Share.

    2 Kommentare

    1. wewillneverhaveparis on

      No it doesn’t. Not only that if the strike lasted too long the public would have turned against the strikers anyways. Same old story my entire life.

    2. alexander1701 on

      It’s true. The system here isn’t really working out as intended.

      >[**107**]() The Minister, where the Minister deems it expedient, may do such things as to the Minister seem likely to maintain or secure industrial peace and to promote conditions favourable to the settlement of industrial disputes or differences and to those ends the Minister may refer any question to the Board or direct the Board to do such things as the Minister deems necessary.

      The goal of this section was to help facilitate rapid resolutions to industrial disputes. But the incentives it has created have achieved the opposite: employers subject to the act routinely sandbag negotiations, expecting the federal government to side with them in an impasse, securing a more favorable deal for themselves at the expense of the state at large.

      Now we’ve seen that *breaking* with this section is what produced a timely outcome, and that the Ministry’s involvement in labour disputes is somehow actually making them *worse*, not better. We need to seriously reform these provisions to ensure that the incentives for companies and for labour unions both align towards immediate and serious negotiations.

    Leave A Reply