ALF V1

Gil McGowan, President of the Alberta Federation of Labour, December 2, 2005

Two-and-a-half years ago, the Alberta government made some sweeping changes to the labour laws covering health care workers in this province.

The government tried to argue that Bill 27 was nothing more than administrative house-keeping. They said it was about simplification, streamlining and efficiency.

But from our perspective, it was something much more serious. It was a law essentially drafted to force concessions from health care unions that the regional health authorities had been unable to win at the bargaining table.

Bill 27 allowed the government to tear up dozens of freely negotiated contracts covering the pay and working conditions of tens of thousands of health care workers.

It forced unions into run-off votes, denying many workers the right to choose the union they actually preferred.

And it removed the legal right to strike from thousands of union members in areas like Community Health, Mental Health and Extended Care - without even attempting to justify how it would threaten the public interest if a speech pathologist, physiotherapist or community health nurse walked a picket line.

We've had our share of anti-union labour laws thrown at us in the province - but Bill 27 has to rank among the worst.

Our concerns about the substance of the law were profound - but we also had serious concerns about the process.

In particular, we were concerned about the role employers may have played in introducing, designing and drafting the legislation.

In an attempt to substantiate these concerns we filed a series of Freedom of Information requests with the Department of Health and Wellness, the Department of Human Resources and Employment and the Labour Relations Board.

The responses we received to these requests only heightened our concerns. The Health department and the Human Resources Department disclosed boxes of documents - most of which turned out to be innocuous. But from the LRB, we got nothing.

The Board refused to release any documents, saying they were all covered by exemptions within the FOIP act.

This blanket refusal, coupled with a few hints from documents from Health and Human Resources, raised a number of red flags for us. In particular, we started to suspect that we had stumbled onto something even bigger than what we had initially thought. We had been worried about the government cozying up with employers. But now we started to have grave concerns about the role that the Labour Relations Board in the whole process.

As we all know, the LRB is the quasi-judicial board that over-sees the administration and application of labour laws covering unionize workplaces in Alberta.

It is the referee, the traffic cop, the court of appeal in matters of labour relations.

It is also - and this is crucial - supposed to be independent and impartial. And by independent, we mean arms-length from government and free from influence by either the unions or the employers that appear before it.

However, at least when it came to Bill 27, the more we learned, the more it appeared that the Board's independence had been compromised. In particular, we were getting hints that the LRB was taking a direct role in drafting Bill 27.

We had no smoking gun. But, if it was true that the Board was working with government on Bill 27 this was very serious & because the LRB would have crossed an important line & they would have gone from interpreting the law, to writing it.

The LRB and Clint Dunford, who was Minister of Human Resources at the time, essentially said we were paranoid & that we were chasing shadows.

While Dunford admitted that there might have been some consultation on technical matters, the he said emphatically that the Bill was written by the politicians, not the LRB. In fact, in one newspaper article that we've included in your information package, he is quoted as saying the board had no role in drafting Bill 27.

But we weren't satisfied with those reassurances.

We had a hard time believing that the LRB had no documents related to Bill 27 or that all of them were covered by FOIP exemptions. So we did what was our right to do & we appealed the whole case to the information commissioner's office. And then, we waited.

And that's where things stood until late last week. On the evening of Wednesday, November 23, our lawyer received a letter and a few documents from the information commissioner's office - you'll find them in the package we've prepared for you.

There are only a few short documents here. But they prove what we have suspected all along & namely, that the independence of the LRB was compromised during the Bill 27 process.

What these documents show is not only that the LRB was playing an active role in drafting labour laws that they where only supposed to be policing and interpreting & the LRB was also actively working with employers to determine what the law should look like.

In the e-mail, dated March 11, 2003 and labelled number 50 by the information commissioner, Bruce Baugh (who is a government lawyer whose job it is to write legislation) says he has followed instructions from LRB Vice-chair Les Wallace.

And in the e-mail dated March 4, 2003 and labelled number 95 - Les Wallace himself provides an outline of what he says Bill 27 should look like. And he goes further. He says he has consulted with Damien Bailey, a senior lawyer from the firm McLellan and Ross - who act as counsel for a number of major health authorities. In particular, Wallace says he had discussions with Mr. Bailey about how the section of the regulation dealing with severance should be worded.

We've done some digging - and the section of Bill 27 they were talking about is the one that took away severance pay from a large group of Mental Health workers, who at the time were represented by the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees.

