OTTAWA, ON – The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) is demanding immediate and decisive action from the federal government to protect workers and defend jobs as an escalating trade war—fueled by U.S. President Donald Trump—threatens Canada’s economy. Just today, Trump announced yet another round of retaliatory tariffs on steel and aluminum, this time in response to Ontario’s energy surcharge. “This is spiraling out of control, and workers across Canada are rightfully alarmed. They are looking to their government for urgent and concrete measures to shield them from job losses and economic uncertainty,” said Bea Bruske, President of the CLC. Canada’s unions...
if you can’t afford to pay people a fair wage to deliver a service, that service is too expensive… this isn’t the fault of people asking for fair compensation
okay but that is an argument that the private sector should be unionised though
that 20% is pretty peanuts since it covers the last however many years of unmet CPI increases, as well as the next 3-4 years and probably accounts for another 5 years or more of unmet CPI increases after that
CPI is on average around 2%ish, so that’s 10 years of CPI adjustment total - that leaves 6-7 years, so really only 3 years before and after the time… strikes don’t happen right away - people have been unhappy about their wages for years before
perhaps, but the capitalist class has done a great marketing job then: it’s not unions that’s the problem, it’s the capitalists that aren’t paying people!
(australian, so i’m sure there are canadian specifics with this case but the general concepts don’t differ at all)
I disagree, especially when focusing on Public Sector Unions. Making arguments about the cost of a service compared to the wage, is nonsensical when discussing public sector employment – 80-90% of the cost is the wage, and the ‘value add’ is nebulous and undefined, removed from regular market pressures. Trying to equate the job security provided by public sector unions to private sector business realities is also not convincing – in private sector, if business is stagnant/declining due to a recession, you fire people – doing so may allow you to increase wages for those who remain, though they may also need to increase efficiency/productivity. The OPs article is basically about unions wanting to ignore market realities… something that public sector unions do all the time, as they don’t need to look at the ‘cost’ side from a market perspective. They just yell at the government to tax us private sector workers more.
Unions have a purpose and a function, yes. But in public sector they are detached from market realities, and have skewed public sector employees into a position where they are the subject of private sector anger. It sets the stage for Republican style/Musk style cuts to gain support amongst the voting electorate – so regardless of whatever high horse pro-union people want to perch themselves on, its folly if they don’t take this disparity as a serious risk.
Even the Ops article belies that unions are no longer about ‘regular’ working class people – the letter is specifically saying that the unions are petitioning to provide better Employment Insurance options for “high earners”. So these salaries, that are well above the Canadian average need our government to increase the payouts to help protect those unionized workers from potential job losses? If their high pay is justified by high demand, they should be able to get other employment quickly in their field… but that whole letter sure isn’t about protecting the ‘regular’ common workers, and its the sort of statement that’s just going to antagonize private sector workers who earn “regular” wages. Why should even more of a waiters paycheque go to paying taxes, so that an Airplane Pilot can have an easier time if they lose their top 5% salary job?