In November, Andrew Stevens and Angele Poirier released a report that examined the union effect on wages and benefits across Canada to 2022, with the data for Saskatchewan also broken out.
Nationally, unionized workers earned an average of 11% more than non-unionized workers. There was significant provincial, gender, age, and sectoral variation. The union advantage appeared particularly pronounced for workers aged 15 to 24 (+26%) and part-time workers (+41%).
Unionized workers were also more likely to have paid sick time (80% versus 555 for nonunionized). Unionized workers were also much more likely to have employment-related pension plans (825 versus 37%) as well as other supplementary benefits.
Interestingly, non-unionized workers experienced slightly higher wage increases between 2020 and 2022. This might reflect pressure on non-union employers to improve wages in order to attract and retain staff (i.e., is a union spill-over effect). It might also reflect that union contracts (which fix compensation for a period of time) may delay increases (e.g., inflationary bumps) or unionized workers (who are very often in the public sector) may have been subject to mandated wage freezes and rollbacks by the state.
-- Bob Barnetson
Showing posts with label pensions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pensions. Show all posts
Friday, January 12, 2024
Wednesday, September 6, 2023
Six Worries for Workers This Labour Day
This blog was originally posted on the Parkland Institute blog.
What can Alberta workers expect from a United Conservative Party government over the next four years? The UCP’s first term cheapened labour costs for employers. Its 2023 election platform contained few promises related to labour and employment issues beyond the usual nostrums about low taxes creating jobs. We think workers should watch six issues.
1. Low wages, high unemployment, and Inequity
While the number of jobs in Alberta has increased, more job seekers and layoffs mean Alberta’s unemployment rate remains the fifth highest in Canada. For those with jobs, the purchasing power of their average hourly wage has fallen by 4.95% (or about $3,000 per worker) over the past 10 years. Alberta is only one of three provinces to experience this loss.
By October, Alberta’s minimum wage will be the third lowest in the country while Alberta’s cost of living remains among the highest. The UCP is unlikely to raise the minimum wage from 2018’s $15 per hour. This means inflation will further erode the purchasing power of 11.5% of Alberta workers, the majority of whom are women.
Not surprisingly, Alberta also continues to have the highest gender wage gap in Canada. In July of 2023, Alberta women earned 84 cents for every dollar men earned (averaging $31.52 per hour vs. $37.61 per hour). The UCP is unlikely to address this gap.
2. Illusion of low-cost childcare
Under an agreement with the federal government, the UCP has promised to implement $10 per day childcare by 2026 as well as create 70,000 additional spaces. While childcare fees have declined, $10 per day childcare is likely to be a chimera.
In February, the UCP established a cost-control framework for childcare. Government funding will ensure that “core” childcare is provided for $10 per day. But the UCP is encouraging providers to charge fees for “enhanced” childcare, such as food, activities, playground equipment, and better qualified staff. Providers are being told they do not have to spend all of these enhanced fees on the enhanced services (i.e., private providers can pad their profits with these fees).
Since demand for childcare spaces will continue to outstrip supply, parents who decline to pay the enhanced fees (i.e., want $10 per day childcare) may have difficulty securing a space because they reduce the providers’ profits. Further, low wages and limited training and professional development opportunities suggest the goal of 70,000 additional spaces may be wildly optimistic.
3. An Alberta Pension Plan
Alberta has been flirting with the idea of leaving the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and creating an Alberta Pension Plan (APP) since 2019, putatively to lower premiums. The UCP did not campaign on the APP, likely because more than half of Albertans are opposed to the idea.
Withdrawing from the CPP requires three years of notice. The terms of Alberta’s departure are difficult to predict since no jurisdiction has ever left the plan. Departure may constitute a major change in the plan, which would require the approval of 7 of the 10 provinces (representing two-thirds of the population) and the federal government.
There are many unanswered questions about an APP, including its financial stability and likely returns, operating cost, the portability of contributions, and its susceptibility to political meddling. Quebec’s experience with running its own pension plan suggests that doing so does not necessarily result in lower premiums.
4. Public-sector bargaining
In 2019, the UCP gave itself the power to foist secret bargaining mandates on public-sector employers, rendering collective bargaining a fettered and hollow process. All unions eventually settled for wage increases well below inflation, after years of prior wage freezes. Despite the negative impact that uncompetitive wages have on recruitment, retention, and productivity, it is likely the UCP will go back to this well in the hope of further grinding public-sector wages.
