Strike While the Fire's Hot

Happy Labour Day!

I'm sitting at a comfortable distance from Ontario school contract negotiations this time out, and I don't know all the ins and outs of the various union positions, but even if I were in the building, I think I'd still lean towards turning down the arbitration option in contract negotiations.

I just don't trust Lecce. 

He's slimy, but he's also a smooth talker. I'm not sure who the arbitrator would end up being, and of course they'd be a professional with a reputation at risk if they can't clearly defend the decision they make, but way too much rides on whether they can see through his persona. This government is so overtly corrupt that we also have to ensure the arbitrator has the integrity to refuse a barrel of money or gifted cottage or any other form of bribery. Even the best of us might bend if the offer is right. I don't trust anything about this government. The Mr. X scandal might reduce the likelihood of further shenanigans - right? - because they'll be so scrutinized. Or will it just be a further distraction?

OSSTF is recommending members to vote in favour of arbitration. If the majority of the 60,000 members vote in favour, then, if they can't settle contracts by October 27, it goes to an outside arbitrator to make a final decision, and it's done. If members vote down the arbitration option, however, then next up is a strike vote for OSSTF to assess their position when continuing negotiations. 

I completely understand the desire for a done deal. It's been a year without a contract. Strikes are horrible and disruptive for everyone. They don't just affect teachers and students, but all their families as well. But that's what makes them an incredibly powerful tool. It's only under the potential collective action of all workers joining forces to refuse an unfair contract that workers can ever ensure they're not being exploited. 

In their "key facts" about their position, OSSTF explains, 

"The proposal also includes a remedy for wages that were unfairly lost under Bill 124. . . . Years of suppressed wages and deteriorating learning and working conditions has led to serious staffing and retention issues. School boards across the province are struggling to find qualified people to fill education worker and teacher positions."

I'm not sure about the stats on this, but of the teachers I know of who want to quit or who have quit, it's never about the wages. Overwhelmingly it's because of a lack of support and respect. It's most often the non-monetary issues. But that's just anecdotal.

ETFO, OECTA, and AEFO all turned down the arbitration option. Their position:

"Entering into binding arbitration at this juncture would not support the students we serve in elementary and secondary schools, as binding arbitration would all but guarantee that the key issues we have brought forward at our respective bargaining tables, which are critical to learning and working conditions in our schools, would not be addressed. . . . Furthermore, the decision to enter into binding arbitration now impacts the opportunity for meaningful local bargaining on key local issues."

And Stephanie Ross and Larry Savage outline four reasons to vote against arbitration: 

"It normalizes the idea that the right to strike is unnecessary. . . . Reliance on interest arbitration can actually increase bargaining impasses by reducing the incentive to negotiate terms that both parties can live with. . . . Researchers call this the 'narcotic effect' because both unions and management become dependent on interest arbitration to decide contract terms. . . . .Changing course in future rounds of bargaining may become difficult if leaders and members become invested in arbitration as teh primary process for resolving contentious issues. . . . Finally, arbitration is based on comparisons. That means the quality of arbitration awards is dependent on the relative success of other unions at the bargaining table to set good wages, some of whom are forced to use the right to strike to reach settlements that meet their members' needs."

I'm most concerned with that final point. Traditionally one bargaining unit affects the others. If one unit settles too soon, then the others might be a bit screwed. If ETFO wants to strike after OSSTF has settled, they have a less powerful position to work from. For strikes to have the most impact, and thereby provoke a faster resolution, everyone has to be on board. Once one group settles, it takes the steam out of other negotiating unions. 

I'm sure Lecce's aware of this and banking on just one bargaining unit to take the bait.