From our perspective, this is nothing short of a scandal.

What's happened here is that, the LRB abandoned its independence. It's supposed to be an independent, third party arbiter - but it allowed itself to essentially become another branch of government.

And even worse, it took advice and direction from employers who had a vested interest in watering down contracts for health care workers.

This is a clear violation of the central role of the Labour Relations Board. And it is a clear conflict of interest.

All of us in this room understand why all of this is upsetting for the labour movement. But for members of press let me use a sports analogy.

Here in Edmonton, we've just watched our football team win the Grey Cup. How would Eskimo fans feel if there were ten seconds on the clock, Edmonton is third and goal - and then the referee goes to the Montreal bench to consult on a crucial penalty call.

That's what's happened to union and working people in this case. The referee is helping the other side to win.

The government passed one of the most sweeping - and we would argue damaging and unfair - pieces of labour legislation in Alberta history. And, instead of remaining impartial, the LRB has consulted with the other team.

In effect, the Labour Relations Board has put itself in the position of writing the law to reflect the interests of employers and government, and then they've gone on to sit in judgement of that same law.

Unions in this province appear before the Board every day.

But, given these revelations, how can we have any confidence that we will be treated fairly? How can we have any confidence that the Board will be fair and impartial? How can we have any confidence that the referee is not working for the other team?

These are deeply troubling questions. And honestly, until such a time that confidence can be restored in the true independence of the board, there will be a crisis in labour relations in this province.

With that in mind - and in an effort to restore the confidence in the LRB that is necessary to make the system work - the AFL has called for a public inquiry.

We don't want an internal investigation or a review that's conducted behind closed doors.

We want an independent body to look at these documents and the many others that are clearly out there, but haven't been released. We want someone who can call witnesses and subpoena evidence. In short, we want a thorough, public investigation. And we want changes to make sure something like this never happens again.

This is a stain on our labour relations system in Alberta. The good news is that the problem is now out in the open. Now all that's need is the political will to deal with it and restore confidence in the system.

EDMONTON-There are a number of developments today in the scandal involving the Labour Relations Board's involvement in Bill 27. First, this afternoon, the Privacy Commissioner took the Alberta Federation of Labour to court to try to force the return of documents given to the AFL last week.

Earlier this morning, senior union leaders from across Alberta met to strategize what the labour movement should do about the breach of trust that has occurred. Third, the AFL received a letter from LRB Chair Mark Asbell attempting to explain their involvement, and the AFL responded by demanding the release of the rest of the documents related to Bill 27.

The Privacy Commissioner served notice late yesterday that they will be applying for an injunction to force the return of documents released to the AFL last week. "The Commissioner is asking us to return the documents we received, and to provide a list of to whom we have sent them," says AFL President Gil McGowan.

"Our reply continues to be 'no', and we will defend our right in court to these documents. Two years ago we applied to receive these and hundreds of other documents related to Bill 27, but have been stonewalled," notes McGowan. "The public's interest to know about inappropriate actions at the LRB override any possible privacy issues the LRB may raise."

"This is not about privacy. It is about the LRB hiding the truth from Albertans."

This morning, about 45 senior union leaders met to discuss what the labour movement should do about the revelations. They decided on a series of actions to put pressure on the Board, including:

• Signing an Open Letter to Ralph Klein demanding the resignations of Mark Asbell, Les Wallace and Nancy Schlesinger, and for a full public inquiry into the scandal
• Selecting a case to pursue a "reasonable apprehension of bias" claim in the courts, to achieve a ruling whether the Board is now compromised
• Other actions to be announced next week

Also, late yesterday, the AFL received a letter from LRB Chair Mark Asbell, attempting to explain that their role was merely "technical". The AFL replied with their own letter today.

"We told Mr. Asbell that his explanation was inadequate, as the memos clearly indicate more than a technical involvement. They drafted the regulations," says McGowan. "We believe even so-called 'technical' involvement is a breach of the LRB's role."

"We have written Mr. Asbell demanding that he release the hundreds of documents in question in our FOIP request. It is the ONLY way for the full truth to be known."

"If the LRB is so certain of the propriety of their involvement, then why are they fighting so hard to keep the documents secret?" asks McGowan. "Release them and let Albertans see what the LRB's role was."

