|
December 4, 2019
Albertans Mobilize Vigorously Against
Kenney Government's Stepped Up Anti-Social
Offensive
Community Builders Stand Against Kenney's
Wrecking
- Peggy Askin -
Ontario Educators Say No! to Government Dictate
• Workers Hold One-Day Province-Wide Strike - Mira Katz
• Elementary Teachers on
Phase One of Work-to-Rule
British
Columbia
• UFCW and Taxi
Associations Launch Legal Challenges Against
Uber
and Lyft - Anne Jamieson
Workers'
Fight to Hold Quebec Government to Account for
Anti-Worker Measures
• Government's
Unacceptable Position on Training Standards
for Crane Operators - Pierre Chénier
• Changing the Reality
on the Ground - Interview, François
Patry, President, National Brotherhood of
Carpenters, FTQ-Construction Local 9
Albertans Mobilize Vigorously
Against Kenney Government's
Stepped Up Anti-Social Offensive
- Peggy Askin -
 A
militant rally organized by Alberta Forward in a
Progressive Canada,
CUPE Alberta and Support Our Students took place
outside the Westin
Airport Hotel in Calgary where the United
Conservative Party (UCP) was
holding its annual general meeting. About 1,500
people attended despite
the bitter cold and isolated location. Teachers,
students, and parents,
nurses and other health care workers and
professionals, seniors, and
people from all walks of life and virtually
every sector of the economy
participated in the rally. They came, as one
speaker said, as community
builders, to oppose wrecking, to speak in their
own names about the
impact of the Kenney government's anti-social
offensive, and to demand
that all the anti-social measures be reversed.
With signs and banner,
chants and speeches, they expressed their
determination to turn things
around.
The rally showed that people do not accept the
claim of
the Kenney government that it has a "mandate,"
are not disoriented by
the government's shock-and-awe tactics, and are
vigorously and
militantly defending their rights and the rights
of all. For many, it
was their first time participating in such an
event, and the day was
filled with the spirit that it is up to all of
us, and together we will
build the resistance.
In a very successful and innovative approach,
the rally
was organized with alternating open mic
sessions, and marches circling
the hotel. The first speaker was a teacher who
set the tone for the
rest of the day by speaking about how important
it was to work
together. A large contingent of teachers took
part to say No!
to planned layoffs taking
place across the province, including 300 Calgary
teachers on term
contracts who will lose their jobs, and to
affirm their fight for their
working conditions that are student learning
conditions.
Nurses were also out in force. The day before
the rally,
Alberta Health Services announced in a meeting
with the United Nurses
of Alberta leadership that at least 750
registered nurses will be laid
off over several years in a massive
"downsizing," eliminating over one
million hours of care. Health care, education
and other public sector
workers
from the Canadian Union of Public Employees
(CUPE) and the Alberta
Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) marched
together. They too had
received a letter stating that up to 6,000 jobs,
many in health care
will be eliminated or contracted out.
 Nurses,
teachers, health and other public sector
workers, students, Assured
Income for the Severely Handicapped recipients,
and many
concerned citizens spoke about how they will be
affected by this anti-people
offensive, and that it is up to all of us to
build the resistance.
Teacher and rally organizer, Stephanie Quesnel,
explained
the impact of the cuts and how they will impact
class size and
specialized care, while cuts to health care will
result in limited
staffing, increased wait times, and decreased
quality in care. "I hope
[Kenney] realizes that it's not a minority, it's
a huge majority, that
are against these cuts
and this isn't what we voted for. If people
voted for the UCP, this was
not on the platform so it's coming as a surprise
to many people," she
said. "We've been awfully loud. If he isn't
listening, then he isn't
listening to a really large chunk of Albertans
because there is a shift
happening and they have to listen."
Vice President of AUPE Local 71 Bobby-Jo
Borodey, said,
"It doesn't matter what union you belong to,
what group you are
associated with, all that matters is that you
are an Albertan and this
government has waged war on the people of this
province. Your fight is
our fight. Our fight is your fight and,
together, we will be stronger
and
together we will win."
Gil McGowan, President of the Alberta
Federation of
Labour, did not mince words. "People are losing
their jobs. Instead of
jobs they have given us the destruction of jobs.
