Community Living Renfrew County South and OPSEU Local 472 have been locked in a labour stalemate for thirteen weeks, and honestly, at this rate, there’s no telling how many more weeks it might take to bring this thing to a close.
After accusations and counter-accusations around getting the other party to “come to the table,” we now seem to be entering a phase where the combatants are both making public statements — less so in the case of management — that indicate that they’re willing to talk with the other party.
Eureka! At last! Finally! A light at the end of the tunnel!
Well, friends, I’m going to have to caution you to hold your horses and maybe not be in such a big rush to buy the victory balloons and noise makers. Because now we’re being treated to a political game of peek-a-boo, where both sides express agreement to talk, but then disagree on things like the identity of the mediator. And then, when that finally gets settled, suddenly one side or the other is “unavailable” to attend on any given day.
This is the politics of a lengthy strike and both sides play the game. I remain, for the most part, sympathetic to the unions position, and am entirely sympathetic with the rank and file workers walking the line. But make no mistake, unions can play politics too.
This, of course, is entirely frustrating. It’s also entirely bullshit on the part of the opposing parties.
After clamouring for twelve weeks for the other side to come to the table, brandishing signs demanding as much, you’re now too busy to go and talk when the moment presents itself? Let me get this straight. You’re unavailable? You’re too busy?
Would it be impolite to ask too busy doing what, exactly?
Too busy posturing would be my bet, and the same goes for the management side, likely even more so. While the rest of us, the taxpayers and impacted families, even the workers, look on in abject frustration.
Unfortunately, this kind of nonsense is not unusual in long labour disputes. The statements issued by both sides I suppose are technically true in that both sides may genuinely be willing to meet with a mediator. In theory. But that’s not going to stop them from engaging in tactics that amount to strategic delay, where time is wasted arguing over which mediator, when the talks will take place, where they’ll take place, and under what conditions.
In short, both sides are buying time, which comes across as a tad ridiculous after twelve weeks of nothing. So the question has to be, time to do what?
In short, time to get ready for the talks. Time to arrive at a strategy for the talks. Time to coordinate information and arguments. Time to consult with political consultants and lawyers. Time to consult with upper management on one side, and time to consult with union leadership on the other. Which is kind of strange, given that one might have reason to logically assume that such things would have been hammered out well before today. But politics often excludes logical and rational thought. Nevertheless, the grown-ups in the room still continue to play the game, even though they’re often not very good at it.
Because after over twelve weeks of picketing, this strike is not solely about wages or seniority or working conditions anymore. It’s now more about the optics, as in who will be blamed for a strike that’s already lasted so long.
Both sides know the value of community support, and there are a lot of people watching now, and not just the families of clients. Various local politicians, maybe some donors, agency board members, and the Ontario taxpayer are all watching too. If Community Living can say, “We offered dates and the union wasn’t available,” it helps its public position. If OPSEU can say, “We accepted mediation and the employer delayed,” it helps theirs. And makes them appear to be the good guys.
Both sides are now playing to a public audience, attempting to position themselves favourably in the court of public opinion.
First, as to the mediator.
Mediators are people, too, which means they’re far from perfect. After doing this work for a period of time, a mediator will begin to develop a reputation. Is he or she an interventionist, a hard-ass, a hands-on type? Or more of a facilitator and peace maker? Do they have a record of favouring the employer or the employee? Do they understand everything that needs to be understood, especially with respect to the industry, bargaining history, and the laws and legislation that govern the industry.
Obviously, both sides will be angling for a mediator that they believe will not only give their side a fair shake, but that might also lean sympathetically towards their position.
We further have to remember that time is a weapon in this war.
By dragging out the timeline, a party can be hoping that some other big event will, happen during the delay. Maybe the cost of all those replacement workers, security guards, private investigators and attending expenses becomes simply too much as time drags on, thereby forcing management — and government — to capitulate. Maybe waiting will eat into the strike pay received by striking workers, reaching a critical point where that pay itself becomes unsustainable, thereby putting pressure on the union. Maybe the Board of Directors has a meeting and resigns en masse in protest over inadequate government funding. Don’t bet on it, but stranger things have happened. Maybe they won’t resign after all. Maybe they’ll fire the Executive-Director. Don’t bet on that either, but gosh, sometimes you just never know.
Maybe the government comes to their senses and starts to make noise that they’re tiring of the whole thing, and that further, they intend to fund developmental services adequately moving forward. I suppose, in a sense, that would be worth waiting for, as that’s the result I’m most hoping for.
And maybe there will be a noticeable shift in public opinion during the period of the delay. That can light fires under asses as well.
Maybe God will show up.
So delay is strategic in the sense that it allows both sides to identify and lean on points of leverage. And friends, that’s what this is all about.
Leverage.
Finding ways to lean into a perceived weakness of the other side.
Meanwhile, clients continue to languish with either no services, reduced services, and/or inadequate services.
While we wait for the self-styled master politicians and strategists to do their thing, whatever the hell that is.
Image by Amjad khan from Pixabay
NEWSMAGRENFREW 