Conservatives set to table bill.........

[TimG]

The members know their budget, if they care enough to go.

why should they have to go to the meeting to get the numbers. They should be published so any can see them without making special requests.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

What is sick is that you actually believe that there is nothing wrong with unions or companies imposing harm on millions of people because they can't agree on a contract. Your priorities are twisted.

Harm? Not getting mail 2 days a week because the employees are striking? ... Incovenience.

Harm? Having to switch a flight to another carrier? ... Inconvenience.

No one was harmed. This far right conservative ideology where an inconvenience is warped into some extreme injustic of pain is disgusting. FOR THE CORPORATION!

Let's take away all worker power. Let's have mud huts as houses.

Let's have expendable workers with no safety precautions. Safety precautions cost more than retraining of course.

The Far Right Conservative Wet Dream.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

why should they have to go to the meeting to get the numbers. They should be published so any can see them without making special requests.

The only people demanding that the numbers be published publicly are those like you who want to criticize and nit pick expenditures that you have no business or say in, in your war on Unions.

Nothing more.

A Solution looking for a problem...

[TimG]

Harm? Having to switch a flight to another carrier? ... Inconvenience.

You are completely clueless. Do you have any idea how much it costs people to change travel plans at the last moment? Inconvenience my a**. Having to pay thousands of dollars to reschedule is trip is serious harm.

If unions (or companies) want the right to cause harm to the public because they can't come to a deal then they should assume financial liability for all costs incurred by innocent third parties as a result of their strike action. Obviously, unions would never agree to that because they know it would cost them dearly.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Corporations are not also made up of people? Judging by the percentage of Canadians that belong to unions today, I’d say corporations play a greater role in the majority of people’s lives………I personally don’t see much of a difference between a union and a church/religion

Corporations have one goal: Generate profit at all costs (monetary, social, environmental, legal) they can get away with.

Unions have one goal: To protect the interest, safety, wage and working conditions of their workers.

One goal is clearly more noble than the other.

[TimG]

One goal is clearly more noble than the other.

Really? I don't see it. Both the corporation and the union are motivated by greed. Neither is morally superior to the other.

[Shwa]

Union to be forced to open books........About time the unions play fair......If charities and religious organisations have to, why not Unions……….Corporations open their books to revenue Canada……….tit-for tat.

A complete non-issue, really. If you are in a union - and the three big unions I have been involved with - just like several NFP & chartible organizations I have been associated with - you can get a look at the books if you are a member, but there is usually a fairly concise report completed by a reputable accounting company available at the annual general meetings. No problem. It isn't a widespread issue.

The bill isn't to force unions to post their financial statements on the web, gawd, but I am sure there are locals that do that anyways. Most prefer the old school route of active participation at meetings.

No it appears that some con was told to piss off by a union when he wanted to see their expenditures:

The Conservatives have accused the NDP of illegally accepting union sponsorships at its recent party convention in Vancouver, with Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro accusing union leaders of “seeking to buy influence” within the Official Opposition.

Russ Heibert is from Surrey. Duh.

Really, for all the anti-union folks here, it will likely not be any big deal for any local to comply with disclosure since they already do to their members. And if you think that Revenue Canada is going to hire another 1000 staff to devote time to auditing all those books, you are out of your minds. And I highly doubt that anyone here will be able to force any union or local to open their books to you or post them on the web. The bill is for Income Tax Act purposes, not for you.

[blueblood]

A complete non-issue, really. If you are in a union - and the three big unions I have been involved with - just like several NFP & chartible organizations I have been associated with - you can get a look at the books if you are a member, but there is usually a fairly concise report completed by a reputable accounting company available at the annual general meetings. No problem. It isn't a widespread issue.

The bill isn't to force unions to post their financial statements on the web, gawd, but I am sure there are locals that do that anyways. Most prefer the old school route of active participation at meetings.

No it appears that some con was told to piss off by a union when he wanted to see their expenditures:

Russ Heibert is from Surrey. Duh.

