CAW Deal Sets Dangerous Precedent
Nov 13, 2007
A few weeks ago, Buzz Hargrove, President of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW), proposed an agreement with Magna International that sacrificed some fundamental rights that organized labour has utilized for decades in bargaining collectively for better wages and working conditions. The agreement gives CAW the right to organize all Magna plants – a possible 18,000 employees in total.
Now concluded, the agreement denies Magna workers the powers that underpin the right of collective bargaining, these being the right to strike and to elect their own shop stewards. It is precisely because of these powers that workers have been able to exercise some control over their working conditions over the years. Without them, the fragile balance of power between management and labour tilts very definitely to the side of the employer.
By introducing “employee advocates” rather than shop stewards, CAW workers at Magna plants will now be represented by individuals who are selected and approved by management, as commitees including management and workers will now review candidates for these positions. The CAW has ceded the democratic right of its workers to select - without management intervention or approval - their workplace representatives.
The right to strike is important not because it’s used, but rather because it gives workers the capacity to take job action. This sends a message to management that they must bargain seriously and in good faith and make a reasonable offer or suffer the potential consequences of a work stoppage. This is probably the most fundamental power workers have over their employers, and the CAW has sacrificed it in this deal with Magna. In fact, the national agreement between the two sides stipulates that any employee or group of employees that engage in work stoppages will be immediately dismissed.
In some ways this CAW-Magna deal can be viewed as a reflection of the times. The labour movement is facing challenges and union density in Canada is declining. Competition for members is becoming more fierce, and as a consequence some unions are raiding the members of others. This ultimate self-interest of these unions only serves to weaken the collective power of the labour movement, and cannot bode well for the future of the movement if it continues unabated.
Even powerful officials within Hargrove’s own union have suggested that his no-strike deal with Magna amounts to nothing less than union suicide. After all, without shop stewards or the right to strike, who really needs a union? Although Hargrove counters that under this deal CAW workers will earn more money and avoid the two-tiered wage deal of their colleagues in the UAW, this seems like a very steep price to pay, never mind the precedent that it sets.
It’s no secret that the manufacturing sector in general and the auto-manufacturing one in particular have been in decline for some time now. But based on this most recent deal, it appears that Hargrove is willing to go to extreme lengths to garner more members for the CAW. But at what cost?
Comments
Comments are now closed