It is unclear whether Alberta’s public-sector workers and their unions have the will to meaningfully resist such a tactic. Resistance would require workers to strike and, perhaps, to do so illegally in the face of back-to-work legislation. That is a risky proposition for both workers and their unions’ leadership. That said, only last fall, Ontario’s unions forced the Ford government to walk back legislated contracts through an illegal strike by education workers that looked set to escalate to a general strike.
Public-sector workers are also likely to see further privatization of their jobs, as the UCP did with laundry and laboratory services in health care. The UCP may also provide more public funding to private-sector providers of education and health-care services.
5. Recruitment and Retention
Not surprisingly, declining compensation, childcare shortages, and uncertainty about the CPP have meant some Alberta employers are struggling to recruit and retain workers. The UCP has promised a $1,200 tax credit for workers in fields such as health care, childcare, and the skilled trades who come and work in Alberta for at least a year, and a $3,000 to $10,000 tax credit (spread over multiple years) for new graduates in unspecified fields who stay in Alberta to work.
These promises are essentially an admission that Alberta is not an attractive place to live and work. Neither promise is very significant in monetary terms and, if implemented, they are unlikely to have much impact on worker shortages because of the negative impact of the UCP’s education and health-care agenda. Increasing post-secondary tuition and a defective K-12 curriculum (e.g., “find gravity on a globe”) make Alberta an unattractive place to study or raise children. Ongoing staffing shortages, the unavailability of rural obstetrical care, and the botched privatization of laboratory services suggest the health-care system is also failing.
6. Union Dues and Bill 32
The UCP has promised to fix one of their controversial changes to Alberta’s labour laws (commonly called Bill 32) that accidentally cost community organizations $2.5 million in lost donations from unions. This happened because Bill 32 required unions to get each member to authorize dues deductions for activities beyond collective bargaining and contract administration. This was designed to constrain unions’ abilities to participate in political and advocacy campaigns but also affected donations.
Before the election, many unions quietly decided to simply ignore Bill 32. It will be interesting to watch how (and, indeed, if) the UCP handles enforcement. It may choose to pursue legal action against these unions. Or it may take the position Bill 32 achieved its political goals and ignore widespread non-compliance.
Conclusion
The UCP has a difficult course to navigate over the next four years. Its political goals include low taxes, low wages, a diminished public sector, and increased privatization. None of the outcomes of these goals are attractive to the skilled workers that Alberta requires. Indeed, declining real-dollar wages, failing health-care and education systems, unstable retirement income, and unavailable childcare are likely to impede both worker recruitment and retention.
What can Alberta workers expect from a United Conservative Party government over the next four years? The UCP’s first term cheapened labour costs for employers. Its 2023 election platform contained few promises related to labour and employment issues beyond the usual nostrums about low taxes creating jobs. We think workers should watch six issues.
1. Low wages, high unemployment, and Inequity
While the number of jobs in Alberta has increased, more job seekers and layoffs mean Alberta’s unemployment rate remains the fifth highest in Canada. For those with jobs, the purchasing power of their average hourly wage has fallen by 4.95% (or about $3,000 per worker) over the past 10 years. Alberta is only one of three provinces to experience this loss.
By October, Alberta’s minimum wage will be the third lowest in the country while Alberta’s cost of living remains among the highest. The UCP is unlikely to raise the minimum wage from 2018’s $15 per hour. This means inflation will further erode the purchasing power of 11.5% of Alberta workers, the majority of whom are women.
Not surprisingly, Alberta also continues to have the highest gender wage gap in Canada. In July of 2023, Alberta women earned 84 cents for every dollar men earned (averaging $31.52 per hour vs. $37.61 per hour). The UCP is unlikely to address this gap.
2. Illusion of low-cost childcare
Under an agreement with the federal government, the UCP has promised to implement $10 per day childcare by 2026 as well as create 70,000 additional spaces. While childcare fees have declined, $10 per day childcare is likely to be a chimera.
In February, the UCP established a cost-control framework for childcare. Government funding will ensure that “core” childcare is provided for $10 per day. But the UCP is encouraging providers to charge fees for “enhanced” childcare, such as food, activities, playground equipment, and better qualified staff. Providers are being told they do not have to spend all of these enhanced fees on the enhanced services (i.e., private providers can pad their profits with these fees).
