I have been following the progress of the strike by the USWA – Local 6500 in Sudbury with a good deal of dismay. This workers at this local have been forced into an untenable situation first, by the sale of the Company to CVRD from Brazil, and secondly, by the collapse of the world nickel market in late 2008. It is unfortunate that their collective agreement expired when it did. The prices on the nickel and copper markets at a levels lower than they have been for some years and the Vale Inco was planning an extended maintenance shutdown over the course of the summer.
It is generally conceded by anyone who has experience in organized labour that in times of economic recession, employers will plead poverty and economic hardship in order to extract concessions from labour. The massive profits leading up to the economic downturn are conveniently forgotten, The following information was found on the Union's Strike Site, (http://www.fairdealnow.ca/):
Vale has $22 Billion US (cash assets as of 31 March 2009).
Vale had $13.2 Billion US PROFIT last year (2008 after-tax profit).
Vale has made twice as much profit in 2 years, as Inco made in past 10 years.
Vale Inco collected $4.1 Billion US profit from Ontario two years (2006-2008).
Inco collected $2.2 Billion US in Ontario profits in 10 years (1996-2006).
Vale has collected big profits every year, even during economic recessions.
In the Sudbury Star, the Company has recently announced their intention of resuming production at some of their mines using company staff, unionized office, clerical and technical employees and contractors. This is the first time in the history of the Sudbury Operations that this has been attempted. It was the modus operandi of the management of Falconbridge during the Mine Mill- CAW strike in 2000-01. That brutal affair dragged on for nearly seven months. Production was maintained at Craig Mine, then the company's flagship operation. This mine was chosen because it was a blasthole, or bulk mining operation that required a smaller workforce to produce the tonnage the company wanted. After the strike was over it was apparent that the tonnage produced was such that the effective reserves, of the mine, had been significantly depleted, and the mine life greatly shortened. This effectively knocked the economic structure of the company out of balance. The greater portion of the company's fixed cost structure fell on the lower grade, higher cost operations relying on cut and fill mining methods, such as Strathcona, Fraser, and Thayer Lindsay. When the nickel and copper prices collapsed on the world markets, as a result of the economic downturn late last year, the end result was that the entire economic structure of the Xstrata Sudbury Operations, (formerly Falconbridge), collapsed. They were all closed down in February 2009, with the exception of one new operation, Nickel Rim South, which is currently being rushed into full production.
It is interesting to note that many members of the management team in the years leading up to the collapse of Falconbridge in the Sudbury Basin are now on the management team at Vale Inco. It seems that this group is determined to use the same tactics against Local 6500, that were used against Mine Mill, even if it results in the destruction of the company.
It is clear that this will be a prolonged strike and that labour must act to support the struggle for a fair contract of their Brothers and Sisters at Vale Inco.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Negotiations Appear Headed for the "Ditch"
There is a looming crisis in area of labour relations in this country. One only has to read the comments after any article remotely related to business, labour, or strikes to see any number of comments opposed to any form a labour activism. Most are ill-informed, some downright venomous. The point is, that they are the result of an active campaign by business, and the conservative elements of government that have gradually begun to take hold. When times were good, workers were told that they didn't need unions because the corporations would look after them. Individual actions versus collective activism were promoted. Now that the bubble has burst, we are told that unions are greedy, and society can't afford them. On the government side, labour legislation has gradually been watered down and programs meant to protect workers such as workman's compensation, and unemployment insurance have been gutted. Good luck trying to deal with an unfair employer, or a unsympathetic bureaucracy if you are a worker in need.
A good example of the tactics being used by business to destroy the effectiveness of unions can be seen in the actions of Vale Inco in their current negotiations with the USWA at the Sudbury and Port Colborne operations. The Company is demanding concessions in the areas of wages, and contract language as well as a major restructuring of the current pension plan. In the Sudbury Star article referenced below, it is reported that the company wants to reduce the nickel bonus paid to the workforce. In the Globe and Mail, the Company sites this as one of the reasons that the Sudbury Operations are not viable. Nickel Bonus is a misnomer. This is not a bonus based on the price of nickel, but a bonus based on the profits achieved by the company. As such it cannot have any impact on the viability of the Sudbury operations. No profit, no bonus. This is an area that is often commented on by the ill-informed union bashers as an example of union greed.
The issue of frequency of being able to change jobs is a clear attempt by the Company to gut the seniority provisions of the collective agreement. This seems on the surface a simple request by the company that would allow them to “streamline” the administration of their workplace. However, anyone who has any background in labour relations would see this as a bright red warning light that is clearly the thin edge of the wedge designed to destroy the seniority provisions of every aspect of the collective agreement. In conjunction with the proposed two tier pension plan, the effect would also be to pit the older and younger workers against each other.
