URGENT ACTION

Free Workshop on Access to Information on Friday, June 28

The Alberta Federation of Labour will host a "Lunch and Learn" workshop covering the basics of Alberta's Freedom of Information legislation. This workshop, the first in a series, is an opportunity for our members, affiliates, and allies to learn about a subject that is of interest to the labour movement.

This workshop will cover the basics of FOIP in Alberta, including:

• How to navigate the FOIP request system
• Why sometimes it's important to get information the government would rather keep secret
• How to word a request to save time and money
• How to follow up with further requests or judicial review.

When: Friday, June 28 from 12:30 to 2:30 p.m.
Where: AFL Meeting Hall (10654 – 101 Street Edmonton)
RSVP: 780-483-3021
See poster for more details.

Important Notice:

Due to flooding in Calgary, all protest events related to the federal Conservative Convention have been postponed until the convention can be rescheduled.

Boycott i-Hotel and Edmonton Hotel and Convention Centre in support of UFCW 401

United Food and Commercial Workers Local 401 started an organizing drive in March to unionize the i-Hotel in Red Deer, Alberta, which was formerly the Holiday Inn on 67th Street.
During the process owner Amin Suleman was made aware of union activity and interfered with the organizing efforts of Local 401.
3 members have been harassed, intimidated, and terminated for expressing their legal right to join a union. The ALRB issued a consent order that UFCW 401 supports and the employer refuses to honour.
UFCW 401 needs your help. They are asking all labour organizations to help them in the fight against a ruthless employer. Please support UFCW 401 by boycotting this employer until an agreement can be reached between the union and employer. UFCW 401 does not want to cripple business and wants people to advise reservations why they are pulling their business. This employer operates two hotels in Alberta.
i-Hotel at 6500 – 67 Street, Red Deer, AB
Edmonton Hotel and Convention Centre at 4520 – 76th Avenue, Edmonton.
Click here for letter from UFCW 401 to the AFL.
For more information please contact Director of Organizing, Chris O'Halloran at [email protected]

Bill C-377 – Send a message to the Senate

The Senate will be debating C-377 this week. There is a real chance to expose the bill as transparently anti-union, and potentially to amend or defeat it.
The bill has been pilloried by almost everyone who attended the hearings held by the Senate banking committee.
The CLC and other labour organizations are asking for maximum lobbying (calls to your regional senators, etc.). To find the right phone # or e-mail, please go here.
Below is a commentary by Jim Stanford, CAW Researcher (speaker at our convention) on the Senate's deliberations.
Every member that is able to voice their opposition to this bill could make a difference. PLEASE SEND A MESSAGE TO ALL SENATORS, WRITE YOUR MP AND CC ALL MEMBERS OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE.
The Alberta CUPE website allows you to send a message to all senators.
Please visit http://cupe.ca/unions/urges-senate-block-anti-union-bill
They're running an online action on an issue that I think will concern you. It takes two minutes and you can make a difference. Other websites:
http://www.albertacarpenters.com/fight-bill-c-377
http://www.canadianlabour.ca/national/news/investment-firms-alarmed-about-bill-c-377-anti-union-bill-will-have-costly-consequence
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/phil-flemming/bill-c377-labour-canada_b_2639500.html

Bill C-525: Another Conservative attempt to undermine unions

The Harper government is again turning to its backbenchers to make laws designed to weaken unions. Bill C-525, if passed, will interfere in labour relations and the established rights of workers to join and remain in a union.
Currently, workers in federally regulated industries are recognized as a bargaining agent if they can show that they represent the majority of workers. Bill C-525 will require the union to prove that 50% of all employees – not just those that vote – want to remain in a union. If that doesn't happen, the unit will be decertified. This opens the door to all sorts of employer interference, such as anti-union propaganda and threats to shutdown workplaces, in efforts to suppress votes to get rid of unions.
Bill C-525 will apply to federally regulated unions, but make no mistake that this is another Harper Conservative attempt to weaken unions. If this Bill passes, we'll likely see more brazen attacks. Together, we can send a message to Harper and stop Bill C-525.
For a summary on Bill C-525 read the CUPE release and backgrounder.
View Bill C-525. 
Please sign and promote the NDP petition

News

Supreme Court sides with workers right to privacy

On June 14, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a mandatory random alcohol testing policy imposed by Irving Pulp and Paper at a Saint John, N.B., Kraft mill in 2006 was unreasonable.

