CHAPTER 13

The Union–Management
Framework
HRM focuses on the shared interests of workers
and managers in the success of their enterprise.
Conflict is de-emphasized in favour of “win–win”
scenarios where problems are solved or put aside
to fulfill organizational objectives. By contrast,
industrial relations assumes conflict is inherent in
the employment relationship.
DAPHNE GOTTLIEB TARAS, ALLEN PONAK, AND
MORLEY GUNDERSON1
Page 349
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
1. LO1Discuss the major reasons why workers join unions.
1. LO2Describe the structure of Canadian unions.
1. LO3Summarize the core legal principles relating to collective
bargaining.
1. LO4Explain how a union organizing campaign is carried out.
1. LO5Outline the key steps in negotiating a union contract.
1. LO6List common techniques to resolve disputes.
1. LO7Describe how unions affect the human resource management
environment.
1. LO8Suggest ways to build union–management cooperation.
Workers may join together and form a union—an organization with the
legal authority to represent workers, negotiate the terms and conditions
of employment with the employer, and administer the collective
agreement.
Many successful companies have one or more unions among their
employees. While unionized organizations are often lumped together,
there is growing evidence that the quality of the relationship between an
employer and a union is a major factor in predicting firm performance.
Still, the presence of a union places limits on the role of human resource
management, and many managers find these new limitations hard to
accept:
CUPE Local 118 in Saint John, New Brunswick, had a clause in its contract
with the city that guaranteed a minimum number of full-time outside
employees. The clause, which was introduced in the early 1980s, had been
renewed several times to avoid damaging union–management relations
and labour unrest. Terry Totten, former city manager, believed that the
clause was fundamentally wrong and impaired the ability of the city to save
money by contracting out services. Union officials reported that the clause
had been introduced to stop corruption, poor-quality work, and kickback
schemes with outside contractors, and they believed that the clause
benefited both employees and taxpayers. In June 2020, the city ratified a
new five-year deal with the union that permitted a minimum staffing level
of 235 positions but allowed for the reduction of up to 43 positions using
attrition. According to city councilor David Merrithew, “I asked staff if we
could negotiate something like contracting out of our garbage. We need
more flexibility to do something like that. No one can tell me that we
wouldn’t be better off without a minimum manning clause.”2
Page 350
As shown in Figure 13-1, the industrial relations and human resource
perspectives on workplace conflict are somewhat different.

Industrial Relations Perspective

1. Conflict stems from an employer–employee power imbalance.
2. Conflict between labour and management is enduring.
3. Correcting the power imbalance between labour and management often
requires institutional intervention in the forms of union representation and
legislation.
4. Conflict can be constructive even when the conflict is addressed in an
adversarial, non–problem-solving fashion.
Human Resource Perspective
1. Conflict stems from poor management.
2. Conflict can be partially reduced by organizational and workplace
innovations that build an employer–employee unity of interests.
3. Conflict can further be reduced by cooperative, mutual gains–oriented
problem-solving techniques.
4. As a result of improved management, conflict will fade from the
employment relationship.
FIGURE 13-1

Industrial Relations and Human Resource Perspectives on Workplace Conflict

Table Summary: Summary

LO1Why Employees Seek

Union Representation
Unions do not just happen. They are frequently caused by some
management action or inaction that workers perceive as unfair. For
example, in a 6:1 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the
RCMP’s internal system for negotiating workplace issues was grossly
unfair and gave Mounties the right to join a union.3 In 2019, the RCMP
voted to certify the National Police Federation (NPF) as its bargaining
agent. It is expected that policing costs will rise in those municipalities
using RCMP services with the negotiation of the collective
agreement.4 Once a union is organized, it becomes the employees’
bargaining agent and the employer is legally obligated to meet with the
union and bargain a labour contract called a collective agreement. The
collective agreement, which is known as the “rule book” by some
managers and union officials, addresses a variety of issues, such as wages
and benefits, hours of work, and working conditions, as well as related
issues including grievance procedures, safety standards, probationary
periods, and work assignments. The collective agreement is usually
negotiated between the local union’s bargaining committee and the
human resource or industrial relations department.
Page 351
The collective agreement places restrictions on management’s rights in
managing the workplace. When a new collective agreement is negotiated,
it is important that supervisors and managers dealing with unionized
employees be made aware of the terms of the agreement and provided
with training regarding the interpretation and application of the new
agreement. All too often, a union grievance arises because the supervisor
did not understand the terms of the collective agreement.

Causes of Unionization
Why do employees join unions? The reasons for joining a union vary
from person to person, and there is no single force that motivates people
to join unions. Instead, perceptions are shaped by a variety of reasons.
The union push explanation asserts that some employees are pushed or
forced into joining a union because of employer treatment of the
workforce, peer pressure by co-workers to join a union, or collective
agreement provisions requiring an employee to join if they want the job
in question. The union pull explanation states that employees are pulled
into the union because of the benefits of union representation (such as
higher wages, greater benefits, job security, and grievance
representation). Consider the comments of one union organizer:
“Without a union an employer can fire you whenever they feel like it. If
you’re visibly queer or trans, that unemployment period is likely to be
much longer.”5
When considering union joining, it is important to distinguish between
the desire for union representation and the opportunity to join a
union. Three factors—job dissatisfaction, individual attitudes toward
unions in general, and perceived union instrumentality (beliefs about
what unions can do for an employee)—appear to be most important in an
individual’s decision to join a union.6
Reasons for not joining a union are equally diverse. Workers who want to
become managers may believe union membership damages their chances
for promotion. Other employees view unions as “just another boss” that
leads to extra costs, such as union dues or lost wages from strikes.
Likewise, past experiences or isolated stories of union wrongdoing may
cause some people to form a negative opinion of collective action. Also,
employer policies and supervisory treatment may be fair, and,
consequently, employees are not motivated to join a union.
As the following example shows, people within a community may have
vastly differing views concerning unionization:
In the small town of Brooks, Alberta, a strike shut down the Lakeside
Packers slaughterhouse. Management was determined to open the plant
(which employed about one-quarter of the town’s population) during the
dispute, which divided the town. While some citizens strongly supported
the employees and their union, others were concerned that the strike
would hurt other businesses in the community and leave lasting
divisions among the town’s residents. Striking workers were very upset—
despite an Alberta Labour Relations Board order that banned strikers
from doing more than delaying vehicles seeking to enter the plant,
workers were committed to restricting access to the facility. As one
worker stated, “If they kill us, they can go in. This is modern slavery for
me.”7

© Steve Russell/Toronto Star via Getty Images

Having a union means strikes and walkouts. Are unions necessary in today’s organizational
environment, with labour and pay equity laws safeguarding workers?

Canadians’ Views Toward Unions

A survey by Leger of 1,400 Canadian adults examined their attitudes
toward unions. While the survey provides important information, the
results are aggregated and important differences may exist among
workers based on demographic characteristics. For a few of the
questions, responses from a Nanos survey are presented. Some of the
major findings with regard to attitudes toward work and employers are
reported below:
• Among Canadians who are not unionized, 19 percent reported that
they were very or somewhat interested in being unionized, 2
percent didn’t know or refused to respond, and 79 percent did
not want to be unionized.
• Among current union members, 71 percent would prefer to be
unionized. Among formerly unionized workers, 46 percent would
prefer to be unionized.
• Among respondents, 71 percent of current union members believed
that unions are as relevant today as they have ever been. Support
for this statement dropped to 46 percent for former union
 members and 42 percent for respondents who had never been in
a union.
• When forming a union in or removing a union from the workplace,
86 percent of current union employees and 83 percent of
nonunion employees believe that a secret ballot vote should be
required.8
Page 352

A CAUT Harris-Decima poll conducted at about the same time revealed

that about 70 percent of participants agreed that unions are still needed,
about 42 percent indicated that they would never join a union, 40
percent supported the position that governments should have the right
to impose contracts on public sector unions, and about 44 percent felt
that public sector unions should not have the right to strike.9

Employer Views Toward Unions

A Canadian HR Reporter survey of human resource professionals
examined their views toward unions. The study revealed several
important trends:
• Of participants, 27 percent thought the union had the upper hand
in bargaining, while 52 percent did not.
• 52 percent believed that economic conditions had pitted unionized
workers against management.
• 42 percent reported that the number of grievances had increased
over the previous three years, 44 percent indicated no change,
and 13 percent believed there had been a decrease.
• 62 percent perceived that there was a growing trend for employers
and unions to work together to find solutions to problems.
• 19 percent of respondents believed that unions had had a large
financial impact on the employer, while 57 percent indicated that
the financial impact of unions had been small.
• 36 percent of participants thought that the employer’s relationship
with the union would get worse over the next five years, 39
percent believed that it would stay about the same, and 24
percent thought that it would improve.10
The bitter labour disputes of the past few years have attracted
considerable media and public attention. Some commentators argue that
unions are fighting to survive. Ken Georgetti, former president of the
Canadian Labour Congress, stated, “There used to be a time when we
had great respect from the public. But we’ve lost that. There’s this notion
that unions are just out for themselves and not for society. You get that
label hung on you, and you have to work to get rid of it.”11 It is argued
that unions must engage the new workforce if they are to survive. While
strikes and threats of strikes have been common in the past, Jim
Stanford, formerly an economist with Unifor and now with the Centre
for the Future of Work, observed that “the confrontations are
overwhelmingly driven by the employers’ side. Almost all of the strikes
and conflicts have been defensive from the perspective of the union.
They’re trying to hang on to what they have.”12

LO2Labour Unions: Goals

and Structure
Labour unions alter the work environment. Their presence changes the
relationship between employees and the organization, and the human
resource department’s involvement in union-related issues is not always
well received by lower levels of management, who believe that their
ability to make workplace decisions has been eroded.
Unions have a major effect on the work environment, but in many other
ways the environment remains unchanged. Supervisors and managers
retain their primary responsibility for employee performance. Profit
objectives and budgetary goals are often not shared with the union
(although this is changing in some organizations). As well, unions do not
reduce the need for effective human resource policies and procedures. To
understand how and why unions influence human resource
management, it is necessary to examine their goals and structure. At
times, the interests of the parties are clearly in conflict:
In early February 2021, the United Food and Commercial Workers called
for the shutdown of the Olymel meat processing plant in Red Deer,
Alberta, following the death of a man linked to a COVID-19 outbreak.
According to the union, with a death and large outbreak, the employer or
government needed to ensure some type of lockdown. The union was
calling for meetings with employees to find out what was happening in
terms of health and safety. Just over a week later, the plant was
temporarily closed. In the words of the local union president, “It’s been a
fight in order to get Olymel to come to their senses. The world needs to
see that this disease is an occupational disease. There’s 1,800 workers
working side-by-side and it’s a very troubling situation.”13
Page 353

Union Goals and Philosophy

A union’s objectives are influenced internally by the wishes of its
members, the aspirations of its leaders, and the financial and
membership strength of the union. Like other organizations, unions are
open social systems that are also affected by their external environment:
the financial condition of the employer, the gains of other unions,
inflation and unemployment rates, and government policies all influence
the union’s objectives.
Yet among all these internal and external considerations, there exists a
common core of widely agreed-upon objectives. Writing more than 100
years ago, one prominent labour leader stated that the mission for the
labour movement was to protect workers, increase their pay, improve
their working conditions, and help workers in general.14 This approach
has become known as business unionism, primarily because it
recognizes that a union can survive only if it delivers a needed service to
its members in a businesslike manner. But some unions have chosen to
address broader social issues of politics and economics when such
concerns are in the best interests of their members. This second kind of
union, social (or reform) unionism, tries to influence the economic and
social policies of government at all levels—municipal, provincial, and
federal.15 In practice, union leaders pursue the objectives of social
unionism by speaking out for or against government programs. For
example, many union leaders oppose substantial government
intervention into collective bargaining because it takes away or limits the
right of the union to engage in free collective bargaining with
management.
A number of unions have developed programs to help members deal with
issues at the workplace. Consider, for example, Unifor’s Women’s
Advocate program:
The program is aimed at providing trained workplace
advocates/representatives to help women (and men) deal with such
issues as partner abuse and workplace harassment by making workers
aware of community resources and workplace supports. According to
Julie White, former director of Unifor’s Women’s Department, “It’s
really important we have that management support person to go through
because, ultimately, if a woman needs time off work, it’s not the union
that can authorize that, it’s the management support system.” According
to Jerry Dias, Unifor national president, “We can make significant gains
for the women in our workplaces by making women’s issues a priority at
the bargaining table. The Women’s Advocate Program’s specially trained,
easy to contact workplace representatives have been instrumental in
creating healthier workplaces and safer communities. They work closely
with management ensuring strong cooperation to achieve this goal.”16
Human resource management is influenced by both business and social
unionism goals. The growth of benefits discussed in Chapter 10 has
resulted partly from union pressure. Even nonunionized employers have
added many benefits in order to remain competitive in the labour market
or to forestall unionization among their employees.

