ALF V1

When we talk about the history of Alberta we usually think of wide-open prairies, cattle ranching and oil -- seldom do historians talk about the men and women of the labour movement who helped Alberta grow and become prosperous. As part of this year's birthday celebrations, the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) is helping Albertans learn about the province's rich labour history. The Alberta Federation of Labour was born on June 14, 1912.

Preparations for the centennial began five years ago when the AFL joined forces with the Alberta Labour History Institute (ALHI) to plan the celebration. They named their venture Project 2012.

As a retiree, I had time to help out. Workers were the focus in the history we did. We interviewed hundreds of workers all over the province and recorded amazing stories of struggles, victories and losses. I had fun setting up the cameras and lights, filming and even conducting the actual interviews, and I learned a lot.

I learned that in the early 1900s, very active, progressive and sometimes radical groups of workers stood their ground against vicious attacks by employers supported by governments and police. They fought for the eight-hour workday, union recognition, health and safety concerns and more, and they won many of those battles for us.

Coal miners, laundry workers, garment factory workers, public- and private-sector workers, meat packers and many more painted a much different picture than how the history of our province is usually portrayed.

An ambulance driver in Calgary talked about how cutthroat the business was in the old days when private operators ruled. He told stories about the race to get to the "victims" and how fisticuffs were often used to decide which ambulance would take the patient to the hospital. Getting that pickup was the only way they would get paid. As I listened I couldn't help but think how lucky we are that he and others fought to change things.

We also recorded the memories of workers who were involved in more recent events in Alberta's labour history, like the Nurses and Postal workers strikes in the '80s, the Gainers and Fletchers' strikes of 1986 and the Calgary laundry workers strike of 1995.

The stories were transcribed and used in pamphlets, DVDs, posters, a website and included in a book on Alberta's labour history entitled Working People in Alberta: A History. It is published by Athabasca University and is a compilation of both academic and trade union authors. The book starts with stories of Native work and moves through the century.

The celebrations started in Medicine Hat on May 3 and continued up to the main event of June 16 with the "Celebration in the Park" at Fort Edmonton.

Some of the events were held at the Calgary Labour Temple on 11 Avenue SE, the site of many of Alberta's prominent labour moments. The temple was the birthplace of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) -- predecessor to the New Democratic Party (NDP) -- in 1932. Inside its walls representatives of many groups, including unions, decided to hold the CCF founding convention in Regina, Saskatchewan -- commonly known as the Regina Manifesto.

In Lethbridge, where the founding convention of the AFL was held in June 1912, the Labour Council joined with the Galt Museum to sponsor a concert by Canadian singer-songwriter Maria Dunn and a picnic in the park, which had a great turnout in a snowstorm.

The Edmonton Labour Council dedicated a monument as a tribute to families of workers injured or killed on the job.

Twenty-five museums and libraries across the province mounted labour history displays in honour of the AFL centennial. Many of the displays are still up. Red Deer is mounting a large stainless steel disc engraved with images of labour on a downtown building.

One of the highlights of the celebration was a labour history conference sponsored by the Alberta Labour History Institute June 13-15 in Edmonton, which was followed by a well-attended mini-non-delegated AFL convention in the Park at Fort Edmonton on June 16. Over 900 attended the celebration dinner.

These and the many other AFL centennial events held in communities around the province helped Albertans remember and learn about our rich and successful labour history. It also reminded me, as a union retiree, that I still have a lot to offer, and my efforts can still help make a difference for others.

Retiree Matters is a monthly column written by members of the Congress of Union Retirees of Canada (CURC) that explores issues relevant to retirees, senior citizens, their families and their communities. CURC acts as an advocacy organization to ensure that the concerns of union retirees and senior citizens are heard throughout Canada.

Rabble.ca, Mon Aug 13 2012
Byline: Susan Keeley for Retiree Matters

A joint study from the Alberta Federation of Labour and the Parkland Institute of Alberta have released a study arguing the province could lose billions in royalty revenue if the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline is built.

The report's authors defend their claim by examining projected royalty payments between 2011 and 2045, using data collected from the Canadian Energy Research Institute. The report's authors compared those numbers to the royalty system that existed under former premier Peter Lougheed, who held office between 1971 and 1985.

Under Lougheed, 35% of Alberta's oil revenue was captured by royalties during the 1980s. The study argues if that system was still in place, the Alberta Heritage Fund could be as large as $1 trillion by 2045, not including any income earned through investments.