"This scandal has rocked the labour relations system in Alberta. Continuing to hide and whitewash will only make it worse. The time for full disclosure is upon us."

Note: All the relevant documents, including letters, are available here.

- 30 -

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915-4599 (cell)  or  780.483-3021 (wk)

EDMONTON-The AFL responded today to comments from Clint Dunford regarding the released emails implicating key Labour Relations Board (LRB) in a scandal regarding the drafting of Bill 27.

"Either Minister Dunford doesn't get it, or he is continuing a game of whitewash," says AFL President Gil McGowan.

Late last week, the AFL received three documents as part of a privacy commissioner inquiry that prove that one of the LRB's Vice-Chairs, with the knowledge of the Chair and other Vice-Chair, prepared initial drafts of the controversial Bill 27 - which ripped up collective agreements and forced the merger of hundreds of bargaining units. These emails indicate that the LRB breached its role as the independent, neutral "court" for labour relations.

Dunford downplayed the emails yesterday  - although admitting he had not seen them - saying the LRB was just providing "technical advice".

"Dunford's comments are absurd," retorts McGowan. "Anyone reading those emails can tell you more than 'technical advice' was being offered - Vice-Chair Les Wallace wrote the initial drafts of the regulations."

"The legislative counsel for Alberta Justice admitted he did not 'deviate' from Wallace's 'instructions' - this is far more than simple technical advice."

McGowan suggests Dunford is whitewashing the scandal. He notes that on September 3, 2003, Dunford was quoted in the Edmonton Sun as saying the LRB "weren't involved in the drafting of the legislation" (page 21).

"The emails prove Dunford was misleading the public in 2003, and I contend he continues to do so today."

McGowan also points out that even the offering of technical advice is a breach of the LRB's mandate. "They are the impartial court for labour relations - do we ask judges how to craft criminal law? No, because it is inappropriate to ask the person interpreting the law to also help create it. That is what happened here."

"Clearly Dunford doesn't understand the role of the LRB. He doesn't get it."

"The Premier doesn't get it either", adds McGowan. "His comments in the legislature yesterday equating a court hearing and a public inquiry are nonsense. The two processes are vastly different - and he knows it. Our court appeal is narrow and technical. What's needed is a broad review of the Board's impartiality that can only be accomplished with a public inquiry."

"This scandal has rocked the labour movement - we have long had doubts about the neutrality of the LRB, but these revelations prove to us that something is wrong at the Board," McGowan concludes.

- 30 -
For more information contact:
Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915-4599 (cell)  or  780.483-3021 (wk)

Documents received by the Alberta Federation of Labour show that key figures of the Labour Relations Board (LRB) breached their role by actively participating in the drafting of legislation, and by consulting with employer representatives about the content of draft legislation, says the Alberta Federation of Labour today.

The AFL received documents as part of a FOIP Commissioners Inquiry. The documents reveal that LRB Chair Mark Asbell, and Vice-Chair Les Wallace were actively involved in the drafting of Bill 27, the Labour Relations (Regional Health Authorities Restructuring) Amendment Act. Their participation in the process contravenes the role of the LRB, and places into serious jeopardy its independence.

The documents also suggest the LRB actively consulted with employer representatives in the drafting of the Bill - another contravention of its role that undermines impartiality.

"We have a 'smoking gun' that demonstrates a serious breach of the LRB's mandate," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "The actions of the two senior officials at the Board have allowed the LRB to become biased and compromised."

"We need a public inquiry to get to the bottom of how deeply compromised the LRB is," says McGowan. "The truth needs to come out." The AFL sent a letter today to Human Resources Minister Mike Cardinal demanding a public inquiry into the breach.

Today, the AFL received a letter from the lawyer for the Privacy Commissioner demanding the return of the documents received by the AFL - saying it got them in error. The AFL has responded by refusing to return the documents. The AFL's position is that it has a right to access these documents and there is a pressing public interest that requires full disclosure of the documents. Neither the Commissioner nor the LRB have not indicated what their next legal steps will be.

Following the receipt of the documents, the AFL sent them to its 350 affiliated union presidents, to update them on ongoing efforts to reveal the truth about the Bill 27 process. The AFL will be calling together senior union leaders in the next couple of days to discuss next steps.