Union Structure and Functions

It has been argued that employees lost direct contact with business
owners as organizations grew larger, so unions emerged to help workers
influence workplace decisions.17 Through unions, workers were able to
exert control over their jobs and their work environment.18 Then, when
attempts were made by employers to cut wages or employment, the
employees relied on unions to resist these actions.19 The most
important levels of union structure are local unions, national and
international unions, and labour congresses.

Local Unions
For most union members and industrial relations practitioners, the local
union, or local, is the most important part of the union structure. Locals
provide the members, the revenue, and the power of the entire union
movement. Historically, the two major types of unions were craft and
industrial unions. A craft union is composed of workers who possess the
same skills or trades; for example, all the carpenters who work in the
same geographical area. An industrial union includes the unskilled and
semiskilled workers at a particular location. When an employer has
several locations that are unionized, employees at each location are
usually represented by a different local union. An example would be the
United Food and Commercial Workers.
Page 354

Figure 13-2 shows the structure of a typical local. The union steward is
usually elected by the workers and helps them present their problems to
management. If the steward of an industrial union cannot help the
employee, the problem is given to the grievance committee, which takes
the issue to higher levels of management or to the human resource
department. In craft unions, the steward, who is also called the
representative, usually takes the issue directly to the business agent, who
is often a full-time employee of the union.
FIGURE 13-2

Structure of a Typical Local Union

National and International Unions
Many local unions are part of a larger union, which may be a national
union, such as Unifor or the Canadian Union of Public Employees, or
an international union, such as the United Steelworkers or
the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. National unions are based
in Canada, while international unions have their headquarters outside
the country (typically in the United States).
National and international unions exist to organize and help local
unions. They also pursue social objectives of interest to their members
and frequently maintain a staff that assists the local unions with
negotiations, grievance handling, and expert advice. Some national and
international unions leave many key decisions (including bargaining a
collective agreement) with their local unions. In other relationships, the
national or international union plays a very active role in local union
affairs. Figure 13-3 shows the membership of the largest unions in
Canada. Note that the two largest unions represent public sector
employees.
Union Membership (000s)
Canadian Union of Public Employees 680
National Union of Public and General Employees 390
Unifor 315
United Food and Commercial Workers Canada 250
United Steelworkers of America 225
Public Service Alliance of Canada 180
Teamsters Canada 125
Social Affairs Federation 110
FIGURE 13-3

Membership in Canada’s Largest Unions (2019)

Table Summary: Summary

Based on R. Hebdon, T. Brown and S. Walsworth (2021). Industrial Relations in Canada (4th ed.), Toronto,
Nelson. Also see the web pages of the unions mentioned above.
Page 355

Canadian Labour Congress

The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) represents many unions in
Canada and has about 3.3 million members. The past president, Hassan
Yussuff, was elected in 2014 and had planned to retire in 2020 but
stayed on when the CLC’s triennial convention was cancelled due to
COVID-19. At the June 2021 convention, Bea Bruske from the United
Food and Commercial Workers was elected president. Women have held
high-ranking positions within Canadian labour. For instance, Grace
Hartman was elected as the national president of CUPE in 1985, the first
woman to lead a major union in North America. Shirley Carr was the
first woman to lead the CLC, with her election win in 1986, and in 2019,
Jan Simpson became the first Black woman to lead a national union (the
Canadian Union of Postal Workers).20
The CLC has five main functions: (1) representing Canada at the
International Labour Organization, (2) influencing public policy at the
federal level, (3) enforcing the code of ethics set out in its constitution,
(4) providing services (such as research and education) for its member
unions, and (5) resolving jurisdictional disputes among its member
unions.
While the Canadian Labour Congress is the largest labour federation, it
is not the only one. In addition to other federations at the national level,
there are also federations operating at the provincial and municipal or
regional levels (for instance, the Quebec Federation of Labour and
the Ottawa and District Labour Council).

Trends in Union
Membership
Union Growth and Decline
In 2020, about 4.77 million workers were covered by collective
agreements (union coverage rate of 31.3 percent). In terms of industry
sector, education was the most highly unionized, at 75 percent, followed
closely by public administration (74 percent), utilities (66 percent), and
health care and social assistance (56 percent). The lowest rates of
unionization were in the agricultural (3.3 percent); scientific,
professional, and technical services (4.3 percent); and
accommodation/food services sectors (4.6 percent).21
Major changes in the Canadian economy, ranging from demographic
shifts to new technology and work restructuring, are influencing the
roles of unions in the workplace and introducing new opportunities and
challenges. Democratic rights are being eroded in favour of individual
needs, resulting in a growing number of “duty of fair representation”
complaints. Other major challenges include a decline in union
representation of Millennials, robots and artificial intelligence changing
many traditional jobs but introducing opportunities in fields that didn’t
exist 20 years ago, and greater focus on work–life balance and a
movement to more remote work (further strengthened by the COVID-19
pandemic).22
However, unions are placing greater emphasis on organizing service and
essential employees:
A “Unions Are Essential” campaign by the Service Employees
International Union (SEIU) is aimed at organizing essential workers.
With COVID-19, thousands of essential workers have been laid off
without any callback guarantees and the pandemic has also led to health
and safety concerns. However, there has been some union organizing
and certification success during the pandemic and a push by the SEIU to
focus on organizing and protecting essential workers.23
In addition, the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union
continues to focus on representing employees at large food retailers (like
Loblaws and Sobeys). During one organizing campaign, Sobeys sent a
letter to employees indicating that the union merely wanted their dues
money and emphasized the good and open relationship the company has
with employees. Loblaws executives indicated that they would welcome
greater unionization in the retail food sector to remove the competitive
disadvantage of paying 35 percent higher wage payments to
employees.24
In recent years, the number of women members in Canadian unions has
been increasing rapidly. In 1967, women made up only 20 percent of
total union membership; now, more than 50 percent of union members
are female—the unionization rate for women surpassed that for men for
the first time in 2004. While about one in six female employees belonged
to a union in 1967, that ratio has doubled over 35 years and now about
one in three women are union members. Thirty years ago, four out of ten
male employees were union members; today that proportion has fallen
to under three in ten. In terms of age, the density rate is 16 percent for
workers aged 15–24, 29 percent for those aged 25–34, 31 percent for
workers aged 35–44, 35 percent for workers aged 45–54, and 34 percent
for those aged 55 and older.
Page 356

Unions today are acknowledging that traditional approaches to

organizing and collective bargaining are becoming less relevant today.
Many Canadians view union workers as being in a blue-collar or
government occupation, so there is a growing recognition of the need to
appeal to other employees. For example, Unifor has decided to try to
attract young workers to the union movement. According to Anna
Goldfinch, formerly with the Canadian Federation of Students, “There is
more and more underemployment, precarious employment for youth.
Unions need to start communicating that they’re applicable in any
workforce—and that unions will reflect young people more and more as
young people start to participate in them.”25
Moreover, low wage employees may look to unions to protect their rights
and improve conditions of work:
On January 1, 2018, the Ontario government raised the minimum wage
to $14 (now $14.25). This was met with resistance by a number of
employers, including some Tim Hortons franchises, which decided to
change paid breaks to unpaid and to cut some employee benefits. It
became clear that there was a major power imbalance between
employers and low wage employees without the resources to fight back.
As noted by Martin Regg Cohn, “If employers trample on their rights,
minimum wage workers have to stand up for themselves—by joining a
union that can push back against companies. Unions can keep a watchful
eye on abuses, enable members to file grievances, and tap into the
collective resources of the larger labour movement.”26
In comparing unionization across provinces, Quebec had the highest rate
(40 percent), followed closely by Newfoundland and Labrador (39
percent), while the lowest union density was in Alberta (26 percent).
Also of note is the lower probability that a part-time worker will be
unionized (the union density rate for full-time workers is 33 percent
compared with 24 percent for their part-time counterparts). In addition,
larger workplaces are more likely to be unionized—about 14 percent of
employees in firms with fewer than 20 employees were unionized, 32
percent in firms with 20–99 employees, 41 percent in firms with 100–
500 employees, and 53 percent in firms with more than 500
employees.27
On the global scene, a number of countries have experienced a decline in
union density (that is, union members as a percentage of the paid
nonagricultural workforce), although Iceland, Belgium, Spain, and Italy
have seen an increase since 1985. Explanations for the decline in union
representation include (1) the decline in the manufacturing sector, (2)
the constraints that the globalization of financial markets have put on
macroeconomic policies, and (3) competition from developing countries
with low labour costs, resulting in the loss of low-skilled, labour-
intensive jobs in high-wage countries.28
Back in the mid-1980s, about 30 percent of workers in OECD countries
were unionized. About 35 years later, that number has declined to about
16 percent. Similarly, the percentage of employees covered by a collective
agreement has declined from 45 percent to 33 percent over the same
time period. When considering selected OECD countries, union density
varies across countries, as shown in Figure 13-4.29

Country Union Density

Iceland 91.8%
Sweden 67.9%
Italy 34.4%
Canada 25.9%
United Kingdom 23.4%
Japan 17.0%
Germany 16.5%
Australia 13.7%
 United States 10.1%
South Korea 10.0%
France 8.8%
FIGURE 13-4

Union Density in Select OECD Countries

Table Summary: Summary

SOURCE: OECD (2018), Trade Unions and Collective Bargaining, www.stats.oecd.org.

Secession
Page 357

In 1960, about two-thirds of union members belonged to an

international union. Over the past half-century, that percentage has
declined noticeably so that now only about 25 percent of union members
belong to international unions.30 This trend, referred to as secession, has
been motivated, in part, by a desire for more autonomy on the part of
Canadian locals and the development of policies aimed at specifically
addressing the needs of Canadian workers. The most dramatic
breakaway occurred in 1985 when the Canadian Auto Workers union
(now part of Unifor), led by former president Bob White, severed ties
with the United Auto Workers and held its founding convention in
Toronto. Canadian members of international unions have often
complained that they receive a disproportionately small share of union
benefits.