Under the current royalty model, secretary-treasurer of the Alberta Federation of Labour Nancy Furlong says Alberta will collect an average of 18% from oilsands revenue between 2012 and 2045.

"That's an extra billion missing," she said. "Under the old system, that means total royalty would be worth $2.2 trillion during that period, based on CERI's numbers."

Furlong acknowledges that lower royalty payouts mean the province would still be missing out on royalties that existed in the 1980s, even if Gateway is not approved. However, she argues the province's economy will still suffer if Enbridge's proposed pipeline is built.

"Gateway will ship thousands of upgrading and refining jobs to the Chinese, taking jobs away from Canadians. It will only leave 104 permanent jobs for Canadians, most of them in B.C. Other jobs surrounding construction of the pipeline will be mostly part-time or temporary labour," she said. "We're not opposed to a pipeline, but any discussion surrounding one has to include getting our fair share."

SunMedia.ca, Thurs Aug 9 2012
Byline: Vincent McDermott

Industry data shows Alberta should have $1 trillion in Heritage Fund by 2045

Edmonton – The Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) and Parkland Institute released a joint study today, showing Albertans will let billions slip through their fingers if the Northern Gateway Pipeline is approved and constructed.

The study showed that if Alberta met the royalty targets in place when Peter Lougheed was Premier, the province would have $1 trillion in the Heritage Fund by 2039.

According to oil industry data generated by the Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI), Alberta will collect an average of only 18 per cent of the revenue generated in the oil sands as royalties.

The data covers the 2012-2045 forecast period and assumes the Northern Gateway pipeline will be constructed and operational.

In the 1980s, Alberta collected 35 per cent of oil industry revenue as royalties. The target was lowered to about 25 per cent during the Klein era.

AFL Secretary-Treasurer Nancy Furlong says any discussion of the Northern Gateway pipeline should involve Albertans getting their fair share first.  

“Albertans only get value out of the oil sands in two basic ways – royalties and jobs.”  “This study shows Albertans are being fleeced on our fair share of royalties.”

“The Northern Gateway pipeline will also ship thousands of upgrading and refining jobs down the pipeline to Asia, leaving Canadians with only 104 permanent jobs, most of them in B.C.  Albertans are not getting their fair share from this pipeline,” adds Furlong. The Alberta Federation of Labour represents 150,000 Albertans, including 25,000 working in the oil sands and energy-related construction.

Furlong adds that Alberta’s oil sands wealth could – and should – be used to build the economy in the rest of the country.

“In the Lougheed era, when the Heritage Fund was growing, it was used for loans to other provinces and for infrastructure projects. There is no reason why – if we collected anything approaching appropriate royalty rates – Alberta could not lead the country toward a greener economy.

“There are certainly ways Alberta could lead a real conversation about a national energy strategy, which would insulate us from demands from other provinces. But instead we’re following oil industry orders for more pipelines, fewer royalties and taxes, and zero plan for how we might transition our economy and protect jobs while we address climate change.”

“What we have now is not an energy strategy.  It’s surrender,” concludes Furlong.

-30-

MEDIA CONTACT: Nancy Furlong, AFL Secretary-Treasurer, 780-720-8945

Study Says Albertans won't get their fair share of Royalties

The Alberta Federation of Labour and the Parkland Institute have released a study that says Albertans could lose billions of dollars in royalties if the Northern Gateway pipeline goes ahead.

The study bases that claim by adding up what the province would collect under the current royalty regime by 2045 as compared to the royalty regime under former premier Peter Lougheed.

Alberta collected 35 per cent of oil revenue as royalties during the 1980s.

According to the study, if that percentage was still in place, the Alberta Heritage Fund would be worth $1 trillion dollars by 2045.

The study quotes figures from the Canadian Energy Research Institute which show Alberta will collect an average of 18 per cent of oilsands revenue under the current royalty regime.

The Parkland Institute is a left-leaning think-tank based in Edmonton.

'Fair share' for Albertans

Nancy Furlong is the Secretary-Treasurer of the Alberta Federation of Labour.

"This study shows Albertans are being fleeced on our fair share of royalties," said Furlong on Thursday.

She says in the Lougheed era, the Heritage Fund was used for loans to other provinces.

"There is no reason why, if we collected anything approaching appropriate royalty rates, Alberta could not lead the country toward a greener economy."

Stelmach royalty review

The province last reviewed the royalty regime in 2007 when it released the report titled Our Fair Share.

