“We don’t want your agreement. Go back to negotiate. » This is the message that more and more union members are sending to their management office at general meetings.
From the FIQ to Airbus via the Sûreté du Québec, many workers have in fact rejected agreements in principle negotiated between their union representatives and their employer recently (see capsule).
“This disconnect between union executives and members is observed here, but also in France, Germany, the United States,” says Jean-Claude Bernatchez, professor of labor relations at the University of Quebec at Trois-Rivières. (UQTR).
What is happening in the union world? After speaking to three labor relations specialists and three trade unionists, here are some possible explanations.
The “$8 pound of butter”
Caroline Senneville, president of the CSN, evokes the “context of the pound of butter at 8 piastres” to explain the rejected agreements in principle. “There is the housing crisis, inflation. If your salary increases by
“The rank and file employees want to seize the moment. In the public domain, they are perhaps not always aware of the fact that money does not grow on trees,” comments Diane Gagné, professor of industrial relations at UQTR. According to her, the union management offices, through their discussions with the management side, are more aware of the employers’ limits. Hence these negotiating committees who say they have gone to the limit of their capabilities… without this satisfying the members.
Mélanie Dufour-Poirier, professor at the School of Industrial Relations at the University of Montreal, speaks of a “domino effect”: when workers obtain generous conditions, this encourages others to want the same thing. Another point: workers who went on strike do not want to have done it for nothing and expect results.
We can also think that in the public sector, where many employees are jumping ship, some had nothing to lose by rejecting an agreement to try to improve their conditions, often non-monetary.
Social networks
Gone are the days when union executive offices were members’ only source of information. Today, media, both traditional and social, play a big role. “Members receive information outside the union structure,” summarizes Professor Jean-Claude Bernatchez. “The damn member Facebook groups!” “, exclaims an experienced trade unionist, who did not want to be named because he did not have permission to speak on behalf of his organization. “Social networks can bring extraordinary cohesion and mobilization, but they also serve as a ventilation valve for many people with red wine on Saturday evening. »
In short, these tools give voices to the most dissenting, who can convince others.
A lack of communication
Mélanie Dufour-Poirier, from the University of Montreal, would like to point out that this is not the case everywhere. But she sometimes observes a lack of “proximity” between the management office and its members.
When a vote on an agreement in principle that we wanted to see ratified does not pass, there is the possibility that the members did not feel heard and fully represented.
Mélanie Dufour-Poirier, professor at the School of Industrial Relations at the University of Montreal
“The big problem with the big union centers is that the people who negotiate at the table are far from the base,” adds Diane Gagné, of the UQTR. She underlines the importance, throughout a negotiation, of keeping members informed of the concessions that are being made. Otherwise, the clash between initial expectations and the negotiated agreement can be brutal.
Lack of commitment
The thesis is not glorious for those who (like me!) are involved in their union. But Jean-Claude Bernatchez notes that positions within a union leadership office are more difficult to fill than before, with workers prioritizing their family and their regular work. “As these positions are not perceived as very interesting, the people who go there, without taking anything away from their personality, do not necessarily have the leadership it takes to mobilize people,” he says.
A bad for a good ?
A problem, the agreements in principle rejected by the members? Not in the eyes of Magali Picard, president of the FTQ.
I may surprise you, but what this tells us is that our democratic organizations are healthy.
Magali Picard, president of the FTQ
“For decades, we were told that unions were big guys. That if you didn’t agree, you were muzzled. That if we vote like that, you vote like that. I’m not saying it was true, but it was a perception,” she says.
According to her, seeing members reject the recommendations of their board of directors en masse breaks down this myth of intimidation and single-mindedness – even if Mme Picard agrees that close votes make it difficult to move forward and should spark discussion.
“We can say that it is dysfunctional and that it makes agreements fail. But it can also be seen as a sign of vitality, confirms Mélanie Dufour-Poirier, professor at the University of Montreal. It shows that people are making their voices heard. »
Disconnected, union leaders?
“Today, major union leaders have practically the same life as business leaders. They have meetings, they travel,” says Jean-Claude Bernatchez, recalling the case of the president of the FTQ, Magali Picard, who went to Dubai for COP28 in the middle of Common Front negotiations.
According to him, this “disconnect” distances leaders from the base, which can lead to agreements that do not satisfy members.
“We are not disconnected,” defends M vigorouslyme Picard, who I caught… when she was going to visit union members.
Mme Picard agrees that she sits on all kinds of bodies and that there is no shortage of meetings on her calendar. But she swears she meets union members at least once a week.
“Yesterday, I was with people from CUPE (Canadian Union of Public Employees). This morning at 7 a.m., I was with people from Hydro-Québec. We have this privilege of being close to the people on the ground. This means that when we do our political lobbying, when we do our campaigns, we have a speech that resonates with our world,” she maintains.
These big unions who said no
- This month, nurses and other employees of the Interprofessional Health Federation (FIQ) rejected by 61% the agreement in principle negotiated between their union leadership office and the government.
- Last weekend, the 1,300 Airbus workers in Mirabel voted against an agreement which granted them salary increases of 22% in five years.
- Last year, Sûreté du Québec police officers said no to negotiated increases of 21%.
- Air Transat’s 2,100 flight attendants overwhelmingly rejected two proposals (98% and 82%) before accepting a third last February.
- The teachers of the Autonomous Education Federation who went on strike last fall, for their part, accepted their agreement in principle in a landslide (barely 50.58% of them voted in favor).
What do you think ? Participate in the dialogue
reference: www.lapresse.ca