Air Canada: Abschnitt 107 des Arbeitsgesetzes ist „tot“; sagt Gewerkschaftsführer
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/article/after-air-canada-strike-section-107-of-labour-code-is-dead-says-union-leader/
Air Canada: Abschnitt 107 des Arbeitsgesetzes ist „tot“; sagt Gewerkschaftsführer
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/article/after-air-canada-strike-section-107-of-labour-code-is-dead-says-union-leader/
8 Kommentare
>Daniel Safayeni, president and CEO of FETCO, an employers’ association comprised of federally regulated firms within the transportation and communications sectors
>He said unions are entitled to challenge decisions in court but can’t just ignore orders because that “sets a dangerous precedent.”
>“That is normalizing behaviour that frankly, I think when we look south of the border, we see it and we are shocked and disappointed to see it, and I don’t think we want to replicate those same norms here,” Safayeni said.
Fuck this guy so hard. So he’s looked at the state of labour in the US right now and said „yup, we need to weaken worker rights“. Talk about failing the open book test.
I’m so happy the union defied this and set the precedent that all unions should ignore this. You shouldn’t be able to be labeled „essential“ just because shareholders lose money. We need much more massive strikes to cripple the world economy to pull some power back from the oligarchs.
[removed]
After decades of employers doing everything to maximize profita, including breaking many laws, lobbying to change laws to limit their financial exposure to the environmental costs of their processes and driving wages as low as they can, all while driving up every necessary cost of living, all so they can have a slightly bigger megayatch, and Mr. Safayeni has the audacity to say this is the problem?
Workers need to stand together, take back their governments, take back their economy and their country from those who would destroy everything just to move their name up a list of who is slightly more obscenely rich.
Man I just read section 107 and it’s kind of a ridiculous section anyway.
>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.
What does that even mean? Like I know that legal text isn’t always the most readable for laymen, but if any section looks like it should be killed and re-written, I would definitely vote this one off the island.
There isn’t enough jail space for everyone.
It’d be easier for the government to just follow the law.
Strong words without having actually tested the code.
The union backed down and accepted the same amount of money as before the strike, just spread differently between flying and ground work, before the back-to-work order reached judicial review.
Given that, and the „end of unpaid work“ that doesnt end any „unpaid work“ that takes more than 60-70 minutes, CUPE seems to be near the bone breaking threshold for stretching this *win*.
This is familiar to anyone whos been in a CUPE union before though. They’ve apparently never not won, while simultaneously casting every *winning* contract as a step off slave labor when its time for the next one.
I’m not sure if people will fully appreciate what happened here. It’s getting global attention and workers of every country are taking notice.
Basic reminder that section 107 of the labour code does not explicitly allow for the Minister of Labour (or ‚Jobs Minister‘ as they’re now called for some stupid reason) to break a strike. There’s a very high chance that if a constitutional challenge went through that the Court would rule it does not allow them to do so.