Ed Stelmach, who was premier at the time, then announced the government would increase royalties to collect an extra $1.4 billion a year.

The announcement created a backlash in the energy industry and was blamed for a downturn in natural gas production in Alberta.

The province eventually backed away from any major royalty changes.

CBC News, August 9, 2012

Labour shortage backgrounder

Government documents show claims of an acute “labour shortage” based on mathematical fiction

The claim that Alberta will be short “114,000” workers has appeared so many times in industry and media as to

appear an unassailable truth.

Nexen could be just the beginning...

In June, the Alberta government launched a website publicly outing employers who haven't paid their workers—an online hall of shame. Among these "deadbeat bosses," as the media quickly dubbed them, the worst offender was a subsidiary of China Petrochemical Corp. (Sinopec), a Chinese state-owned oil giant. That same subsidiary, along with others, is facing charges after the deaths of two Chinese workers flown in to work on a site near Fort McMurray, Alta., in 2007. After much delay, the trial begins this fall.

It's the kind of bad press Chinese firms can't afford as they seek to buy up swaths of Alberta's oil patch and attempt to win over Canadian regulators and a wary populace. Last week, Chinese state interests went after two Calgary-based companies. China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) Ltd.'s $15.1-billion bid for Nexen Inc. got the most attention by far: it's the biggest-ever takeover of a Canadian company by a state-owned entity. On the same day, Talisman Energy Inc. said it would sell a 49 per cent stake in its U.K. North Sea outfit to Sinopec for $1.5 billion. "Virtually overnight, Chinese investment in the energy sector has doubled to over $30 billion," says Wenran Jiang, director of the Canada-China Energy & Environment Forum. Although the deals have yet to be approved, it's a sign of things to come.

The proposed Nexen deal would be the latest—and by far the largest—in a string of acquisitions. Last fall, Sinopec bought Calgary-based Daylight Energy Ltd. for $2.1 billion, the first time a Chinese state-run company made a successful bid for a North American energy firm. Earlier this year, PetroChina bought Athabasca Oil Sands Corp., giving China its first full ownership of an oil sands project. The Nexen deal takes things to another level. It's worth more than all of China's direct investment in Africa in 2011 ($14.7 billion), according to Gordon Houlden, director of the University of Alberta's China Institute. Jiang says China's interest in Canada is ramping up partly because we've become more welcoming. Prime Minister Stephen Harper once vowed not to sell Canadian values to the highest bidder and bestowed honorary Canadian citizenship on the Dalai Lama, to China's chagrin; lately he's softened his stance. In January, after the U.S. rejected the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline from the oil sands to the U.S. Gulf, Harper courted the Chinese more aggressively, visiting Beijing to discuss oil sales as part of a trade mission. (With the vast majority of Canada's crude oil going to the U.S., he's said he's keen to diversify.) The controversial Northern Gateway pipeline, if approved, will tap into the surging demand in Asia.

If last week is any indication, China could quickly become a dominant—if not the dominant—player in Canada's oil sands. Many critics question the motives of state-run firms, which operate like other Western companies but ultimately answer to the Chinese government. Beyond that, China's markets remain largely closed to foreigners. On July 27, U.S. Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer wrote a letter asking Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to block the deal until China opens its markets. (Nexen has offshore holdings in the Gulf of Mexico, so the deal also requires U.S. approval.) "I urge you not to miss this opportunity—the largest foreign acquisition ever by a Chinese company—to hold China to the commitments it has made to provide a level playing field for U.S. companies seeking to access Chinese markets," Schumer wrote, calling the current investment relationship between the U.S. and China a "one-way street."

Other critics worry about whether Chinese companies will respect Canadian regulations on the environment and labour standards, where Beijing's track record remains notoriously poor. "Does it matter who owns the oil sands? You bet it does!" said Gil McGowan, president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, in a statement about Nexen. He argues that foreign governments would "develop the oil sands in their own best interests," keeping the best jobs for themselves, and ignoring Canada's energy needs and environmental priorities. McGowan has previously expressed concern about overreliance on temporary foreign workers in the oil sands, driving down wages for Albertans. The NDP, too, criticized the Nexen deal for lacking "hard commitments on the environment."