Since demand for childcare spaces will continue to outstrip supply, parents who decline to pay the enhanced fees (i.e., want $10 per day childcare) may have difficulty securing a space because they reduce the providers’ profits. Further, low wages and limited training and professional development opportunities suggest the goal of 70,000 additional spaces may be wildly optimistic.
3. An Alberta Pension Plan
Alberta has been flirting with the idea of leaving the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and creating an Alberta Pension Plan (APP) since 2019, putatively to lower premiums. The UCP did not campaign on the APP, likely because more than half of Albertans are opposed to the idea.
Withdrawing from the CPP requires three years of notice. The terms of Alberta’s departure are difficult to predict since no jurisdiction has ever left the plan. Departure may constitute a major change in the plan, which would require the approval of 7 of the 10 provinces (representing two-thirds of the population) and the federal government.
There are many unanswered questions about an APP, including its financial stability and likely returns, operating cost, the portability of contributions, and its susceptibility to political meddling. Quebec’s experience with running its own pension plan suggests that doing so does not necessarily result in lower premiums.
4. Public-sector bargaining
In 2019, the UCP gave itself the power to foist secret bargaining mandates on public-sector employers, rendering collective bargaining a fettered and hollow process. All unions eventually settled for wage increases well below inflation, after years of prior wage freezes. Despite the negative impact that uncompetitive wages have on recruitment, retention, and productivity, it is likely the UCP will go back to this well in the hope of further grinding public-sector wages.
It is unclear whether Alberta’s public-sector workers and their unions have the will to meaningfully resist such a tactic. Resistance would require workers to strike and, perhaps, to do so illegally in the face of back-to-work legislation. That is a risky proposition for both workers and their unions’ leadership. That said, only last fall, Ontario’s unions forced the Ford government to walk back legislated contracts through an illegal strike by education workers that looked set to escalate to a general strike.
Public-sector workers are also likely to see further privatization of their jobs, as the UCP did with laundry and laboratory services in health care. The UCP may also provide more public funding to private-sector providers of education and health-care services.
5. Recruitment and Retention
Not surprisingly, declining compensation, childcare shortages, and uncertainty about the CPP have meant some Alberta employers are struggling to recruit and retain workers. The UCP has promised a $1,200 tax credit for workers in fields such as health care, childcare, and the skilled trades who come and work in Alberta for at least a year, and a $3,000 to $10,000 tax credit (spread over multiple years) for new graduates in unspecified fields who stay in Alberta to work.
These promises are essentially an admission that Alberta is not an attractive place to live and work. Neither promise is very significant in monetary terms and, if implemented, they are unlikely to have much impact on worker shortages because of the negative impact of the UCP’s education and health-care agenda. Increasing post-secondary tuition and a defective K-12 curriculum (e.g., “find gravity on a globe”) make Alberta an unattractive place to study or raise children. Ongoing staffing shortages, the unavailability of rural obstetrical care, and the botched privatization of laboratory services suggest the health-care system is also failing.
6. Union Dues and Bill 32
The UCP has promised to fix one of their controversial changes to Alberta’s labour laws (commonly called Bill 32) that accidentally cost community organizations $2.5 million in lost donations from unions. This happened because Bill 32 required unions to get each member to authorize dues deductions for activities beyond collective bargaining and contract administration. This was designed to constrain unions’ abilities to participate in political and advocacy campaigns but also affected donations.
Before the election, many unions quietly decided to simply ignore Bill 32. It will be interesting to watch how (and, indeed, if) the UCP handles enforcement. It may choose to pursue legal action against these unions. Or it may take the position Bill 32 achieved its political goals and ignore widespread non-compliance.
Conclusion
The UCP has a difficult course to navigate over the next four years. Its political goals include low taxes, low wages, a diminished public sector, and increased privatization. None of the outcomes of these goals are attractive to the skilled workers that Alberta requires. Indeed, declining real-dollar wages, failing health-care and education systems, unstable retirement income, and unavailable childcare are likely to impede both worker recruitment and retention.