The case, which stems from a grievance filed by Communications Energy and Paperworkers (CEP) Local 30 in New Brunswick, has implications to similar cases in Alberta's oil sands. The ruling is a major victory in the fight against random and arbitrary privacy violations through drug and alcohol testing.

"This decision is in line with years of jurisprudence, makes sense, and is in the interest of Canadians. Employers can't arbitrarily introduce a random drug or alcohol testing regime by declaring a workplace "dangerous" without proving that there's a problem," Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan said. "There's a direct parallel between this case and what's happening at Suncor: there's no evidence that there's a problem and the employer can't simply impose their will on the worker and strip them of their privacy without proving there's one."

In 15 years before the policy was imposed, there were eight instances in which a worker was found to be under the influence of alcohol and none involved an accident or injury. During the 22 months the policy was in effect, no one tested positive.

"The expected safety gains to the employer in this case were found by the board to range 'from uncertain ... to minimal at best' while the impact on employee privacy was found to be much more severe," Justice Rosalie Abella wrote for the majority. For more information see June 14 release

AFL wraps up its case against job-sucking Northern Gateway pipeline

The Alberta Federation of Labour made its final arguments to the Northern Gateway Pipeline hearings on Tuesday, June 18 in Terrace, B.C. The Federation made the case that the Pipeline is not in the best interests of Canadians.

The pipeline, if approved, will ship some of our country's best potential jobs down the pipeline to China. In its presentation to the National Energy Board, the AFL showed that it makes economic sense to upgrade bitumen in Alberta – or at least in Canada – rather than exporting it raw to foreign markets.

"The proponents of this project have compared the pipeline to the CPR and called it an important piece of Canadian infrastructure. But the Northern Gateway Pipeline is a piece of Chinese infrastructure, not Canadian infrastructure," Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan said. "The ownership structure of the pipeline shows that the project will benefit China's state-owned oil companies, shipping good-paying oil sands jobs to Asia." For more information see June 17 release with links to a backgrounder and AFL final arguments

Did you know...

• the Northern Gateway pipeline will create only 228 permanent jobs in Canada
• During construction of the pipeline, the project will temporarily create 1,500 construction jobs
• At least 26,000 Canadian jobs would be created if we upgraded/refined the bitumen destined for China here at home.

Events

June 28: Alberta Federation of Labour "Lunch & Learn", 12:30 -2:30 PM
July 1: Canada Day
July 5-6:
Aug 5: Civic Holiday
Aug 5-9: AFL Kids' Camp
Aug 24: EDLC "Big Splash Open" Golf Tournament
Aug 31: EDLC Labour Day BBQ
Aug 31: Sept 2: Founding UNIFOR Convention
Sept 2: Labour Day
Sept 8: World Literacy Day
Sept 17-18: AFL Executive Committee/Council

2013 Backgrounder_Final Arguments against the Northern Gateway Pipeline

AFL Final Written Argument Northern Gateway Pipeline

The Alberta Federation of Labour gave its final arguments against the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline on Monday, begging the joint review panel to reject the project.

At a hearing in Terrace, B.C., AFL president Gil McGowan argued Gateway will hurt Canada's economy, creating few jobs locally and more jobs in Chinese refineries.

"The proponents of this project have compared the pipeline to the (Canadian Pacific Railway) and called it an important piece of Canadian infrastructure. But the Northern Gateway pipeline is a piece of Chinese infrastructure, not Canadian infrastructure," said McGowan.

"The ownership structure of the pipeline shows that the project will benefit China's state-owned oil companies, shipping good-paying oilsands jobs to Asia."

McGowan states the pipeline will create only 228 permanent jobs and 1,500 temporary construction jobs during a three year period. He also argues that the pipeline will drive up operating costs for Canadian refineries by more than $800 million.

