Brian Bell |
What needs to be remembered is that the employer/employee relationship is different in a unionized place of work. I sometimes receive phone calls from union members stating they have lost faith in their union representative, and that they want to take the employer to court themselves. Unfortunately, I have to tell them they're out of luck. It simply isn't an option for union members.
Workers of a unionized environment have a Collective Agreement which outlines all of the terms and conditions of employment between the parties. These include grievance/arbitration procedures that form the basis for resolving disputes in the workplace.
It may be difficult for some workers to understand this, because the situation may leave them feeling that they have limited access to justice. Not so.Essentially, unionized workers must follow the Collective Agreement. It doesn't matter if the worker does not agree with the final outcome - the Collective Agreement does not provide that worker with an additional avenue to pursue their issue in a way that workers in a non-unionized environment might.
It may be difficult for some workers to understand this, because the situation may leave them feeling that they have limited access to justice. Not so. The grievance/arbitration process allows the worker/union to seek a resolution in a manner that is intended to be efficient, productive, less costly, and equally as time sensitive as it would be when proceeding through the courts. Employees in a non-unionized workplace, on the other hand, are left to their own means in establishing the terms and conditions of employment, and in some cases even they make use of employment agreements to outline their terms.
In any event, if “arguments” are in place within either a non-unionized or unionized workplace, the employee is governed by the terms of their respective agreements. One does not really have any procedural advantage over the other, but it is worth remembering what their differences are.
No comments:
Post a Comment