries or deaths at
work would not be included in official statistics. This would include
workers who are self-employed, domestic helpers, banking
employees and farmers, as well as the most vulnerable sectors of the
working class whose working conditions are amongst the most dangerous
-- undocumented and migrant workers.
"This situation is akin to crime statistics only ever
including solved homicides, therein leaving the impression that
attempted murders, unsolved murders or suspicious deaths are not a
concern," write the study's authors. Steven Bittle, an associate
criminology professor at the University of Ottawa who lead the
research, explained to the CBC, "Our
notion of what constitutes a workplace fatality is too narrow and it is
a mistake to count work-related fatalities through our compensation
regimes." Bittle and the other authors estimate that a more accurate
figure is between 10,000 to 13,000 deaths annually.
The study's authors propose that deaths while commuting
to and from work be included in workplace-fatality statistics, a figure
they estimate at about 460 per year. "We live in a culture of
presenteeism, where people are expected
to be at
work -- at least culturally expected to be at work, if not through
pressures in their workforce -- regardless of whether they're ill or
whether the weather conditions are such that they shouldn't be driving
at that particular time," Bittle told the CBC.
Another category of fatalities the authors suggest could
be included in these figures are non-workers who die
collaterally, but whose deaths can be directly attributed to workplace
issues, such as a spouse who dies from mesothelioma after
exposure to asbestos from washing their
partner's work clothes, or bystanders killed in a crane or
scaffolding collapse
while passing by a construction site.
The study also looks at situations of extreme stress
arising from working conditions unlikely to be covered by the current
arrangements. The example is given of a Saskatchewan
man employed by a small rural municipality who in 2017 took his own
life after
struggling with mental-health issues worsened by
his work. In this case, the province's compensation board partly
attributed his death
to his
employer. However, the study
suggests the number of suicide-related claims is drastically
underestimated. Bittle estimates that between 10 and 17 per cent of
annual
suicides in Canada could be classified as work-related, which works out
to 400 to 800 fatalities each year.
The study concludes by saying that the single biggest
category for underestimation are work-related diseases. At present,
while approximately 500 to 600 deaths attributed to occupational
disease are reported through the compensation systems nationwide,
Bittle estimates that the actual number is more than 8,000 deaths. Such
situations are well-known to injured
workers,
their families and their organizations, who for decades have fought
tooth-and-nail for work-related cancers and other diseases to be
recognized under the
workers' compensation systems.
For some occupations, workers' defence organizations
have been successful in turning this situation around. CBC reports that
in January,
Prince Edward Island's Workers Compensation Act came into
force, giving firefighters presumptive coverage for certain types of
cancers and illnesses. PEI was the last province to make such
provisions.
Another example familiar to readers of Workers' Forum
is the fight of the General Electric workers in Peterborough, Ontario,
for recognition of the compensation claims of workers exposed to toxic
chemicals over the years and for compensation for themselves and their
survivors.[2] Another
example is the McIntyre Power Project in Northern
Ontario, that seeks justice for miners in Ontario's gold and uranium
mines who in the mid-20th century were forced to inhale aluminum powder
each shift purportedly to prevent silicosis, with many later suffering
from serious neurological disorders, including Parkinson's and
Alzheimer's diseases.[3]
This study underscores the justness of the the Ontario
Network of Injured Workers'
Groups' "Workers' Comp Is a Right" campaign to fight for a compensation
system that is truly universal, so
that no one's injuries or deaths can be swept under the rug, and the
causes for these casualties can be identified and eliminated
and
compensation for the victims provided. It confirms the justness of
working people's fight for the dignity of labour, beginning with
putting an end to working conditions that endanger the lives and health
of workers.
Notes
1. "Work-Related
Deaths
in
Canada," Steven Bittle, Ashley Chen, Jasmine
Hébert, Labour, Journal of Canadian Labour Studies, Vol.
82 (2018).
2. See: "The Injustice Faced by
General Electric Workers in Peterborough," Interview, Sue James,
Chair, GE Occupational Health Advisory Committee, Ontario Political
Forum, May 10, 2018.
See also: "Peterborough
General
Electric
Retirees'
Proposals
for
Workers'
Compensation
Reforms," Workers'
Forum, June 5, 2018.
3. See: "Standing Up for Injured
Workers in Northern Ontario: Four Successful Days of Action in Support
of the Rights of Injured Workers," Ontario Political Forum,
May 31, 2018.
Quebec City, QC
 
 
Drummondville, QC
 
Ottawa, ON
 
Kingston, ON
Barrie, ON
Toronto, ON
 
Mississauga, ON
 
Hamilton, ON
Oakville, ON; St. Catharines, ON
 
London, ON
Windsor, ON
 
Winnipeg, MB
Calgary, AB
 
Edmonton, AB
Vancouver, BC
Prince George, BC
Read and Subscribe to TML Weekly
Rally for public health care, Queen's Park April 30, 2019, to be
covered in May 4 issue of
TML Weekly.
Every week, TML Weekly features in-depth
coverage and analysis of matters of concern to the Canadian polity,
dealing with important developments at home and abroad. It gives
expression to the concerns of working people and provides coherence to
all those taking part in the movement for peace, justice and political
empowerment.
The next issue of TML Weekly, dated May 4, will
feature coverage of activities held in Canada and worldwide to mark May
Day, the international day of working class unity and struggle,
including an extensive photo review.
Also featured will be coverage of the April 30 Ontario
Rally for Public Health Care, that brought together health care workers
and others as part of the broad resistance to the anti-social offensive
of the Ford government against public health care and other social
programs that ensure the people's well-being.
If you are not already receiving TML Weekly, we
encourage you to complete the online subscription at cpcml.ca.
(To access articles individually
click on the black headline.)
PDF
PREVIOUS
ISSUES | HOME
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: office@cpcml.ca
|
