Labour & Pop Culture: Boney Fingers

This week’s installment of Labour & Pop Culture is “Boney Fingers” by Hoyt Axton. This 1974 song is a bit Grand Ole Opry for my tastes, but provides an interesting view into the work-a-day world where there isn’t really much prospect of moving up or life getting better.

If you really listen to the lyrics, the contrast between the exhortation to accept that things suck (“Might as well like it 'cause you're all that I've got”) and hope that “Maybe things’ll get a little better, in the mornin’” really jars with the up tempo music and kitschy stage presentation.

A better song from that period and genre is "One's On the Way" by Loretta Lynn. If you'd prefer to listen to that one, you can find it here.



See the rain comin' down and the roof won't hold 'er
Lost my job and I feel a little older
Car won't run and our love's grown colder
But maybe things'll get a little better, in the mornin'
Maybe things'll get a little better.

Oh! the clothes need washin' and the fire won't start
Kids all cryin' and you're breakin' my heart
Whole darn place is fallin' apart
Maybe things'll get a little better, in the mornin'
Maybe things'll get a little better.

[CHORUS]

Work your fingers to the bone - whadda ya get?
( Whoo-whoo ) Boney Fingers - Boney Fing-gers.

Yea! I've been broke as long as I remember
Get a little money and I gotta run and spend 'er
When I try to save it, pretty woman come and take it
Sayin' maybe things'll get a little better, in the mornin'
Maybe things'll get a little better.

[CHORUS]

Yea! the grass won't grow and the sun's too hot
The whole darn world is goin' to pot
Might as well like it 'cause you're all that I've got
But, maybe things'll get a little better, in the mornin'
Maybe things'll get a little better.

[CHORUS]

-- Bob Barnetson

Is it time to start jailing employers for killing workers?

This past weekend, the Edmonton Journal reported that the government has laid 19 charges against 3 companies following a 2015 workplace fatality. On April 28, 2015, a labourer died after a trench caved in.

The Journal reports:

Haya Homes Ltd., the infill homes developer, faces six charges, including failure to ensure the regulations and code were followed on a work site and failing to ensure Sahib Contracting Inc. — which had been hired to dig the trench — stabilized the soil in the excavation as required. … 

Sahib Contracting Inc. faces seven charges, including [failing to?] stabilizing the soil in an excavation, ensuring workers had a safe entrance and exit from the excavation and ensuring labourers working in an excavation were competent in doing so. 

Sukhwinder Nagra, named as a prime contractor with Sahib Contracting Inc., faces eight charges, including failing to take reasonable care to protect the safety of a worker, failure to assess a work site for hazards, and failure to stabilize the soil in an excavation.

I cannot confirm any of this because (as of Monday) the government hadn’t provide a press release or updated its list of “charges pending”. The summary of 2015 fatality investigations simply says:

A worker entered a 2-3 meter deep newly excavated water main trench. The trench collapsed and the worker was trapped.

The OHS Code requires any trench (i.e., a hole deeper than it is wide) deeper than 4’10” to have some sort of shoring or grading or other means of protecting workers from a collapse (there are other rules around working near a trench wall).

The absence of information about this fatality means we don’t know much about the circumstances. Reading between the lines, it sounds like the worker entered a trench that was six- to nine-feet deep and had not been shored up against the walls collapsing.  Mostly, we're left with questions:

Was he directed to enter the trench? 

Did he balk? 

Did he jump in before the employer could shore it up? 

Did the employer even have proper shoring materials nearby? 

The worker was a day labourer who may have had no training on proper behaviour around an excavation.

Based on the charges, this sounds like a pretty clear case of employer error and the likely outcome is a plea bargain, a creative sentence (wherein the employers donate cash to a charitable group and get to look good for doing so), and everyone moves on (except the dead worker, of course).

This has been Alberta’s approach for the last decade or so and, if the purpose is to meaningfully reduce fatalities and injuries, it doesn’t seem to be working. What might get the attention of employers (especially small employers in the construction industry) is putting some employers in jail for their negligence. Both the OHS Act and the Criminal Code have provisions for this kind of sentencing.

