This study examines the growing danger of labour-related work stoppages across Canada. These stoppages refer to both employer-initiated lockouts and worker-led strikes. It argues that Canada has been dealing with an increasing frequency of national work stoppages that can harm the economy and negatively affect the livelihood of Canadians. In the recent rail strike, for example, the federal government has imposed binding arbitration on both parties to pre-emptively thwart, or at least slow-down, paralyzing the country. Both unions and the union-friendly NDP, have criticized the government’s move to force binding arbitration on both sides. Nevertheless, this study argues that binding arbitration is justified in defending the public interest when industries crucial to the national interest are threatened with work stoppages.
The author argues that an adversarial model of labour relations has affected the government’s ability to articulate a public interest clearly. The author also notes how judicial activism has “constitutionalized” some elements of the labour relations system—including the ‘right’ to strike—which creates difficulties for the government to use its authority to end strikes. In this study, the author compares Canadian unionization rates to that of the United States.
The study documents that previously both the United States and Canada had a much more conciliatory labour relations model that quite clearly emphasized avoiding work stoppages. The author makes a plea to return to such a model while recognizing the changing policy environment in Canada. Finally, the study concludes with a few recommendations that could re-orient our labour relations system so that the public interest has a higher priority.
Download the full report. (24 pages)