The LRB, as an arms-length quasi-judicial body, has the mandate of interpreting and enforcing the Labour Relations Code. In performing its job, it must adhere to a strict policy of independence and neutrality. As the "court" for labour relations, it must avoid participating in the setting of government policy or regulations regarding labour relations. In other words, its job is to interpret the law, not make it.

"The documents we have received clearly show that the Vice-Chair of the LRB wrote the bill that the government used to attack health care unions," notes McGowan. "This says to me that the LRB has sided clearly with the employer - and destroyed any semblance of fairness in their dealings. For an LRB, this is unconscionable."

Bill 27 set in motion a process to reduce the number of bargaining units in health care. It led to a series of acrimonious and bitter run-off votes, cancelled longstanding collective agreements, removed the right to strike for community health and other workers, and denied nurse practitioners the right to join a union. It was widely seen as an anti-union piece of legislation.

"The LRB is the anchor of our modern labour relations system. If the parties can't trust its fairness and independence, the whole system is at risk. The actions of the LRB's senior officials have jeopardized trust in the system. This could have wide ranging implications." McGowan concludes.

- 30 -

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915-4599 (cell)  or  780.483-3021 (wk)

The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), announced today they have a tentative agreement with Finning Canada. The 1,000 workers at Finning in Alberta have been on strike since October 20 to fight against further contracting out of their jobs.

"The new agreement includes language to protect our jobs and discourage the kind of contracting out Finning has been aggressively pursuing the past few years," says IAM Lodge 99 President Bob MacKinnon. "It is a testament to the determination of our members."

"Going into this strike, Finning said it would never agree to limits on contracting out, and after five weeks, they have done just that," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "I think this is due to the creative way the union approached the strike."

"The company probably heard about the labour movement's plans for the strike, including large actions in Fort McMurray, radio ads, a leaflet and other strategies. The labour movement was mobilizing to support the Finning workers, and it played a role in the settlement."

"I'm convinced that what we were calling 'the Dinning Pursuit' was an effective tool," says McGowan. "The union and the labour movement made a decision to show up at every public event that Jim Dinning attended. That kind of pressure made a difference."

The labour movement set up information pickets everytime Jim Dinning made a public appearance. Dinning is a Conservative leadership hopeful, but also sits on Finning's Board of Directors. His position offered a unique opportunity to IAM to place extra pressure on the company.

"The labour movement was ramping up," says McGowan. "Radio ads targeting Dinning were slated to start running next week in Calgary, a leaflet was being distributed and actions were being planned for Fort McMurray and other key sites in the dispute."

The script of the ads was used at the bargaining table, and the union suspects that Finning caught wind of other labour plans, and this prompted them to give in to the union's key demand.

"This victory is an example of what happens when the labour movements stands together. Employers should take note - this is not an employers market anymore." McGowan concludes.

-30-

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915-4599 (cell) or 780.483-3021 (wk) or

Bob MacKinnon, IAM 99 President at 780.483-4103 (wk)

Good morning. My name is Gil McGowan and I'm president of the Alberta Federation of Labour.

For those who are not familiar with our federation, we are the umbrella group representing unions in the province.

More specifically, we represent 29 unions in both the public and private sectors, who, in turn, represent about 120,000 Alberta workers.

But this morning, we're not here to talk about our members. We're not here to talk about those who are already represented.

Instead, we're here to talk about a forgotten group of workers.

We're here to talk about a group of people who are at the heart of our province's traditional economy, but who have been abandoned on the margins of our legal system.

The group that I'm talking about, of course, is farm workers.

In an effort to bring Alberta farm workers 'in from the margins' the AFL has decided to designate August 20th as Farmer Workers Day. This will be the first of what we hope will become an annual event.

We're also here to launch a lobbying campaign aimed at shining a public spotlight on the problems faced by farm workers in Alberta.

In particular, it is our intention to educate members of the Legislative Assembly and convince them to update the workplace laws governing farm workers so that they better reflect the realities we face in the 21st century.

In many ways farm workers have been enduring a drought when it comes to legal protections; that's why we're calling the plan we're unveiling today the 'End the Drought' campaign.

To help me launch this campaign this morning, we've invited two special guests.

To my left, we have Eric Musekamp. Eric is President of the Farmworkers Union of Alberta, or FUA for short.

For several years now, Eric has been a lonely voice trying to draw attention to the plight of farm workers. With this event today, we are signaling that Eric will no longer be alone in his work: the broader labour movement is also taking up the cause.