The Impact of Union

Representation
Strikes
Members of the public frequently associate unions with strikes.
However, the reality is that most collective agreements are settled
without the union’s resorting to strike action or the employer’s locking
out the workers. Still, there are exceptions:
In 2009, approximately 1,800 City of Windsor (Ontario) inside and
outside workers went on strike. By the six-week mark of the strike,
frustration was setting in. A bar owner reported that her employees were
harassed by city workers for removing the bar’s garbage during the
strike, and a newspaper columnist said his car was vandalized after he
wrote an article about taking garbage to a private firm. There were
allegations of individuals putting clothes hangers in tall grass to prevent
it from being mowed and spreading nails on the road leading to a private
waste disposal site. The local CUPE president insisted that there were no
reports of union picketers doing any of that. Rather, one CUPE member
stated that he suffered a broken ankle and cuts to his face after a
confrontation with a private contractor cutting grass, and other picketers
revealed that they had been nudged by automobiles operated by people
seeking to drive past the picket line. One picketer was the victim of a hit-
and-run and another was put in a headlock by an irate driver.31
In studying why strikes occur, it is possible to classify strikes into one of
two categories:
1. Strikes as Mistakes/Misjudgment. At least some strikes occur
because the parties have uncertain and imperfect information
when trying to negotiate an agreement or because one or both
negotiation teams are inexperienced negotiators. For example,
some negotiators easily become frustrated when bargaining and
make their “final offer” too early or without carefully considering
the implications of shutting down bargaining.
2. Strikes as Collective Voice. In a number of instances, the decision
to go out on strike is not because of a mistake or misjudgment
but because of a perception on the part of workers that they are
not being treated fairly. A strike is considered a mechanism by
which to voice discontent to management:32
Alberta health care workers, including those in food services,
maintenance, cleaning, and clerical services, engaged in an illegal wildcat
strike in late 2020 to protest the planned outsourcing of their jobs to
private employers. The employer, Alberta Health Services, asserted that
while the large majority of positions would remain, they could be moved
from the public sector to the private sector. The dispute was settled when
the workers’ union, the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees, told
employees to return to work.33
In a strike environment, there are several issues to consider. An
extended strike puts considerable financial pressure on employees. As
well, the family is at risk for more than just financial reasons: Normal
family patterns and routines are seriously disrupted. Physical and
emotional harm may also be an issue:
During a recent strike, a Canadian National Railway worker was injured
after being struck by a pickup truck and ending up on the hood.
According to a union spokesperson, “It’s unacceptable that our members
are being hit by pickup trucks on the picket line …We encourage all
Canadians to show the same respect for striking workers as they would
for anybody else.”34
Once the dispute is settled, employees have to return to a workplace and
to work teams that just a few days before were divided by a fundamental
conflict. While companies need to get on with business, the human
issues do not go away by themselves. It can take four to six weeks to
return to normal working conditions, and some workplaces are never
really the same.35
Page 358

What factors distinguish firms with lower strike activity? Strikes were
less common in smaller firms and in organizations where
• workers had more autonomy in the workplace;
• the employer introduced progressive human resource management
practices;
• the union was in a strategically weak position; and
• employers had a large share of the market.36
How common are strikes and lockouts? Data on the number of strikes
and lockouts, the number of workers involved, and the person-days not
worked are provided in Figure 13-5. Over the 2016–2020 period, 2020
(when the COVID-19 pandemic started) saw a noticeable decline in the
number of strikes and lockouts but high numbers for workers involved
and person-days not worked. Obviously, a small number of large strikes
in a given year can markedly affect the number of workers involved and
the person-days not worked.
Year Number of Strikes Workers Person-Days Not
and Lockouts Involved (000) Worked (000)
 2006 151 42 793
2007 206 66 1,771
2008 188 41 875
2009 157 67 2,162
2010 174 58 1,202
2011 149 91 1,351
2012 281 137 904
2013 165 205 205
2014 153 80 1,711
2015 237 429 1,846
2016 189 44 632
2017 192 207 1,201
2018 173 86 1,134
2019 129 46 1,214
2020 61 624 1,447
FIGURE 13-5

Strikes and Lockouts in Canada

Table Summary: Summary

SOURCE: Based on Work Stoppages by Jurisdiction and Year, ESDC, 2021.

Quebec and British Columbia prohibit the use of replacement workers if
there is a strike or lockout. However, some employer groups are arguing
that the ban on replacement workers does not reduce the number of
strikes or lockouts or days lost due to work stoppages. In addition,
employers argue that the legislation discourages investment by
employers in Quebec.37
A recent University of Saskatchewan survey of 400 citizens revealed that
about 50 percent approved of unions, 21 percent were neutral, and about
26 percent disapproved (3 percent didn’t respond). When asked about
whether they would support legislation banning replacement workers,
about 34 percent supported such legislation, 36 percent opposed, 28
percent were neutral, and the remainder did not provide a usable
answer.38
Sometimes workers do not go out on strike but come up with other
approaches to put pressure on the employer:
After about 200 Air Berlin pilots called in sick one day, approximately
100 flights had to be cancelled. The pilots’ union indicated that it was
surprised by the absences and stated that it had not encouraged pilots to
call in sick.39
Page 359

Recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions addressed important issues

relating to strikes. First, the court struck down Saskatchewan legislation
that prevented public sector workers from going on strike. According to
Lori Johb of the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour, “Workers aren’t
generally keen to strike. Without that right, we really had no power, we
had no ability to achieve fair, collective bargaining for all the
members.”40 The court also ruled that a part of Alberta’s privacy
legislation violated the right of a union to free speech by prohibiting the
union from videotaping employees crossing a picket line. The court
recognized the importance of freedom of expression in labour disputes
with picketing representing a particularly critical form of expression.41
In commenting on these decisions, union labour lawyer Chris Paliare
stated the following:
“The very notion of collective bargaining implies that there is an
imbalance between workers and employers. So unless you have an
inherently anti-union bent, you have to accept that workers need the
fundamental right to bargain collectively, to be protected from unfair
labour practices, and to take strike action in order to address that
imbalance.”42
In most jurisdictions, employers have the right to operate during a strike
but some choose not to:
According to one labour relations expert, “The employer has to calculate
very carefully if bringing in replacement workers is going to exacerbate
the bitterness of the dispute. After a strike it takes a while to put the
relationship back together. There’s a lot of bitterness left over. The
employer takes some chance of exacerbating that when they bring in
replacement workers—at a substantial cost to the labour–management
relationship over the long term.”43
As noted above, employers also have the right to lock out employees. In
the winter of 2021, Hickman Chrysler Jeep in St. John’s, Newfoundland
and Labrador, locked out nine sales employees who are represented by
the Teamsters Union. Four weeks into the dispute, it had not been
settled. According to the business agent for the Teamsters, the employer
was seeking a change in the commission pay structure on wholesale
transactions which could reduce income by 15–20 percent. The union
also noted that the lockout might work to the employer’s advantage as
the winter tends to be a slower time for sales and the pandemic (and a
shortage of computer chips) had limited the availability of vehicles for
sale.44
One issue that frequently comes up after a strike is settled concerns the
rebuilding of the labour–management relationship. A strike changes the
relationship, often leads to workplace conflict, and typically destroys the
trust between the parties:
When a seven-week strike at CBC ended, management announced plans
to hire consultants to “reintegrate” the workers with their managers. The
reaction from most employees was “They’ve got to be [expletive]
kidding.” According to one consultant, “There is always a dramatic
erosion in trust of management after a strike, which creates lingering
resentment, and lack of productivity unless it is addressed properly.”
While each strike is different, some companies ask outside consultants
with expertise in psychology and social work to conduct confidential
debriefing sessions for employees. As well, some organizations have
“return to work” training programs (again run by consultants) for
managers; the programs focus on role plays, dealing with employees, and
getting the team back and running. In addition, employees should be
made aware of the EAP program and other assistance available to
them.45

Wages and Benefits

What are the effects of unions on wages and benefits? The average hourly
wage for full-time unionized employees for 2020 was $33.47 an hour
(compared with $27.10 for nonunion workers) and $30.16 an hour for
part-time unionized employees (compared with $18.17 for part-time
nonunion workers).46 Moreover, unionized employees tend to have
more comprehensive benefit plan coverage.
Spotlight on HRM
Moving Toward Cooperation?
Background
In early January 2021, the Nova Scotia Health Authority (NSHA)
announced that work being done by 91 NSHA employees at 24 hospitals
across the province could be contracted out to a U.S. company. That’s
part of NSHA’s plan to improve the quality of record keeping in Nova
Scotia. The company, Iron Mountain, would be responsible for scanning
patients’ records into a digital format.
In late November 2020, employees first heard that their jobs would be
eliminated after having a conference call with their NSHA manager.
Jason MacLean, president of the Nova Scotia Government Employees
Union (NSGEU), said that the union was not consulted prior to
November 2020, there was no opportunity to give feedback on the NSHA
plan, and specific details of the change were not provided. Andrew
Nemirovsky, chief information officer at NSHA, agreed that there was no
consultation in 2019, but verbal and written communication was
provided to employees in September and October 2020. According to
NSHA, “We’ve made an honest effort to engage the union as much as
possible and we’ve made sure we’ve been in line with the collective
agreement. We are committed to finding comparable opportunities for
the employees, whether in existing or new roles and if there is any job
loss, it’ll be very minimal. Ideally zero.
Why the need for change? NSHA alleged that there have been significant
scanning errors in the past and boxes and boxes of unscanned charts
waiting to be scanned. However, some of the problems are due in part to
the quality of the scanning equipment available. NSHA stated that it
couldn’t afford to buy the high-quality and high-capacity scanners
required to do the job properly. Iron Mountain had agreed to buy the
higher-end scanners and keep them at the company’s facilities.
Moreover, NSHA also said that it lacked sufficient funding to hire
auditors to ensure quality of the scanned records. NSHA noted that the
government is not consulted in “day-to-day operational work” within the
health authority, such as contracting or eliminating jobs
The Union Position
In December 2020, the NSGEU released a report that was critical of the
NSHA position, in particular the rationale provided by the NSHA in
support of contracting out the work and the fact that there was no
tendering for the contract with Iron Mountain. NSGEU president
MacLean was highly critical of NSHA moving forward with the transition
rather than finding internal solutions. According to MacLean, “The
inability of NSHA to hire auditors or purchase proper scanners reflects
the mismanagement of the NSHA. There’s no accountability to Nova
Scotians in spending their money, especially during a pandemic. We will
not stop with this just being swept under the rug … especially for those
that you call health-care heroes during the pandemic.”
A Change of Heart
On January 22, 2021, NSHA announced that it had decided not to
outsource the storage and scanning of health records. Rather, it would,
over the coming weeks and months, examine internal alternatives to
address the quality and backlog issues. According to NSHA, the change
in approach was a result of additional business planning, as well as
feedback from employees and health care providers.
The union and employees had several meetings with the NSHA to outline
their concerns. According to the union, the proposed plan left the
employees feeling unvalued but the NSHA then decided to work with the
employees to find alternative solutions.
NSGEU president MacLean stated that “They heard all the concerns that
we raised, and they really made the proper decision. We’re very thankful
for that and very happy. For the employer to work with the employees to
get this done, we know that this will be a win for all. With the employer
and government listening to the workers that were affected here, I think
that shows a new way that things can be done in this province and
hopefully we can continue on that road.”
SOURCE: Based on: NSGEU/CUPE, A Matter of Trust: A Review of NSHA’s Quiet Plan to Hand Control of Nova
Scotians’ Health Information to an American Company, www.nsgeu.ca, Dec. 21, 2020: N. Snan, “NSHA Axing 90
Health-Record Keeping Jobs,” Chronicle Herald, Jan. 7, 2021; NSH, NSH Seeks Alternative Ways to Improve Health
Records Process, www.nshealth.ca, Jan. 22, 2021; N. Snan, “NSHA Scraps Plan to Contract U.S.-Owned
Company for Health-Record Keeping,” Chronicle Herald, Jan. 27, 2021.

Unions and Productivity

One major issue of interest for human resource management and
industrial relations practitioners is the relationship between
unionization and productivity. On one hand, it can be argued that unions
have a “monopoly” face that creates economic inefficiency by introducing
restrictive and inflexible work rules, withdrawing labour in the form of a
strike if an employer fails to meet union demands, and increasing
compensation costs. On the other hand, it can also be asserted that
unions have a “voice” face that increases productivity by reducing
turnover, enhancing employee morale, improving communications with
workers, and “shocking” management into using more efficient
workplace practices.47 Studies have shown that the impacts of unions
include:
Page 360

• reduced employee turnover (fewer quits);

• increased tenure with the firm;
• increased training opportunities;
• greater access to benefits (20–45 percent) and more
comprehensive benefit plans;
• higher productivity (in some situations);
• reduced innovation; and
• lower profits.
48

Note that the relationship between unionization and productivity is open

to considerable debate and has not been universally agreed upon. In fact,
management perceptions are opposite to some of the empirical work:
While managers from both the union and nonunion sectors tend to
believe that unions lower productivity, some studies indicate that, in a
number of industries, productivity is actually higher in unionized firms.

