This whole situation disgusts me. The government legislates them back to work and will most likely impose a contract on them. What is the point of having a union if the government won't negotiate with them. And what did the government expect the employees to do? If I was forced to take a 15% wage cut I'd fucking strike too.CBC wrote:VANCOUVER - The unions representing 40,000 health support workers who have been on strike in British Columbia have been found in contempt of court.
The decision was handed down by the B.C. Supreme Court on Sunday afternoon.
The health employers were hoping the judge would impose fines on those who ignore an order from the B.C. Labour Relations Board to return to work.
The judge said he would make a decision on fines later this week.
A lawyer for the Health Employers Association of B.C. called the walkout by more than 40,000 members of the Hospital Employees Union a series of "protest lines" and not a legal strike.
On Friday the labour board backed the province's back-to-work legislation. The legislation includes what amounts to a 15-per-cent wage cut, some of which is achieved by moving to an extended work week.
B.C. Health Minister Colin Hansen says the government will negotiate some aspects of Bill 37, but not now. "We are not negotiating with them until the illegal pickets stop."
But the government's problems aren't over yet. The striking health workers are heading into their second week on the picket lines and the province's transit workers and teachers say they will join the strike on Monday to show support.
B.C. health workers in contempt of court
Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital
B.C. health workers in contempt of court
From Canada's propoganda ministry, the CBC.
M1891/30: A bad day on the range is better then a good day at work.
How exactly does one differentiate between "protest lines" and a strike?
I'm presuming the "protest lines" were made up of the workers and those people thought they were on strike, so how is that not a strike?
Anyway, the US has an almost constant shortage of nurses so if anyone knows any of those people just let them know the USA could use them.
I'm presuming the "protest lines" were made up of the workers and those people thought they were on strike, so how is that not a strike?
Anyway, the US has an almost constant shortage of nurses so if anyone knows any of those people just let them know the USA could use them.
By the pricking of my thumb,
Something wicked this way comes.
Open, locks,
Whoever knocks.
Something wicked this way comes.
Open, locks,
Whoever knocks.
-
Vohu Manah
- Jedi Knight
- Posts: 775
- Joined: 2004-03-28 07:38am
- Location: Harford County, Maryland
- Contact:
Is there a law in Canada specifically prohibiting them from going on strike?
“There are two kinds of people in the world: the kind who think it’s perfectly reasonable to strip-search a 13-year-old girl suspected of bringing ibuprofen to school, and the kind who think those people should be kept as far away from children as possible … Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference between drug warriors and child molesters.” - Jacob Sullum[/size][/align]
No law against going on strike in Canada.
HOWEVER, 'illegal' strike would seem to imply (forgive me, for I care not about the details of a strike on the other side of the country) that they didn't have a legitamate reason for going on strike.
(There are rules for it)
The best way to say it is, during the last contract negotitaions at work (I work for an Ontario government ministry), there was a report the negotations were not going well, and someone at a union meeting said 'well, let's go on strike right now' (before the dead line) and he was told 'no, that would be illegal, we have to wait for the deadline to come and go. (insert stuff about negotiations in good faith here)'
HOWEVER, 'illegal' strike would seem to imply (forgive me, for I care not about the details of a strike on the other side of the country) that they didn't have a legitamate reason for going on strike.
(There are rules for it)
The best way to say it is, during the last contract negotitaions at work (I work for an Ontario government ministry), there was a report the negotations were not going well, and someone at a union meeting said 'well, let's go on strike right now' (before the dead line) and he was told 'no, that would be illegal, we have to wait for the deadline to come and go. (insert stuff about negotiations in good faith here)'
-
Col. Crackpot
- That Obnoxious Guy
- Posts: 10228
- Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
- Location: Rhode Island
- Contact:
Its even worse in the states. The Federal Aviation Administration, or FAA has a requirement that when you join you MUST join the FAA Union. This is Federal law. Back in the early 80s this Union decided to strike. Every single person who went on strike was fired. These people were required by law to join the Union, and when the did what the Union decided they got fired.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
-
Col. Crackpot
- That Obnoxious Guy
- Posts: 10228
- Joined: 2002-10-28 05:04pm
- Location: Rhode Island
- Contact:
that was an illegal strike IIRC. Also, The Union couln't have expected Reagan to sit on his hands while the entire air traffic control system suddenly shut down. I feel bad for the people, nut the blame for that fiasco rests on the crooked shoulders of the greedy Union leadership.Alyeska wrote:Its even worse in the states. The Federal Aviation Administration, or FAA has a requirement that when you join you MUST join the FAA Union. This is Federal law. Back in the early 80s this Union decided to strike. Every single person who went on strike was fired. These people were required by law to join the Union, and when the did what the Union decided they got fired.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
In other words the FAA workers were by law required to join a powerless union and had to pay all union dues. Still the governments fault.Col. Crackpot wrote:that was an illegal strike IIRC. Also, The Union couln't have expected Reagan to sit on his hands while the entire air traffic control system suddenly shut down. I feel bad for the people, nut the blame for that fiasco rests on the crooked shoulders of the greedy Union leadership.Alyeska wrote:Its even worse in the states. The Federal Aviation Administration, or FAA has a requirement that when you join you MUST join the FAA Union. This is Federal law. Back in the early 80s this Union decided to strike. Every single person who went on strike was fired. These people were required by law to join the Union, and when the did what the Union decided they got fired.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."