Really, for all the anti-union folks here, it will likely not be any big deal for any local to comply with disclosure since they already do to their members. And if you think that Revenue Canada is going to hire another 1000 staff to devote time to auditing all those books, you are out of your minds. And I highly doubt that anyone here will be able to force any union or local to open their books to you or post them on the web. The bill is for Income Tax Act purposes, not for you.

This story is still in early stages. If the disclosure rules are similar to charities, I would have to wonder if the access to information act applies. If it does the feds won't need to hire revenue canada staff, the minions at sun news network will be more than happy to do it. I think the bill is fair, if unions don't want to pay taxes just like charities (according to the article), they can play by the same rules. Unions, the charity that a worker is forced to donate to.

Publically traded companies have to post finances if they want to trade on the stock market. The pissing and moaning by union supporters over this is similar to wheat board supporters when the feds tried to implement the regulation that only those growers with sales of 40 tonnes or more of board grains could vote in cwb elections. To put that into perspective, that amounts to gross sales of about 12000 dollars, not enough to make a living off of. If there's smoke there's fire...

[cybercoma]

If [corporations] fudge numbers, people can and do go to prison

hahahaha. Good one.

[Topaz]

Let's see if the Tories will put their money were their mouths are. Let them OPEN THEIR books and show Canadians were THEY are spenting our money. There has been some MP's in the past that came forward and did it on their own, but, now with Bill, Canadians should see where their money is going. There's too many secrets in Ottawa and the Tories should lead the way and open their books too! I think they Tories would call it accountability.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Let's see if the Tories will put their money were their mouths are. Let them OPEN THEIR books and show Canadians were THEY are spenting our money. There has been some MP's in the past that came forward and did it on their own, but, now with Bill, Canadians should see where their money is going. There's too many secrets in Ottawa and the Tories should lead the way and open their books too! I think they Tories would call it accountability.

They are directly targetting anything that might keep them from retaining power. I want to see their books. Being that fraud convictions are an asset when helping the con party, they probably fudge their numbers better than most. So it might be of no use anyways.

The Conservatives want an autocracy with the veil of democracy. Removing opposition by unethical means. It will only get worse.

Edited October 4, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist

[Shwa]

This story is still in early stages. If the disclosure rules are similar to charities, I would have to wonder if the access to information act applies. If it does the feds won't need to hire revenue canada staff, the minions at sun news network will be more than happy to do it. I think the bill is fair, if unions don't want to pay taxes just like charities (according to the article), they can play by the same rules. Unions, the charity that a worker is forced to donate to.

Any information collected by the federal government falls within the parameters of the Access to Information and Privacy Act. If you are unsure, send in an ATIP request for the financial data for MADD (or any other charity) and see how it works. This has nothing to do with the sun news network unless they want to source out the union financials for their printers or camera operators, etc.

[CPCFTW]

They are directly targetting anything that might keep them from retaining power. I want to see their books. Being that fraud convictions are an asset when helping the con party, they probably fudge their numbers better than most. So it might be of no use anyways.

The Conservatives want an autocracy with the veil of democracy. Removing opposition by unethical means. It will only get worse.

Another centrist post by MCC.

I don't get what the big deal is for union supporters. If there's nothing to hide then this should be a non-issue.

It's like dating a girl who refuses to show you her locked phone because "you should trust her". I just know you unions are cheating on me you damn whores!

Edited October 4, 2011 by CPCFTW

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Sums up all of your posts

[capricorn]

Easy.

Ontario Teachers' Federation has an annual meeting that teacher's can go to. The members know their budget, if they care enough to go.

My brother is in another union and is actively involved. He also sees the annual budget.

It's there for any union member that wants to see how the money is budgetted.

Seeing the budget but having a say in how those budgeted funds are spent is another matter. Let's take the example of the Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario (ETFO). That's the same ETFO that is currently airing those media ads "Vote against kids". Evidently, the ETFO is active in political action and it is part of their agenda.