LO3 The Legal Environment

Page 361

Government shapes the union–management framework

both through the enactment of laws and in its role as employer. Unlike in
the United States, where employers and unions across the country are
regulated by the National Labour Relations Act, in Canada the federal
government and each province has its own labour legislation. This
division of responsibilities for trade union law is a result of the British
North America Act (now the Constitution Act, 1867), which specifies the
powers of the federal government and the provinces.
The issue of jurisdiction over labour relations is significant for human
resource practitioners. The Canadian Parliament is restricted in its
jurisdiction over labour relations matters to organizations involved in
interprovincial trade and commerce (e.g., banks, airlines, railways, and
federal government agencies). All other organizations fall under the
jurisdiction of the provinces. It has been estimated that less than 10
percent of the Canadian labour force comes under federal jurisdiction.
Consequently, it is important that human resource practitioners be
aware of the appropriate legislation.
Although the traditional view is that the employer and union should be
free to sit down and negotiate a collective agreement, we are seeing
increasing government intervention in the bargaining process at both the
provincial and national levels. For instance, in Nova Scotia, the
government overhauled and radically altered the education system with
minimal consultation. One of the changes, the removal of new school
psychologists, speech pathologists, and social workers from the Nova
Scotia Teachers Union bargaining unit, was overturned in 2019 by
arbitrator Eric Sloane. Sloane concluded that the decision to exclude
such employees was made unilaterally and breached the collective
agreement in numerous respects. He also required the employer to remit
any outstanding dues those employees would have paid to the
union.49 Buzz Hargrove, former president of the Canadian Auto
Workers union, stated, “There’s no respect left for the collective
bargaining process. It’s about government coming in on behalf of
employers and defending employers, almost guaranteeing they’re going
to win the dispute … it’s so anti-democratic, it’s so un-Canadian.”50

The Common Core of Canadian Labour

Legislation
The fact that each province and the federal jurisdiction has its own
labour relations statutes makes dealing with unions somewhat more
difficult, particularly for employers operating in more than one province.
Some of the key aspects of Canadian labour law (which will be discussed
in more detail later) include the following:
 • Right to Join a Union. Employees have the right to join a trade union
of their choice and participate in the union’s activities.
• Good Faith Bargaining. In attempting to negotiate a collective
agreement, both labour and management have a duty to “bargain
in good faith.”
• No Strikes or Lockouts During the Life of the Collective Agreement. It is
illegal for a union to strike or an employer to lock out employees
during the life of the contract.
• Prohibition on Unfair Labour Practices. All jurisdictions have
legislation prohibiting unfair labour practices by employers and
unions.
• Conciliation. The right of a union to strike or an employer to lock
out employees is (in most provinces) delayed until the
conciliation process has been exhausted.
While the provinces and the federal jurisdiction have some unique
features in their labour laws, there is a “common core” of provisions
contained in the various labour relations acts (refer to Figure 13-6).51
Page 362

1. All jurisdictions create labour relations boards to decide who

has the right to participate in collective bargaining and what
bargaining unit should be permitted to represent those who are
organized.
2. Most jurisdictions prohibit strikes during the life of an
agreement.
3. Most jurisdictions contain regulations that delay strike action
until a conciliation effort has been made and has failed.
4. All jurisdictions require that a collective agreement be in force
for at least one year.
5. All jurisdictions specify and prohibit certain “unfair labour
practices’’ by management and unions.
FIGURE 13-6

Common Characteristics of Federal and Provincial Labour Legislation

Table Summary: Summary

Labour Relations Boards

To enforce labour legislation, the federal and all provincial governments
have created labour relations boards (LRBs). These agencies investigate
violations of the law and have the power to determine (1) whether a
person is an employee for the purposes of the law; (2) whether an
employee is a member of a trade union; (3) whether an organization is an
appropriate bargaining agent for bargaining purposes; (4) whether a
collective agreement is in force; and (5) whether any given party is bound
by it. The enforcement procedures of an LRB relating to unfair labour
practice allegations are summarized in Figure 13-7.
1. The aggrieved individual or organization contacts the
appropriate LRB office (federal or provincial) and explains the
alleged violation.
2. If the case appears to have merit, the LRB informs the other
party of the complaint and asks for a response.
3. The LRB gives the parties involved the opportunity to present
evidence and to make representations. If the complaint cannot
be solved informally, the LRB conducts an official hearing with
the interested parties present and usually represented by legal
counsel.
4. On the basis of the evidence, the board will either dismiss the
case or, if one party is found guilty of a violation, issue a cease-
and-desist order. In the event of noncompliance, this order is
enforceable in a court of law.
5. It is up to the courts to decide whether a verdict can be
appealed or not. In any case, an appeal can be made in matters
of jurisdiction, failure to pursue legitimate complaints, and
procedural irregularities.
FIGURE 13-7

LRB Procedures for Redressing Unfair Labour Practices

Table Summary: Summary

In comparison to traditional courts of law, LRBs are more flexible in

their procedures for resolving a conflict. They may rely on expert
evidence instead of adhering to precedents, suggest a compromise, or
even impose a solution upon the parties. In all jurisdictions, the boards’
decisions are final and binding and cannot be appealed except on
procedural matters.
When charges have been filed against an employer, the human resource
department usually assists the organization’s lawyer in preparing the
case. For example, the HR department may be involved in compiling job
descriptions, performance appraisals, attendance records, and other
documents that help the company prove its case. Consider the following:
Patrick Veinot was an employee of Vale Canada (a nickel mining and
metals company) and vice-president of his local union. During a long and
bitter strike, Veinot was charged with criminal harassment after an
employee who crossed the picket line was assaulted. Vale investigated
the incident, concluded that Veinot had verbally harassed the employee
and encouraged another striking worker to assault the employee, and
terminated Veinot’s employment (but Veinot was subsequently acquitted
of the charges). Veinot was also prohibited from going onto the
employer’s property. After the strike ended, Veinot was appointed a vice-
president of the local union—the company would contact him by phone
to discuss grievances but refused to allow Veinot onto the company
property. The union grieved the employer’s action and the labour board
held that banning Veinot from company property was interference with
union activities. The company was ordered to stop such interference and
to allow Veinot on the property for the purpose of union meetings.52

LO4The Collective Bargaining

Process
Union Organizing
Page 363

It is worth remembering that a union exists only when workers create it.
While unions may use professional organizers, the outcome of the
organizing drive depends primarily upon the employees. George Meany,
the first president of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of
Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) in the United States, once said this:
“Despite the well-worn trade union phrase, an organizer does not
organize a plant. Now, as in the beginning, the workers must organize
themselves. The organizer can serve only as an educator; what he or she
organizes is the thinking of the workers.”53
In addition to professional organizers, employees interested in
unionization often play an important role in convincing co-workers to
join the union. During regular working hours, employees are not allowed
to discuss unionization with co-workers. However, several other
techniques are used to encourage workers to sign authorization cards,
including handbills, speeches, conversations, and even home visits.
Depending on the jurisdiction, a union is typically certified either on the
basis of card signatures or as a result of an election. Some unions are
particularly creative in the organizing process:
The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) have developed a
Youth Internship Program that involves youth activists who are given the
opportunity to work with union representatives to learn negotiating
skills and experience hands-on union organizing campaigns. Travel and
accommodation expenses as well as lost wages are covered by the union.
The UFCW also has a program—Talking Union—where union
representatives and members visit high schools, colleges, and
universities and provide students who are new to the workforce with
information on labour history and workplace rights. However, the
pandemic resulted in cancelling events in 2020.54
Union organizers educate the workers by explaining how the union can
help employees and reduce mistreatment of workers. However,
professionals only assist workers; they do not cause workers to join a
union. Even experienced organizers find it difficult to organize a well-
managed and growing company with proactive human resource
practices.55 Some unions are focusing attention on non-traditional
workers:
A decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board found that Foodora
couriers were dependent contractors and in essence work for Foodora
based on the company’s terms and conditions of employment. The case
of Uber v Heller involves a $400 million class action lawsuit arguing that
Uber drivers should be recognized as employees rather than independent
contractors. An earlier Supreme Court of Canada decision supported the
use of a class action lawsuit challenging Uber’s arbitration system
requiring workers to take employment claims to the Netherlands and pay
a $14,500 filing fee. These decisions are seen as potentially paving the
way for the unionization of gig economy workers.56
In a 2020 Ceridian report, more than half (56 percent) of freelance and
gig workers indicated that gig workers should unionize. The main
reasons for unionizing included negotiating higher wages (69 percent),
better benefits (59 percent), greater equality such as more equality in
compensation across employers (55 percent), better workplace health
and safety (39 percent), and better job security (34 percent).57
Some experts are suggesting that unions use more technology and
analytics in an effort to recruit new members. For example, unions could
use “big data” and algorithms to identify and engage prospective
members. Similarly, having a presence on social media sites such as
Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter could be useful in informing young
workers about the advantages of belonging to a union. Online organizing
may be particularly effective in attracting Millennials. Other options
range from having live-assistance help lines to digital marketing and a
digital organizing tool.58
Page 364

Prior to many union organizing campaigns, there are signs of employee

interest in union representation. Of particular importance is the work
environment. For example, are the turnover and absenteeism rates
higher than the norms for the industry and community? Is morale poor?
Are pay and benefits below average for the industry? Does the employer
have a procedure for resolving employee complaints or issues, and, if so,
is the process used by workers? Changes in employee behaviour may also
suggest that a union drive is under way (see Figure 13-8). However,
these are only indications of a possible union drive.
• Obvious signs—such as �inding a union �lyer
• Change in employee turnover
• Exit interview language—comments on a negative work
environment
• Employee language—such as common labour management terms
like arbitration and unfair labour practice
• Employee communication behaviour change—less cooperative
behaviour by workers
• New employee alliances—among those interested in unionization
• Social media language—involving unionization
• Employee phone time—discussing union activities
• Emotions running high—negative portrayal of working conditions
• Employee routines change—such as lunch breaks
Based on “Are You Missing These 10 Signs of Union Organizing
Activity?” UnionProof, http://www.unionproof.com
FIGURE 13-8
 Employee Behaviour That Suggests Union Activity
Table Summary: Summary

Spotlight on ETHICS
Ethics and Refusing to Work
Can Canada Post mail carriers refuse to deliver mail having content they
oppose? Two Canada Post workers in Regina were suspended without
pay for three days after telling their supervisor that they would not
deliver a sample edition of the Epoch Times. According to the Canadian
Union of Postal Workers, the employees were escorted from the facility
after their refusal to deliver the newspaper.
The Epoch Times is a controversial newspaper that claims to have about
5.7 million readers monthly in Canada. It also, on occasion, sends out
complimentary sample copies to Canadians using Canada Post’s
advertising mail service. The Epoch Times has a variety of articles on
several topics but also has a focus on material critical of the Chinese
Communist Party.
One employee objected to delivering the paper due in part to the paper’s
coverage of the coronavirus and its origins in China. A second employee,
who was born in China, refused to deliver the paper because of her fears
that the paper’s coverage could fuel anti-Chinese and anti-Asian
sentiment. Both employees stated that the Epoch Times goes against their
personal beliefs and thus they could not agree to deliver the paper.
The Canadian publisher of the Epoch Times stated that using advertising
mail to promote a paper is common industry practice. Canada supports
freedom of the press, and people who do not want to read the paper can
treat it like any other promotional mail that they don’t want. Refusing to
deliver the paper would be censoring an independent media outlet.
Canada Post, although it has discussed this issue with the Canadian
Union of Postal Workers, takes the position that mail that is properly
prepared and paid for must be delivered by mail carriers. The Epoch
Times is considered “mailable matter” (that is, it is not prohibited as
being illegal, obscene or fraudulent) and the courts have ruled that the
role of Canada Post is not to censor mail or regulate freedom of
expression in Canada.
Should the two Canada Post carriers have been suspended? Does an
employee have the right to refuse performance of duties due to ethical
concerns? As a human resource professional, what advice would you give
the employer?
SOURCE: K. Nicholson and J. Ho, “2 Canada Post Workers in Regina Suspended for Refusing to Deliver Epoch
Times,” cbc.ca, January 29, 2021.
Page 365

Once a union drive begins, management’s choice of responses becomes

limited in several important ways. A labour relations board (LRB) will
protect workers from management reprisals. For example, the discipline
of union supporters is illegal, unless the employer can prove that the
basis for punishment was not involvement in a union but improper
behaviour.
Employer lawyer Jamie Knight identified three stages to an employer’s
defence in the event that an employer is committed to remaining union
free. Stage 1 involves removing the incentive to unionize through
effective human resource management (such as competitive wages and
benefits, fair and reasonable policies, excellent communication with
employees, and a complaint and suggestion system that allows
employees to voice their concerns without the threat of reprisal). Stage 2,
which occurs when card signing begins, involves discussing the impacts
of unionization (such as the union becoming the exclusive bargaining
agent, the requirement for employees to pay dues, and the need to
carefully assess union promises) and the need to avoid unfair labour
practice charges. In Stage 3, when an election is about to be held, the
employer is advised to encourage employees to get out and vote because
the chance of a union victory may decline as voter turnout increases.59
When unions are organizing, labour relations boards pay particularly
close attention to the actions of employers. Unlike the United States,
Canadian labour law provides employers with relatively little freedom to
counter a union organizing drive.60 Both the context and content of
statements about unionization are carefully examined by LRBs.
Consequently, employers are well advised to obtain prudent legal advice
in the wake of a union organizing campaign.
Canadian LRBs are quite vigilant in enforcing unfair labour relations
practices. Human resource administrators should stress to every
member of management, from supervisor to chief executive officer, the
following two cautions:
1. Can management actions be judged as unfair labour practices by
the LRB?
 2. Will management actions provide fuel for the organizing drive?
When an unfair labour practice is committed by any member of
management, it can lead to expensive, time-consuming lawsuits and (in
some instances) automatic certification of the union. Moreover, union
supporters can point to management violations as further justification
for a union.

