Showing posts with label Collective Bargaining Agreement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Collective Bargaining Agreement. Show all posts

Monday, April 29, 2013

Should I Join A Union? Maybe. But Do Your Homework

Toronto Labour Lawyer Brian Bell: In these tough economic times, some non-union employees who have lost their jobs may have stated, “I should have had a union,” or words to that effect.

While employers today may be taking every opportunity to gain concessions from unionized employees - which in some cases leads to closings - some employees might determine that their best response is to sign up with respective locals.

Firstly, let me say that choosing to belong to a union is the employees' choice. But whatever your decision, be informed before you make that choice. There are positives and negatives to the union route, and you should educate yourself about them.

Recently, I received a call from a man I'll call Rick. Several months prior to the call, Rick had signed the appropriate documentation to become a union member. He said a union representative had laid out all of the benefits of joining the union. It sounded good to Rick, and he signed on.

Unfortunately, after Rick had signed the document, the promises failed to materialize. Rick now wanted to “de-certify” from the union. He was somewhat surprised when he found out that the de-certification process was not so easy. In fact, for a case like Rick's, quashing his certification at that time was not even possible.

For all those in the workplace, know what you are getting into. Be informed. By doing so, you can make reasonable decisions that best suit your needs.

Brian Bell is a Labour and Employment Lawyer with Pace Law Firm in Toronto.

Monday, November 5, 2012

Lockout vs. Strike

Toronto Employment Lawyer Brian Bell: We're well into the second month of the NHL lockout, and everyone around the water cooler has an opinion about it. Still, you may be wondering what exactly a lockout is, and how it differs from a strike.

According to the legal interpretation, a lockout is generally defined as an employer’s withholding of work and closing of a business because of a labour dispute. The term is very literal: you're locked out.

A strike is the opposite. When an employer and and a union reach a deadlock, a strike sometimes occurs, whereby the union members withhold their skills and abilities and do not work until some agreement is reached.

A lockout is the option the employer has in dealing with the employee representatives with the intent to put pressure on the employees’ union: if the union members are locked out and can't work, then they aren't being paid, either.
If you consider yourself to be a sports fan, especially a hockey fan, you're probably getting sick of the term "lockout."
If you consider yourself to be a sports fan, especially a hockey fan, you're probably getting sick of the term "lockout." The term has been used in the NFL and the NBA over the last year or so, as well, as these two leagues recently went through their Collective Agreement negotiations process. For the NHL, though, this is their second lockout in the past 7 years.

The use of either a lockout or a strike is intended to force the other party to reach an agreement/renewal of the Collective Agreement. Whatever the case, whether employees choose to strike or the employers choose a lockout, there is a work stoppage.

The ultimate cost of such an action remains to be seen when the product or service is offered once again.  Will the consumer return?  I guess we will have to wait to see if consumers of professional hockey will return, or if they've had enough and will take their entertainment dollar elsewhere.