-- Bob Barnetson

Trouble in paradi... err.... Cold Lake?

This week, workers represented by the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) at the Points West Living (PWL) senior centre in Cold Lake were set to strike. The employer had also served lockout notice. 

PWL is one of the most profitable and fastest growing seniors care providers in Alberta. PWL receives public funding to provide seniors’ care. Worker pay is poor so turnover is high. AUPE has a website with more info about PWL.

Bad working conditions are the (intended) outcome of Alberta’s private-care system, set up by the former Conservative government. As former AUPE organizer Trevor Zimmerman explains it:

…the PCs created a funding system that incentivizes employers to reduce wages by not tying adequate strings to funding handed over for care. They do have to hire staff, but are not required to pay them with 100% of the funds given. They can use surplus funds generated by underpaying staff for fancy renovations, executive bonuses, or pure profit. This means most private care workers - especially the non-union ones - are getting screwed by this system. (Facebook post, reproduced with permission).

AUPE has a long-running campaign to organize workers in these facilities and improve wages and working conditions such that workers in private-sector operations are treated the same as workers in the public sector.

As the work stoppage approached, the government quietly appointed a disputes inquiry board (DIB).  A DIB is a process whereby pending work stoppages are placed in abeyance for a period of time and a mediator is appointed. If there is no settlement, there is a tedious process of recommendations and votes before a strike or lockout can commence. This DIB was requested by the employer

Basically a DIB is a delaying tactic—it puts off a work stoppage. Delay in a work stoppage typically benefits the employer more than the workers. It allows the employer additional time to procure scab labour, stockpile materials, target union supporters, and take other steps that minimize the effectiveness of the strike.

As Zimmerman points out, the Tories used to dress up a DIB by wringing their hands about “patient safety” and other bogey-men. This is obvious hokum. Strikes are not sudden events and employers have lots of time to prepare. PWL has a security firm at the ready and scabs being trained in Vegreville, so they are ready for a strike.

Indeed, if there was a serious safety threat, the government could use its powers under the Labour Relations Code to send the matter binding in arbitration (called a Public Emergency Tribunal). Interestingly, the NDs made no public announcement whatsoever about the DIB.

Not surprisingly, AUPE was pissed off:

“The NDP government is allowing the employer to prepare scab labour, private security and put other provisions in place enabling the company to avoid dealing with this situation directly,” said AUPE vice-president Mike Dempsey. “The province has rescued the employer and left residents and the workers who care for them in limbo.”

There are also many ND activists in the labour movement who are quite upset at what they view as a betrayal. Not everyone is jumping on the government. For example, the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) has been conspicuously quiet (at least in public) on the issue (AUPE is not part of the AFL).

The real question here is why did the government intervene, instead of letting the strike/lock out occur? Strike/lockout is how collective bargaining impasse is broken and restricting the right to strike (through senseless delay) runs contrary to the spirit (although probably not the strict interpretation) of the Supreme Court’s decision in Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v Saskatchewan.

The best theory I have heard is that the government has chosen one day of bad press (wherein some unionists complain about being betrayed in a complicated way and ambiguous circumstances) over a long-running story about seniors being held hostage by a strike (with the opposition pounding the NDs about doing nothing about it because they are all putatively buddy-buddy with labour).

I’ve heard other, more entertaining explanations, including that this is some kind of “false flag” event (wherein AUPE looks tough on PWL without having to strike and the NDs look tough on labour without having to really do anything). That sounds pretty improbable to me, but who knows?

The real question will be how this shakes out during the DIB process. If the parties don’t resolve the impasse, then the government gets the nasty strike headlines during the fall sitting pus it just pissed off a bunch of supporters. That said, whether either of those things really matters by the time the next election rolls around is a good question.

And that may be the real political calculus. It is not like labour has anywhere to go for the next election (except staying home) and the public’s memory about a strike is likely to be short. So avoiding the work stoppage on the chance that the DIB will resolve the matter (and, if not, at least it gives the government a “well, we tried” sound bite) may be the best play available to them.