The changes to the pension plan would allow the company to cap the current defined benefit pension plan and place any workers hired after 2010 into a defined contribution plan. The article by Jim Stanford explains the magnitude of this concession demanded by the company from its workforce.
On the other hand, in the face of these types of assaults on the unions by both management and companies, organized labour has been for all intents and purposes been asleep at the wheel. These are not the isolated skirmishes by individual employers or industry groups of years past. These are much more organized and widespread and with the support of the political right, more effective. They have been aided and abetted by a Canadian media that has over the past quarter century become more conservative and concentrated in the hands of a few. The Labour Movement must begin to react to these assaults quickly or face becoming an increasingly irrelevant force for social change. A key strategy that needs to be adopted by unions is the realization the unions are more than an organization that was formed to look after the economic needs of a group of workers in a workplace but part of a broader social movement. In other words, unions need to reach out to each other and organize their responses to the assaults made against the working classes. They also need to engage their own memberships. Once organized, a union cannot afford to become complacent and ignore their own members. An old tennet of the Mine Mill and Smelter Workers Union from the 1940's was the one of the chief duties of the union leadership was to organize themselves. Many in the modern labour movement have been overwhelmed or have lost sight of this aspect of the job.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/vale-ceo-calls-sudbury-unit-not-sustainable/article1209841/
http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1646633
Update: Vale Inco has posted their latest contract proposals online: http://www.northernlife.ca/News/LocalNews/2009/vale080709.asp?NLStory=vale080709
A good example of the tactics being used by business to destroy the effectiveness of unions can be seen in the actions of Vale Inco in their current negotiations with the USWA at the Sudbury and Port Colborne operations. The Company is demanding concessions in the areas of wages, and contract language as well as a major restructuring of the current pension plan. In the Sudbury Star article referenced below, it is reported that the company wants to reduce the nickel bonus paid to the workforce. In the Globe and Mail, the Company sites this as one of the reasons that the Sudbury Operations are not viable. Nickel Bonus is a misnomer. This is not a bonus based on the price of nickel, but a bonus based on the profits achieved by the company. As such it cannot have any impact on the viability of the Sudbury operations. No profit, no bonus. This is an area that is often commented on by the ill-informed union bashers as an example of union greed.
The issue of frequency of being able to change jobs is a clear attempt by the Company to gut the seniority provisions of the collective agreement. This seems on the surface a simple request by the company that would allow them to “streamline” the administration of their workplace. However, anyone who has any background in labour relations would see this as a bright red warning light that is clearly the thin edge of the wedge designed to destroy the seniority provisions of every aspect of the collective agreement. In conjunction with the proposed two tier pension plan, the effect would also be to pit the older and younger workers against each other.
The changes to the pension plan would allow the company to cap the current defined benefit pension plan and place any workers hired after 2010 into a defined contribution plan. The article by Jim Stanford explains the magnitude of this concession demanded by the company from its workforce.
On the other hand, in the face of these types of assaults on the unions by both management and companies, organized labour has been for all intents and purposes been asleep at the wheel. These are not the isolated skirmishes by individual employers or industry groups of years past. These are much more organized and widespread and with the support of the political right, more effective. They have been aided and abetted by a Canadian media that has over the past quarter century become more conservative and concentrated in the hands of a few. The Labour Movement must begin to react to these assaults quickly or face becoming an increasingly irrelevant force for social change. A key strategy that needs to be adopted by unions is the realization the unions are more than an organization that was formed to look after the economic needs of a group of workers in a workplace but part of a broader social movement. In other words, unions need to reach out to each other and organize their responses to the assaults made against the working classes. They also need to engage their own memberships. Once organized, a union cannot afford to become complacent and ignore their own members. An old tennet of the Mine Mill and Smelter Workers Union from the 1940's was the one of the chief duties of the union leadership was to organize themselves. Many in the modern labour movement have been overwhelmed or have lost sight of this aspect of the job.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/vale-ceo-calls-sudbury-unit-not-sustainable/article1209841/
http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1646633
Update: Vale Inco has posted their latest contract proposals online: http://www.northernlife.ca/News/LocalNews/2009/vale080709.asp?NLStory=vale080709
Friday, June 26, 2009
Thoughts on the "Garbage Strike", (revised)
I have been following some of the reporting of the CUPE strike in Toronto, especially with regard to the garbage situation. To be honest, it is difficult not to be aware of this situation, and the opinions held by the Union, the City, and the populace of Toronto. As the holder of a senior leadership position in a larger private sector local, (in a previous life), I have definite opinions with regard to most matters regarding organized labour. Up front, I support the position of the Union regarding the issues surrounding concessions demanded by the employer.