Our other special guest is Stan Raper. Stan is the Agriculture Worker Coordinator for the United Food and Commercial Workers union. UFCW has taken the lead among unions in organizing farm workers in Canada, and Stan has been the man directing most of that important work.

As far as the agenda for this morning goes, we'll break our presentation into four main sections.

First, I will outline the nature of the problem facing farm workers in Alberta, and I will talk about what our Federation plans to do about it.

Second, Eric will talk about what it's like to actually be a farm worker here in Alberta in 2005, and why, from his perspective, legal changes are so desperately needed.

Third, Stan will provide us with a national perspective on the issue of workplace protections for farm workers. In particular, he'll tell us about some of the progress that's been made in other provinces; progress which highlights just how much ground farm workers here in Alberta still have to make up.

Fourth, and finally, we'll open the floor for questions, and afterwards, we'll all make ourselves available for one-on-one interviews.

So who are we talking about when we talk about farm workers and just how bad are things for them?

As it stands right now, there are about 12,000 people working as farm or agricultural employees in Alberta.

About 25 percent of these people work on a temporary or seasonal basis. And about 300 are classified as foreign or migrant labourers.

But the rest - the vast majority - are full-time, permanent workers who make their homes in our communities.

Some of them work in nurseries and market gardens. Some of them work in mushroom farms or greenhouses.

But the majority work in animal production. You'll find them working on ranches, in huge hog barns and on sprawling feed lots around the province.

When it comes to the challenges these workers face, it can be boiled down simply.

The problem in a nutshell is that farm workers in our province are excluded from almost all of the legal, workplace protections that other Albertans take for granted.

Other workers are covered and protected by laws like the Employment Standards Code, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Workers' Compensation Act and the Labour Code.

These laws provide the basic legal framework of protections that most working Albertans take for granted. They guarantee rights and provide a safety net.

But farm workers here in Alberta fall outside that legal framework. They have no safety net.

More specifically, farm workers are either fully or partially excluded from all of the laws I've mentioned and denied the protections that those laws provide.

As a result, if you're a farm worker in Alberta today you work in an extremely insecure environment.

You're excluded from most provisions of the Employment Standards Code - so you have no protection when it comes to things like hours of work. You're not guaranteed a minimum wage. You're not entitled to overtime. You don't get statutory holidays or vacation pay.

If you're a farm worker in Alberta, you're also excluded from the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Workers Compensation Act. So you don't have the right to refuse unsafe work and, in most cases, you're not entitled to compensation if you're injured on the job.

If you're a farm worker in Alberta, you're also excluded from the Labour Code. So you don't have the right to join a union. You don't have the right of association that's guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and which is, or will soon be, available to farm workers in every other province.

As a result of all these exclusions, Alberta is once again, at the back of the pack when compared to other provinces. Farm workers here in our province have fewer rights and fewer workplace protections that their counterparts in any other part of the country.

We have fewer employment standards protections for farm workers; we are the last to recognize farm workers right to organize; and we are the only province that has not committed to including farm workers in health and safety legislation.

So, Alberta may be number one in oil, gas and cattle - but we are dead last when it comes to protecting the rights and interests of farm workers.

That's why we're here today. And that's why we're launching our campaign to 'End the Drought' for farm workers.

The work that these workers do is valuable. It's also often hard and dangerous. And we believe they deserve the same kind of legal protections that are available to other Albertans working in other sectors of the economy.

Defenders of the status quo will say that agriculture is a special case. They will say that the rules in place for other workers are not appropriate for farm workers.

A generation or two ago that may have been the case. Back then, that majority of agricultural production in Alberta came from family farms - where the workers were usually the farmers themselves or members of their families.

But today, the small family farm is being pushed aside by agri-business. More and more of our agricultural products are being produced by corporations on factory farms.

Green Acres is being replaced by Hogs-R-Us.

As a result, farm workers are not relatives or friends of the family, they are employees. And the employers are not struggling small farmers, they are profitable corporations.

As employees, we think that farm workers should have the same rights as other employees in the province. As profitable corporations, we think big agricultural employers should have the same obligations to their workers as other employers in the province.

To put it simply, farming in Alberta has changed, and we think the law needs to change to reflect those changes. It's time to end the drought in legal protection for farm workers.

And it's time to end the free ride for agricultural employers.