Everyone should be
prepared to join us on the picket line. This is
our moment to stand up
and fight back and that is exactly what we
intend to do," he said.
Barb Silva, representing Support Our Students
Alberta,
spoke with great conviction, saying, "This is a
question of educational
justice. Do not ask us to compromise, Jason
Kenney. Don't ask us to
negotiate on the backs of Alberta children. We
see your plan. We know
where you are taking Alberta education. We know
Kenney wants to break
unions, weaken public education and divide
communities [...] Kenney wants
you to see education as an individual commodity.
We know it's a public
common good. He wants to attack public education
at every opportunity.
We will meet him there every time to defend it.
We are here today,
public education proud. We are community
builders not
breakers. We support students, we support
teachers, we support public
education, and we will not stand by and let the
government sell it to
the highest bidder."
Peggy Askin, vice president of the Calgary
chapter of
the Congress of Union Retirees and former
President of the Calgary and
District Labour Council said, "The Kenney
government has no mandate to
carry out this brutal anti-social offensive. He
does not act in our
name when he swings his wrecking ball. We are
here together speaking
and
marching for our rights, for the needs of human
beings to come first.
It is no accident that workers are writing 'UCP,
United Corporate
Puppets' on their signs, as that is whose
interests this government
serves. We are here together fighting for the
Alberta that we stand for. It is the teachers,
the health-care workers, the public-sector
workers, all working people -- it's all of us
who work to make this province function.
"We say Stop Paying the Rich and Increase
Funding for Social Programs!
"We say No! to this dictate. We want a
real say and we are empowering ourselves."
See also the article titled "Kenney Government's Despicable
Attacks on Teachers" by Kevan Hunter to be published in TML Weekly
No. 30, December 7, 2019.
 
 
  
Ontario Educators Say No! to Government Dictate
- Mira Katz -
 
Teachers and education workers tell Education
Minister, "No Education Cuts!"
Toronto, November 27, 2019.
On Wednesday, December 4, members of the Ontario
Secondary School
Teachers' Federation (OSSTF) who work in K-12
and adult education in
Ontario, will hold a province-wide one-day
strike. In an act of
solidarity, members of the Canadian Union of
Public Employees (CUPE)
who also work in the system announced they would
not
cross the picket lines.
OSSTF represents high school teachers in public
secondary schools across Ontario as well as
educational support staff
in many elementary and secondary schools and
school board facilities
across the province. This means that in addition
to high schools being
shut down by the strike, many elementary schools
will also be
shut as they are unable to function without the
work of educational
support staff, who in many ways keep the system
from completely falling
apart. Meanwhile CUPE represents custodians,
secretarial staff and
other educational support staff in many schools
across the province and
their refusal to cross the picket line brings
more schools, including
those in the Catholic and French publicly-funded
system, into the
strike as well.
After eight months of trying to get the Ford
government
to back down on its assault on education,
especially its arbitrary
change of class size averages and a requirement
that students take
e-learning courses to graduate, OSSTF has taken
the step of letting the
government know that No Means No!
Meanwhile the government,
through its
Minister of Education Stephen Lecce, tries to
present its modifications
to its earlier dictate -- proposing to raise
class size averages from
22 to 25 instead of 28, or requiring two instead
of the previous four
e-learning classes to graduate -- as evidence of
its flexibility. The
unions and the working people of Ontario are not
buying it.
 All
along the line, the government and Minister
Lecce have been attempting
to disinform the public about the just demands
and claims of the
teachers in order to undermine the broad support
that teachers and
education workers have among the people. Still,
upwards of 75 per cent
of parents who responded to the Ford government
consultations
opposed increased class sizes and the reduction
of individual attention
for students.
Parents' groups have joined the fight, calling
for
parents to bring their kids to the Sheraton
Hotel in downtown Toronto
the night before the strike begins if a deal has
not been reached
between the parties, to make it clear that they
stand with the
educators.
Laura Chesnik, Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada
spokesperson on education and related matters,
and an elementary
teacher in Ontario, stated in an interview with
Workers Forum:
"Everyone who is able should join the picket
lines. Educators in
Ontario are making it clear that they will not
accept government
dictate and that No Means
No!
