City of Toronto and CUPE 416 Need to Take the ‘water under the bridge approach’ to Retaliation
This is a no-brainer. The City of Toronto needs to forget about trying to fire workers who acted up on the line during the strike. CUPE 416 decided not to vote today to ratify the collective agreement when the City refused to agree not to take measures against workers who misbehaved on the line. Generally the Union and the City agree to overlook the misbehaviour and wrongs each commits during a strike as part of a collective agreement.
There are over 600 workers who crossed the line who need the City to protect them from expulsion proceedings that would see them lose their jobs for crossing the line, but the City seems prepared to risk the jobs of those individuals to go after some militant strikers.
What the City should have done is called the police if there was objectionable behaviour happening on the line that they wanted addressed. Waiting until the strike has ended to decide to go after workers who misbehaved seems to me like a bad idea that both risks serious and irreversible harm to the City’s allies in both CUPE 416 and 79 and the City’s relationship with unions.
I think all Torontonians want this strike to end, we want our workers back at work and our Council to get the job done – the City needs to get out of the way and let it happen.
Let’s go guys, shake hands, agree to move forward together, and repair the relationship through a mutual protection of those each side would otherwise seek to punish.
Tags: City of Toronto, City of Toronto Garbage Strike, City of Toronto Strike, City of Toronto Strike Agreement, City of Toronto Strike Negotiations Update, City of Toronto Strike Update, City of Toronto's Offer to Unions, CUPE 416, CUPE 416 negotiation update, CUPE 416 Tentative Agreement, CUPE 79, CUPE 79 negotiation update, Day 36, July 26 Strike Update, July 27, Sick Pay benefits in Toronto, Toronto Child Care, Toronto Strike, Toronto Strike Tentative Agreement
July 30th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
I can’t disagree with you more on this issue. Why should picketers who have misbehaved be forgiven as part of the contract package? If the law was broken, then the correct enforcement action should be taken. Should you not be pushing for reform in the law to protect the workers who chose to cross the line to return back to work? Surely, you must agree that there should be better protection for those workers than appeasement.
July 30th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Darren,
The City doesnt write labour laws so they need to negotiate protection of picket crossers.
I did say I supported the City reporting illegal activity to the police and having it addressed while it is relevent.
August 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 am
I wonder if one of those law breaking, striking union workers committed assault on you or damaged your property if you would have the same outlook. The members who broke the law should be charged simple as that. I can’t even find words to describe how “wacked” your way of thinking is suggesting those law breaking people should be forgiven.
Luis
August 2nd, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Luis – I do not support forgiving individuals who violated law. I am saying if incidents occurred they need to be addressed through our criminal process, not employment law. I do not support allowing for the mass firings of hard working CUPE 79 and 416 members who crossed the picket line, which would occur in retaliation for using employment law to punish folks who violated criminal law. Does that not seem reasonable?
If you were assaulted or if the City believed assaults took place then you or they should have contacted the police like everyone else – and not hoped to seek some kind of revenge by firing individuals weeks after the fact and causing serious economic harm to them.
We have police for a reason, they are intended to be involved in situations of law breaking. I strongly believe that criminal law, not employment law is the remedy for such situations and frankly would not support risking some six hundred workers jobs, so I can get one individual fired out of revenge.
That is the height of irresponsibility in my mind.