Introduction
At the beginning of writing this blog, I wrote up some posts that focused on the management-rights clause of collective agreements between a union and an employer in order to demonstrate the limitations of collective bargaining and collective agreements. I then integrated the issue of management rights into an anlaysis of the rate of exploitation of specific workers for a specific employer. However, I have decided to resume writing posts that focus on the management-rights clause of collective agreements. The reason for doing so is my experience on the so-called Marxist listserve MarxMail.world. In particular, one of the so-called Marxists on the listserve, Marv Gandall, wrote the following:
Should I in any or all of these settings, have insistently pointed out the “limitations of collective bargaining”? It wasn’t necessary to do so. Trade unionists, particularly those who are active, are already aware on the basis of their own experience with the negotation and administration of contracts of the system’s inherent limitations. It was enough to simply refer to the language of specific clauses to illustrate the point.
Gandall simply ignores one of the most objectionable aspects of unions–their ideological integration of workers into a system dominated by a class of employers. Gandall’s claim is at best a social-reformist point of view and, at worst, a fraud and lie. I responded to his statement with the following:
This is made-up. Union reps often use the term “fair contracts” and similar phrases to justify their idealization of collective bargaining and collective agreements.
Where does Gandall show that unions do indeed systematically educate their members on the “limitations of collective bargaining?” Evidence, please–not Gandall’s assurance that this is so. If they do indeed educate their members about the limitations of collective bargaining, why is it that they so frequently use the term “fair contract.?”
And what does Gandall think Marxists should do about this phrase? Nothing? What is his position with respect to the frequent use of this phrase by unions? What has his response been with respect to this phrase–given his frequent reference to “material conditions” of workers?
Gandall’s response was–silence. And what do most so-called Marxists on the listserve do? Nothing. Only a few openly challenge his reformist and fraudulent views. (One such exception is S. Artesian, who writes a blog called Anti-Capital (see https://anticapital0.wordpress.com/anti-capital-1/).
Collective Agreement Between Imperial Oil Stratchona Refinery and Unifor Local 21-A
Here is another example of a management rights clause in a collective agreement. From Collective Bargaining Agreement between Imperial Oil Strathcona Refinery and Unifor, Local 21-A Effective February 1, 2019, pages 3-4:
Article 3 – Management Rights
3.01
Subject to the terms and conditions of the Collective Agreement, the Company maintains the exclusive rights to manage and direct all aspects of the refinery operation and the work force.These rights include:
(a) manage operations in an efficient, profitable manner to maintain our competitive capability;
(b) hire, promote, demote, classify and transfer employees;
(c) make, enforce and alter, from time to time, rules and regulations to be observed by the
employees, provided such rules do not conflict with the terms of this agreement and the Union is given sufficient notice;(d) assign and direct the working forces;
(e) determine the products to be refined, produced or handled at the Refinery, the schedules of production and the methods, processes and means of refining, producing or handling products;
(f) determine methods and techniques of work, requirements or qualifications for jobs, and the content of jobs;
(g) determine the number of employees to be employed, and the expansion, limitation or
cessation of operations at the Refinery or any part of it.3.02 Disciplinary action
(a) The Company has the right to discipline, suspend or terminate the employment of any employee for just cause.(b) When the Company disciplines an employee, a Union representative shall be present at any disciplinary meeting where a verbal warning, a written warning, a suspension or a discharge is given, unless requested to leave by the employee. Discipline does not include regular management communications with employees such as coaching, planned personal contacts, appraisal discussions, etc. The Company shall advise the Union of the nature of the disciplinary actions and the reasons for such actions, prior to the meeting being held.
Purely Positive Characterization of a Collective Agreement by Unifor Local 21-A and the National President of Unifor, Laura Payne
With respect to another collective agreement, neither representatives of Unifor Local 21-A nor the national president of Unifor, Laura Payne, referred to managenet rights at all ( https://www.unifor.org/news/all-news/unifor-local-21-a-members-procor-ltd-ratify-collective-agreement):
JUNE 6, 2023Members of Unifor Local 21-A at Procor Ltd. in Edmonton have voted 90% in favour of ratifying a new four-year collective agreement with the company.
“Congratulations to the bargaining committee on their continued efforts and negotiating a strong collective agreement that provides good wage and benefit improvements,” said Unifor National President Lana Payne. “With this contract in place, our members can confidently anticipate four years of progressive wage gains and unwavering benefit security, providing exceptional stability amidst the uncertain economic landscape.”
The agreement includes a total wage increase of 13.25% over the lifetime of the agreement. (4% year one, 3% year two and-three, and 3.25% year four). The new agreement is retroactive to February 1, 2023 and includes a 20 cent per hour increase to afternoon shift differential and 50 cents per hour for midnights; a $25 increase to the annual safety boot allowance; a $25 increase on Vision Care; and increases to Paramedical Benefits and Major Medical.
“I am extremely proud of the outstanding accomplishments achieved by our diligent bargaining committee,” said Michelle Barsness, Unit Chair and Treasurer of Local 21-A. “This contract, addresses our members’ foremost concerns while securing substantial wage increases. Notably, we have successfully negotiated enhancements to shift differentials and bolstered benefits.”
A deal was initially reached on January 26, 2022, but the agreement was not ratified during voting held on February 3, 2023. Need some details on what happened here – did they renegotiate or vote again on the same contract and on what date did they ratify it?
The 98 members of Local 21-A inspect, repair and provide maintenance of Procor’s fleet of railway tank cars at its main service centre in Edmonton, one of three such centres in the country, and on-site mobile repairs in the Edmonton area and at Imperial’s Strathcona Refinery in Sherwood Park. Procor cars are used to transport petroleum, renewable fuels, LPG, petrochemicals, plastics, chemicals, fertilizers and food.
The contract will expire on January 31, 2027.
Conclusion
There is nothing fair about collective agreements which concentrate most decision-making power over our work lives in the hands of the representatives of employers called managers. Collective agreements limit such power–but they do not by any means challenge such power. Indeed, they do not challenge the dicatorship of employers (see for example Employers as Dictators, Part One). Nor do they challenge the use of human beings as things that are treated as means for other people’s ends.
The law certainly does not prevent the exploitation and oppression of workers; workers may be able to use the law to limit their exploitation and oppression–but not abolish them.
The Abolitionary 