"Like educators across Canada, those who work
to provide
the younger generation with an education will
not accept being
relegated to becoming robots or police in the
classroom with no say
over the direction of the system and their wages
and working
conditions. The government's arbitrary changes
to class sizes and
e-learning as well as
attempts to undermine educators' professional
judgment in the classroom
are destructive. They are aimed at hiding that
this government, like
those before it, is using its control over the
public treasury to pay
the rich and sees education as a cost rather
than a value which is the
basis for a prosperous and sustainable economy.
This is a fight for
empowerment by those who deliver vital public
services asserting their
right to have a say over the education they
deliver and the economy as
a whole. This is why parents and students are
standing alongside
educators in Ontario as they also want a say.
 "The
government's only option at this point is to
either back down and drop
these changes or to double down and try and
criminalize educators who
refuse to submit. If the government chooses the
latter it will only
place the democratic institutions in Canada into
a deeper crisis of
legitimacy and may well backfire as education
workers refuse to
back down. Dalton McGuinty's own former
constituency assistant during
the Bill 115 debacle, John Fraser, who is
currently interim Ontario
Liberal Leader, said as much in testimony in
committee. He appealed to
the government to learn from the former Liberal
government's experience
and to back down on using dictate to get what it
wants.
Fraser speaks for that section of the ruling
class that wants a
government that gets education workers to agree
to attacks on education
voluntarily, and sees Ford as too much of a bull
in a China shop.
Whatever the case may be, education workers are
more and more speaking
for themselves and making it clear that they
will not accept being
disrespected and they want a say."
On November 14, 2019, EFTO announces a
series of meetings in preparation for a
work-to-rule beginning November 26, 2019.
Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario
(ETFO)
commenced Phase 1 of a work-to-rule on November
26 in the face of the
Ford government's refusal to bargain in good
faith. ETFO represents
83,000 elementary school teachers, occasional
teachers and other
educational professionals who work in the
province's public elementary
schools. ETFO members have gone more than three
months without a
contract.
ETFO president Sam Hammond stated that the
teachers and
other education professionals have been forced
to take strike action
because the Ford government has refused to
address their concerns,
while at the same time engaging in a
disinformation campaign to break
their unity and the broad support they have from
Ontarians.
Hammond pointed out the Education Minister
Stephen Lecce
has been misleading the public by saying that
there are only a few
bargaining issues outstanding when this is not
the case. Large class
sizes, the shortage of supports for students
with special needs, rising
school-based violence and the attempt by the
government to bypass a
2012
regulation to hire teachers on the basis of
qualifications and
experience, are all unresolved issues in these
negotiations.
Hammond noted that the Ford government has
wasted more
than $230 million in penalties to cancel
renewable energy projects,
while at the same time demanding up to $150
million in cuts to
elementary education. That is unacceptable,
Hammond said.
During phase one of the work-to-rule the
teachers will
teach their students but will not participate in
any School Board
related activity including filling in report
cards, attending school
board mandated meetings, and other
administrative functions including
curriculum committee meetings. They will,
however, continue to
participate in extracurricular activities such
as supervising student clubs.
According to ETFO, the work-to-rule will
continue until
the labour dispute is satisfactorily resolved or
the ETFO Provincial
Executive deems that further actions are
required. Workers'
Forum stands with the teachers and
education workers of Ontario.
British Columbia
- Anne Jamieson -
Uber and Lyft are huge multinational
ride-hailing
corporations that have applied to the Passenger
Transportation Board
(PTB) for licences to operate in British
Columbia. Uber, founded in 2009
in the U.S., has grown to global proportions.
Its business model is
described in Alberta Worker as "intended
to wreck, not coexist
with, the
existing taxi industry. It is designed to prey
on unemployed and
under-employed workers, drive down the living
standards of all workers
and the service standards of a regulated
industry, and seize value and
remove it from the local economy."[1]
With the goal of curtailing the exploitative
practices
of these two corporations, the United Food and
Commercial Workers
(UFCW) and the Vancouver Taxi Association (VTA)
have filed legal
applications to the BC Labour Relations Board
(LRB) and to the Passenger
Transportation Board (PTB), to force Uber
and Lyft to adhere to
the same
regulations as other
taxi companies in BC. Taxi associations in other
parts of the province
have taken similar actions.
