Comment 65228

By observer (anonymous) | Posted June 27, 2011 at 17:39:52 in reply to Comment 65223

Ryan or someone also regst'd as him, wrote, "That, in turn, weakens the incentive for individual workers to organize." That posting is a debate club thing, not an observation that holds in Canada's real world. My response could be : if only! You give far too much credit to the successes of CCF, NDP or similar socially progressive parties out of Quebec, e.g.
As for this: "In other words, unions are actually acting against their **own narrow interests** when they advocate for broader social equity." Social unionism has been a function of Canadian labour unionism for well over a century now: what's good for me is good for all. Unions have often--or usually-- taken the lead that political parties have then had to be dragged to follow--in occupational health and safety, in social health plans and provision of, in gender equity questions where of course there'd been weakness within the labour mvmt too, and other important initiatives.
Achieving success in labour union initiatives taken has often shown to governments that, hey, this makes sense and can work for all. Jean Claude Parrot expressed these thoughts in Hamilton three decades ago in explaining why what was necessary and demanded by workers in postal factories may very well be beyond the NDP's comfort level [he'd been asked to respond to exactly that question]--but that fact in no way was going to inhibit the union he was democratically elected to lead from pursuing what was right and necessary--any possible 'embarrassment' to the NDP notwithstanding.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds