Quebec Wal-Mart

[LOLseph Stalin]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned on here at all, but a few days ago I read in a newspaper about a Canadian Wal-Mart closing down because the employees wanted to unionize.

I think this is completely unfair and just more evidence of Bourgeois oppression being imposed onto us.

thoughts?

[lvatt]

When compared with other jurisdictions, Quebec provincial law is comparatively favorable to trade unions. For example, during a strike, the employer is not allowed to hire scabs (this is different from Canadian federal law). Also, the law states that a CBA stays in effect even if a business changes form, for example go from being a company to a joint venture or if it is sold to new owners. The unionization procedure is also more simple than in many places and the law provides for things such as forcing the employer to pay union dues on the salary of the workers (instead of having the union go through the trouble of asking its members to pay, which would weaken it) and force workers who are not union members but covered by the CBA to pay dues like the others to prevent free riders who eventually destroy the union.

Anyway the Wal-Mart in Jonquiere was at an early stage of union accreditation when the company decided to just pull the plug since they felt the hassle of dealing with unions wasn't worth it commercially. Once they realized the unionizaion process couldn't be stopped, it was their only solution since they simply refuse to have anything to do with unions.

Sadly, the law was of no help for all the workers involved since it's never illegal for a business to close its doors. For some of those companies, defeating unions is probably a priority above all others. Laying off workers because they belong to an union or because they support a strike is illegal in Quebec... but shutting down the business completely is not.

And this problem will continue as long as the private sector will be allowed to continue to flourish...

[Invincible Summer]

I remember watching a documentary about Wal-Mart, and the owner (Sam Walton or something) saying basically that worker's shouldn't need to unionize b/c Wal-Mart treats them fairly, and it's insulting to the employer to unionize or something to that effect.

[progressive_lefty]

When compared with other jurisdictions, Quebec provincial law is comparatively favorable to trade unions. For example, during a strike, the employer is not allowed to hire scabs (this is different from Canadian federal law). Also, the law states that a CBA stays in effect even if a business changes form, for example go from being a company to a joint venture or if it is sold to new owners. The unionization procedure is also more simple than in many places and the law provides for things such as forcing the employer to pay union dues on the salary of the workers (instead of having the union go through the trouble of asking its members to pay, which would weaken it) and force workers who are not union members but covered by the CBA to pay dues like the others to prevent free riders who eventually destroy the union.

Anyway the Wal-Mart in Jonquiere was at an early stage of union accreditation when the company decided to just pull the plug since they felt the hassle of dealing with unions wasn't worth it commercially. Once they realized the unionizaion process couldn't be stopped, it was their only solution since they simply refuse to have anything to do with unions.

Sadly, the law was of no help for all the workers involved since it's never illegal for a business to close its doors. For some of those companies, defeating unions is probably a priority above all others. Laying off workers because they belong to an union or because they support a strike is illegal in Quebec... but shutting down the business completely is not.

And this problem will continue as long as the private sector will be allowed to continue to flourish...

It seems to provide unions with a new challenge of how to deal with a company like Wal-Mart that is known for treating workers badly, and which obviously is prepared to blackmail in order to protect itself from having to give workers rights..
I'm from Australia so I'm not entirely familiar with Wal-Mart, but from what I've read and heard, this is the kind of workplace where a union is needed and must be strong. Australia has had a long and positive history of unions working to provide further rights for workers whilst not destroying the economy, well from a left-orientated view anyway.

[redguard2009]

Over the past several years there have been a large number of businesses in Quebec shutting down entirely because workers have attempted to unionize. Gildan is the only one I can think of off the top of my head -- they had, iirc, one or two factories in Montreal that they shut down to move to Guatemala I believe because the workers attempted to unionize. Other companies have laid off thousands of workers with no provocation whatsoever simply to move to cheaper foreign labour markets. The RCP has been involved with several of these worker groups, we organized a protest at a closing Goodyear plant outside of Montreal with some of the recently and soon-to-be laid off workers there.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I remember watching a documentary about Wal-Mart, and the owner (Sam Walton or something) saying basically that worker's shouldn't need to unionize b/c Wal-Mart treats them fairly, and it's insulting to the employer to unionize or something to that effect.

What? Wow! That's violation! :cursing:

[Invincible Summer]

What? Wow! That's violation! :cursing:

Perhaps I worded it more harshly than what Wal-Mart intended, but of course they're gonna use candy-coated language:

Straight off their site, here is their position on unions:
http://walmartstores.com/FactsNews/NewsRoom/4698.aspx


It’s all about taking care of our people. If we do that and do what is right for our communities, we will be fine. We will continue to foster an environment of open communications and encourage our associates to express their ideas, comments and concerns. We are not against unions.They may be right for some companiesbut there is simply no need for a third party to come between our associates and their managers.

The title says "For US operations only," but with this case in Quebec, it's clear that their policies are pretty much chain-wide.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Wal-Mart is awful. Even some of my Conservative friends hate it. That's saying something...