Political Action

ETFO is engaged in political action at a number of different levels and through a variety of issues.

The Federation lobbies the provincial and federal governments on issues of direct interest to its members, including those related to equity, social justice, and democratic reform. Recent examples of campaigns that ETFO supports include the promotion of a national child care strategy and the push for proportional representation in our provincial and federal electoral systems.

ETFO attends the conventions of the three main provincial political parties and encourages members to participate by providing a subsidy for those who attend political conventions as delegates.

ETFO members interested in political action at any level can subscribe to a political action listserv provided by the federation or complete a voluntary, on-line questionnaire.

For more information about ETFO's involvement in political action, contact Government Relations Officer Vivian McCaffrey, extension 2333.

The contact person for the Citizen’s Assembly and Proportional Representation is Mary Morison, extension 2337.

http://www.etfo.ca/advocacyandaction/politicalaction/pages/default.aspx

Provincial Election 2011

Much is at stake in the next provincial election, to be held in October 2011. It will be important for every ETFO member to be informed about the policies promoted by the respective political parties. It will be important for ETFO members to engage in discussions with their family, friends, and neighbours about the importance of investing in public education, other public services, and programs that contribute to Ontario being a fair and just society.

At both the provincial and local level, ETFO will be working hard to keep members informed and to foster broad involvement of our members in the campaigns of candidates committed to our goals and priorities.

http://www.etfo.ca/advocacyandaction/provincialelection/pages/default.aspx

Where does the money come from to conduct this political action? The funds necessary for political action are set by delegates at ETFO conventions, and that forms part of ETFO's budget. Once those funds are approved at that level, mainstream member of the ETFO have no say in how their executive spends those funds. As per the example I provided "Vote against kids", although mainstream members may oppose their dues being spent on that ad campaign, there's diddly they can do about it. The decisions on how to spend ETFO's budgeted funds is made at the executive level of the union.

Essentially, major unions operate the same. National/provincial unions hold conventions attended by delegates selected by locals. Note that those selected delegates are almost without exception drawn from the activists at the local level. It's questionable whether mainstream members agree with the priorities or pet interests of those activists. The convention meets and assigns the budget that will carry through the next convention and adopts it. The convention also elects an executive to administer affairs until the next convention. After the convention, the executive takes charge of the budget and spends it as it sees fit.

Most people don't even know what they are talking about. There is no conspiracy to hide union budgets from their members.

It's not so much about hiding a budget. It's that union executives are given too much latitude in how they spend the union dues they collect from their membership. It's oh so easy for a union executive to keep members in the dark in how their dues are spent. As one who has worked at the highest echelons of a major federal public service union for 13 years, I know what I speak of.

[Oleg Bach]

Unions become who the dispised in time. They are the new establishment - If you can look into Conrad Blacks books - then you can look in the union books - will be surprised - they are just as corrupt as big buisness - cos they are now the nova-big-buisness.

[Wilber]

If there is a lock out then the employer is to blame. I really don't care. The point two squabbling parties have no business imposing harm on millions of people because they can't agree.

Note that in both cases Air Canada and the union settled rather than letting the government set the terms. This is pretty strong evidence that the government needs to step in to force agreement in these situations.

What is sick is that you actually believe that there is nothing wrong with unions or companies imposing harm on millions of people because they can't agree on a contract. Your priorities are twisted.

Why just restrict it to management union issues? Government had no problem with ACE stripping Air Canada of its most profitable assets and making it a captive customer of those former assets to ensure their profitability. If Air Canada goes broke and there is no service as a result, that's just business but if service is interrupted because of a much less serious labour management dispute, they have to get involved. Politics, pure and simple.

[TimG]

If Air Canada goes broke and there is no service as a result, that's just business but if service is interrupted because of a much less serious labour management dispute, they have to get involved. Politics, pure and simple.