-- Bob Barnetson, Susan Cake, and Jason Foster
Friday, May 26, 2017
Labour & Pop Culture: Talk a Walk
This song offers a sympathetic portrayal of the life of a business man (or men) who is down on his luck. Each verse of the song is based upon the experiences of a different family member of the lyricist.
The result is the singer’s perspective and/or circumstances is constantly changing (i.e., the singer does not stay in character). In a May 2012 interview, Michael Angelakos stated:
All these kinds of places
Make it seem like it's been ages
Tomorrow's sun with buildings scrape the sky
I love this country dearly
I can feel the lighter clearly
But never thought I'd be alone to try1
Once I was outside Penn Station
Selling red and white carnations
You were still alone
My wife and I
Before we marry, save my money
Brought my dear wife over
Now I want to bring my family state side
But off the boat they stayed a while
Then scatter cross the course
Once a year I'll see them for a week or so at most
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
I take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Practice isn't perfect
With the market cuts and loss
I remind myself that times could be much worse
My wife won't ask me questions
And there's not so much to ask
And she'll never flaunt around an empty purse
Once my mother-in-law came
Just to stay a couple nights
Then decided she would stay the rest of her life
I watch my little children, play some board game in the kitchen
And I sit and pray they never feel my strife
But then my partner called to say the pension funds were gone
He made some bad investments
Now the counts are overdrawn
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Honey it's your son I think I borrowed just to much
We had taxes we had bills
We had a lifestyle to front
And tonight I swear I'll come home
And we'll make love like we're young
And tomorrow you'll cook dinner
For the neighbors and the kids
We could rent the Wart of socialists
And all their ten taxes
You'll see I am no criminal
I'm down on both bad knees
I'm just too much a coward
To admit when I'm in need
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
-- Bob Barnetson
It's about very specific family members, the male hierarchy, and how the men in my family have always dealt with money. I've always been really fond of a lot of my family members and not so fond of others. All these men were very conservative; socially very liberal but for some reason, they all came here for capitalism, and they all ended up kind of being prey to capitalism.Overall, a more metacognitive spin on being a worker than most songs about labour.
All these kinds of places
Make it seem like it's been ages
Tomorrow's sun with buildings scrape the sky
I love this country dearly
I can feel the lighter clearly
But never thought I'd be alone to try1
Once I was outside Penn Station
Selling red and white carnations
You were still alone
My wife and I
Before we marry, save my money
Brought my dear wife over
Now I want to bring my family state side
But off the boat they stayed a while
Then scatter cross the course
Once a year I'll see them for a week or so at most
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
I take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Practice isn't perfect
With the market cuts and loss
I remind myself that times could be much worse
My wife won't ask me questions
And there's not so much to ask
And she'll never flaunt around an empty purse
Once my mother-in-law came
Just to stay a couple nights
Then decided she would stay the rest of her life
I watch my little children, play some board game in the kitchen
And I sit and pray they never feel my strife
But then my partner called to say the pension funds were gone
He made some bad investments
Now the counts are overdrawn
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Honey it's your son I think I borrowed just to much
We had taxes we had bills
We had a lifestyle to front
And tonight I swear I'll come home
And we'll make love like we're young
And tomorrow you'll cook dinner
For the neighbors and the kids
We could rent the Wart of socialists
And all their ten taxes
You'll see I am no criminal
I'm down on both bad knees
I'm just too much a coward
To admit when I'm in need
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
Take a walk, oh-oh-oh
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
I took a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
Take a walk, take a walk, take a walk
-- Bob Barnetson
Friday, May 19, 2017
Labour & Pop Culture: Boiled Frogs
Band member George Pettit told Much Music:
"It's an analogy. I wrote it inspired by my father who worked at a job where he designed refrigerator parts for 26 years. He was coming up to his pension the last three years and I guess when people are coming up to their pension they really put the screws to them. They're up for review all the time, trying to get them to quit so that they forfeit their pension. It really makes it a stressful last three years. The song is kind of about that, about there being no loyalty in the workplace.
"And my mother went to this conference talking to different generations in the workplace and they referred to her generation as 'boiled frogs.' The analogy is that if you take a frog and put it in boiling water, it will jump right out immediately, but if you put it in cold water and then you slowly turn the heat up, they'll just eventually fall asleep and die. Same way with people in the workplace. If it's too hectic when they first get there, they'll just quit and get another job, but if you slowly up the workload, lower the pay, they're more likely to sit there and just boil."While the boiling frog story is a myth, the dynamic as it applies to work (in my experience) appears to be real. Many people will choose to accept deteriorating conditions rather than leave. This may be due to the high cost of job change (especially as we age) as well as our perception about whether things will be better elsewhere.