Unfair Labour Practices

To prevent employers from interfering with employee rights, the law
prohibits specific unfair labour practices by management. These legal
prohibitions are summarized in Figure 13-9. They require that
management neither interfere with nor discriminate against employees
who undertake collective action.
Every jurisdiction in Canada has specific provisions dealing with unfair
labour practices by management. Some of the most common provisions
addressing unfair labour practices are provided below. Activities that
management may not engage in include the following:
1. Interfering in the formation of a union or contributing to it
financially (although there have been allowances for the
providing of an office for the union to conduct business and for
paid leave for union officials conducting union business)
2. Discriminating against an employee because the individual is or
is not a member of a trade union
3. Discriminating against an employee because that individual
chooses to exercise rights granted by labour relations statutes
4. Intimidating or coercing an employee to become or not become
a member of a union
FIGURE 13-9

Unfair Labour Practices by Management

Table Summary: Summary
Unfair labour practices by unions are also prohibited. A summary of such
practices is provided in Figure 13-10.
While every jurisdiction has laws regulating trade union conduct, some of
the most important unfair labour practice provisions are presented below.
Activities that a union is not permitted to engage in include the following:
1. Seeking to compel an employer to bargain collectively with the
union if the union is not the certified bargaining agent
2. Attempting, at the workplace and during working hours, to
persuade an employee to become or not become a union
member
3. Intimidating, coercing, or penalizing an individual because he
or she has filed a complaint or testified in any proceedings
pursuant to the relevant labour relations statute
4. Engaging in, encouraging, or threatening illegal strikes
5. Failing to represent employees fairly
FIGURE 13-10

Unfair Labour Practices by Unions

Table Summary: Summary

Obtaining Bargaining Rights

Legal recognition or bargaining rights may be obtained in three ways: (1)
through voluntary recognition, (2) through certification by a labour
relations board, and (3) through a prehearing vote or automatic
certification resulting from unfair labour practice.
Page 366

1. Voluntary recognition occurs if a union has organized a majority of

employees and the employer is satisfied that the union did not
apply undue pressure in the organization process. The employer
then accepts the union as the legal bargaining agent without any
involvement of a third party.
2. Regular certification may take different forms (depending on the
jurisdiction):
• In some provinces, if a substantial number of employees
(usually between 50 and 65 percent, depending on
jurisdiction) sign union cards, the labour relations board
 may certify the unit without an election. If the union is
unable to get enough employees to sign cards to qualify
for automatic certification but still gets a significant
number of card signatures (typically between 35 and 45
percent of bargaining-unit members, again depending on
the jurisdiction), an election is mandatory. A secret ballot
is taken under the supervision of the labour relations
board at the employer’s place of business. If the union
loses, another election among the same employees cannot
be held for one year. If the union wins (that is, the
majority of eligible employees who vote cast ballots in
favour of the union), then the employer must prepare to
negotiate with the union and attempt to reach a collective
agreement.
• Other provinces do not automatically certify unions based
on card signatures. Rather, an election is held if there is
sufficient support for the union in the form of signed
cards. Again, the union is certified if the majority of the
ballots cast are in favour of the union. While employers
generally favour a mandatory secret ballot vote for
certification, the legislative change away from
certification on the basis of card signatures was strongly
opposed by unions. A poll of Manitoba residents by the
Canadian Federation of Independent Business revealed
very strong support for the use of secret ballots in union
certifications. More than 70 percent supported the use of
secret ballots (51 percent strongly agree and 20 percent
agree) and 68 percent of small business owners are
supportive of the secret ballot approach (57 percent are
very supportive and 11 percent are somewhat
supportive).61 Amendments to the certification process
are not uncommon:
Ontario’s Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017, has some
interesting features that will impact union organizing in the
province. For instance, a union able to show at least 20 percent
membership support can obtain employee contact information
(such as name, phone number, and email) from the employer.
Also, the Act provides for off-site or electronic voting. However,
there have been fewer requests for employee lists than
 anticipated as unions may be unwilling to seek such lists earlier
in the certification process and thus put employers on notice of a
potential organizing drive and permit more time for employer
preparation.62
3. Page 367
Prehearing votes are taken in cases when there are significant
indications that an employer has committed unfair labour
practices to prevent unionization. In such a case a union can ask
an LRB to conduct a prehearing vote. In addition, most
jurisdictions provide for automatic certification if employer
actions (in the form of unfair labour practices) are such that the
true wishes of employees may not be known.63

LO5Negotiating a Collective
Agreement
Once a union is certified, the various labour relations statutes require
both the union and management to bargain in good faith. This means
that both sides are required to make a reasonable effort to negotiate a
collective agreement. The failure of either party to do so can lead to
unfair labour practice charges.
The collective bargaining process has three overlapping phases.
Preparation for negotiations is the first and often the most critical stage.
The success of the second stage, face-to-face negotiations, largely
depends on how well each side has prepared, the skill of the
management and union negotiators, and the bargaining power of each
side. The third phase involves the follow-up activities of contract
administration. An organization may establish an industrial relations
department or create a labour relations specialist position within the
human resources department to administer the collective agreement and
coordinate contract negotiations. In recent years, we have seen a trend
toward longer collective agreements:
Over the past 30 years, the average length of collective agreements has
doubled (from 20 to 40 months). Unions have generally preferred
shorter agreements while employers often sought longer deals.
According to labour lawyer Will Cascadden, “Because bargaining
involves multiple meetings, bargaining is usually a time-consuming
expensive process. Employers have to allocate significant resources
figuring out what the bargaining positions are and what positions you are
going to take on those issues.”64

© CP/Sean Kilpatrick

Postal strikes tend to have a serious impact on customers, especially small businesses.
Should postal strikes be prohibited? Could such prohibitions be done legally?

Preparing for Negotiations

The purpose of negotiations is to achieve a collective agreement. The
agreement specifies the rights and responsibilities of management and
the union. Detailed preparations are required if each party is to achieve
its objectives.
Labour relations specialists need to monitor the environment to obtain
information about likely union demands. A number of strategies can be
employed. The labour relations department must be sensitive to the rate
of inflation and the settlements made by other unions:
VIA Rail encourages regular structured discussions with the union and
opening the communication lines before meeting during contract
negotiations. This permits the parties to discuss relevant issues, share
direction, and identify emerging trends in advance of bargaining.
According to Ed Houlihan, director of labour relations at VIA Rail,
“better ideas will emerge when both sides work together early in the
process to solve common issues.”65
One set of bargaining issues revolves around management rights. These
rights provide management with the freedom to operate the business
subject to any terms in the collective agreement.66 They often include
the right to reassign employees to different jobs, to make hiring
decisions, and to decide other matters important to management.
Page 368

Under what is known as the residual rights theory of management,

employers argue that they have the authority over all issues not
contained in the collective agreement. On the other hand, union leaders
assert that residual rights do not exist and that they are free to bargain
over any issue affecting workers. Most collective agreements have
a management rights clause. A typical clause might be as follows:
The Employer retains and shall possess and exercise all rights and
functions that the Employer possessed prior to the signing of this
collective agreement, excepting only those that are expressly
relinquished or restricted in this agreement.67
In negotiating a collective agreement, management may want to include
contract language that increases its flexibility at the workplace. For
example, supervisors may want all job descriptions to include the phrase
“and other duties assigned by management.” This clause prevents
workers from refusing work because it is not in their job description. The
clause also gives supervisors greater freedom in assigning employees.
Labour relations specialists in the human resource department may use
a variety of sources (such as surveys, discussions, focus groups,
provisions in other collective agreements, and information from
grievance claims) to discover which rights are important.

Negotiating With the Union

After preparing for bargaining, the second phase of negotiations is face-
to-face bargaining with the union. Discussions often start as much as 60
to 90 days before the end of the present contract. If the negotiations are
for a first contract, they begin after the union is recognized by the
employer or wins a certification election.
Negotiations cover a variety of issues relating to terms and conditions of
employment, including wages, hours of work, and working conditions.
These areas are interpreted broadly. Wages refer to all forms of
compensation, such as pay, insurance plans, retirement programs, and
other benefits and services. Hours of work include the length of the
workday, breaks, holidays, vacations, and any other component of the
work schedule. Working conditions involve such issues as safety,
supervisory treatment, and other elements of the work environment. The
contents of a collective agreement are only limited by the ingenuity of the
parties. For instance:
Canadian Blood Services (Edmonton) permitted employees to take up to
three days off to attend their wedding. In PEI,
the Labourers International Union negotiated a clause that prohibits
the use of cellphones and smart phones during work hours, and in
Quebec, CBC and Groupe TVA agreed to a clause guaranteeing an
employee salary and benefits if the individual is incarcerated for refusing
to divulge a confidential source.68

© THE CANADIAN PRESS/Frank Gunn

Union leaders, like politicians, are elected. Are there other similarities?

Successful bargaining usually begins with easy issues in order to build a

pattern of give-and-take. Negotiations almost always take place in
private, permitting more open discussion of the issues. When deadlocks
occur, several tactics can keep negotiations moving toward a peaceful
settlement. By settling easy issues first, bargainers often point to this
progress and say, “We’ve come too far to give up on this impasse. Surely,
we can find a solution.” This sense of past progress may increase the
resolve of both sides to find a compromise.
Richard Dixon, former vice-president and human resources officer
at NAV Canada, stated, “In any unionized environment, if you’re sitting
at the collective bargaining table, you’re sitting across from individuals
who know the business very well. When trying to introduce a new
business process or negotiate a more streamlined way of doing things,
the HR professionals who don’t know the business as well as the people
on the other side of the table could have their pockets picked.”69
Compromises may be achieved by offering counterproposals that take
into account the needs of the other party. For example, Air Canada and
its pilots reached an agreement without resorting to strike action or
arbitration for the first time since 1996. In addition to reopener clauses,
the 10-year contract also provided for profit sharing for union members
using a formula similar to that applied for executive bonuses.70
Page 369

Many management teams will exclude top executives. They are kept out
of negotiations because top managers are often not experienced in
collective bargaining. Also, their exclusion gives management bargainers
a reason to ask for a temporary adjournment when the union introduces
demands that require a careful review. Rather than refusing the union’s
suggestion, management bargainers may ask for a recess to confer with
top management (using the adage “My hands are tied”).
Experienced bargainers realize that the other side must achieve some of
its objectives. If the employer is powerful enough to force an
unacceptable contract on the union negotiating team, the union
membership may refuse to ratify the contract, or union officials and
members may refuse to cooperate with management once the collective
agreement goes into effect. In addition, if management does not bargain
in good faith, the union may file unfair labour practice charges.