All labour negotiations that go into the ditch and result in a labour disruption are political acts. There are clearly two strategies in dealing with the current garbage situation. The first, and it appears that is the track the Union has chosen, it a complete withdrawal of all services and a militant posture that paints both management, and the users of the system, (the people), as the adversary. This is partially the result of biased reporting in the media and the Union's "take no prisoners", strategy. Who is to blame actually, is mostly irrelevant. The Unions's position, can be an effective tactic, but it requires a clear winner, and a clear loser. In this case the populace with likely eventually have to concede, or force back to work legislation, but the Union will in the end, have lost the support the people. It cannot be overstated that the Union does represent a workforce in the public service.
The second strategy would be in my opinion as effective in the short term and less damaging to the Union in the long term. Politically they should adopt a less confrontational posture, in their dealings with the populace. There should be an effort made to assist the public in any way they can, (without breaking their own strike of course). This should include efforts such as assisting the people at the transfer stations, by helping people carry their trash bags, minimizing any delays, public displays of good citizenship, such as cleaning up litter in parks, and beaches etc. This may seen counter-intuitive, but in the end public support can help end this strike and not leave everyone with a bitter taste in their mouths. In other words, they need to be seen not as the problem, but in a sympathetic light. Public opinion will support a victim before an aggressor.
Unions in these times of recession have enough of a public relations problem without leaving everyone with the impression that they are greedy, inflexible, and/or totally self-serving. Strikes are a result of the failure of negotiations, and should not be used as an excuse to declare war on everyone not in the local. When it is over, and it will eventually come to an end, the Union will still have to deal with management, and and the public. It is obvious that it is easier to organize and operate in an environment that is sympathetic to organized labour rather, than with the hostility now being suborned by the Union's strike strategy.
I ran across a blog this evening and stand corrected. Although I don't usually agree with Warren Kinsella's point of view, he has provided another point of view regarding the tactics of the union, one that hasn't been covered in the main stream media.
http://www.warrenkinsella.com/index.php
I went to the CUPE Local 416 site and I still support their actions but still believe they are losing the PR part of this fight. They are up against a lot of media bias but even finding their site wasn't totally simple with a Google search and it is not the best layout to get their message out.
http://www.local416.org/
All labour negotiations that go into the ditch and result in a labour disruption are political acts. There are clearly two strategies in dealing with the current garbage situation. The first, and it appears that is the track the Union has chosen, it a complete withdrawal of all services and a militant posture that paints both management, and the users of the system, (the people), as the adversary. This is partially the result of biased reporting in the media and the Union's "take no prisoners", strategy. Who is to blame actually, is mostly irrelevant. The Unions's position, can be an effective tactic, but it requires a clear winner, and a clear loser. In this case the populace with likely eventually have to concede, or force back to work legislation, but the Union will in the end, have lost the support the people. It cannot be overstated that the Union does represent a workforce in the public service.
The second strategy would be in my opinion as effective in the short term and less damaging to the Union in the long term. Politically they should adopt a less confrontational posture, in their dealings with the populace. There should be an effort made to assist the public in any way they can, (without breaking their own strike of course). This should include efforts such as assisting the people at the transfer stations, by helping people carry their trash bags, minimizing any delays, public displays of good citizenship, such as cleaning up litter in parks, and beaches etc. This may seen counter-intuitive, but in the end public support can help end this strike and not leave everyone with a bitter taste in their mouths. In other words, they need to be seen not as the problem, but in a sympathetic light. Public opinion will support a victim before an aggressor.
Unions in these times of recession have enough of a public relations problem without leaving everyone with the impression that they are greedy, inflexible, and/or totally self-serving. Strikes are a result of the failure of negotiations, and should not be used as an excuse to declare war on everyone not in the local. When it is over, and it will eventually come to an end, the Union will still have to deal with management, and and the public. It is obvious that it is easier to organize and operate in an environment that is sympathetic to organized labour rather, than with the hostility now being suborned by the Union's strike strategy.
I ran across a blog this evening and stand corrected. Although I don't usually agree with Warren Kinsella's point of view, he has provided another point of view regarding the tactics of the union, one that hasn't been covered in the main stream media.
http://www.warrenkinsella.com/index.php
I went to the CUPE Local 416 site and I still support their actions but still believe they are losing the PR part of this fight. They are up against a lot of media bias but even finding their site wasn't totally simple with a Google search and it is not the best layout to get their message out.
http://www.local416.org/
Monday, June 22, 2009
"Remembering fallen mine workers"
Remembering fallen mine workers is the title, (and link), to a story that appeared in Sudbury's Northern Life this weekend. It is the story of a tragic event that took place in 1984 at Falconbridge Limited's No. 5 Shaft a few miles north of Sudbury. Although not personally involved, (I was on the opposite shift at the time), this single event has had a profound and far reaching effect on my working career and the repercussions have been felt throughout the working world. After the rockburst, production at the mine ceased and it was placed on a salvage basis and only the shafts and ore transportation systems were maintained. I continued working at what was known at Falconbridge East End mines for another seven years before moving to the "West End". No one who worked there ever forgot how quickly things can go horribly wrong on the job and just how much diligence is required to keep a workplace, any workplace, safe.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Conservatives are at Best Only Capable of Mismanagement.
