A Few Words from Gary Mason on the Strike

The Globe & Mail's Gary Mason wrote a brilliant piece about the strike. While I'm unable to provide a link to it, here are a few key comments of his:

There was a time that citizens of Vancouver actually felt some sympathy for striking civic workers. Not any more.

People have lost their patience - finally. You can hear it on the radio. You can see it on television. You can certainly read it in letters to the editor. The original reserves of goodwill the striking workers had with the public are now completely empty.

The 84-day strike, which will become the longest in city history if it drags on into next week, has now officially entered the lunacy phase. And the real idiots are those leading - and I use that term loosely - the striking CUPE locals. Those leading a couple of them anyway.

The advice that the still-striking workers have been getting from their union leaders has been at best misguided, at worst appallingly irresponsible and politically motivated.

It's funny, from the very beginning of this dispute the unions tried to foist the blame for it on Mayor Sam Sullivan. They called it Sam's Strike. From the outset, CUPE made this dispute political, doing the bidding of the centre-left civic parties that oppose Mr. Sullivan and his Non-Partisan Association party.

At first it worked. When Mr. Sullivan said he was not going to interfere to try to bring an end to the strike, the unions made him out to look weak and ineffectual. Mr. Sullivan, it seems, had a master plan: let the unions hang themselves.

What has really pushed the public over the edge is the attitude, in particular, of the outside workers, many of whom have bragged in interviews about easily finding other jobs that pay them more than the ones they have at city hall. Proof, they say, of just how grossly underpaid they are.

Of course, the reason most of them wouldn't even consider the idea [of leaving their civic jobs] is because the jobs they've found don't come with the same lucrative benefit packages as the ones they have. Or the same job security. Or the same number of days off.

Vancouver's Civic Strike: The Truth Is Finally Becoming Clear!

It's said that if you tell a lie enough times that even you start believing it. Such is clearly the case with the "altered truths" told to the striking CUPE workers by their leadership and then repeated amongst themselves ad nauseum.

This became clear to me when I heard striker after striker calling into CKNW and providing a completely twisted, false view of the facts at hand. Recall the first sentence above.

Province columnist, Michael Smyth, offers a scathing view of the strike here. He says what many of us have been thinking for some time: This strike was mostly about the union leaders and their political masters trying to embarrass Mayor Sam Sullivan and his NPA party so that the CUPE friendly parties will win the next election. I have to wonder what a striker, who wasn't able to find temporary work, thinks about being used as a political pawn throughout all of this.

The ironic thing for me is that I have not been a fan of Sam Sullivan whatsoever. I did vote for him but have since found him to be weak, indecisive, and at times, just downright odd. But the hairs on the back of my neck have gone up over the past 13 weeks, watching the way he has been treated.

If you're a citizen of Vancouver then think carefully about who you vote for next time around. Also, think doubly carefully about not voting at all. For if the union-friendly thugs get in, watch for your taxes and rents to go sky high!!!

Vancouver's Civic Strike: Absurbity Beyond Compare!

Back in late July, when the Vancouver civic strike began, if you had asked anyone whether 12 weeks later, the CUPE members would vote down an agreement that had essentially long been accepted by municipal unions all over the rest of Metro Vancouver, you would rightfully have been told you were nuts. After all, what kind of person, after being out of work for 3 months, and now sitting out in the rain everyday, would possibly vote to stay out even longer?

But in order to understand why 2 out of 3 unions turned down the offers presented to them, you need to revisit the question posed above and see the fallacy in its assumptions. It turns out that there are a great number of CUPE members who have not been out of work and are not getting rained upon every day. These folks immediately obtained work elsewhere, much of it in the private sector, and often for higher wages than they're getting from the City of Vancouver. Why won't they quit their city hall job? Because they don't want to give up their lucrative benefits and pension.

So we have a classic impasse. What's thick with irony though - in fact, as wide as the RAV line passing in front of their picket lines on Cambie Street - is that these same people who voted 'No' are supposedly holding out for lifetime job security. Think about that for a second. Their union is wanting guaranteed employment security for jobs that these people clearly hate. Don't believe me? Talk to a civic worker sometime: They have the worst jobs known to mankind, they're treated harshly, and they're not paid enough. It's sad.

The only way I see out of this problem is for the courts or the provincial government to order them back to work. Otherwise, new deadlines will come & go but nothing will ever change, because there's absolutely no incentive for those 'No' workers to change their minds.

Back on August 5, 1981 U.S. President Ronald Reagan fired 11,345 air traffic controllers for failing to return to work. Perhaps something similar needs to happen here? Imagine going into a municipal government office and being greeted by people who are pleasant & caring and actually seem to enjoy what they do.

Nahhh, I've got to stop day dreamin'!

A Different View of Guaranteed Work for Life

This posting by fellow blogger, Walter Schulz, got me thinking about something. I compiled my thoughts and sent the following letter to the Vancouver Sun:

It seems the Vancouver civic strike has come down to whether the union can force the city to guarantee that none of its members will be let go ... ever. I have a somewhat different view on this than the rhetoric that seems to be tossed back & forth.

The public is constantly told that Vancouver City Hall employees are among the best workers anywhere. Assuming this is true, we all have to recognize that in any organization there are some bad apples. This small percentage of people tend to make everyone else's life miserable.

In Jim Collins' landmark book, "Good to Great, he emphasizes repeatedly that the key ingredient to any successful organization is getting the right people along for the ride on the proverbial bus. If the wrong person slips through the interview process and gets hired, they end up in the organization in a way somewhat akin to cancer in an otherwise healthy body. Thus, any organization that is forced to keep onboard ALL employees, regardless of their competency, regardless if they get along with others, is doomed to be a miserable work environment for all.

In the private sector, such a company gets more & more inefficient and eventually goes bankrupt. In the public sector, where bankruptcy is impossible, empirical evidence suggests that many employees are unhappy but put up with it for fear of what their lives will be like without the security of their benefits package and pension.

Nobody owes anybody else a job. I believe there are ideal jobs for every person but too often people spend years, if not decades, in jobs they're not well suited for or even hate. Getting fired is often a blessing in disguise, as it frees up one's mind, time, and energy to seek out a job that they really enjoy.

As the rainy storms of autumn touch down upon Vancouver more often, perhaps the good folks on the picket line will reflect upon a simple question: Is it really in their own best interest to forego their good wages to support an historical union objective that's might just be more important to their leadership than to anyone else?