In terms of the nuts and bolts of our campaign, we've produced a leaflet that we plan to distribute around the province. We're going to be holding town hall meetings in in targeted communities. And we're going to be lobbying the Human Resources Minister and other MLAs.

Our goal is to bring our farm labour laws into the 21st century, and we're going to make it really easy for our politicians.

We're not asking for the moon. All we want is four small amendments to four pieces of Legislation. It's work that the government could accomplish in a day or two if there was a will.

At this point, we remain optimistic. From our perspective the need for these changes is clear. It simply no longer makes any sense to leave farm workers out in the cold.

We hope the government will see basic inequity and injustice here - and we hope they will do the right thing and make sure farm workers are no longer relegated to the status of second class citizens.

Gil McGowan, President of the Alberta Federation of Labour, November 14, 2005

Good morning and welcome.

My name is Gil McGowan and I'm the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour.

We're here today largely because of a strike that captured public attention not only here in Alberta, but across the country.

It was a strike that shocked us; angered us; and pulled at our heart strings.

It was also a strike that did not have to happen. In fact, it was a strike that would not have happened in almost any other Canadian jurisdiction.

The strike I'm talking about, of course, is the strike that recently came to an end at the Lakeside meatpacking plant in Brooks.

For those of us in the Alberta labour movement, the Lakeside strike was significant because it was about rights that most working people take for granted.

Like the right to go to the bathroom when you need to.

Like the right to see a doctor when you're injured on the job.

Like the right to actually get paid for all the work you do.

But the Lakeside strike was also important because it highlighted a major weakness in our province's system of labour laws.

In particular, the Lakeside strike reminded us of what happens when you have laws with loopholes.

It reminded us of what happens when you have laws that ignore easy-to-predict problems - and laws that don't give people "on the ground" the options they need to deal with problems.

That's why we're here today - to talk about the lessons of Lakeside - and how we can learn from those lessons.

The big lesson that we think needs to be taken from the experience at Brooks is that we need some form of first contract arbitration here in Alberta.

It's commonly known in labour relations circles that first contracts are the most difficult contracts to negotiate - mostly because the two sides haven't built a relationship. They haven't yet found ways to live together and to prosper together. This often leads to hostility and conflict.

Recognizing this problem, most provinces have adopted laws that provide for an independent third party to step in and settle first contract disputes when they've bogged down and have the potential to get dangerous.

The federal labour code makes provisions for first contract arbitration. So do the labour codes in B.C., Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island.

Eighty percent of Canadians live in jurisdictions that have first contract arbitration. Only Alberta, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick don't have it.

The reason so many provinces have chosen to adopt these laws is because they make sense - and because they work.

I think we can all agree that the goal in labour relations should be to settle disputes and reach fair agreements without recourse to nasty strikes. If that's the goal then the record from provinces that have first contract arbitration speaks for itself.

In 2002, the last year for which complete statistics are available, 41 first-contract strikes were avoided in B.C., Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario alone. 41 strikes that could have been ugly like the strike at Lakeside didn't happen because of first contract arbitration.

The really frustrating thing about our Labour Code here in Alberta is that it actually encourages confrontation. Under the Alberta Code, if no collective agreement has been reached 10 months after a union has been certified, an application to decertify that union can be filed. So for employers who want to bust the union, all they have to do is drag their feet in bargaining, wait for the clock to run out, and then push for a decertification vote.

Union members know this - so when they strike for a first agreement, those strikes tend to be even more bitter and acrimonious than usual because they are literally strikes for survival.

First contract arbitration would allow us to avoid this kind of bitterness and conflict. It would promote negotiation and discourage confrontation.

That's what happens in provinces that have first contract laws. Just knowing that an arbitrator could step in and impose a deal, encourages the parties to negotiate. In the 41 cases I mentioned earlier of strikes that had been avoided in other provinces, 31 were actually settled through negotiation after the arbitration process had been started because the parties wanted to avoid an imposed deal.

So the evidence shows that first contract arbitration works and makes good policy sense. But, you know what? It also makes good politics.

Near the end of the Lakeside strike, the AFL and the United Food and Commercial Workers commissioned a large province-wide poll of 800 Albertans.

The results of that poll are in your press kit. What it showed was that 61 percent of Albertans supported the idea of bringing first contract arbitration to Alberta. Even among self-identified Tory voters, more than 60 percent said they either supported or strongly supported the idea.

