Special to People's Voice
The most exciting part of the CUPE National Convention, held Oct. 15-19 in Toronto, was supposed to be the debate on recommendations of the National Women's Task Force. On Oct. 17, a structural change recommendation to add seats for women to CUPE's National Executive Board (NEB) was defeated, leaving many women and their allies amongst left‑centre forces deflated. Adding to the dismal tone were a Strategic Directions document that contained little demand for action, and resolutions which lay the foundation for action coming to the convention floor without concurrence from the resolutions committee.
But the most dramatic moment came on the afternoon of October 18, with the walkout of Ontario delegates. The trigger was Resolution 333, which proposed that locals without the legal right to strike (predominantly hospital/healthcare workers) be permitted to access the Strike Fund for strike aversion purposes.
Submitted by the Ontario Council of Hospital Unions (OCHU), the resolution stated that in 1999, Sisters Judy Darcy and Geraldine McGuire (President and Treasurer) committed that workers without the legal right to strike would continue to have access to funds for strike aversion in advance of a potential illegal strike aimed at affecting government policy. Since this commitment was made, the NEB has revised the Strike Fund Regulations. Strike aversion funding is now only available for disputes against employers, where locals have gone through conciliation, and not therefore for political strikes.
OCHU raises the possibility that the newly re‑elected McGuinty government will ramp up their campaign to restructure Ontario health care, much the same way as BC's Gordon Campbell tore up the collective agreements of Hospital Employees Union (HEU) in 2002. The new Strike Fund Regulations mean that OCHU, and other locals without the legal right to strike, will not be able to access the Strike Fund to build strong campaigns to fight legislative attacks on their collective bargaining rights.
While all CUPE locals must pay into the strike fund, many will not be able to access these funds - a fundamental unfairness addressed by the Darcy/McGuire commitment in 1999.
Two excellent examples of the benefits of accessing the Strike Fund for political strikes occurred in BC. First, when Campbell came after HEU collective agreements, HEU and other BC CUPE locals who walked out in support were able to access the Strike Fund. Two years ago, when teachers went on strike, BC was given $2 million to support CUPE members who walked out in support of the teachers.
Resolution 333 came to the convention floor with a recommendation of non‑concurrence. Those who spoke at the pro mikes, in favour of the Resolutions Committee recommendation, were Secretary‑Treasurer Claude Genereux followed by a handful of NEB members. The con mikes had long line‑ups, all from Ontario. When the vote was taken, Ontario was the only region to vote against the non-concurrence recommendation.
Several OCHU local members immediately asked if they could go somewhere to "have a conversation" about what just happened. Initially, there was some confusion, but as OCHU members left the floor, most other delegates from Ontario followed. The "conversation" took place in a large meeting room used by the Ontario caucus throughout the Convention. With few Ontario locals left on the floor, quorum was lost.
Ontario delegates heard OCHU President Michael Hurley's explanation of the history of the Strike Fund Regulations. Many delegates were not fully aware of the political implications of Resolution 333. The final resolve of the afternoon meeting was to meet again at 8:45 am to decide on a plan of action. The Ontario Division Executive Board and the Executive of OCHU planned to meet beforehand to discuss a recommendation to put to the membership.
The delegates overwhelmingly supported the move to go back into the convention together, to ask Ontario President Sid Ryan to deliver a strong message to the Convention from Ontario, and to walk back out and reconvene in the Caucus room for more discussion. Coming back onto the convention floor disrupted a confused Jack Layton, who was taken aback by the huge cheer that went up when he mentioned Ontario.
Visibly shaken by Ryan's impending speech, CUPE President Paul Moist used his position of chair to make a lengthy introduction before recognizing Ryan.
Ryan's intervention addressed the unfairness of the new Strike Fund regulations. But his remarks also encompassed the frustration of many delegates.
Situating the struggle within CUPE, Ryan said, "We need to ask ourselves, just what kind of union do we want? Do we want a union that is inclusive? Do we want a union that fights against unfairness and for social justice?"
CUPE Ontario brought a fighting program to the convention, under a campaign for An Agenda for Change. The main components of this Agenda include building a representative union, developing a more inclusive union and encouraging a more militant organizing culture. Every single resolution sent in by Ontario to address its Agenda for Change met with a recommendation of non‑concurrence.
Clearly, Ontario leadership and the Ontario delegates are fighting for social unionism. Even more clearly, the national leadership is defending its right to take the union down another road. Pointing to this contrast, Hurley asked Ontario delegates, "Do you remember the militant years of Judy Darcy, when CUPE was a fighting union?"
At the end of the day, little was accomplished at this convention. Few resolutions were debated, even fewer agreed to by the floor. The Strategic Directions paper containing few action items did not get debated after a paltry few suggestions were included in the final draft. The Women's Task Force recommendation on structural change was defeated. Women's voices are still marginalized within CUPE.
The next steps taken by this divided union will be crucial. Will CUPE reinvest in building social unionism, or follow others down the road of institutionalizing a business model to union governance?