Yes, they did, and it’s arguable still. Given how many downstream jobs and the lives attached to them would be hurt by a sustained lock out of our dual member rail oligopoly I think binding arbitration is a preferrable option.
Binding arbitration is often opposed by both employers and employees, for different reasons. Amongst employers it’s because Canadian arbitrators don’t take ability to pay / fund into consideration when determining compensation and benefit changes, and so actually favor employees more.
If there’s that much of an issue, then rail employers should actually acknowledge the power of the union, negotiate, and fucking deal. The state stepping in to kill collective action here, because it might affect people over there is done not to protect the people over there, but to ensure they don’t get any ideas of their own.
I don’t beleive that cynical take for a second. The federal government has an obligation to consider the nationwide impact of a work stoppage, especially in a natural oligopoly like rail that moves a billion dollars of goods accross the country every day.
In the end the arbitration is likely to favor the workers as it has on average in Canada.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Yes, they did, and it’s arguable still. Given how many downstream jobs and the lives attached to them would be hurt by a sustained lock out of our dual member rail oligopoly I think binding arbitration is a preferrable option.
Binding arbitration is often opposed by both employers and employees, for different reasons. Amongst employers it’s because Canadian arbitrators don’t take ability to pay / fund into consideration when determining compensation and benefit changes, and so actually favor employees more.
If there’s that much of an issue, then rail employers should actually acknowledge the power of the union, negotiate, and fucking deal. The state stepping in to kill collective action here, because it might affect people over there is done not to protect the people over there, but to ensure they don’t get any ideas of their own.
I don’t beleive that cynical take for a second. The federal government has an obligation to consider the nationwide impact of a work stoppage, especially in a natural oligopoly like rail that moves a billion dollars of goods accross the country every day. In the end the arbitration is likely to favor the workers as it has on average in Canada.