The AFL is not opposed to selling oilsands product to lucrative Asian markets, says McGowan. Instead, McGowan favours refining bitumen in Alberta before selling it to foreign markets. The labour orgainization estimates that at least 26,000 Canadian jobs would be created if bitumen sold to China was refined in Alberta.

"If we want Cadillac prices for our resources, then we have to sell a Cadillac product," said McGowan.

"That means selling upgraded bitumen, called synthethic crude, rather than raw bitumen. Some country is going to capture the value and create the jobs. We think that country should be Canada, not China."

The AFL represents 160,000 Alberta workers, including 25,000 in energy and energy-related construction.

The Monday hearings were the final arguments to either supporting or denouncing the $6.5 billion pipeline that, if approved, will link the oilsands to the B.C. coast. From a port in Kitimat, bitumen will be loaded onto tankers heading to California and Asia, on the B.C. coast.

The largest hurdle is a coalition of aboriginal groups who argue they were poorly consulted by Enbridge, and that the pipeline will run through territory seen as culturally vital.

Enbridge and company supporters have spent approximately $500 million on environmental and engineering studies, as well as public and aboriginal consultations for the project. Enbridge also argues B.C.'s oil and gas industry could gain more than $18 billion in additional investments if the project is approved.

The joint review panel is expected to finish the hearings within two weeks and make a recommendation on the project's future to the federal government by Dec. 31.

 

TERRACE, B.C. — Enbridge Inc. shot back at critics of its proposed Northern Gateway pipeline Monday, arguing the project is making enormous and costly commitments to avoid accidents and that the biggest risk to the country is not approving it.

In its final words to a panel of regulators reviewing the project, Northern Gateway lawyer Richard Neufeld said Canada is vulnerable to its only market, the United States, deciding it no longer wants Canadian oil.

"You want to see an economic Black Swan for Canada?" Mr. Neufeld said in addressing fears the pipeline exposes the country to an unpredictable event of massive proportions.

"How about a decision from the U.S. that it will no longer need Canadian oil? ... The $30-billion in export price discounting ... would be a drop in the bucket. Canadians would be facing, we suggest, an economic catastrophe of unprecedented proportion."

After a massive review that reached out to communities along Northern Gateway's proposed right of way from Edmonton to the Northern West Coast, proponents and critics of the oil sands pipeline are presenting their closing oral arguments in this picturesque frontier town about an hour's drive from Kitimat, its endpoint.

Related

In a packed banquet room in the town's main hotel, Mr. Neufeld dismissed the most common criticism of the project — that Enbridge hasn't provided enough information about its risks and the benefits for regulators to approve it.

Participants hold signs in Terrace, B.C., during an anti-pipeline protest, on Sunday June 16, 2013.

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Robin Rowland

"Given the volume of information that comprises the hearing record, it's an argument that appears quite hollow to use," Mr. Neufeld said.

"No amount of additional ... information would persuade any member of the tar sands campaign to support a pipeline such as this. They are never going to say that enough information has been provided."

There were no demonstrations at the start of the hearings, although a rally in opposition to the pipeline was held on Sunday in a local park.

The three-member Joint Review Panel of the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency is expected to wrap up the hearings in two weeks and make a recommendation to the federal government by Dec. 31 on whether the project is in the public interest.

Mr. Neufeld said the project has presented a path forward to address many of the concerns raised during the review, from the potential of an oil spill on land or in the ocean, to engagement with First Nations, and urged the panel to approve it.

"Tradeoffs are a fact of life," he said. "That does not mean that any person or community or region must be marginalized.... all it means is that in determining public interest we need to seek the balance that respects local interests, plans that deliver benefits to local communities, while still ensure that the projects that are needed for this country will proceed. We suggest that this project respect that balance."

But Art Sterritt, representing the province's Coastal First Nations, said Enbridge has failed to show the benefits are greater than the costs and the risks and approval would lead to "nothing but conflict.

"Remember this," he warned panel chair Sheila Leggett.