Using Mutual Gains Bargaining

Rather than use the traditional adversarial approach to negotiating a
collective agreement, some unions and employers are employing mutual
gains bargaining. This approach moves away from the us-versus-them or
win–lose attitude in favour of a win–win approach, in which both parties
work together to solve common problems. However, labour unions are
often skeptical about win–win bargaining, as one senior union official
asserts:
It has been our experience that most employers only become “less
adversarial” and talk about cooperation when they want something that
will benefit them. Many employers have approached unions wanting to
extract concessions, normally accompanied by promises of future
employer cooperation. It is also usually followed by an acute case of
amnesia on the part of the company. Any level of cooperation between
the union and company must be accompanied by a commitment that
front-line supervisors are prepared to treat our members with dignity
and respect on the shop floor. Without that commitment, cooperation
between the union and company is meaningless.71
Note that mutual gains bargaining does not mean “soft” bargaining or
one side giving in. Rather, both parties sit down at the bargaining table
as equals and engage in joint problem-solving activities. The process is
usually preceded by training in conflict resolution for both employer and
union representatives. In addition, mutual gains bargaining requires
substantial commitment, trust, and respect, and a long-term focus on the
part of both labour and management.
What does a mutual gains enterprise need to succeed? At the workplace
level, it is important to have high standards of employee selection, broad
design of tasks and a focus on teamwork, employee involvement in
problem solving, and a climate based on cooperation and trust. At the
human resource policy level, key elements include a commitment to
employment stabilization, investment in training and development, and
a contingent compensation strategy that emphasizes participation,
cooperation, and contribution. Finally, at the strategic level, there must
be a strong commitment from top management to the mutual gains
concept, business strategies that support and are aligned with the mutual
gains model, and an effective voice for human resource management in
strategy making:72
In a recent settlement between the CBC and Canadian Media Guild
(CMG), the union stated that the atmosphere in bargaining was
respectful and constructive with both parties looking to move the
discussions forward. “Similar to past negotiations, the parties relied on
an interest-based approach throughout the bargaining process that has
worked to the benefit of both parties. This approach encouraged
cooperation, respect, transparency and fact-based decisions to address
issues.73
Research by the Conference Board of Canada revealed that 36 percent of
employers and 42 percent of unions have attempted interest-based or
mutual gains bargaining techniques.74
The Harvard Program on Negotiation has several important strategies to
avoid reaching an impasse in collective bargaining. Factors leading to
impasse and a potential strike include overconfidence by the negotiators
(believing that your position is stronger than it is and the other side is
weaker), fairness concerns and a desire to seek retribution if treated
unfairly, the use of agents who may have interests that do not align with
the parties they represent, seeing negotiations as a competition, and
incrementally commit to an impasse (failing to ignore past investments
such as time, money and other resources).
Suggestions for reducing conflict during bargaining are listed in Figure
13-11.75
1. Avoid extreme demands and drawing a line in the sand.
2. Consider the other side’s perspective and brainstorm for
creative solutions to issues on the table.
3. Get an outside opinion, such as an external expert who can
examine the demands and issues from a disinterested
perspective.
 4. Consider a “virtual” strike which involves the parties continuing
operations but not receiving pay or revenues—these are paid
into an escrow fund for distribution after the dispute is settled.
5. Develop contingency clauses, for instance, if there is a change in
inflation or revenue stream.
FIGURE 13-11

How to Reduce Conflict During Bargaining

Table Summary: Summary

SOURCE: K. Shonk, “Collective Bargaining Negotiations and the Risk of Strikes,” Program on Negotiation—
Harvard Law School, www.pon.harvard.edu, Jan. 18, 2021.
Page 370

Still, many labour relations experts are somewhat skeptical about

interest-based bargaining, as one labour lawyer points out:
“If you ask seasoned negotiators (about interest-based bargaining),
they’ll give you the look of death and say, ‘Are you crazy?’ Mutual gains
bargaining requires both sides to invest so much time and energy in
being trained in things like ‘What do you need?’ ‘What are our needs?’
‘How do we negotiate in a collaborative fashion?’ But to go from
traditional bargaining into mutual interest takes a diametric mind-shift.
You need to invest the resources and the relationship has to be mature
enough.”76

Approving the Proposed Agreement

The bargaining stage of negotiations is completed when the agreement
has been approved. Often final approval for the employer rests with top
management. Negotiations are not complete until the union also
approves the proposed agreement. Typically, the union bargaining team
submits the proposal to the membership for ratification. If a majority of
the members vote for the proposal, it replaces the previous collective
agreement. If members reject it, union and management bargainers
reopen negotiations. Administration of the collective agreement begins
when both sides sign it.

LO6 Conciliation and Mediation

What happens in the event that negotiations between labour and
management break down? In their legislation, all jurisdictions provide
for conciliation and mediation services. Actually, in most provinces, no
strike action is permitted before a conciliation effort has been made and
has failed.77 A 10-year review of conciliation cases in Nova Scotia
revealed that conciliation officers settled more than 90 percent of the
cases.78 However, the results vary among provinces, and some
jurisdictions have not come close to matching the 90 percent figure.
Conciliators are appointed by the federal or provincial minister of labour,
at the request of either one or both of the parties involved or at the
discretion of the ministers. A conciliator is requested to submit a report
to the minister within a specified time period. If conciliation fails, strikes
or lockouts can legally commence, usually two weeks after the
submission of the conciliator’s report. Although labour relations
legislation may include an option to have a conciliation board meet with
the parties, this is used infrequently.
With reference to mediation, often a mediator will meet separately with
each bargaining team, especially when the negotiations take place in a
hostile atmosphere. Effective mediation requires a high degree of
sensitivity, patience, and expertise in the psychology of negotiation.

Administering the Collective

Agreement
Page 371

Upon ratification by union members and approval by management, the

parties begin living with the collective agreement. What happens if the
parties have a disagreement regarding the interpretation of a term of the
agreement? As discussed below, alleged violations of the agreement
typically go through the grievance procedure. A grievance is defined as a
complaint by an employee or employer that alleges that some aspect of a
collective agreement has been violated. Almost every collective
agreement in Canada contains some type of formalized procedure for
resolving disputes. Furthermore, labour legislation typically requires that
a grievance that cannot be resolved between the parties be submitted to
an arbitrator or arbitration board whose decision is final and binding. To
give an example, consider the following case:
A 46-year-old Ottawa city worker was found to have altered the water
meter at both his current and former residences. The employer met with
the worker, who admitted to tampering with the meter and agreed to
reimburse the city for almost $7,000 to cover unrecorded water usage.
The employee admitted turning off the meter on several occasions (such
as on heavy laundry days or when filling his pool). Although the
employee had 23 years of service without performance or disciplinary
issues and the misconduct was off-duty and not directly related to his
employment, an arbitrator upheld the termination of the employee.79

Grievance Procedures
While either management or the union may file a grievance when the
collective agreement is violated, most workplace decisions are made by
management. Consequently, most grievances are filed by the union:
The Laborers’ International Union of North America recently filed a
grievance after claims that a nurse at a senior care home in Ontario was
required to give the COVID-19 vaccination to at least 10 people (friends
of a manager at the home) who were not front-line staff or home-care
residents and one member of the medical staff took home about five
doses of the vaccine for personal use. The union is arguing that the nurse
was pressured into administering the vaccine and a number of the
individuals entering the home to receive the vaccination were in violation
of current pandemic regulations and represent a major breach of
infection control measures. The employer is asserting that the vaccines
would have gone to waste if not provided to outside people.80
The grievance procedure consists of an ordered series of steps. Figure
13-12 describes the steps that an employee’s grievance typically passes
through. An example further demonstrates how grievances may occur:
Preboarding screeners at the Edmonton International Airport, who are
members of Teamsters Local 362, filed more than 900 grievances
resulting from delayed or missed breaks. Although all workers are
entitled to two or three half-hour breaks based on shift length, employer
GardaWorld changed its interpretation of the clause so that all required
security lines could be open. Union officials reported that at least four
workers soiled themselves after being denied bathroom breaks. Union
vice-president and business agent Jordan Madarash stated, “Morale is
low, absenteeism is higher. It’s not a fun place to work right now,
wondering if you are going to get a break to get your food if you are a
diabetic.”81
• Preliminary discussion. The aggrieved employee discusses the
complaint with the immediate supervisor with or without a
union representative. At this stage, or at any other step in the
process, management may resolve the grievance to the
satisfaction of the union, or the union may decide to drop the
grievance. Otherwise, the grievance proceeds to the next step in
the process.
• Step 1. The complaint is put in writing and formally presented by
the shop steward to the first-level supervisor. Normally, the
supervisor must respond in writing within a contractually
specified time period, usually two to five days.
• Step 2. The chief steward takes the complaint to the department
superintendent. A written response is required, usually within a
week.
• Step 3. The complaint is submitted to the plant manager/chief
administrative officer by the union plant or grievance
committee. Again, a written response is typically required.
• Step 4. If Step 3 does not solve the dispute, arrangements are
made for an arbitrator or an arbitration board to settle the
matter.
FIGURE 13-12

Typical Steps in a Union–Management Grievance Procedure

Table Summary: Summary

Page 372

The number of steps in the grievance procedure and the staff involved at
each step will vary from organization to organization, but most grievance
procedures have between three and five steps. The purpose of a
multistep grievance procedure is to allow higher level managers and
union representatives to look at the issue from different perspectives and
to assess the consequences of pursing the matter further. This approach
increases the chance that the dispute gets resolved without going to
arbitration.
Although an employee may prefer to bring the case to court rather than
to arbitration, this may not be permissible. For instance, former
Canadian Football League receiver Arland Bruce’s lawsuit against the
CFL and former league commissioner Mark Cohon will not be going to
court. Bruce was alleging in his lawsuit that he had sustained permanent
and disabling head trauma while playing football and has post-
concussive symptoms, including depression and paranoia. The Supreme
Court of Canada refused to hear Bruce’s appeal, following its earlier
decision that unionized employees must use labour arbitration for
disputes arising from their collective agreements.82

Handling Grievances
Once a grievance has been filed, management should seek to resolve it
fairly and quickly. Failure to do so can be seen as a disregard for
employee needs and is not conducive to building and maintaining
effective labour relations. However, in resolving grievances, management
should consider several issues. First and most important, grievances
should be settled on their merits. Complaints need to be carefully
investigated and decided on the facts. Second, the cause of each
grievance should be recorded. A large number of grievances coming from
one or two departments may indicate poor supervision or a lack of
understanding of the contract. Third, the final solution to the grievance
needs to be explained to those affected:
Shahab Makholi, an immigrant from Iran, was hired as a welder by a
Mississauga company that manufactures fire doors. Makholi injured his
hand at work and had to have a splint put on it. He continued working
and was ultimately assigned alternative duties. Eventually, his lead hand
assigned Makholi to do work that he couldn’t perform and he went to the
production manager’s office to complain. After some discussion, the
employer concluded that Makholi wanted to be laid off and
documentation was prepared. Makholi was dismissed, which he
ultimately grieved. The arbitrator, in reinstating Makholi, noted that
Makholi could not read or write English, the company did not make a
substantial effort to explain the importance of the dismissal
documentation, no union representative was present at the termination
meeting although the agreement required that the union be notified of
any layoffs, and Makholi was instructed not to tell the union what had
happened.83
Arbitration
Consider the following arbitration decision:
During the COVID-19 pandemic, a Toronto hospital employee ignored
the pleas of a screener and brought pizza into the facility for a party with
fellow union members which was in violation of the Trillium Health
Partners’ safety rules. The employee denied bringing the food into the
hospital but photographs showed otherwise. The employee also became
involved in an argument with a screener who was trying to prevent a
contractor from entering the facility without wearing a mask. The
employee’s tirade was laced with obscenities. The employer dismissed
the employee but the dismissal was overturned by an arbitrator who
found the penalty was too harsh. The employee was reinstated but with
loss of pay for the period of the dismissal. The arbitrator also gave the
employer the right to dismiss the employee if the employee engages in
misconduct that would normally result in discipline over the next 18
months.84
All jurisdictions require that collective agreements include a provision
for final settlement by arbitration, without stoppage of work, of all
differences concerning the interpretation or administration of a contract.
This means that, as long as a collective agreement is in force, any strike
or lockout is illegal. An arbitrator may be selected from a list provided by
the appropriate ministry of labour, or the parties may agree to the
selection of an arbitrator. The arbitrator’s decision is final and cannot be
changed or revised, except in rare instances (such as corruption, fraud,
or a breach of natural justice).85 There is growing concern that the
arbitration process is becoming too costly, too slow (some cases take two
years or more to be resolved), and too legalistic.86
Page 373

Arbitration holds two potential problems for labour relations

practitioners: costs and unacceptable solutions. An arbitration case can
cost both the union and employer several thousand dollars. There are
also time commitment costs in terms of preparing for arbitration,
attending the actual hearings, and following up on the case. From the
perspective of management, a potential problem occurs when an
arbitrator renders a decision that is against management’s best interests.
Since the ruling is binding, it may drastically alter management’s rights
and set a precedent for future cases. For example, if an arbitrator accepts
the union’s argument of extenuating circumstances in a disciplinary case,
those extenuating circumstances may be cited in future cases. Consider
the following case and decide if the employee should be terminated:
Mark Davis was a Toronto Transit Commission fare collector who had
been employed for 25 years. After gesturing at a customer with his
middle finger, Davis was suspended for two days and required to take
sensitivity training on dealing with difficult customers, workplace
violence, and professional conduct. One day after completing the
training, Davis commented to a co-worker, “If anything ever happened,
like losing my job, I’d have no problem coming in and shooting them. I’d
die for that cause.” Davis indicated that he would only shoot managers
(three of whom he named). The co-worker subsequently told her shop
steward and a manager about the comments and Davis was terminated
from employment. Although Davis stated that he was only joking and
had no animosity for anyone, an arbitrator upheld the dismissal.87
This decision shows that once an employer goes to arbitration, the
decision is turned over to a third party. In dismissal cases, the union will
typically argue that discharge is an inappropriate penalty and the
possibility exists that an arbitrator may agree with the union position.
Consequently, it is important that an employee grievance be treated
seriously by management representatives and that the organization
attempt to resolve grievances with the union in a fair and timely manner.
However, there may be some instances where arbitration is unavoidable.