Legal Challenge by UFCW
On November 27, UFCW Local 1518 filed an
application to the Labour Relations Board in
Vancouver to have the LRB
declare that drivers of Lyft and Uber are
employees under the terms of
the BC Labour Relations Code and thus
have rights to protections under
the Code like other workers in BC. (Uber and
Lyft claim that
their drivers are not employees, but are
self-employed). UFWC further
declared that Lyft and Uber are violating
sections of the Code by
requiring drivers to enter into an agreement to
not be considered
employees; and by requiring drivers to agree
"that all claims regarding
an alleged employment relationship between the
company and a driver be
governed by commercial arbitration." This, the
UFCW points out, is an
attempt to "contract out of the protections of
the Code."
Legal Challenge by Vancouver Taxi Association
For their part, the VTA filed an
application on November 28 to the PTB in
Victoria, stating that in view of the illegal
conditions
Uber and Lyft are imposing on their potential
drivers, the PTB should
not process the applications of these
ride-hailing companies until the
matter
has been resolved. In the meantime, the VTA
states that it does not oppose
the PTB issuing ride-hailing licences to other
applicants in December,
as "none of the other applicants are imposing
conditions on their
drivers that interfere with their ability to
collectively protect
themselves from exploitative terms and
conditions of employment."
In September, the VTA filed a judicial review
against
the PTB over its decisions to exempt
ride-hailing companies from
regulations that restrict existing taxi
companies: the PTB decisions
sought to ensure that ride-hailing companies
would not face
restrictions on fleet size, would not have a
price cap, and could
operate within larger regional
boundaries than existing taxi companies.
The situation facing taxi drivers will worsen
if Uber and Lyft are not curtailed.
Workers' Forum interviewed Kulwant
Sahota, a
spokesperson for the Vancouver Taxi Association.
He pointed out that
the Insurance Corporation of British
Columbia has an agreement with Uber and
Lyft by which it intends to charge
them a small fraction of the price to insure
their vehicles as
compared to what companies like Yellow Cab have
to pay in insurance.
They would pay just 19 cents per kilometre,
whereas an operator of a
regular taxicab must pay $40,000 per year for
insurance. He said that
VTA is not against other local ride-hailing
companies, which could
complement the present taxi companies by
operating in peak hours.
This would benefit everyone in the Lower
Mainland, he added -- riders
and drivers alike, as long as the same
regulations apply to all with
respect to fares, numbers of vehicles in the
fleet, and the cost of
insurance.
Sahota said he has been driving for Yellow Cab
for 25
years, 17 of those on night shift. He said he
felt happy about
the successful struggle of the transit workers
recently, and noted that
some transit workers also drive taxis part-time.
He explained that if Uber and Lyft are allowed
licences
in BC under their own terms, the conditions for
existing taxi drivers
in Vancouver, as well as for those in
ride-hailing companies, would
become intolerable. If licences are to be issued
to those companies, he
said, it must be under the same terms under
which present taxi
companies are
required to operate. Other local ride-hailing
companies that have
applied for licences from the PTB have agreed to
abide by these same
regulations. "Why should Uber and Lyft be
exempt?" he asked. He pointed
out that Uber "operates all over the world and
has billions of dollars
at its disposal. Thus if it is not restricted to
a price cap, it will
offer
a much lower fare price and will wipe out all
the existing taxi
companies in the city. They would then charge
whatever they want for
fares, and they could pay drivers whatever they
want."
As noted in Alberta Worker, the Uber
model is
about seizing value from the workers who produce
it and from their
communities. Wherever Uber operates, it results
in part-time precarious
work, wages far below what has been established
as the Canadian
standard of wages, no predictable income, no
regular hours of work, no
benefits,
pensions, or workers' compensation board
coverage. It is the
neo-liberal way, which is given deceptive names
like "the sharing
economy."