So when people ask me: can we avoid future Lakesides? I say: you bet we can!

There's a mechanism out there that we know can help us cool temperatures in first agreement disputes. It's been tested and proven in other provinces. And it's supported by the majority of people here in Alberta. First Contract Arbitration is a good idea whose time has come. All that's missing is the political will to put it into practice.

If we had first contract arbitration in Alberta we could have avoided Lakeside.

We could have avoided the $1.8 million tab for policing.

We could have avoided the picket line clashes.

We could have avoided the smash-up derby that almost killed the union president.

We could have avoided the anxiety and financial losses sustained by the ranching community.

We could have avoided splitting the town of Brooks down the middle.

And it's not just about Lakeside. Over the past few years there have been other nasty first contract disputes that also could have been avoided. Like the Shaw Conference Centre Strike in Edmonton. Like the Calgary Herald strike in Calgary.

The bottom line is that our labour law is broken and it needs to be fixed. If we don't seize this opportunity and take advantage of the momentum that's been building behind the idea of bringing first contract arbitration to Alberta, then it's not a question of "if" we're going to see more Lakesides, it's just a question of "when."

That's why the Alberta Federation of Labour is launching this campaign today. It's a campaign that's supported by most of the major unions in the province including, to name just a few: the United Food and Commercial Workers, who represent the workers at Lakeside; the United Nurses of Alberta; the Health Sciences Association of Alberta; the Canadian Autoworkers; the Communication Energy Paperworkers union; the Canadian Union of Public Employees, the Alberta Teachers Association and the Alberta Building Trades.

Starting today, we will be running radio ads across the province urging our provincial government to bring first contract arbitration to Alberta.

We will be distributing leaflets to the public. We will be meeting with groups outside the labour movement and urging them to get on board. We will be talking to the media. We will be lobbying MLAs.

The good news is that we've off to a running start. As most of you know, some members of government are already talking about first contract arbitration.

Lyle Oberg has said it might be a good idea. Premier Klein said it might be a possibility. And just last Thursday I met with Human Resources Minister Mike Cardinal and he gave me his personal commitment that public hearings will be held on the issue.

I've also been given a date in February to appear before the government's standing policy committee on Education and Human Resources to make the case for first contract arbitration.

All of this is encouraging. But, given this government's track record on labour issues, we know we can't simply wait for members of cabinet to do the right thing.

The only reason first contract arbitration is even the table right now is because Lakeside was on the front page almost constantly for more than a month. Politicians move when they feel the heat - and with this campaign we hope to keep the heat on.

In the end, what we're asking for is a relatively small change. We've included excerpts from other provincial labour codes in your press kits - so you can see that this issue can be dealt with in as little as half a page. With the Legislature reconvening tomorrow, I can't think of a better time to fix the problem that has been so dramatically highlighted for us by the strike at Lakeside.

First contract arbitration won't eliminate all strikes. But it will help us avoid some of the worst strike - the ones most likely to spill into the streets and onto the front pages.

It's a small change, but one that - if implemented - could go a long way to promoting workplace peace in the province. And that's a goal we think is worth striving for.

Given the lessons that we've learned from Lakeside, we think the time has come to fix about Alberta's broken labour law. The time has come to support the change that brings workplace peace. The time has come to bring first contract arbitration to Alberta.

Thank you.

In the wake of the bitter Lakeside Packers strike, the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) today launched a new campaign to urge the government to implement first contract arbitration in Alberta [click here for first contract arbitration leaflet and Lakeside Packers leaflet.]

"We want to prevent future Lakesides," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "The best way to prevent ugly strikes over first agreements is to implement some form of first contract arbitration. As we say in our campaign slogan: "It's the change that brings workplace peace - and we're going to do everything we can to bring it here to Alberta."

In other provinces first contract arbitration is used when the two parties are unable to come to an agreement over a first collective agreement. It allows the government to appoint an objective third party to craft a contract that is binding on both parties. It applies only for first contracts, which are commonly acknowledged to be the most difficult contracts to reach.

"If Alberta had first contract arbitration, there would have been no strike at Lakeside," says McGowan. "Unfortunately, it took a bitter strike to reach a resolution that could have been found at a bargaining table. We need to change the law."