So far, at least, it seems that China's interest in our energy sector has been of benefit to both sides. Here, China has found a stable place to invest. Resource-rich and democratic, this country is undeniably attractive, and China has been burned in the past; in Libya, it had to evacuate more than 35,000 workers after civil war broke out, Jiang notes, losing $18 billion in the process. Nexen made an ideal target. It has considerable assets abroad, where the Chinese are also interested in expanding (just 28 per cent of Nexen production is in Canada). Nexen's stellar corporate image and brand reputation also make it appealing—Nexen was featured in Maclean's in May as one of Canada's top 30 green employers, its third year on the list.

Still, it's not hard to see why Nexen felt pressure to sell. The firm has been plagued by operational difficulties at its Long Lake oil sands project. "It wasn't creating value for shareholders, and its stock price wasn't performing well [relative to its peers]," says Lysle R. Brinker, director of equity research on integrated oils and national oil companies at I.H.S. Herold in Colorado. In January, Nexen removed CEO Marvin Romanow, and CNOOC swooped in. It offered an all-cash price of $27.50 per common share in its bid, a 61 per cent premium to Nexen's closing price on July 20.

This takeover is undoubtedly the best possible outcome for Nexen shareholders, but whether it's best for Canada is still up to regulators to decide. The deal now faces review by Industry Canada and the federal Competition Bureau. Even though Harper has insisted that "nothing should be assumed," experts agree this takeover will almost certainly go ahead.

First, though, it must be shown to have a "net benefit" to Canada, a condition that CNOOC has clearly considered. The company said it will put its North and Central American headquarters in Calgary, list its shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange, and hold onto Nexen's management and employees. "CNOOC looked at why Potash didn't go through, and made some adjustments," says Robert Schulz, professor in the University of Calgary's Haskayne School of Business, referring to BHP Billiton Ltd.'s $40-billion hostile bid for the Saskatchewan fertilizer company, which was withdrawn after regulators indicated there was no net benefit.

Foreign investment has long been a reality in the oil sands, but if the U.S. is the "devil that we know," China is the devil we don't, Jiang says. State-run companies still have to obey Canadian laws, pay royalties and taxes, just like any other company here. Jiang points to a poll from the Asia Pacific Foundation noting that a majority of Canadians feel uncomfortable with Chinese foreign direct investment. This anxiety stems "from concerns about human rights and democratic development, to product safety and Chinese defence buildup," notes Paul Evans, director of the Institute of Asian Research at the University of British Columbia. "There's not a deep knowledge about these Chinese state-owned enterprises and how they're conducting themselves."

China is the largest energy consumer in the world, and will use as much as 70 per cent more energy than the U.S. by 2030, says Jiang. What if Canada, in the face of deep economic troubles, decided that oil resources would be better used to benefit Canadian interests? It's not inconceivable. The country flirted with nationalization under Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau when he introduced the National Energy Program in 1980 to boost Canadian ownership and government revenues. Canadians rejected it in favour of a market-based system. "We need to make a choice: will Canada maintain its market-economy status, or convert our natural resources into a state-owned enterprise?" Jiang says. If we really are "open for business," China will continue buying from us.

The Nexen deal is "a tough first test," Evans says. If it gets the go-ahead, we'll see other state-owned companies—from China and elsewhere—wading in. How this will reshape Canada's energy sector is an open question. Among the opposing camps who either welcome the Nexen sale or view it with trepidation, one point is agreed upon: this is only the beginning. "If China now has the second-largest economy on earth, and is en route to number one, there may not be much choice but to deal, trade with and work with China," Houlden says.

Macleans Magazine, Wedn Aug 8 2012
Byline: Kate Lunau

Re: "Premiers must stand up to Ottawa's cheap-labour strategy; Harper Tories have launched stealth attack on middle class," by Gil McGowan and Lana Payne, Opinion, Aug. 3.

This opinion piece criticizing federal reforms misses the mark on several issues.

Pension reform is about fairness and sustaining future pensions for all Canadians. Decisions taken this year will ensure we have a viable Canada Pension Plan into the future. Consider what's happening in Europe.

Employment insurance should be run as an insurance program, not a social welfare program. Its aim is to provide a financial bridge to help able-bodied unemployed Canadians find jobs where their skills are needed.

If the Temporary Foreign Worker Program is all about exploitation, how can you say construction workers making $30 to $40 an hour are being exploited? The assertion that employers will automatically pay temporary foreign workers 15 per cent less than their Canadian workers is also wrong. While federal guidelines permit flexible wage scales, they stipulate that all rates must be comparable to what workers in the company are paid.

