Province moves towards allowing public sector workers to strike

[Buster]

The abuse of the taxpayer in Alberta continues.

http://www.newstalk770.com/2016/03/1...sc_ref=twitter

Province moves towards allowing public sector workers to strike Calgary,Alberta / News Talk 770 (CHQR) Joe McFarland Posted: March 15, 2016 04:28 pm Province moves towards allowing public sector workers to strike Alberta’s public sector workers, including nurses and hospital staff, could soon be able to walk off the job in a labour dispute. The government has tabled Bill 4, the Essential Service Act, granting workers the right to strike as long as unions and the employers can agree on a contingency plan. Lawyer and consultations facilitator Andrew Sims says the current legislation is three decades old and needed to reflect decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada and others. “I don’t think it’s, although easily expressed in 140 characters, fair to say that the one interest has to outweigh the other,” Sims told reporters on Tuesday afternoon. ”We could go back to illegal strikes, but that isn’t particularly constructive either.” The labour ministry estimates the legislation will affect 150,000 provincial workers. “There will be some disruption to public services in the event of a strike or lockout,” Labour Minister Christina Gray said. ”But essential services will remain available.” “And Albertans who previously did not have the right to strike, will be better-served by this legislation because their right to strike has been returned to them,” she added. Firefighters and police officers don’t fall under the legislation because of the role they play in society, Gray said.

[HiTempguy1]

You do realize that the Supreme Court (federal jurisdiction) struck down the previous laws because they violated constitutional rights... right?

This has nothing to do with the province allowing public sector workers to strike. Public sector workers can (and should) be allowed to strike. This is the province revising it's laws on the books to meet the rights of it's citizens

[Buster]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1
You do realize that the Supreme Court (federal jurisdiction) struck down the previous laws because they violated constitutional rights... right?

This has nothing to do with the province allowing public sector workers to strike. Public sector workers can (and should) be allowed to strike. This is the province revising it's laws on the books to meet the rights of it's citizens

It sounds like you are defending a monopoly. In this case, the monopoly that a union has on labour.

Monopolies are bad for everyone.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Buster


It sounds like you are defending a monopoly. In this case, the monopoly that a corporation has on capital/power

Ohhhhhhhhh.

I can play that game too.

A union gives employees the same power an employer has in the employer/employee relationship. Why should an employee be forced into a position of less power/control in that relationship?

[Buster]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Ohhhhhhhhh.

I can play that game too.

A union gives employees the same power an employer has in the employer/employee relationship. Why should an employee be forced into a position of less power/control in that relationship?

That's just whiner/beta/crybaby talk.

People should have precisely the amount of leverage over a negotiation that they can muster. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm fine with workers organizing. I'm fine with unions. I'm even fine with striking. It's a freedom of association thing.

However, employers should have equal freedom to fire the employees and break the unions. And certainly a public union has far more power than its "employer" since government officials provide a rather imperfect agency.

The protections offered to public unions are a perfect example of how populism regularly gets it wrong.

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Ohhhhhhhhh.

I can play that game too.

A union gives employees the same power an employer has in the employer/employee relationship. Why should an employee be forced into a position of less power/control in that relationship?

You mean like every non-union employee in Canada? Lol...

Can employers fire employees who strike immediately? You know...like what would happen if I told my boss I am unhappy with my pay and am not showing up until he pays me more even if I am not worth it? If you are not happy with your pay then quit. Simple as that. Find a new job. I'm sorry to tell you but you are 100% replaceable 100% of the time no matter how valuable you think you are. This goes for 99% of people in the world.

Unions allow employees to take extreme advantage of corporations by not allowing them to properly manage staff.

[codetrap]

.

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by codetrap
I get it. So, if you're not happy with your currently employer, you always have the option to leave and find another employer, right?

How does that work for nurses, or teachers? Isn't there pretty much a monopoly on employers in those fields?

Let's cherry pick two job roles to suit your argument instead of the 100s of unionized roles that don't....good work!

[Sugarphreak]

...

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by codetrap
How does that work for nurses, or teachers? Isn't there pretty much a monopoly on employers in those fields?

If Government Unions wouldn't politicize so aggressively to fight private business that wouldn't likely still be the case. The Government Union is a big part of what limits those fields to one "employer" wouldn't you say?

[codetrap]

.

[bjstare]

Originally posted by Buster


That's just whiner/beta/crybaby talk.

People should have precisely the amount of leverage over a negotiation that they can muster. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm fine with workers organizing. I'm fine with unions. I'm even fine with striking. It's a freedom of association thing.

However, employers should have equal freedom to fire the employees and break the unions. And certainly a public union has far more power than its "employer" since government officials provide a rather imperfect agency.

The protections offered to public unions are a perfect example of how populism regularly gets it wrong.

Preach! Couldn't agree more.

But good luck with this argument actually being productive

[l/l/rX]

I'm too lazy to google search this, but how much does this differ than Ontario for instance or is Alberta the first ones to allow the public sector workers to strike?

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by codetrap
I have no idea. Are you trying to say that it's the Unions fault there isn't more private hospitals or privately run schools?

Government Unions lobby heavily against privatization so yes, to some degree they are responsible.

We're in an election campaign here right now and the NDP, Government Health Care Unions and the SGEU are once again attacking with massive fear-mongering campaigns that the evil SK Party has the secret agenda to privatize it all, drown kittens and eat your newborn babies while watching your grandparents starve to death all while glad-handing to the evil private corporations.

Big business Government Unions absolutely help impose a monopoly in certain sectors - they do not want competition.

FYI - I'm not against the right to strike, I was only responding to the one comment.

[ExtraSlow]

i feel like we have a variation of this argument every month or so. its feeling super productive. thumbs up to you all!

[JRSC00LUDE]

More productive than going on and on about Trump and the US election.....at least it's about OUR assholes!

[Buster]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow
i feel like we have a variation of this argument every month or so. its feeling super productive. thumbs up to you all!

Turns out I remit income tax about once a month too.

And every time I do, I look at my friends employed in the public system, and wonder what it's like to not save for retirement.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by Buster


Turns out I remit income tax about once a month too.

And every time I do, I look at my friends employed in the public system, and wonder what it's like to not save for retirement.

I have 14% of my gross income taken and put into a pension I have no choice in contributing to. You really think all public sector pensions are funded solely by the taxpayer?

Does your employer match RRSP contributions? Perhaps offer stock or investment type options? Many do, and that is an incentive to do the work you do, for the company you work for. My employer providing a share of contributions is along the same lines, and gives me incentive to work in public service doing a job many don't want to or won't do.

[codetrap]

.

[Buster]

Originally posted by phil98z24


You really think all public sector pensions are funded solely by the taxpayer?

Well, technically, 100% of all public sector everything is funded by the taxpayer.

In fact, public employees don't really even pay tax at all- they simply recycle taxpayer funds back to the gov't.