The Need to Restrict Monopoly Right and Defend
the Rights of All
Numerous organizations in BC are opposing the
invasion
by these giant ride-hailing corporations into
the economy of this
province. The provincial government and
municipal councils need to be
reminded that they are duty bound to protect
workers and people from
the destructive practices of these monopolies,
and not collude with
them. The
working class and its allies in all sectors need
to support the
challenges by UFCW and the taxi associations to
restrict the right of
Uber and Lyft to act illegally to disrupt the
taxi industry in BC. An
injury to one is an injury to all! Support the
legal challenges against
Uber and Lyft, and work to develop the workers'
movement into an
effective
opposition to the neo-liberal wrecking by
corporations like these!
Note
1. "Restrict the Monopoly
Uber! Defend the Rights of All Workers! Our
Security Lies in the Defence of the Rights of
All," Alberta Worker, February 10, 2016.
Workers' Fight to Hold Quebec
Government to Account
for Anti-Worker Measures
- Pierre Chénier -
In a recent meeting with the leadership of the
Union of
Crane Operators, Jean Boulet, Labour Minister in
the Legault
government, said he is "comfortable" with the
recommendations of the
Committee of Experts set up by his government
which endorses the
decision of the government and the Quebec
Construction Commission (CCQ) to
reduce the
training that is required to become a crane
operator.[1]
 The
Minister is comfortable, but the crane operators
and construction
workers who work in dangerous and difficult
conditions are, to say the
least, not comfortable with the government's
stand. They have been
fighting for almost a year now against this
lowering of training
standards. The facts are not consistent with the
minister's position
either. The Diploma of Vocational Studies (DEP)
was introduced in 1997
because of the large number of accidents,
including several fatalities,
which were related to crane operation.
Statistics show that since the
introduction of the compulsory DEP training for
crane operators, fatal
accidents involving crane operation have dropped
by 66 per
cent.
Crane operators report that last September
alone there
were three accidents in Quebec involving the
toppling of cranes, one of
which could have caused fatalities. In this last
accident, four workers
had to go to the hospital for nervous shock. In
all three cases, crane
operators who investigated the accidents report
that the crane
operator involved did not have the DEP.
The position of the Minister of Labour is
irrational and
arrogant. It is a position of prejudice, in
defence of narrow private
interest, and it is also an irresponsible
political stance that is a
continuation of the efforts of successive
governments to smash the
crane operators' union and the construction
unions in general.
According to the government
and the CCQ, the presence of a strong
and combative crane operators' union is not in
the interest of
construction workers and the public. This is
allegedly a problem, a
situation of "control" by a particular group
that prevents workers'
access to the construction trades through
opposition to deregulation of
the
sector. The Charbonneau Commission was very
clear on this point when it
equated the collective organized struggle of
construction workers with
mafia-like activities because they undermine
free competition between
workers on building sites and the realization of
private profit by the
employers.
 What
must prevail? The health and safety of
construction workers and the
public, or the shenanigans of cartel political
parties and state
agencies like the CCQ who are serving narrow
private interest and
anti-worker fanaticism? Having crane operators
who are appropriately
trained and whose organizations defend the
interests and rights of both
the workers and the public and can
authoritatively say No Means No!
when it comes to safety is an asset for workers
and society.
Workers' Forum recently spoke with the
director
of the Union of Crane Operators, Evans Dupuis,
who spoke eloquently
about the role of the crane operator in the
construction sector.
He said, among other things: "The crane
operator's job
is vital to the safety of other construction
workers. All crane
operators work with other workers. There is
always someone ahead of the
crane and other workers in the area. The
slightest bad movement, a
sudden movement, can endanger the workers and
the public. It's a job of
precision,
it's a job of stress. The crane operator must
live with this. He must
be competent and well trained. The other worker
must have confidence in
the crane operator. If he asks the crane
operator to bring a load an
inch from him and the operation is not done
carefully and safely, the
worker will no longer want to work with the
crane operator because it
is too dangerous for his security. The bond of
trust will be broken and
the bond of trust is vital for the safety of
all. Lowering security
standards is absolutely contraindicated. "
The Minister of Labour and the Quebec
government must
withdraw the new regulations that lower training
and safety standards
on construction sites.