-- Bob Barnetson

Labour & Pop Culture: Hard Hat and a Hammer

This week’s intallment of Labour & Pop Culture is “Hard Hat and a Hammer” by Alan Jackson. This is a typical valourization of the (blue collar) worker that we see a fair bit of in country music. This song has two notable parts.

First, while the lyrics approve of hard work (presumably in support of a family), the lyrics recognize the interchangeability of workers in advanced capitalism. That is to say, at some level, there is an awareness workers get used and discarded.

He gives his life then fades away
Another young man takes his place

While I expect most workers would at some level recognize this dynamic, it was striking to hear it normalized in a song.

Second, this song constructs (blue-collar) work as the preserve of men (and mostly white men). Sure, at the end of the song Jackson sings “Oh, the working man and… woman” but this is clearly an after-thought: the lyrics and the images in the video are highly gendered and clearly message that workers are men.

Further, workers are mostly white men. There were about 40 or 45 different workers pictured in the video. All but one (at the end) were men and only about 5 or 6 were non-white. The effect of the song and the lyrics is to define blue collar workers as mostly white guys.

I’m reading a very interesting ethnography written by a woman who spent three years in the construction industry (I will blog about it in the future) and a central theme in her experience was the construction of work as the preserve of white males. And the social norms on construction sites are often designed to maintain this position of privilege.



Lace-up boots and faded jeans
A homemade sandwich, a half jug of tea
Average Joe, average pay
Same ol' end and same ol' day

[CHORUS]
But there's nothing wrong with a hard hat and a hammer
Kind of glue that sticks this world together
Hands of steel and cradle of the Promised Land
God bless the working man

All week long making a living
Life keeps takin', he keeps giving
Behind the scene, below the grade
Hardly noticed but part of everything

[CHORUS]

He gives his life then fades away
Another young man takes his place
Average Joe, average pay
Same ol end, same old' day

But there's nothing wrong with a hard hat and a hammer
Kind of glue that sticks this world together
Hands of steel and cradle of the Promised Land

No, there's nothing wrong with a hard hat and a hammer
Kind of glue that sticks this world together
Hands of steel and cradle of the Promised Land
God bless the working man

The working man

Oh, the working man and woman

-- Bob Barnetson

Free Movie Saturday: Migrant Dreams

In Edmonton this Saturday, Migrante Alberta will be hosting a free screening of Migrant Dreams, a powerful feature documentary by multiple award-winning director Min Sook Lee (El Contrato, Hogtown, Tiger Spirit) and Emmy award-winning producer Lisa Valencia-Svensson (Herman’s House).

The film tells the undertold story of migrant agricultural workers struggling against Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) that treats foreign workers as modern-day slaves.

The Canadian Seasonal Agricultural Workers program (CSAWP) began in 1966 as a government agreement between Jamaica and Canada. For the past 50 years, the migrant farm workers have arrived in Canada under conditions that are akin to indentured labour.

Migrant Dreams exposes the underbelly of the Canadian government labour program that has built a system designed to empower brokers and growers to exploit, dehumanize and deceive migrant workers who have virtually no access to support or information in their own language. Workers willing to pay exorbitant fees to work at minimum wage jobs packing the fruits and vegetables we eat in our homes. Migrant workers who deserve basic labour and human rights. Canada it seems, has failed them.

The screening will be at the U of A ECHA Building (11405 87 Ave.) on Saturday, October 1st at 2:00pm. You can learn more on Facebook. There will be a short discussion after the film.

-- Bob Barnetson

Did Bill 6 destroy Western Feedlots? Probably not.

One of the bigger Alberta news stories last week was the announcement that Western Feedlots will close by early 2017. At three sites, Western Feeders employs about 80 staff and has the capacity to finish 100,000 cattle. According to the company’s announcement:

Western’s shareholders chose this course of action due to the current high risk/low return environment in cattle ownership, which is inconsistent with shareholder objectives. In addition to strong headwinds in the cattle industry, the poor political and economic environment in Alberta are also contributing factors to this decision.

The major factor that appears to be driving this closure is a significant decline (~30%) in the price of slaughter-weight cattle. A fed steer brought in about $3000 last year and now sells for $2000.