[George] A man sits at his desk
One year from retirement,
And he's up for review
Not quite sure what to do
Each passing year
The workload grows
[Dallas] I'm always wishing, I'm always wishing too late
For things to go my way
It always ends up the same
(Count your blessings)
I must be missing, I must be missing the point
Your signal fades away and all I'm left with is noise
(Count your blessings on one hand)
So wait up, I'm not sleeping alone again tonight
There's so much to dream about, there must be more to my life
[George] Poor little tin man, still swinging his axe,
Even though his joints are clogged with rust
[Wade] My youth is slipping, my youth is slipping away
Safe in monotony, (so safe), day after day
(Count your blessings)
My youth is slipping, my youth is slipping away
Cold wind blows off the lake, and I know for sure that it's too late
(Count your blessings on one hand)
[Dallas] So wait up, I'm not sleeping alone again tonight
There's so much to dream about, there must be more to my life
[George] Can't help but feel betrayed, punch the clock every single day
There's no loyalty and no remorse
Youth sold for a pension cheque
And it makes him fucking sick
He's heating up, he can't say no
(Whoa-oh-oh-oh-oh)[x4]
[Dallas] So wait up, I'm not sleeping alone again tonight,
There's so much to dream about, there must be more to my life.
(So wait up)
So wait up I'm not sleeping alone again tonight
Between the light and shallow waves is where I'm going to die
Wait up for me
Wait up for me
Wait up for me
-- Bob Barnetson
Tuesday, August 9, 2016
Adequacy of wage-replacement benefits for injured workers
Looking at permanently disabled workers who were injured between 1998 and 2002, the IWH study found that these workers had (on average), full compensation for wage losses when compared to a control group. That said:
… there is some variation around the average in the earnings replacement rates. About 46 per cent of the sample had replacement rates of 100 per cent or more, while 25 per cent had replacement rates of under 75 per cent… .What this means is that some of these injured workers did not see their wage-loss fully replaced by the various benefit programs (e.g., workers’ compensation benefits, Canada Pension Plan disability benefits). Ontario’s target was to ensure injured workers had an earnings replacement rate of at least 85%--a goal achieved for only 65% of the injured workers in the sample.
-- Bob Barnetson
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
Mandatory retirement in Canada
Presently, Canadians subjected to a mandatory retirement rule can file human rights complaints based on age discrimination. (Some jurisdictions may also preclude claims where the claim arises from a requirement in retirement or pension plan.)
All jurisdictions also have statutory retirement requirements for some occupations (e.g., police, judges). In other occupations, employer seeking to impose mandatory retirement must demonstrate that the policy comprises a bona fide occupational requirement.
The Meiorin test for bona fide occupational requirements requires the policy must be adopted in good faith, for a rational job-related purpose, and is reasonably necessary to accomplish that purpose. Few mandatory retirement policies have met these criteria when challenged, although some employers have successfully argued accommodation imposes undue hardship.
The article concludes with an interesting discussion of legitimate strategies available to employers seeking to create turn over among older workers. These include reducing the availability of pensions (these were historically the quid pro quo for mandatory retirement), requiring medical or competency testing, offering financial incentives for retirement, or provide notice of termination (with the risk of an age discrimination complaint).
-- Bob Barnetson
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Pay equity legislation in Alberta
Education alone is not sufficient to overcome discrimination in wages and employment; clearly other forces are at play. Key among them are the distribution of unpaid work, the undervaluing of work in predominantly female fields, the concentration of men and women in different fields of work, and the often unspoken social norms that see men offered higher wages and rates of promotion than women from the very beginning of their working lives. (p. 2)This led nicely into a Parkland Institute report that examines what Alberta can do about gender-based economic inequality. “Equal Worth: Designing Effective Pay Equity Laws for Alberta” follows up on a 2015 report entitled “The Alberta Disadvantage: Gender, Taxation and Income Inequality.” Alberta has the largest gendered income gap (41%) in Canada.