Note
1. In April of 2018 the
former
Quebec Liberal government unilaterally imposed
new regulations
governing the training of crane operators in
Quebec. That decision
overturned existing standards and the training
requirements for new
crane operators necessary to ensure not only
their safety but also the
safety of other construction workers and the
public at large. The new
regulations abolished the mandatory requirement
that a crane operator
have completed the 870-hour Diploma of
Vocational Studies (DEP)
training in a professional institution before
being able to work as an
operator. The DEP is now optional. The new
required training is just a
150-hour training provided directly on the
worksite by the employer.
The regulations now only require a mere 80-hour
course for boom trucks
with a maximum capacity of 30 tonnes, after
which a worker becomes a
qualified driver. It is precisely this type of
crane that tips over the
most and causes the most damage.
The crane operators and their union have
resolutely
fought, and are still waging a fierce battle
against this attack on the
safety of construction workers and the public.
It's within this context
that the government established the Committee of
Independent Experts in
September of 2018, with a mandate to assess the
security aspect of the
new
regulations. In its report issued in March of
2019, the committee said
that the DEP remains the reference standard for
the training of crane
operators, however it has accepted that it
become optional. As an
alternative, it proposed a three-week initial
training period and that
on-site training be maintained.
- Interview, François Patry,
President, National Brotherhood
of Carpenters, FTQ-Construction Local 9 -
Demonstration at Quebec National Assembly to
demand pro-worker reform to the Act respecting
occupational health and safety,
November 27, 2019.
Workers' Forum: The Quebec
government announced a reform of the Act
respecting occupational health and safety
to be introduced in the winter of 2020.[1] How does the
issue of the reforming of the Act pose itself in
relation to the health and safety conditions in
the
workplaces which also affect the health and
safety of the public?
François Patry: We will be very
vigilant on this when they introduce the bill.
The question we will ask
is if we can make use of the Act to improve the
health and safety
conditions on construction sites. Prevention is
the key factor in
dealing with accidents and fatalities on
construction sites. We need
prevention, which means
that organizations on the ground take charge of
prevention. The
question is, as an organization, do I have a
role to play that is
important, or is it just a matter of being a
member of some committee?
Prevention means identifying the dangers in
order to
eliminate them. It means planning the equipment
and the methods of
work, and workers and employers sitting together
to look at how we are
going to do the job in order to eliminate the
danger. Prevention must
be integrated into the organization of the work
on the sites.
 The
construction sector is very dangerous. We have a
lot of accidents. We
represent five per cent of the Quebec workforce
and we have 25 per cent
of all fatal accidents year after year. This is
unacceptable. We are
facing this situation not because it is
unavoidable, that this is the
way things are and will always be in
construction. There are
reasons why these accidents occur.
In order to eliminate the causes of these
accidents we
need to have support mechanisms for the workers.
One of the important
mechanisms is the prevention representative. We
have prevention
programs on construction sites. We have a Safety
Code for construction
work that outlines solutions to the problems we
have identified, ways
to make
sure that employers use safe work methods and
equipment so as to have
control over the dangers that exist on
construction sites.
The problem is that employers always do the
minimum when
it comes to prevention. They cling to minimums,
even if we know that it
will not solve the problem, in order to create
the illusion that
problems are being solved. So then when there is
an accident, it is the
worker who is blamed.
To change this, it is necessary to have a
prevention
representative on construction sites, a worker
representative appointed
by the workers who enforces existing programs
and is trained by the
trade unions, protected by law so that he does
not lose his job, and
paid by the employers. Prevention programs often
look good, but that is
just on paper.
The problem is that the programs that exist are
not being implemented
on job sites. Even the employers' supervisors,
superintendents and
project managers often do not know about the
prevention programs.
A kind of pattern has emerged where employers
are doing
the minimum, using methods that have been
established because the work
is done faster. These methods are considered to
be cost-effective but
they create a lot of problems. Employers are
counting on the fact that
they will not be caught by the inspectors from
the Labour Standards, Pay
Equity and Workplace Health and Safety Board
(CNESST). However, CNESST
is reducing the number of inspectors more and
more. It requires that
the inspectors do more and more paperwork, which
means inspectors spend
more time in the office and less time on
construction sites.
We need prevention representatives on construction sites
who are accountable to the workers. If she or he does not do their job,
they will be replaced by the union. The employer does not have a say in
it. The accident prevention representative is independent of the
employer. The only thing the employer would do is pay her or his wages.