The AFL campaign, will consist of the following elements:

• Radio ads which start today on radio stations across Alberta
• A mass-produced leaflet asking Albertans to lobby the government
• A presentation to the Provincial Government's Standing Policy Committee on Education and Employment
• Meetings with Minister Cardinal and other government officials

The AFL also released the results of a poll on first contract arbitration. More than 60% of Albertans support some form of first contract arbitration. Even among conservative party voters more than 60% indicated they support the idea.

"The case is strong. It works in B.C. and Ontario and Manitoba to prevent ugly strikes. Albertans support it and are calling for it," adds McGowan. "The legislature session begins tomorrow - I can't think of a better time to fix a gaping hole in our labour law."

"We have seen this kind of strike too often in Alberta - from the Calgary Herald to the Shaw Conference Centre in Edmonton and now Lakeside. Clearly something needs to change."

Alberta is one of only three jurisdictions in Canada without first contract arbitration (along with New Brunswick and Nova Scotia). In provinces with the provision, its existence encourages the parties to resolve their disagreements at the bargaining table, and allows for a final course of action to prevent a strike.

"No one liked what we saw at Lakeside, but thankfully it is resolved. Now the government needs to make sure it doesn't happen again."

-30-
For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915-4599 (cell) or 780.483-3021 (wk)

AFL president Gil McGowan has written a letter to the RCMP praising them for the approach they took to policing the recent Lakeside Packers strike in Brooks.

In a letter to Superintendent Bob Boyd of the RCMP's Calgary District office, McGowan said that without the neutral, impartial and even-handed approach adopted by the RCMP "a bad situation could easily have gotten worse."

McGowan thanked the RCMP for recognizing and respecting the fact that the strikers had a legitimate, democratic right to be on the picket line. He also commended the Mounties for actively seeking out "best-practice" models for policing labour disputes from other jurisdictions and incorporating them into their policy for Brooks.

"After looking at what happened in Brooks, I would like to strongly encourage you to adopt the RCMP's "Brooks policy" as the formal policy for policing all labour disputes in Alberta," wrote McGowan.

"I would also encourage you to share your experiences with other city and regional police forces in the province. Some of these forces - most notably the Edmonton Police Service - already have thoughtful labour policies in place. But I think everyone could benefit from the lessons that you learned in Brooks."

The Alberta Federation of Labour is Alberta's largest union organization, representing 120,000 workers from 29 different unions.

-30-

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915-4599 (cell) or 780.483-3021 (wk)

The Alberta Federation of Labour today applauded the union at Lakeside for reaching a tentative agreement with Lakeside Packers in Brooks, but pledged to continue to pressure the government for first contract arbitration laws.

"The fact that Tyson Foods and Lakeside management actually agreed to terms with the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) 401 demonstrates how much public support the workers at Lakeside had won," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "If this settlement is ratified, it will be a giant first step toward justice for the Lakeside workers and it will also provide some much-needed assurance of dependability for Alberta's cattle industry."

"But we have to put all of this in perspective," says McGowan. "The really frustrating thing is that this is a strike that didn't have to happen in the first place. All the picket line clashes, all the tension, all the economic damage could have been avoided if Alberta had first contract arbitration like other provinces."

"So, while we're all relieved that a settlement is in sight," says McGowan, "this whole situation has highlighted the fact that we have a real problem with labour laws in this province. By allowing employers to simply refuse to bargain with duly and democratically elected unions, our laws actually provoke the kind of confrontation that we've seen in Lakeside."

McGowan warns that future crises are inevitable without government action. "The sad truth is that under our labour laws there are no real consequences for companies who bargain in bad faith, says McGowan. "So if something is not done to change the law, we're going to see more Lakesides in the future. It's not a question of 'if,' it's a question of 'when'."

McGowan insists that Albertans cannot let the provincial government off the hook on their promise to look at first contract arbitration laws for Alberta and promises that labour intends to keep the pressure on the government. "This issue can not simply be allowed to disappear until we are in the middle of the next labour relations crisis," says McGowan.

McGowan suggests that for today, however, the UFCW and the labour movement can take the time recognize they have won an historic victory. "UFCW and the Lakeside workers have made a breakthrough today that paves the way for a better future for them and their families," concluded McGowan. "If ever there was a group of people who need the kind of protection that a union contract can bring, this is it. They stood up to one of the U.S.'s biggest corporate heavyweights, and they got them to agree to a contract. My hat is off to them."

-30-

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915-4599 (cell) or 780.483-3021 (wk)