Alberta’s human rights laws precludes discrimination on the basis of gender (i.e., you cannot pay male and female servers different wages). But Alberta has no laws requiring employers to pay workers the same wage for work of equal worth such as pipefitters and child-care workers. (Note I just made up that example; it may not be accurate). This matter because of the gendered segregation of Alberta’s labour force (i.e., there often are not male wages to offer comparators in some occupations.
The Parkland report takes a holistic look at wage inequity and makes a number of recommendations to enable women to achieve economic parity with men. These include affordable childcare, pay equity legislation and workplace practices, and tax reform. The report does a good job of explaining the ripple effect of lower wages for women through various aspects of their lives in ways that basically mean women earn about half of what men do.
The report also does a good job of unpacking what pay equity laws might looks like. This provides a useful yardstick for evaluating whatever policies or legislation the Status of Women Ministry may eventually enact. Section 5 of the report also examines how federal and provincial tax structures create a disincentive for women to participate in employment, one that might be attenuated by access to low-cost daycare (an important plank in the New democrats’ election platform).
-- Bob Barnetson
Wednesday, February 18, 2015
Hancock to receive honorary degree???
I've just been informed that Athabasca University will be
awarding Dave Hancock an Honorary Doctor of Laws on Saturday, June 13.
From
the university's announcement:
Mr. Hancock is known for his comprehensive knowledge and understanding of public policy, as well as his passion for education and the betterment of our province.Hancock's public record is truly a marvel. He was Minister of Human Services when the Redford government promised universities a 2% increase in funding and the delivered a 7% cut (leading to layoffs and program closures). During his time as Deputy Premier, he also helped lead the government's attack on public sector workers wages, pensions and freedom of speech.
As acting premier, "his comprehensive knowledge
and understanding of public policy" convinced him to maintain a tax regime which
will deal another blow to the public sector this year, including another likely
5% cut in post-secondary grants. So you can see why Athabasca University would
want to reward his public service.
In a related news item, chickens have
just announced they will be awarding Col. Sanders the Cordon Bleu Medal of
Freedom.
"The Colonel has given employment opportunities to literally millions
of our brothers and sisters," enthused Ugatta B. Kiddinme, President of
the Federation of United Chickens seeking Meaningful Employment.
-- Bob Barnetson
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Public-service morale is low? You don't say!
Yesterday, Alberta Jim Prentice announced “outside agents of change” will look into why there is such high turnover and low morale in Alberta’s civil service.
A better solution would be a government that has the fortitude to stop throwing civil servant under the bus for partisan gain. Basically, Alberta politicians have been lousy bosses. Will “agents of change” be able to change that? Seems doubtful.
-- Bob Barnetson
“There have been employee surveys that show the morale of the civil service is low, and that there has not been a healthy relationship between elected representatives of government and the civil service.
“There has clearly been a very high level of turnover and churn, and I actually found the numbers quite shocking,” he said, adding inexperience at senior levels is also a concern.I don’t claim to have all of the answers about why morale is low and turnover is high, but as a former government policy wonk and observer of the public sector, here are some issues the agents of change might want to look into:
- Workload: Alberta has, roughly the same number of civil servants today (with a population of 4 million) as it did when Alberta had a population of 2 million.
- Instability: The public service faces a fiscal roller coaster caused by government choices about revenue streams; the public service frequently experiences hiring freezes, inadequate cost-of-living adjustments and the spectre of layoffs.
- Interference: Tory politicians often put civil servants in untenable positions. “Can you do X because so and-so is a constituent?” Civil servants can’t easily refuse these demands and it places the civil servant (not the politician) in jeopardy.
- Inattention: Politicians have very short memories and often start projects only to lose interest before they can be brought to conclusion, No one tells the workers this and they labour (sometimes for years) on ultimately pointless projects. Add in nearly continuous “red zones” (when nothing gets approved because of a looming election or leadership contest) and you can see why it is pretty tough for public servants to care about one’s job.
- Attacks: This past year saw the government violate workers’ labour rights, freeze their pay, and attack their pensions. And morale is low, you say?
A better solution would be a government that has the fortitude to stop throwing civil servant under the bus for partisan gain. Basically, Alberta politicians have been lousy bosses. Will “agents of change” be able to change that? Seems doubtful.