I am puzzled as to what our Federal Government is doing. Perhaps I shouldn't be, after all this particular government hasn't shown a lot of promise when it comes to putting the people first. Their game plan seems to be all about self-preservation and posturing in front of the media.
In the Toronto Star, today, ('Virtually nothing coming' from Tory stimulus fund) there was an article that detailed how little of the money allocated for infrastructure stimulus has actually been released by the feds. The numbers are pitiful.
To be fair, I will also include a link that illustrates the Conservative Government's position, (Flaherty looks for way to end stimulus). So it seems that Harper and Flaherty are ready to unilaterally declare an end to the recession and leave the unemployed in this country to their own devices. This position seems to be echoed by cabinet when, "Human Resources Minister Diane Finley said EI changes were far from a done deal and would depend on the state of the economy." in today's Ottawa Sun.
It appears that it is long past time to consider the competence of our current government. I am ready for an election on these issues. It would be an expensive to be sure, but the Conservatives clearly have no plan and leaving things as they are is potentially more damaging than not.
In the Toronto Star, today, ('Virtually nothing coming' from Tory stimulus fund) there was an article that detailed how little of the money allocated for infrastructure stimulus has actually been released by the feds. The numbers are pitiful.
To be fair, I will also include a link that illustrates the Conservative Government's position, (Flaherty looks for way to end stimulus). So it seems that Harper and Flaherty are ready to unilaterally declare an end to the recession and leave the unemployed in this country to their own devices. This position seems to be echoed by cabinet when, "Human Resources Minister Diane Finley said EI changes were far from a done deal and would depend on the state of the economy." in today's Ottawa Sun.
It appears that it is long past time to consider the competence of our current government. I am ready for an election on these issues. It would be an expensive to be sure, but the Conservatives clearly have no plan and leaving things as they are is potentially more damaging than not.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Harper-speak
Stephen Harper, in Cambridge, this morning, told Canadians they should be pleased that his government has managed to keep the deficit at $50 billion, while lowering taxes. This is good, prudent financial management? The conservatives blew the budget surplus left by the previous government in an ill considered GST reduction that has had little impact on the average Canadian's life. They took a balanced budget, and ran it into deficit, all the while continuing their tax reduction plans and ran us into the hole even further, potentially to the tune of $134 billion, (according to TD Bank economists).
I will grant that we are in a major economic downturn worldwide, but the actions of our federal government haven't done much to mitigate the problem...
I will grant that we are in a major economic downturn worldwide, but the actions of our federal government haven't done much to mitigate the problem...
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
What Is Going On At Chalk River?
Lost in the media feeding frenzy surrounding Natural Resources Minister, Lisa Raitt's inappropriate, and insensitive remarks surrounding the "sexy medical isotopes issue", was Stephen Harper's pronouncement that Canada would eventually be out of the medical isotope business. There are some serious issues that need to be publicly aired before the Federal Government proceeds with this course of action. I, like most Canadians, haven't enough information to either agree or disagree with their plans. We need to examine the history of how it is that the AECL has effectively melted down economically since the Conservatives came to power. Also, who is going to gain from the failure and sale of the AECL? Canada is the supplier of 80% of the medical isotopes used in this country, and 40% of the isotopes used worldwide. In the early '90's the isotope marketing business Nordion was sold to MDS and AECL took back a forty year contract to supply medical isotopes to MDS-Nordion. Now that Harper has announced the shutdown of the aging Chalk River reactor, and the shelving of the Maple reactor project, (originally planned to replace Chalk River), MDS has launched a $1.65 billion lawsuit against the Federal Government, (guess who pays the costs on that?).
Further, now that they are shutting that facility down, what is going to happen to all of the spent nuclear fuel stored at the Chalk River site, and where will they store the ever increasing stockpile of nuclear waste?
This country definitely needs a long term policy to deal with the nuclear issue and short term economics, or political expediency shouldn't be the main criteria in making any of these decisions.
For additional information, check the links below:
http://thetyee.ca/News/2009/06/09/LittleReactorsCouldnt/
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/feb2008/cana-f22.shtml
http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/457036
Further, now that they are shutting that facility down, what is going to happen to all of the spent nuclear fuel stored at the Chalk River site, and where will they store the ever increasing stockpile of nuclear waste?
This country definitely needs a long term policy to deal with the nuclear issue and short term economics, or political expediency shouldn't be the main criteria in making any of these decisions.
For additional information, check the links below:
http://thetyee.ca/News/2009/06/09/LittleReactorsCouldnt/
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/feb2008/cana-f22.shtml
http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/457036
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
