By Angela Stelmakowich

"Scabs." Healing coverage? Or a temporary mask for a deeper wound?

A person's take on the word will likely depend on which side of the picket line he or she stands. Talk of "replacement workers" often elicits strong opinions, and harsh language. Employers may consider their use a life line to continuing operations; organized labour may see "strikebreakers" as a stumbling block to timely negotiations and a contributor to violent confrontations.

Whatever the view, replacement workers could soon be banned in federally regulated workplaces, at which about one-tenth of this country's workers are employed. After some false starts, a private member's bill has achieved what few do: pass second reading in Parliament.

There are, of course, more hurdles to clear before it becomes illegal to hire new staff during a strike or lockout at, among other places, Crown corporations, and federally regulated transportation, telecommunications and mining operations. The bill received unanimous support from New Democrats and members of the Bloc Québécois, most Liberals and a handful of Conservatives.

But that story could change if all Tory MPs opt to vote against it the next go-around.
Heated labour disputes have not been in short supply around the country. In recent years, there have been actions at a federal telecommunications company, an Alberta slaughterhouse, and a mine in the Northwest Territories.

It was at another NWT mine, more than a decade ago now, that a highly contentious labour dispute gave birth to a deliberately set explosion that killed nine men. Three replacement workers and six union members who had crossed the picket line died at Yellowknife's Giant Mine.

Sometimes, the line separating talk and action is crossed. And that can carry the seeds of contention and spread rot along the picket line, and into the community.
Consider that in the fall of 2005, officials for a meat packing and processing company, along with a union leader, were charged after the worker representative's vehicle was said to have been forced" off the road.

In another incident, a gravel truck driver in Alberta faces a charge of second-degree murder in the death of another operator. The dispute, it appears, began at a haulers strike in which one driver supported the union; the other crossed the picket line.

Other times, the setting seems an unlikely one for extreme actions or rogue violence, but may still carry as dramatic a cost. Last March, the fight for what Ontario community college professors hoped would be an improved contract turned deadly. An accounting professor on picket duty died from head injuries days after he was hit by a car.

After viewing surveillance tapes, the police determined the 22-year-old motorist did not commit a criminal offence. No charges were laid.

Most labour disputes, clearly, do not raise the ante with human stakes. Though language may be rough, and rhetoric given free rein, they are generally peaceful.

Of course, situations, regardless of their settings, can sour quickly.

Flexibility is always desirable, but rules, much like a contract, must be developed, before lines are set up. Police should be in the loop and enlisted to keep the peace should anyone, on either side of the line, get out of line.

Whether you consider replacement workers a blessing or a scourge, the acrimony that can come from their use must be carefully evaluated to prevent any resulting bad feelings, nasty behaviour and rough language from seeping into the community.
Workers have a right to set up a picket line. Employers have the right to return operations to normal as quickly as possible.

But any move to prohibit use of replacement workers must not be preoccupied with fining for non-compliance at the expense of requiring measures that prevent violence from taking hold.

There's no need to light a match in so volatile a situation. Unless, of course, we're also prepared to be constantly putting out fires.

Back