-- Bob Barnetson
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
WestJet union drives leave textbook authors red-faced
I just finished reviewing a textbook for a publisher and ran across yet another mini-case study of WestJet Airlines. I’ve seen at least four of these in the past year in textbooks and typically they are used to illustrate high-involvement management strategies. Such workplace are said to give workers more autonomy and control and, in return, workers work harder.
Despite the relative paucity of successful high-involvement workplaces (which maybe explain the seemingly endless WestJet cases), most HR textbooks uncritically accept this approach as achievable and desirable. In short, by drawing workers into collaboration, workplace conflict is expected to diminish. (Most HR texts adopt a unitarist view of employment where conflict is viewed as undesirable and avoidable, instead of a structural feature of employment in capitalist relations.)
WestJet uses a number of techniques, including partly paying workers (on a matching basis) in shares in lieu of a pension plan as well as in a profit-sharing plan. This sounds good (“the employees are also the owners”). Missing in these case studies is a critical analysis that would surface issues like share purchases reduce operating costs and externalize risk onto workers. For example, if WestJet went belly up, workers would be out of a job and their shares would be worthless.
The point here is not to trash WestJet. I much prefer WestJet to Air Canada: although Air Canada is unionized, they treat their workers (and their customers) terribly. Rather, the point is that these case studies are very superficial and tend to gloss over the structural conflicts of interest that remain in organizations that adopt high-involvement management strategies.
For example, WestJet has various “employee associations” that represent groups of WestJet employees to the company. WestJet pilots (likely the most privileged group of employees, other than executives) have been considering unionization due to concerns about the quality of the deals their current (non-union) association has been able to procure.
The threat of unionization may have contributed to a new contract offer (which WestJet says is “industry leading”) after an earlier offer was rejected. Flight attendants have also be the subject of two unionization efforts.
Despite the relative paucity of successful high-involvement workplaces (which maybe explain the seemingly endless WestJet cases), most HR textbooks uncritically accept this approach as achievable and desirable. In short, by drawing workers into collaboration, workplace conflict is expected to diminish. (Most HR texts adopt a unitarist view of employment where conflict is viewed as undesirable and avoidable, instead of a structural feature of employment in capitalist relations.)
WestJet uses a number of techniques, including partly paying workers (on a matching basis) in shares in lieu of a pension plan as well as in a profit-sharing plan. This sounds good (“the employees are also the owners”). Missing in these case studies is a critical analysis that would surface issues like share purchases reduce operating costs and externalize risk onto workers. For example, if WestJet went belly up, workers would be out of a job and their shares would be worthless.
The point here is not to trash WestJet. I much prefer WestJet to Air Canada: although Air Canada is unionized, they treat their workers (and their customers) terribly. Rather, the point is that these case studies are very superficial and tend to gloss over the structural conflicts of interest that remain in organizations that adopt high-involvement management strategies.
For example, WestJet has various “employee associations” that represent groups of WestJet employees to the company. WestJet pilots (likely the most privileged group of employees, other than executives) have been considering unionization due to concerns about the quality of the deals their current (non-union) association has been able to procure.
The threat of unionization may have contributed to a new contract offer (which WestJet says is “industry leading”) after an earlier offer was rejected. Flight attendants have also be the subject of two unionization efforts.
What this suggests is that despite being the veritable Canadian poster-child for high-involvement management strategies, WestJet faces many of the same pressures every workplace does. And that what you read in textbooks is not necessarily the whole truth.
-- Bob Barnetson
-- Bob Barnetson
Friday, February 28, 2014
Two protests in the next few days
Over the next few days, there are a couple of interesting
labour-related events in Edmonton. On Sunday, March 2, there will be a protest
at Winston Churchill Square over the government’s recent attack on public-sector pensions.
On Monday, March 3 the group Canadians Against the Temporary Foreign Worker Program will be hosting a protest at the
Legislature reflecting ponds at 9 am. The Legislature steps are apparently booked for the same time for something official, which could make for an interesting collision of messages.
As far as I can tell, CATFWP is a grassroots group of folks who are
concerned about the erosion of job security and working conditions given
employers’ greater ability to replace Canadian workers with foreign migrants. There
also appears to be some folks concerned about the treatment of foreign workers
with a very slight leavening of xenophobes. Quite an interesting Facebook group to follow.
-- Bob Barnetson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)