Larry's Corner

The Carpenter’s Union And the City of Hamilton
By Larry Di Ianni
(posted September 21, 2007)

By now most people know about this issue which is dividing Council, creating potential economic pressures for the city and embattling trade unions within the community. As well, local construction businesses that look to doing work with the municipality are also fearful of being shut out of the process. All in all, this is not a pretty picture.

So what led to this state of affairs? The incident actually happened during my watch, when the City entered into exclusive certification with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (UBCJA) local 18 in 2005. The procedure which led to this exclusive relationship has been amply reported. A fax went to a little used fax machine the Friday of a long weekend. Appropriate staff did not see the fax; therefore, the City sent no one to the hearing to adjudicate the request for exclusive certification, and the Board granted the request of the two carpenters, employees of the City, who made the application. Simple. Done.

If you listen to one side or the other this was a case of City incompetence or UBCJA games-playing. The City appealed the certification twice. It lost both times and is now appealing to the Provincial Government to amend legislation so that municipalities can be recognized as non-construction employers. Meanwhile, others have weighed in on the issue. LIUNA, the local Labourer’s Union, feels that UBCJA is infringing on work traditionally done by their members. Staff is claiming potential cost overruns in the $100’s of millions if exclusivity is maintained; and employers without ties to UBJA are crying foul. Is there a way out of this impasse?

Yes.

The first way is to recognize that there are no villains in this situation. The City was not incompetent. It simply was not aware of the hearing taking place. The Carpenter’s Union is not filled with mean-spirited ogres. It is a union representing local trades people who are taxpayers in this community and simply want an opportunity to have good work at fair wages. LIUNA, with its long history of good work in the municipality, simply wants to ensure that its members receive jobs that traditionally have gone to them; and city staff wants to make sure of the continuing economic viability and affordability of contracts being let going forward.

Recognizing that there are no villains lurking about, what is needed, as the local paper’s editorial pointed out, is for someone to show strong leadership, bring all the sides together around the same table, put all the facts and figures in front of the group and hammer out a compromise that all can live with. To me that is the best strategy. Legislation by the Province, if it comes, is too time consuming and won’t help the current situation. Litigation is fraught with peril for one or both sides of this debate. It is also expensive and divisive. Better to negotiate than to litigate is a motto I have always embraced.

So, if this is the appropriate step, then who should be brought on to try to stimulate this discussion? The current Council members seem to be on one side or the other so they will be seen with suspicion by either or both groups squaring off. Staff will be accused of having an agenda. The mediator should be a neutral person who is trusted by all sides of this debate. It should be someone with municipal experience who also knows the community leaders involved. It should be someone with some skills at reaching compromise. Maybe it should be a former Mayor of the city. C’mon, Council. You have four to choose from!!

BACK TO LARRY'S CORNER