There is a direct relationship between labour strife and service disruptions. The dubious corporate structures created during AC restructuring might contribute to a failure in the future but that is not a given. Nor is it a given that a future bankruptcy would lead to service disruptions. Edited October 4, 2011 by TimG

[Wilber]

There is a direct relationship between labour strife and service disruptions. The dubious corporate structures created during AC restructuring might contribute to a failure in the future but that is not a given. Nor is it a given that a future bankruptcy would lead to service disruptions.

Bankruptcy would lead to service ceasing, permanently. In this case there is a direct relationship between labour strife and those dubious corporate structures. Those dubious corporate structures ACE created during AC restructuring were paid for by Air Canada shareholders and employees. ACE shareholders made out like bandits and have departed the fix leaving others the mess. This is the first opportunity the employees have had since restructuring to actually bargain but government put a stop to it, because it is politically expedient.

Edited October 4, 2011 by Wilber

[Oleg Bach]

I don't understand and I don't care...this complex stuff is beyond me..What I find about things that go over my head is that they were never meant to be in my head to begin with. Unions are not spiritual movements similar to Christian benevolence - they are material movements - EXACTLY like corporations....difference between a union member and middle and upper management in a corporation - is the accident of birth and privledge - Unionist want what others were born with..be it wealth or talent - but somethings are not transferable.

[TimG]

In this case there is a direct relationship between labour strife and those dubious corporate structures.

You have a point here. But that does not justify service disruptions which create hardship for thousands of people that use air canada every day.

There is a saying that applies: your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.

Collective barginning make be a right but that does not mean AC or the AC union have right to impose hardship on others because they cannot come to a deal.

[Wilber]

You have a point here. But that does not justify service disruptions which create hardship for thousands of people that use air canada every day.

There is a saying that applies: your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.

Collective barginning make be a right but that does not mean AC or the AC union have right to impose hardship on others because they cannot come to a deal.

Any labour interuption imposes some sort of hardship on customers, do we apply that to every part of the economy? It seems you are in favour of government intervention in business so what are your limits or do you have any?

[TimG]

It seems you are in favour of government intervention in business so what are your limits or do you have any?

If there are reasonable alternatives that can handle the extra business available to consumers then it is not a big deal. e.g. if Safeway workers go on strike people can go to other grocery stores. I would not have ordered the posties back because there are many alternatives to mail now a days. An AC strike is a problem because of the way airline ticket pricing works (tickets bought months in advance and cost a bundle to change at the last moment) and international routing works (i.e. capacity cannot be easily increased).

I also do not assume the union is always at fault. Sometimes it is the company and the government should focus on encouraging a negotiated settlement instead of picking sides. e.g. instead of a imposed contract the union and company should face hefty fines (set a levels required to be equally painful) for each day of disruption.

Edited October 4, 2011 by TimG

[Wilber]

If there are reasonable alternatives that can handle the extra business available to consumers then it is not a big deal. e.g. if Safeway workers go on strike people can go to other grocery stores. I would not have ordered the posties back because there are many alternatives to mail now a days. An AC strike is a problem because of the way airline ticket pricing works (tickets bought months in advance and cost a bundle to change at the last moment) and international routing works (i.e. capacity cannot be easily increased).

I also do not assume the union is always at fault. Sometimes it is the company and the government should focus on encouraging a negotiated settlement instead of picking sides. e.g. instead of a imposed contract the union and company should face hefty fines (set a levels required to be equally painful) for each day of disruption.

There are alternatives to Air Canada as well. There is more than one carrier on almost every route flown by Air Canada. During any strike an alternative might be costlier so why pick on an airline? Couriers are more expensive than regular postal service. Government is picking its targets for political mileage more than out of necessity. The only clout employees have is removal of their labour. Government took that away.

[Smallc]

We're in the middle of the most shaky economic times in decades. This is no time for a union to be demanding things of a company that isn't making money, and then striking when they don't get their way, hurting the economy.