Basically, a shortage of cattle drove up prices over the past two years. Producers responded by increasing the supply and, consequently, the price dropped (there are other factors at play but this is basically micro-economics 101). The lag time involved in finishing cattle means that feedlots are now forced to sell finished cattle at a significant loss (one number I saw was $500-600 per head).

Western Feedlots noted it will be maintaining its equipment. This suggests the operation may re-open when economic circumstances change. Indeed, a temporary closure may be the most sensible option available: as long as prices keep falling, feedlots will keep taking losses.

There has also been significant speculation that Alberta’s recent changes in labour law and its intention to introduce a carbon levy have also contributed to the closure. The company itself as much as said this with its mention of a “poor political and economic environment in Alberta”. The argument goes that the industry has low profitability (averaging $18/head or somewhere around 1%) and thus has limited capacity absorb cost increases.

The Alberta Cattle Feeders Association is estimating the carbon tax will add $6-7 in cost per head. The only certain cost of providing agricultural workers with basic employment rights are WCB premiums. These sit between $2 and $3/$100 of payroll (I can’t estimate the per head cost because there are too many unknown variables). There may be other costs depending upon the government’s decisions around what portions of the Employment Standards Code and which occupational health and safety rules apply to farms, but none of that is clear.

Edit: The Herald published a story Friday night where one operator estimates WCB costs at $2/head and overall profitability at $20-$30/head.

I’m increasingly sympathetic to the cost-price squeeze faced by commodity producers. That said, I’m pretty skeptical that closure is really (or even marginally) due to WCB premiums and a future carbon levy. The driving factor seems to be free-falling commodity prices in a low-margin industry.

For the sake of argument, though, let’s momentarily accept that WCB premiums and the carbon levy are the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back, making this operation unprofitable. What does this say about Western Feedlots (or, if you accept the canary-in-the-coal-mine argument being advanced online, the entire agricultural industry)?

In short, it says that these businesses are only viable when they can externalize the cost of production onto others. These externalities are borne by employees in the form of uncompensated injuries and poor working conditions, and by society (and the planet) in the form of unsustainable carbon emissions.

I don’t accept the camel and canary arguments, but, if we do, then we should ask if it is in the public interest to have such businesses continue. In a truly free market (which truthfully account for the true cost of production), shouldn’t they go out of business as unprofitable?

I don’t say that to be nasty (I feel quite badly for the 80 workers who will be out of work). But a business that is only viable if it can harm others isn’t one that’s existence is in the public interest.

And, before we accept the “and so it begins!” catastrophizing being bandied about by opponents of Bill 6 (and other government initiatives), it is worthwhile thinking through what is actually happening and ask ourselves if the rhetoric around this closure is accurate.

-- Bob Barnetson

Labour & Pop Culture: Geraldine

This week’s installment of Labour & Pop Culture is “Geraldine” by GlasVegas. You don’t hear a lot of songs about social workers so I initially thought the social worker in this song was simply a metaphor for the care that we all provide to others.

As it turns out, Geraldine is an actual social worker who quit her job to join GlasVegas on the road. According to Wikipedia (which is never wrong…), her official job is selling merchandise. But there is some suggestion she also provides support to one of the band members.

From a labour perspective, this kind of support is often a part of the unpaid duties (normally performed by women) to ensure social reproduction. Certainly these duties can be hired out (hence the professional of social workers) but, more often, they are done informally and without pay.



When your sparkle evades your soul
I'll be at your side to console
When your standing on the window ledge
I'll talk you back, back from the edge
I will turn, I will turn your tide
Be your Sheppard and your guide
When you're lost in the deep and darkest place around
May my words walk you home safe and sound

When you say that I'm no good and you feel like walking
I need to make sure you know that's just the prescription talking
When your feet decide to walk you on the wayward side
Up upon the stairs and down the downward slide
I will turn, I will turn your tide
Do all that I can to heal you inside
I will be the angel on your shoulder
My name is Geraldine, I'm your social worker

-- Bob Barnetson