It is also wrong to say Bill C-377 will restrict unions from spending. Rather, the proposed legislation calls for unions to account for and disclose how mandatory union dues are spent, in the same way charities and native bands do. Recent surveys suggest unionized workers in Canada support this type of legislation.

While union leaders across Canada are banding together to oppose reforms that are relevant in the 21st century, there are others who believe the Harper government should be applauded.

Edmonton Journal, Tues Aug 7 2012
Letter by: Stephen Kushner, president, Merit Contractors Association, Edmonton

A labour shortage occurs when the demand for labour exceeds the supply of labour, right? Well, apparently not in Alberta.

The Alberta Federation of Labour took a long, hard look at the Government of Alberta's projections showing an astronomical labour shortage of 114,000 workers by 2021 and found them to be based on misleading methods.

Instead of a straightforward calculation of demand for labour minus supply of labour, with a shortage occurring when total demand exceeds total supply, Alberta used a strange formula that subtracts the annual change in demand from the annual change in supply.

The result: even though the Alberta government's projections show the supply of labour exceeding demand (a labour surplus, one would think) for every year through 2021, their strange method shows a labour shortage.

What's more, the government accumulated these phoney yearly labour shortages up to 2021 to show a "cumulative shortage" of 114,000 workers even though this supposed shortfall would be captured in the following year's demand. Put another way: one vacant job over 10 years is still one vacant job, not 10 as the Alberta government would have us believe.

The same day the AFL released its report, the Certified General Accountants Association of Canada released its own report with similar findings. Their findings include "Labour shortages are difficult to observe and measure directly" and "Where sufficient data exists, an assessment shows that labour shortages occurred rather sporadically and did not persist for more than one year at a time over the past ten years."

These bad numbers lead to bad public-policy decisions.

On July 16, Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney used Alberta's "acute labour shortages" to justify an expansion of a Temporary Foreign Worker pilot program whereby employers won't have to consider hiring Canadians in certain occupations first before turning to offshore labour.

Originally, the pilot program allowed some Alberta employers to bring in Temporary Foreign Workers for steamfitter/pipefitter jobs without going through the Labour Market Opinion (LMO) process. The LMO process forces employers to show efforts to "recruit and/or train willing and available Canadian citizens/permanent residents." The expanded pilot process to include six more occupations, including welders, heavy duty equipment mechanics, ironworkers, millwrights and industrial mechanics, carpenters, and estimators.

Of course, the AFL acknowledges that there is a "tight labour market situations in select trades and skills" in the province, but those specific shortages in certain occupations are related to the provincial government's ineptitude for planning and pacing development in the oil sands.

Nevertheless, that fact hasn't stopped anti-union interests in the province from using the government's faulty labour shortage figures to call for radical changes to labour markets with the end goal of depressing wages in the oil sands.

This article was a guest post by the Alberta Federation of Labour's Tony Clark. It was first posted on the Progressive Economics Forum.

Rabble.ca, Tues Aug 7 2012
Byline: Tony Clark

One of the downsides with having one of the hottest -- if not the hottest -- economies in the world is that there comes a time when you might not have enough labour to meet the demand.

Alberta experienced that just a few short years ago. And if you accept the Alberta government's most recent projections, Alberta may be in for the most pronounced labour shortage of its history -- a shortage of as many as 114,000 workers by 2021.

Unless, of course, you ask the Alberta Federation of Labour. They, apparently, have a very short memory, and insist that everything is going to be a-OK.

Apparently, their complaint is that the Alberta government used a formula to compute these numbers that they don't like.

At the core of their complaint is that the government used a formula that subtracted annual change in labour demand from the annual change in labour supply. Apparently, the AFL prefers a method that simply subtracts labour demand from labour supply.

"These projections are built on a lie, they're designed to manufacture a crisis where there is none. So, what do we do about it?" demanded AFL President Gil McGowan. ""I've written a letter to (Employment and Immigration Minister Dave Hancock), asking him to justify his decision, and the government's decision, to use such a discredited approach (to formulating labour projections)."

But whose approach to projecting labour availability is actually discredited? It turns out it's the AFL's.

The weakness in the AFL's favoured approach is obvious: it treats both labour demand and labour supply as static. It fails to take into account growth of labour demand on a year-by-year basis, and overlooks the number of workers that can be brought in on the same basis.