That is why, even if we were to be given new
programs in
the Act, new committees, although they have
their place, without the
prevention representatives to bring them to
life, the situation will
not change.
In addition, not all employers are covered by
the
mechanism calling for joint health and safety
committees because such
committees are only required when an employer
has at least 10 workers
on the job site. But 90 per cent of construction
employers do not have
10 workers. So in the end these are bogus
committees. It's like a
beautiful
showcase created to say that 'we have worksite
committees,' 'we have
prevention programs,' so the fact that there are
still accidents means
that accidents are unavoidable and must be
accepted.
It is true that we must have access to all the
mechanisms that are currently in the Act, those
that exist but are not
being implemented. It is necessary to claim all
the mechanisms of
prevention but, unlike the present situation,
there must be
enforcement. The prevention representative is
essential for enforcing
them.
In addition, prevention representatives must be
appointed on a yearly basis because construction
sites are often very
small and workers go from contract to contract.
We should actually have
flying squads of prevention representatives who
do not change according
to the contracts and who go from site to site in
a given region.
Prevention representatives would enforce the law and
regulations. They would go around the sites and talk to the workers.
They would participate in accident investigations. At the moment, we
are not entitled to do investigations; we are not even informed when
there is an accident. We sometimes learn about it a few days later,
especially on very large sites. If we have a prevention representative,
she or he will participate in the investigations and at the conclusion
of an investigation if she or he disagrees with the conclusions of the
report, she or he can register their dissent. That opinion will stay on
the record and can be used to prevent further accidents.
WF: How do you organize to defend
workers on construction sites?
FP: We have union representatives
in each
region. At Local 9 we have 23 representatives
who go to construction
sites, do labour relations and prevention. But
there are so many sites
to cover. If they denounce an employer for
failing health and safety,
it is easy for the employer to say that he will
solve the problem in
the next
few days, but by then the representative is
already somewhere else.
Prevention representatives on the sites would be
able to do the
follow-up. We must change the way of thinking,
so that employers cannot
plead innocence, cannot think that they can act
without being
accountable. We must make a change in the way
all sites operate.
In addition, with things like Bill 152 passed
in 2018 by
the Quebec government, it is increasingly
difficult for union
representatives to intervene on construction
sites.[2]
Today, as soon as we intervene to change things,
even on matters of
health and safety, when we denounce something,
the employers
say that we are threatening them. They threaten
to bring in the Quebec
Construction Commission that will declare that
there has been a
slowdown in the work and that this is a
violation of that legislation.
Yes, we may have carried out a slowdown but such
an action is allowed by
the Act respecting occupational health and
safety.
Our work is more
difficult as far as dealing with the employers
are concerned. It is also more
difficult at the level of the CNESST and it is
actually very difficult
to make them come to the sites when workers
exercise their right of
refusal. The CNESST has adopted the philosophy
that these matters are
not important, they do not have to come to
construction sites, they
will just
make a call to the employer. That's not what the
law says. The law says
that if we were not able to reach an agreement
with the employer and
have phoned the CNEEST to ask for it to
intervene, they must come to
the site, take the names of each worker, ask
them why they stopped
working. They also have to assess the danger
that is at the source
of the refusal to work, and talk to the employer
and the union and
determine whether they accept the corrective
action taken by the
employer, so that the work can actually resume.
We continue our work, we fight, we support each
other, but it's more difficult to intervene now.
Notes
1. Adopted in 1979, the Act
respecting occupational health and safety
provides for four prevention mechanisms. It is
estimated that these
mechanisms are applied to only about 12 per cent
of workers. These
mechanisms are the prevention program, the
health program, the
employer-worker
joint health/safety committee and the prevention
representative.
2. Bill 152, An Act
to Amend
Various Labour-related Legislative Provisions
Mainly to Give Effect to
Certain Charbonneau Commission Recommendations
was passed in May
2018 by the Quebec government. It criminalizes
construction workers who
defend their rights, especially on construction
sites, accusing
them of intimidation or threats "that are
reasonably likely to cause an
obstruction to or a slowdown or stoppage of
activities on a job site."
(To access articles
individually click on the black headline.)
PDF
PREVIOUS
ISSUES | HOME
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: office@cpcml.ca
|