Contract Provisions
Every collective agreement contains specific terms and provisions. A
number of the most common ones are listed in Figure 13-13. These
clauses are important because they define the rights and obligations of
the employer and the union. For instance, union security is a very
important issue from the union’s perspective. In addition, some of the
most frequent disputes concern seniority and discipline.
• Union recognition. Normally near the beginning of a contract, this
clause states management’s acceptance of the union as the sole
representative of designated employees.
• Union security. To ensure that the union maintains members as
new employees are hired and present employees quit, a union
security clause is commonly demanded by the union. Union
security provisions are discussed later in the chapter.
• Wage rates. The amount of wages to be paid to workers (or classes
of workers) is specified in the wage clause.
• Cost of living. Unions may negotiate automatic wage increases for
workers when price levels go up. For example, one approach is
for wages to go up in response to an increase in the consumer
price index above some specified amount.
• Insurance benefits. This section specifies which insurance benefits
the employer provides and how much the employer contributes
toward these benefits. Frequently included benefits are life and
supplemental hospitalization insurance and dental plans.
• Pension benefits. The amount of retirement income, years of
service required, penalties for early retirement, employer and
employee contributions, and vesting provisions are described in
this section if a pension plan exists.
• Income maintenance. To provide workers with economic security,
some contracts give guarantees of minimum income or
minimum work. Other income maintenance provisions include
severance pay and supplements to Employment Insurance.
• Time-off benefits. Vacations, holidays, rest breaks, washup
periods, and leave-of-absence provisions typically are specified
in this clause.
• Seniority clause. Unions seek contract terms that require human
resource decisions to be made on the basis of seniority. Often,
senior workers are given preferential treatment in job
assignments, promotions, layoffs, vacation scheduling,
overtime, and shift preferences.
• Management rights. Management must retain certain rights to do
an effective job. These may include the ability to require
overtime work, decide on promotions, design jobs, and select
employees. This clause reserves to management the right to
make decisions that management thinks are necessary for the
organization’s success.
• Discipline. Prohibited employee actions, penalties, and
disciplinary procedures are either stated in the contract or
included in the agreement by reference to those documents that
contain the information.
 • Disputeresolution. Disagreements between the union and
management are resolved through procedures specified in the
contract.
• Duration of agreement. Union and management agree on a time
period during which the collective agreement is in force.
FIGURE 13-13

Common Provisions in Union–Management Agreements

Table Summary: Summary

Union Security
Can an employee be required to join a union as a condition of
employment? An employer and union can negotiate clauses dealing with
union security and, in some jurisdictions, compulsory dues checkoff is
required.
The highest form of union security is the closed shop (found in about 8
percent of agreements), which requires that an employee be a union
member prior to obtaining employment and pay dues to the union. The
closed shop, which is frequently operated through a hiring hall, is
common in construction and longshore industries.
Under a union shop security arrangement, the employer is free to hire
an individual, but, as a condition of employment, the new hire must join
the union within a specified period of time after being hired and must
pay union dues. If the individual refuses to join the union, the employer
is required to terminate the worker’s employment.
The Rand Formula requires an employer to deduct union dues at source
from the wages of an employee and remit the funds to the union.
However, the employee is not required to join the union. In some
jurisdictions, dues checkoff clauses must be negotiated; in other
jurisdictions, compulsory dues checkoff is enshrined in law.
While the amount of dues varies, it is typically in the range of about 1–1.5
percent of an employee’s earnings. Most workers covered by a collective
agreement are subject to a dues checkoff requirement. Some
jurisdictions allow workers who object to joining a union on the basis of
religious grounds to pay the equivalent amount to a registered charity.
In an open shop, an individual does not have to join the union and is not
required to pay dues.
Seniority
Unions typically prefer to have employee-related decisions determined
by the length of the worker’s employment, called seniority. Seniority
assures that promotions, overtime, layoffs, and other employee concerns
are handled without favouritism. As well, the influence of seniority is not
restricted to the union environment; several nonunion organizations also
place considerable weight on seniority in making human resource
decisions.
Page 374

Seniority is often very important in deciding layoff rights. For example,

when a company plans a layoff, the most recently hired workers are
typically the first to go. The remaining employees probably receive
higher wages if there is a premium for service with the organization.
Thus, the higher paid employees are retained, even though the layoff
may have been implemented as a cost-reduction measure. Moreover,
layoffs may undermine a company’s employment equity plan, since
employees hired through the employment equity program may have low
seniority.
A major concern for unions is job security in light of rapid technological
changes. According to the Conference Board of Canada, job security
benefits both employees and employers but the past reliance on a
seniority-based system may not be sufficient to provide employers with
the requisite mix of talent. The major suggestion is that the parties will
need to work together to develop new parameters for job security and
perhaps develop mechanisms allowing portable seniority between
employers.88

Discipline
Page 375

Unions often challenge the discipline of a union member. Due to the

difficulty of trying to list employee behaviours that may warrant
discipline, many collective agreements provide the employer with the
right to discipline or discharge if “just cause” exists. In any disciplinary
action, management must abide by the terms of the collective agreement.
Arbitration cases are frequently lost because management failed to
establish grounds for disciplinary action, neglected to document past
disciplinary procedures, and failed to adhere to the provisions of the
collective agreement.
In deciding discipline and discharge cases, the starting point is the
collective agreement. However, many collective agreements have a
provision indicating that the employer must have “just cause” to
discipline or discharge an employee. In determining just cause, a number
of factors may be important:
• Nature and seriousness of the offence
• Due process and procedure
• Past record of the grievor
• Seniority and age of the grievor
• Knowledge of rules
• Previous warnings from management
• Lax enforcement/condonation by management in the past
• Unequal treatment of employees
• Provocation by management
• Isolated incident
• Sincere apology/remorse on the part of the grievor89

Although an employer may believe that clear grounds for discipline or

dismissal exist, arbitrators consider a number of issues in making their
decisions:
A Beer Store employee in Ontario took a Toronto Maple Leafs shirt from
a case of beer being returned by a customer. Cases of beer containing
Maple Leafs shirts were part of a special promotion, and the employee’s
daughter was a big Leafs fan. The employee put the shirt in his coat
pocket (with part of it hanging out) and went to serve a customer. The
employer terminated the employee as part of its zero-tolerance theft
policy while the employee argued that he had intended to ask his
supervisor whether he could keep the shirt. An arbitrator ruled that the
employee, who had 23 years of service with the employer, had not
intended to steal the shirt and replaced the termination with a three-day
suspension.90

Past Practice
The actions of managers and union officials sometimes change the
meaning of the agreement. A precedent is a new standard that arises
from the past practices of either party. Once a precedent results from
unequal enforcement of disciplinary rules, the new standard may affect
similar cases in the future.
The fear of past practices usually causes two changes in human resource
policies and procedures. First, employee-related decisions are often
centralized in the human resource department. Supervisors are stripped
of their authority to make decisions on layoffs, discipline, and other
employee matters. Instead, supervisors are required to make
recommendations to the human resource department to ensure
uniformity and consistency of application and to prevent precedents.
Second, employers increase the training of supervisors in the
administration of the contract. Training is needed to ensure that
supervisors administer the collective agreement in a consistent manner.
For example, if each supervisor applies a different standard to tardiness,
some employees may be disciplined while others with more lenient
supervisors may not receive any penalty. In time, the union might argue
that unequal treatment makes it unfair to discipline those who are late.
Through centralization and training, human resource departments
create a more uniform enforcement of the contract.

Public Sector Bargaining

When Parliament passed the Public Service Staff Relations
Act (PSSRA) in 1967, it essentially gave federal civil servants bargaining
rights similar to those granted workers in the private sector—usually the
right to bargain for wages, hours, and certain working conditions. More
important, it also gave them the right to strike. This is in contrast to civil
servants in the United States, who since 1962 have had the right to
bargain collectively but not to withhold their services. Under the PSSRA,
the methods of conflict resolution are different from those in the private
sector. Before a bargaining agent can give notice that it wishes to
bargain, a decision must be made as to whether a conciliation-strike
procedure or a binding-arbitration procedure will be used should a
deadlock occur. The union has the right to choose different procedures
for each subsequent collective agreement. If the strike route has been
chosen, conciliation procedures must be followed before a strike can
begin.
Page 376

Another difference from the private sector is that the law allows the
employer to designate certain employees as performing essential
services, thus divesting them of the right to strike. The union, however,
may challenge the list of “designated employees,” in which case the
Public Service Staff Relations Board makes the final decision.
A comparison of the federal and provincial legislation for government
employees reveals little uniformity across Canada. While municipal
government employees generally fall under the same legislation as
private sector workers, the legislation applicable to provincial civil
servants varies markedly. For instance, Saskatchewan government
employees come under the same legislation as private sector employees;
in some provinces there is specific legislation applicable only to
provincial government employees; and in other jurisdictions, there may
be two or more statutes applicable to government employees. In
addition, some provinces markedly restrict or prohibit strikes by public
sector workers.91
Public sector labour disputes can present major challenges:
On October 16, 2017, about 12,000 college teachers represented by the
Ontario Public Service Employees Union went on strike, affecting around
500,000 college students. The major issues concerned the ratio between
full and contract employees, job security, academic freedom, and
compensation. The strike ultimately came to an end when the Ontario
Liberal government passed back-to-work legislation on November 19
and an arbitrator set a new four-year contract one month later. However,
the union initiated a court charter challenge in early 2018, alleging that
the back-to-work legislation violated workers’ rights.
Even though students and faculty are back to class, repercussions from
the dispute are still being felt. A condensed schedule meant cutting and
skimming over course material. Some faculty lost external research
funding, stress and anxiety increased, and students missed employment
opportunities. For example, one student had secured full-time
employment with the federal government upon her anticipated
graduation in December, but one of her courses was delayed by the strike
and, consequently, her employment contract was changed to temporary
status.92
LO7Human Resource
Practices in the Union
Environment
Human resource issues are constantly arising in the union environment.
Consider the following example from the health care sector:
There is a growing concern relating to people using cell phones to record
nurses at work. Examples range from recording the birth of a child to a
person waking up after being anesthetized to someone upset about wait
times or inefficiencies at the hospital. According to Janet Hazelton,
president of the Nova Scotia Nurses Union, recording nurses at work can
distract them while performing their jobs and violates the privacy of
patients. As Hazelton notes, “It makes nurses uneasy. You become very
self-conscious. And you worry what are they going to do with it?” Karen
Hornberger, director of privacy for Nova Scotia’s Health Authority, says
that patients have the right to record their interactions with medical
personnel but recording others in the hospital would be treated like a
privacy breach.93
A study by the Industrial Relations Centre at Queen’s University provides
insights on the labour relations profession in Canada. Among the major
findings are the following:
• The four activities that labour relations professionals are most
involved in are conflict resolution management, coaching with
regard to labour relations best practices, administration of the
collective agreement, and grievance settlement.
• From a knowledge perspective, the most important areas are
understanding the union–management perspective, conflict
resolution, labour statutes, and negotiation.
• Page 377
In terms of skills required to perform day-to-day work, the top
four skills are communication, active listening, relationship
building, and collective agreement interpretation.
 • When considering the labour relations profession, 59 percent are
optimistic about the future of the profession, 15 percent are
pessimistic, and 26 percent are unsure.
• The top three perceived opportunities for the profession are talent
management, union–management collaboration and
partnership, and strategic labour relations.94
While there is a significant and growing body of information about
human resource management from the perspective of the employer, less
attention has been paid to examining which human resource
management practices are found within unionized workgroups.
A survey of Canadian union officials examined a number of human
resource issues in the unionized environment. Concerning human
resource management policies, union officials were asked to indicate
whether a number of specific HRM programs or practices applied to
bargaining-unit employees. As revealed in Figure 13-14, more than 95
percent of units had a policy addressing sexual harassment, 86 percent
had an orientation program for new hires, 86 percent had an employee
assistance plan (EAP), and 66 percent had some type of formal
performance appraisal system. About 51 percent of respondents reported
that the employer shared business information with union members.
FIGURE 13-14