The AFL describes the government's method of calculating labour supply as "discredited," but the truth is that based on the labour shortages Alberta experienced very recently -- labour shortages the province turned out to be largely unprepared for -- and by the looming labour shortage the province is already on the very verge of. Placement agencies have already turned to recruiting US Army veterans to fill jobs in Alberta.

This is something that many left-wing Canadians took to their Twitter accounts to protest, but the AFL has a very unique interest in this matter. After all, should a minimum of 114,000 new workers stream into Alberta over the next nine years, there's no guarantee that they'll agree to join union shops. In a seller's labour market, absolutely no one will be able to coerce them to. They could just as easily decide to ply their trades with a MERIT contractor, and would probably be much better off for it That might result in an awful lot of new competition that the flagging AFL just might not be able to stand up to.

That the only "academic forum" the AFL can find willing to air their grievances is the Progressive Economics Forum is also very telling.

It seems worth noting that the Progressive Economics Forum has also given Robyn Allen an outlet for her own junk economics. As reluctant as I am to simply attack the source, it seems that anything originating from the PEF needs to be taken with multiple grains of salt. Judging from history alone, their projections that Alberta's labour market will remain hunky dory is definitely one of those things.

Examiner.com, Sat Aug 4 2012
Dave Hancock, Patrick Ross

Call it a digital warning shot.

Two Alberta unions have quietly launched a website, EthicalSpoon.com, which targets one of Canada's largest restaurant franchisers, Cara, over alleged "ethical concerns".

The barebones site, created by the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Union Local 401 and the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) only states, "There are serious ethical concerns relating to Swiss Chalet, Milestones, Harvey's and Kelsey's" and to "Stand by for more information".

"Your definition of ethics and my definition of ethics may vary," says Tom Hesse, UFCW 401 union negotiator. "But most people would agree that they'd like a restaurant in their community that treats their people fairly, or at least reasonably."

"People will obviously think, 'What is going on? What are the ethical concerns?' when they go by these places. It's a very good strategy on their part." — Marjorie Griffin, Simon Fraser UniversityHesse says the ethical concerns with Cara, hinted at on the new website, were uncovered during the union's interviews with Cara's employees. The UFCW currently represents the workers of two Swiss Chalet restaurants in Edmonton.

The two parties are scheduled to meet next week, to begin collective bargaining for the Swiss Chalets UFCW 401 represents.

Hesse says the restaurants exploit immigrant workers, pays its employees poorly, ignores health and safety concerns, and is using Alberta's two-tiered minimum wage system to its advantage.

Alberta's minimum wage is set to increase from $9.40 to $9.75 per hour this September. However, the minimum wage for liquor servers, $9.05 per hour, will remain unchanged.

And because the restaurants serve alcohol, Hesse says Swiss Chalets typically pay their workers the lower rate. "They don't serve alcohol there in any meaningful way," he says. "One of the owners told me it's less than five percent of their overall sales."

Cara is a privately held restaurant conglomerate that's been operating in Canada since 1883. Its 673 restaurants in Canada reported $1.3 billion in sales in 2011.

The company declined interview requests to respond to the website or to Hesse's accusations, issuing a prepared statement:

"As discussions are still ongoing between our Edmonton franchisee and the UFCW union local representatives, it would be inappropriate for Cara to provide comment at this time."

EthicalSpoon.com will function much like EthicalShoppingAlberta.com, another website launched by the UFCW 401 and the AFL. That site, says Hesse, aims to inform diners and shoppers of the most ethically sound places to spend their money.

"You can go look at UrbanSpoon (.com) for a rating of where to eat... based on whether or not people like it," says Hesse. "But our constituency of people are saying they want to eat somewhere that treats their people fairly, that has good food safety practices, that isn't overpriced, and that buys locally."

Cara's franchises will likely be the first restaurants to be on the receiving end of an EthicalSpoon information campaign, if working conditions are not addressed soon, Hesse says.

It may turn out to be an effective strategy, but is it fair to sling mud anonymously?

"I think it's a good tactic, they've got nothing to lose by this," says Marjorie Griffin Cohen, professor of political economy at Simon Fraser University's Morgan Centre for Labour Studies.

Griffin Cohen says unions in Canada are increasingly taking to Twitter and Facebook to promote their agendas, and keeping the site's creators off EthicalSpoon makes it all the more interesting to whoever comes across it.

"People will obviously think, 'What is going on? What are the ethical concerns?' when they go by these places." she says. "It's a very good strategy on their part."

OpenFile, Mon July 30 2012
Byline: Sean Young