"Despite the hundreds of millions and effort by the proponents, B.C. First Nations and all of the public of B.C. have rejected this project ... I have never witnessed a project that has garnered such opposition, never in the history of B.C. I don't envy the position that you are in."

Up next are the Alexander First Nation, the Alberta Federation of Labour, B.C. Nature and Nature Canada, and then the province of British Columbia. These are all expected to present Monday.

Ottawa Citizen, Monday, June 17, 2013
Byline:  Claudia Cattaneo, Financial Post

AFL to make final arguments against Northern Gateway Pipeline

EDMONTON – The Alberta Federation of Labour is making the case that the Northern Gateway Pipeline is not in the best interests of Canadians.

At a hearing today in Terrace, B.C., the AFL will argue that the pipeline, if approved, will ship some of our country's best potential jobs down the pipeline to China. In its presentation to the National Energy Board, the AFL will show that it makes economic sense to upgrade bitumen in Alberta – or at least in Canada – rather than exporting it raw to foreign markets.

"The proponents of this project have compared the pipeline to the CPR and called it an important piece of Canadian infrastructure. But the Northern Gateway Pipeline is a piece of Chinese infrastructure, not Canadian infrastructure," Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan said. "The ownership structure of the pipeline shows that the project will benefit China's state-owned oil companies, shipping good-paying oil sands jobs to Asia."

To date, evidence presented to the Joint Review panel considering the pipeline shows that:

• the pipeline will create only 228 permanent jobs in Canada
• only 1,500 construction jobs will be created for three years, then nothing more
• the Northern Gateway Pipeline will drive up costs for Canadian refineries more than $800 million, which could lead to refinery closures.

The AFL's evidence shows:

• At least 26,000 Canadian jobs would be created if we upgraded/refined the bitumen destined for China here at home.

"If we want Cadillac prices for our resources, then we have to sell a Cadillac product," McGowan said. "And that means selling upgraded bitumen, called synthethic crude, rather than raw bitumen. Some country is going to capture the value and create the jobs. We think that country should be Canada, not China."

The AFL's arguments against the Northern Gateway pipeline are the product of more than two years of sifting through evidence and participating in cross-examination on the economic benefits of the project.

The AFL represents 160,000 Alberta workers, including 25,000 in energy and energy-related construction.

"Governments at all levels pay lip service to wanting to keep good jobs in Canada," McGowan said, adding this is this is the AFL's fourth intervention against raw bitumen exports in recent years. "Through these pipeline hearings, Alberta's unions are holding governments to their word. Oil sands jobs belong to Albertans first."

AFL president Gil McGowan will be available for comment at 3:00 P.M. at the United Nurses of Alberta offices, 700-11150 Jasper Avenue, Edmonton.

AFL Backgrounder: AFL final arguments against the Northern Gateway Pipeline

-30-

MEDIA CONTACT:

Olav Rokne, Communications Director, Alberta Federation of Labour at 780-289-6528 (cell) or via email [email protected]

Decision reaffirms union’s stance against random drug and alcohol testing

EDMONTON – Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a major victory in the fight against random and arbitrary privacy violations through drug and alcohol testing.

The case, which stems from a grievance filed by Communications Energy and Paperworkers (CEP) Local 30 in New Brunswick, has implications to similar cases in Alberta’s oil sands. Labour leaders hailed the decision as a victory for human rights.

“This decision is in line with years of jurisprudence, makes sense, and is in the interest of Canadians. Employers can’t arbitrarily introduce a random drug or alcohol testing regime by declaring a workplace “dangerous” without proving that there’s a problem,” Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan said. “There’s a direct parallel between this case and what’s happening at Suncor: there’s no evidence that there’s a problem and the employer can’t simply impose their will on the worker and strip them of their privacy without proving there’s one.”

In 2006, CEP Local 30 challenged Irving Pulp and Paper Inc.’s decision to impose random workplace drug and alcohol testing without first proving that there was a problem. In a 6-3 decision released on Friday, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in favour of CEP’s position that the impact on employee privacy was too severe to justify random testing.

