[ad_1]
The federal government is launching a review into the “structural issues” underlying the weeks-long port dispute in British Columbia, Labour Minister Seamus O’Regan said Wednesday.
The dispute between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Canada (ILWU) and the B.C. Maritime Employers Association (BCMEA) throttled supply chains across the country in July, before union members voted last week to ratify a tentative agreement.
The Greater Vancouver Board of Trade estimated $10.7 billion of trade was disrupted during the strike, when work stopped entirely at more than 30 ports for nearly two weeks, before another three weeks of uncertainty over an agreement.
It’s led to calls from B.C. business leaders for government to pursue ways to end such disputes sooner.
O’Regan said in a statement Wednesday that the dispute caused serious disruption to the economy, and that businesses that rely on the ports deserve long-term solutions in case of a similar dispute in the future.
He said the review will be launched under Section 106 of the Canada Labour Code, which allows the minister to make any inquiries “regarding matters that may affect industrial relations.”
“Previous governments have commissioned reports on past disputes and analysis on these issues has already been done. So, we will begin by immediately reviewing that work. That will determine the next steps, and it will be done in short order,” he said.
Ports as an essential service
Union leaders initially rejected a tentative deal to end the strike and briefly sent workers back to pickets on July 18, before that move was deemed illegal.
The ILWU then issued a new 72-hour strike notice only to rescind it hours later, and announced it would recommend the original deal to members in a full vote. But members rejected it on July 28, triggering O’Regan’s ministry to appoint a mediator to bring the two sides to an agreement.
As the dispute dragged on, leaving valuable cargo stranded on ships arriving at B.C.’s ports, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau faced calls from some political leaders and business groups to legislate port workers back to work.
Business owners and associations, as well as consumers, are “definitely breathing a sigh of relief now that this is coming to an end,” said Annie Dormuth, director of provincial affairs for B.C. with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB).
“We heard from small business owners from Ontario to Atlantic Canada having to cancel orders, or just not have product available to their consumers or customer base. But we did definitely see a little bit of a more negative impact in B.C., just because of that close proximity.”
Dormuth told CBC’s The Early Edition the CFIB wants the federal government to explore tools to protect businesses from the effects of similar labour disputes in the future.
She suggested ports should be deemed an essential service that wouldn’t be allowed to shut down completely in the event of job action.
The B.C. Labour Relations Board can designate a service essential if a labour dispute threatens the health, safety and welfare of British Columbians.
More power for labour minister to stop long strikes
Matthew Holmes, senior vice-president for policy and government relations with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, told The Early Edition that designating ports an essential service might be a blunt tool, given the term is usually reserved for sectors like health care and first responders.
Instead, he said, he’d like the labour minister to have more power to stop strikes that have gone on for too long.
“The final deal [in the port dispute] was essentially the first deal that the federal mediator put forward. And so we lost weeks and weeks of inaction,” Holmes said.
“And whether or not that was political will or whether there was a lack of tools, I think if the government had more defined tools on how to push the two sides together in these sorts of situations, the government would be more accountable to the public on whether — or why — they think $10 billion is worth 35 days of trade disruption.”
CBC News has contacted the ILWU for comment.
[ad_2]
Source link