HRM Practices/Programs Among Canadian Unions

Union officials were also asked to indicate whether bargaining-unit

employees were involved in a number of specific team-based and
incentive programs (Figure 13-14). As the figure reveals, 28 percent of
the union locals reported having work teams, 22 percent had quality
circles, and 40 percent had problem-solving groups. Unions have
generally stayed away from contingency compensation plans such as
profit sharing, productivity sharing, and employee stock ownership
plans; overall, less than 20 percent of respondents reported having such
plans.
Page 378
A study on the impact of a strike on a workplace team examined two
groups: the strikers and those who continued to work during the dispute.
The two groups became more cohesive during the conflict and their
social network increased but there were several challenges after the
dispute was settled and the two groups needed to work cooperatively.95

Implications of Union
Avoidance Approaches
In nonunion facilities, an implicit objective of many employers is to
remain nonunion. Employers frequently adopt either a union
suppression or a union substitution approach in order to avoid
unionization. The union suppression approach involves fighting union
representation. An employer may try to intimidate workers, threaten to
close or move the plant or facility, or discriminate against union
supporters.
The union substitution approach examines what unions bring to the
employment relationship and then tries to introduce such features into
the nonunion workplace. This approach requires that human resource
specialists do the following:
• Design jobs that are personally satisfying to workers.
• Develop plans that maximize individual opportunities while
minimizing the possibility of layoffs.
• Select workers who are well qualified.
• Establish fair, meaningful, and objective standards of
individual performance.
• Train workers and managers to enable them to achieve
expected levels of performance.
• Evaluate and reward behaviour on the basis of actual
performance.
• Provide employees with a “voice” in the workplace.
 • Implement a compensation plan in which wages/salary and
benefits parallel those available in the union sector.
The union substitution approach is advocated by many HR practitioners,
consultants, and labour lawyers. According to one labour lawyer:
“Nonunion companies that want to remain nonunion should steal some
of their best features from their competitors’ collective agreements.
Often a collective agreement will contain provisions that do not
contradict an efficient and effective operation. Employers should have a
nonunion dispute resolution process. Dealing with complaints is the
biggest challenge in a nonunion workplace.”96
On the other hand, Canadian labour relations legislation requires that
workers need to take the initiative in establishing collective bargaining
relationships, knowing that many employers are opposed to unions.
Consequently, the beginning of the new union–management relationship
is already characterized by conflict and adversarialism. Roy Adams,
professor emeritus of industrial relations at McMaster University, argues
that the practice of union avoidance sabotages the right to bargain
collectively and contravenes the International Labour Organization’s
Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, which
includes the effective recognition of the right to bargain collectively. In
North America, this right is generally not available until workers go
through an arduous certification procedure, which results in an
adversarial relationship.97

LO8Managing in a Union
Environment
When unions are present, the human resource function is changed. In
many organizations, the human resource department is expanded by the
addition of specialists in labour relations, who deal with such critical
areas as negotiations and contract administration, while human resource
professionals attend to their more traditional roles. Although some
organizations establish separate industrial relations departments to deal
with labour relations issues, industrial relations is often considered a
subset of human resource management.
Page 379

Unionization may be associated with greater centralization of employee

record-keeping and discipline to ensure uniformity of application. This
change can mean that line managers lose some of their authority to the
human resource department. They may also find their jobs more difficult
because of the new rules imposed by the contract—while management
has the right to act, the union may have the right, under the contract, to
react to management’s actions.
Line managers may become dissatisfied because their authority
diminishes while their responsibility increases. These added
responsibilities are likely to result from requests of human resource
professionals, who may need to monitor the work environment more
closely and need more information from the line managers. For example,
the line manager may have to compile new reports on such issues as
absenteeism, lateness, productivity, and employee grievances. Such
demands on supervisors may create friction between line managers and
human resource staff members.
The presence of a union means that management has less freedom to
make unilateral changes. No longer can an employer simply decide
which changes to implement. Instead, collective agreement provisions
and labour laws must also be considered.
Some unions have been using the media to control the debate on key
issues. Both employers and unions need to consider the effect of media
relations but there is a fear that media can be a barrier to good-faith
bargaining or result in misinterpreting or sensationalizing fundamental
workplace issues. A number of employers are increasing their focus on
media relations and making sure that they have a carefully considered
response to media queries.98

Labour–Management Cooperation
Some unions and employers are moving toward greater co-operation,
and there is increasing acceptance that labour and management must
work together if they are to survive and prosper in the highly competitive
global economy.99
Some employers and unions are using or considering “evidence-based
labour relations.” According to Cooper, Jackson, and Irish, “Both unions
and employers are expressing an interest in partnering on initiatives to
tackle challenges related to health and safety, precarious work, and
marginalized groups.” The parties also may be interested in grievance
metrics, such as grievances as a percentage of unionized headcount,
arbitrated grievances as a percentage of grievances open, and percentage
of grievances closed. A Conference Board report revealed that both
employers and unions viewed arbitration as a “cumbersome,
unpredictable process.”100
About 52 percent of respondents to a recent Conference Board of Canada
study reported that their overall union–management climate was
cooperative and a further 9 percent said it was very cooperative. The
major issues for 2020 included wages (58 percent of respondents),
followed by flexible work practices (34 percent), business
competitiveness (33 percent), productivity (31 percent) and
organizational change (27 percent). Their perception of the top issues
from a union perspective included wages (81 percent), employment
security (51 percent), health benefits (38 percent), employment and pay
equity (28 percent), and outsourcing and contracting out (22
percent).101
There is growing evidence that organizational performance is enhanced
when labour and management cooperate. For example, research using
data from both employers and unions indicated that a more positive
labour climate was associated with perceptions of higher productivity,
enhanced product or service quality, and greater customer or client
satisfaction.102 However, cooperation is a very challenging process:
A recent survey of the City of Edmonton’s communication branch
revealed low morale and allegations of workplace harassment,
disrespect, and bullying. The City’s engagement survey showed that only
27 percent of respondents reported having “trust and confidence in my
branch’s leadership team’s ability to achieve the city’s goals” while just
30 percent indicated that “the City inspires me to do my best work.” One
employee stated that she would be criticized at large meetings, get yelled
at, and have people go behind her back to her supervisor. Another finally
quit after seeing man after man get promoted and stated, “It was awful.
My mental health deteriorated over the years I was there.” The branch is
now under new leadership that is committed to improving the work
environment.103
Obstacles to Cooperation
Industrial relations specialists often seek union cooperation to improve
the organization’s effectiveness. However, cooperation may not be
politically attractive to union leaders, who see little gain in cooperating
with management. In fact, if leaders do cooperate, they may be accused
by workers of forgetting the union’s interests. These accusations can
mean defeat by political opponents within the union. Thus, cooperation
may not be in the union leader’s best interests.
Page 380

In addition to political obstacles, union leaders may mistrust

management. For example, bitter remarks during an organizing drive or
arbitration case may convince union officials that human resource
specialists are anti-union. Within this climate, cooperative gestures are
often seen as tricks or gimmicks aimed at hurting the union. If
cooperative proposals threaten the members or leaders, mistrust
increases and cooperation usually fails.
While employers often have good reasons for seeking more cooperation
with their unionized workforce, a number of cooperative programs have
the underlying goal of increasing managerial domination in the
workplace. As well, some employers use cooperation to “stress the
system” by reducing employees or resources, giving workers more tasks,
or speeding up the assembly line; such practices may dramatically
increase the stress level of workers and dehumanize the workplace.104

Building Labour–Management Cooperation

An employer and union interested in greater labour–management
cooperation have several options to consider. Some of the most common
cooperative efforts are summarized in Figure 13-15. One of the most
basic actions is prior consultation with the union. While not every
management decision must be approved by the union, actions that affect
unionized employees may result in grievance filing unless explained in
advance to the union.
Managers and human resource specialists can build cooperation
between the employer and the union through the following:
• Prior consultation with union leaders to defuse problems before
they become formal grievances
 • Sincere concern for employee problems and welfare even when
management is not obligated by the collective agreement
• Training programs that objectively communicate the intent of
union and management bargainers and reduce biases and
misunderstandings
• Joint study committees that allow management and union officials
to find solutions to common problems
• Third parties who can provide guidance and programs that bring
union leaders and managers closer together to pursue common
objectives
FIGURE 13-15

Methods of Building Labour–Management Cooperation

Table Summary: Summary

Human resource specialists can also build cooperation through a sincere

concern for employees. This concern may be shown through the prompt
settlement of grievances. As well, employers can establish programs
(such as employee assistance programs and job counselling) that assist
employees who are experiencing personal difficulties.
Training programs are another way to build cooperation. After a new
contract is signed, the human resource department often trains only
managers. The union does the same for its leaders. The result is that both
sides continue their biases and misunderstandings. If human resource
management sponsors training for both the union and management, a
common understanding of the contract is more likely to be brought
about. The training can be as simple as taking turns paraphrasing the
contract, or outside neutral parties can be hired to do the training. Either
way, supervisors and union officials end the training with a common
understanding of the contract and a new basis for cooperation.
When a complex problem confronts the union and employer, joint study
committees are sometimes formed. For example, one organization
recently set up a joint committee with its union to establish a policy on
sexual harassment. Other employers use joint study committees to
address such issues as workplace rules, quality of work life, technological
change, budget reduction strategies, and safety. However, union
participation and support is absolutely essential.
 A final method of building cooperation is through the use of third
parties, such as consultants or government agencies, who may act as
change agents or catalysts to cooperation. For example, in Nova Scotia,
the provincial government has established and delivers a variety of joint
union–management programs (including grievance mediation, joint
supervisor–steward training, and labour–management committees) with
the goal of increasing cooperation in the workplace.
Page 381

There is no single best approach to building cooperation. Since each

relationship is unique, the methods used will depend upon the situation.
Improving union–management relations is an important function that
can be addressed by human resource professionals in unionized
organizations.

SUMMARY
The labour–management framework consists of unions, government,
and management. Although each union is unique, unions share the
common objectives of protecting and improving their members’ wages,
hours, and working conditions. To further these objectives, the union
movement has created local, national, and international structures, plus
federations at the provincial and federal levels.
In Canada, the federal government has jurisdiction in labour relations
matters over Crown corporations, airlines, most railways,
communication companies, and federal government agencies—or
approximately 10 percent of the labour force. All other organizations fall
under the jurisdiction of the provinces, which have enacted separate but
similar legislation.
Unionization often occurs when workers perceive the need for a union as
a response to unsatisfactory treatment by management. During the
organizing process, management’s response is limited by laws and
employee reactions. The employer’s primary defence is sound policies
implemented by competent supervisors before unionization begins.
If workers form a union, federal or provincial law requires management
and the union to bargain in good faith. The success of the employer at
the bargaining table is affected by its actions before negotiations begin.
Negotiations with the union usually result in a “collective agreement”
that must be approved by union members and top management. Once
negotiated, the collective agreement is administered by the union and
management.
In administering the agreement, human resource specialists face several
challenges. For example, contract clauses place limits on management,
day-to-day administration of the contract can lead to precedents, and
limitations often result from the resolution of disputes through the
grievance procedure or arbitration.
Although unions may represent the employees, management remains
ultimately responsible for organizational performance and effectively
utilizing the human resources. Through prior consultation, sincere
concern for employees, training programs, joint study committees, or
third parties, human resource specialists can lay the foundations of a
cooperative union–management relationship.