The Court ruled that the dangerousness of a workplace doesn’t give an employer free reign to run roughshod over employee’s rights.

“A unilaterally imposed policy of mandatory, random and unannounced testing for all employees in a dangerous workplace has been overwhelmingly rejected by arbitrators as an unjustified affront to the dignity and privacy of employees unless there is reasonable cause, such as a general problem of substance abuse in the workplace,” Justice Abella wrote. “This is not to say that an employer can never impose random testing in a dangerous workplace. If it represents a proportionate response in light of both legitimate safety concerns and privacy interests, it may well be justified.”

CEP local 30 from New Brunswick brought the case forward, we were interveners on the case, as was CEP 707 representing Suncor workers, because the Alberta Federation of Labour and affiliated unions believe in a worker’s right to privacy.

-30-

MEDIA CONTACTS:
Gil McGowan, President, Alberta Federation of Labour at 780-218-9888 (cell)
Olav Rokne, Communications Director, Alberta Federation of Labour at 780-289-6528 (cell) or via email [email protected].

AFL Lunch & Learn
Topic: Alberta’s Freedom of Information system to access information from public bodies

Friday, June 28, 2013
Lunch: 12:30 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Learn: 1:00 p.m. - 2:30 p.m.
The Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) - Meeting Hall
10654 – 101 Street, Edmonton, AB T5H 2S1

• Empower staff and activists from affiliated unions
• Engage staff and activists in order to strengthen inter-personal ties within the labour movement
• The workshop is free, including lunch

RSVP by Wednesday, June 19 to Karen Painchaud at [email protected]
Please indicate any dietary restrictions

Click here for complete details and to register

Supreme Court says Irving pulp mill's random testing policy has 'severe' impact on privacy

The Supreme Court of Canada has overturned a company's right to impose mandatory, random alcohol testing on its unionized workers in a dangerous workplace.

In a 6-3 decision released on Friday, the court ruled the policy unilaterally adopted by Irving Pulp and Paper Ltd. in Saint John in 2006 for employees in safety sensitive positions is unreasonable.

The Supreme Court of Canada says random alcohol testing by an employer is only justified in certain circumstances.

A dangerous workplace is not automatic justification for random testing, the court ruled in the case, which dealt narrowly with unionized workers and management's ability to balance privacy rights with the need for safety in dangerous workplaces.

The decision says dangerousness of a workplace only justifies testing particular employees in certain circumstances:

• Where there are reasonable grounds to believe an employee was impaired while on duty.
• Where an employee was directly involved in a workplace accident or significant incident.
• Where the employee returns to work after treatment for substance abuse.

"It has never, to my knowledge, been held to justify random testing, even in the case of 'highly safety sensitive' or 'inherently dangerous' workplaces like railways (Canadian National) and chemical plants (DuPont Canada Inc. and C.E.P., Loc. 28-0 (Re)(2002), 105 L.A.C. (4th) 399), or even in workplaces that pose a risk of explosion (ADM Agri-Industries), in the absence of a demonstrated problem with alcohol use in that workplace."

The case stems from a 2006 grievance filed by Local 30 of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada (CEP), at the Irving mill.

"We respect the decision," Irving spokeswoman Mary Keith said in a brief emailed statement.

"We will be reviewing the decision and have no further comment at this time," she said.

"Our focus has and continues to be the safety of our co-workers and communities where we have operations."

Could affect Alberta Suncor case

David Coles, the national president of CEP, said the ruling is "very clear" and believes it will help resolve a similar dispute in Alberta.

Suncor Energy is trying to bring in a random drug and alcohol testing program for employees and contractors at its oilsands operations in Fort McMurray.

"As clear as it is written... if someone was to have random drug testing, they would have a fairly high bar to cross before they would be able to, I believe, get it past the judiciary because there just isn't any evidence at all that it affects the outcome at work," said Coles.

"The fundamental issue here is there's absolutely no evidence presented here or anywhere else that random drug testing increases the safety in any operation," he said.

"So it turns out to be nothing more than an invasion of ones' privacy with no net gain for the consequence of safety."

