The Law of Work
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
The Law of Work
Law of Work Archive

Walmart Workers Legally Strike in U.S., But Strike Would Be Illegal in Canada

by David Doorey October 10, 2012
written by David Doorey October 10, 2012

Have you noticed the stories this week about a series of strikes hitting Walmart stores in the U.S. This Huffington Post story explains that as of yesterday, there were strikes at 28 stores spanning some 12 States. The workers are protesting what they claim are lousy working conditions and crappy pay. These are nonunion workers, although in the background is an organization called OUR Walmart, which has support and backing of the UFCW union.
These Strikes Would Be Illegal in Canada
For Canadians, what’s interesting about this story is that the strikes are perfectly legal in the U.S.  In contrast, were Walmart workers to go on strike in Canada, they would breaking the law, and subject to discipline, including dismissal.  Few democratic, capitalist nations in the world have more narrow a right to strike than Canada, and the scope of that right that remains is being eroded even further by recent legislative interventions banning strikes by public and private sector workers alike.

 
 

Walmart Workers in the U.S. Have Staged a Series of Strikes This Week


“I make $8.90 an hour and I’ve worked at Walmart for three years,” said Colby Harris, 22, of Dallas. “Everyone at my store lives from check to check and borrows money from each other just to make it through the week.” The six heirs to Walmart founder Sam Walton, meanwhile, are worth $89.5 billion, or as much as the bottom 41.5 percent of Americans combined.”

Look at the main section of the American legislation that protects freedom of association of workers.  It’s Section 7 of the NLRA:

Sec. 7. Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in section 8(a)(3)

That section protects the right of workers to engage in “concerted activities” designed to improve their working conditions, including striking.  Section 8 then makes it unlawful for an employer to punish an employee for engaging in associational activities.
In Canada, our labour legislation is crafted more narrowly.  Firstly, it protects only ‘trade union’ association, and not freedom of association more broadly.  Section 5 of the Ontario Labour Relations Act is our equivalent to Section 7 of the NLRA.  Look how it is worded:  “Every person is free to join a trade union of the person’s own choice and to participate in its lawful activities.”  Can you see the difference between the two sections?
Standard Canadian labour law protects only one type of employee association:  trade unionism.   The UFCW is playing a background role in these Walmart strikes in the U.S., but even if it were not, the workers would still be protected, since Section 7 is concerned with employee association in a broad sense, and not just ‘trade union’ association.  That’s not true here.  If a bunch of nonunion workers come together and demand a raise in Ontario, but without forming or contacting a trade union, the Labour Relations Act doesn’t protect them.  The could be fired for their audacity.
Secondly, in Canada, nonunion workers can never lawfully strike.  Ever.  If Canadian Walmart workers here did what the Americans are doing, they’d be violating their contracts and could be dismissed as a result.  If a union organizer was working in the background, organizing the strike, the union organizer would likely be committing the tort of inducing breach of an employment contract, exposing the organizer to damages and possibly a contempt of court order.  Only unionized workers can strike here, and then only after the union has hoped through a series of legislative loopholes.
Should Canada’s Laws Expand to Protect a Broader Scope of Freedom of Association?
I have argued in a recent article that, in light of recent pronouncements by the Supreme Court of Canada on the substance of the Charter’s guarantee of ‘freedom of association’, it is time for governments here to expand the scope of labour legislation to protect not just ‘trade union’ activity, but freedom of association more generally.
This would mean moving our legislative language in  the direction of Section 7 of the NLRA, so that workers are protected whenever they engage in collective activities that relate to working conditions, whether or not a trade union is involved.  Also, the law should ensure that workers have at least the right to make collective representations to their employer, who should be required to engage in meaningful dialogue about those representations, regardless of whether the workers are represented by a majority trade union.  Workers represented by a certified union would still have all of the rights and responsibilities imposed by the current Labour Relations Act, but under the new model, workers who associate otherwise then through a majority, certified trade union, would have a least the rights the SCC says are guaranteed by the Charter.
I call this model Graduated Freedom of Association.  If you’re interested in reading about this idea, and what I suggest it would mean in practice, check out my draft paper, which is available here.
Questions for Discussion

1.   Do you think workers should be entitled to strike when they are unhappy with their working conditions, or should they “just quit”?
2.   In the U.S., nonunion workers can join together and lawfully strike.  Nonunion workers can never lawfully strike under Canadian law as it now stands.  Which model do you think is more appropriate?
3.   The American model protects the right of workers to join together and engage in collective activities (whether or not through a majority trade union).  Canadian laws only protect the ‘right to join a trade union’.  Do you think this difference matters in practice?  Which model is better?
 

3 comments
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is Academic Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program. Professor Doorey is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School (LL.B., Ph.D), London School of Economics (LLM Labour Law), and the University of Toronto (B.A., M.I.R.).

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

previous post
Love this New Animated Ed Broadbent Message About Income Inequality
next post
New Work Law Comic: The Collective Raise Demand Doesn't Go Well

You may also like

This Blog Entry is About the Lunacy of...

July 21, 2019

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

The Folly of Not Voting to Strike in...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 337 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

David J. Doorey🇨🇦Follow

Law Prof. Talking #labor & #employment #law #Gig to the masses. Alpaca ❤️ @YorkUniversity @OsgoodeNews @LSELaw @LWPHarvard @Jacobin @OnLaborBlog https://t.co/5V9r8VPHsh

David J. Doorey🇨🇦
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦@TheLawofWork·
7h

If one these dimwits was a Sacha Baron Cohen-like comedian playing the role of a Republican would any one notice?

PatriotTakes 🇺🇸@patriottakes

Marjorie Taylor Greene believes generating electricity from “wind turbines and solar panels” will result in the loss of air conditioning and home appliances.

Greene: “I like the lights on. I want to stay up later at night. I don’t want to have to go to bed when the sun sets.”

Reply on Twitter 1558630572783722497Retweet on Twitter 15586305727837224972Like on Twitter 15586305727837224974Twitter 1558630572783722497
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦@TheLawofWork·
10h

A student told me she is translating chapters of my book into Korean because she learned a lot and wants it as a reference but English is her second language.

Any Korean speakers out there? What does this say?

일의 법칙

Reply on Twitter 1558595466182393858Retweet on Twitter 1558595466182393858Like on Twitter 1558595466182393858Twitter 1558595466182393858
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey🇨🇦@TheLawofWork·
10h

I have no idea who this person is or what is going on in Peterborough.

There’s a world of crazy around me that I’m missing.

Caryma Sa'd - Lawyer + Political Satirist@CarymaRules

Romana Didulo provides entertainment for the thinned out crowd in the form of her favourite song, Rasputin.

#cdnpoli #Peterborough #QAnon

Reply on Twitter 1558592062097956865Retweet on Twitter 1558592062097956865Like on Twitter 15585920620979568653Twitter 1558592062097956865
Load More...

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Climate and Just Transition
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Sports Labour
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.