Coles said the union is opposed to anyone using any kind of alcohol or drug at work, but contends substance abuse is a societal issue that must be dealt with, not a workplace issue to be legislated.

"Stop spending so much money trying to beat on blue collar workers and get to the problem," he said. "You don't see random drug testing in downtown Toronto in the big white towers... And please don't tell me that the incidence of drug and alcohol abuse is any different in Fort McMurray than it is on Bay Street."

The Alberta Federation of Labour, which was an intervener in the Irving case, also believes the decision could influence the Suncor arbitration, said president Gil McGowan.

"Employers simply have to demonstrate there's a problem with drug abuse or alcohol abuse in the workplace before they can move ahead with these kind of arbitrary random drug testing regimes, but it's clear the employer didn't prove that and we would argue that they haven't been able to prove that in Suncor either. So we're very pleased with the decision."

The court found the Irving policy had been properly rejected by a labour arbitration board.

"In this case, the expected safety gains to the employer were found by the board to range from uncertain to minimal, while the impact on employee privacy was severe," the decision states.

Irving "exceeded the scope of its management rights under a collective agreement by imposing random alcohol testing in the absence of evidence of a workplace problem with alcohol use."

The court awarded "costs throughout" to CEP.

Daniel Leger, a lawyer representing the union, declined to discuss the amount involved, citing attorney-client privilege.

But he said the judgment will allow the union to recoup some of its legal costs in the seven-year dispute.

Broad implications

The decision from the top court could have broad implications. It is considered a national test case for how far an employer can go when it comes to a worker's right to privacy.

It attracted numerous interveners, including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian National Railway Company, Via Rail Canada, the Canadian Mining Association, and the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters (CME), which describes itself as the largest industry and trade association.

Ian Howcroft, vice-president for the Ontario division of the CME, said it's "unfortunate" the Supreme Court did not uphold a company's right to do random testing.

But "it's encouraging the judgment did not close the door completely and companies may still be able to do some testing in certain circumstances," Howcroft said.

He maintains companies should have everything at their disposal to ensure the workplace is free of hazards.

Lawyer argues reasonable cause needed for testing

Irving Pulp and Paper Mill in Saint John had unilaterally adopted a policy of mandatory random alcohol testing for employees in safety-sensitive positions in 2006.

The Supreme Court heard arguments last December, but reserved its decision.

Fredericton-based lawyer David Mombourquette, who was representing the CEP, had argued a breathalyzer is an involuntary submission of bodily fluids and amounts to a high level of random personal intrusion.

Testing should only be permitted when there is reasonable cause, such as slurred speech or the smell of alcohol, he had said.

But the Irving company's lead counsel, Neil Finkelstein, had argued the policy is justified because the mill is full of hazardous chemicals, flammable substances, heavy rotating equipment, a 13,000-volt electrical system and a $350-million high-pressure boiler.

In addition, the mill had a history of drinking being a problem, he had said, citing eight documented incidents between 1991 and 2006, when the random testing policy was implemented.

In March of that year, millwright Perley Dey's name was randomly selected by a computer program to take a breathalyzer test.

Dey said he took the test because he was afraid of losing his job. The test showed a blood alcohol level of zero.

But Dey, who describes himself as a religious man who doesn't drink, said the test was humiliating and unfair.

An arbitration board allowed the grievance, ruling Irving had failed to establish a need for the policy. But a New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench judge reversed that decision, which the union appealed.

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal dismissed the grievance in 2011, ruling the mill qualifies as an inherently dangerous workplace. The union appealed that decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.

CBC News, Friday, June 14, 2013

 

Another week, another RCMP scandal.

On Tuesday, Staff Sgt. Caroline O'Farrell, one of the first women to join the force's storied equestrian show, the Musical Ride, launched an $8-million lawsuit claiming that the RCMP did not properly investigate her allegations of relentless, repeated abuse.

In what sounds like juvenile, cruel bullying and assault that is commonly committed by the dumb kids in junior high, O'Farrell was subjected to painful and humiliating hazing rituals.

Her statement of claim states that she was repeatedly soaked with cold water and then dragged by her arms and legs face down through the horse stall shavings, which included horse manure and urine.

Other than moving her out of the Musical Ride detail, nothing happened to those who assaulted her. O'Farrell has named the Attorney General of Canada and 13 RCMP officers, including senior officers whom she claims continue to work for the RCMP today in senior positions, in the lawsuit. They got promotions, she got shipped off.

It's important to note that most RCMP officers are honourable and dedicated, but there are simply too many dishonourable members.

These ostensibly endless scandals seem to fall into four main categories:

* botched, incompetent investigations that allow criminals to commit or continue their crimes for too long (such as serial killer Willie Pickton and the Air India bombers);

* incompetent investigations that wrongly accuse innocent people (such as the wild horse case near Sundre and the Canmore daycare case);

* the unwarranted brutality by RCMP members against unarmed civilians (such as Robert Dziekanski, who was Tasered to death in Vancouver, and Buddy Tavares, a compliant, helpless brain-injured Kelowna man who was kicked in the face by RCMP officer Geoff Mantler); and

* the sexual harassment of female RCMP members by their colleagues and supervisors.

Better training and better recruitment criteria could help fix the first two problems; harsher penalties, including criminal charges and real time behind bars, might help the third; but perhaps the easiest problem to fix is the fourth — the sexual harassment and bullying of female officers, and sometimes even male officers, by Neanderthal supervisors and bully colleagues. In short, the solution to the toxic harassment issue within the RCMP can be summed up in one word: union.

Not being a big fan of unions, this solution is not an easy one to advocate for. But a high-ranking Calgary Police Service officer mentioned the solution to me many months ago, and as each case of harassment was revealed and I applied the union solution to it, the more it seemed to make sense.

Currently, RCMP officers being harassed on the job have no one to turn to without risking their own career rise, since case after case shows that it was often the officer's direct supervisor or someone even higher up the ranks who was the problem.

Consider Cpl. Catherine Galliford, who was the official spokesperson for the RCMP in B.C. during the Pickton investigation. She alleges that her bosses and superiors exposed themselves to her and extorted sex from her.

After Galliford, who suffers from post-traumatic stress, launched a lawsuit against the RCMP, a veritable flood of complaints and lawsuits followed.

O'Farrell is just one. More than 300 other former women RCMP officers are also suing the force in a class-action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff in that suit is Janet Merlo, who worked as an RCMP constable in Nanaimo, B.C., from 1991 to 2010. In her statement of claim, Merlo alleges she "was subject to persistent and ongoing gender-based discrimination and harassment by individual male members during the time she served as a constable."

For instance, the supervising corporal on Merlo's night shift watch commented to Wayne Merlo (who was then her boyfriend, but became her husband) "words to the effect 'Janet is perfect ... Janet is the right height because you can lay a six-pack of beer on her head while she gives you a blow job.'"

She had dildos placed in her work files and was berated for getting pregnant. Reached recently in Newfoundland, where she recently moved, Merlo says she believes a union would have solved many of her problems.

Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan, not surprisingly, agrees that a union for the RCMP would solve many of the force's issues with regard to sexual assaults and harassment.

"A union would help civilize the workplace, and over time, would eliminate the problem," said McGowan.

"When people think of unions, they think first about the wages and benefits that we've been able to negotiate for our members, and certainly we're proud of those achievements, but one of the most important benefits that unions provide is access to a grievance procedure," said McGowan.

He points out that the union rep cannot be fired or reprimanded for taking on a complaint. As he notes, the most dysfunctional police service in the country is the RCMP, and it is the only one — as far as he knows — that does not have a union.

As the next RCMP harassment scandal is revealed, and the next, and the next, imagine what a codified grievance procedure would do. It would, over time, help rub off some of the layers of tarnish on the country's most iconic but discredited and scandalized police force.

Licia Corbella is a columnist and the editorial page editor. [email protected]

The Calgary Herald, Saturday, May 25, 2013
Editorial byline: Licia Corbella