Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6244
Reputation: 228.2
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:23 am    Post subject: Senate blocks liberals plan to repeal anti union law Reply with quote

( the liberals move to repeal these union laws never made much sense and I think the senate realised that )


Senate blocks Liberals’ plan to repeal ‘anti-union’ law


Bill Curry


OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail


Published Friday, Apr. 14, 2017 5:48PM EDT



In one of its first acts after winning the 2015 federal election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government moved to reverse two Conservative laws that Canada’s labour leaders viewed as an attack on unions.

When the House of Commons passed the legislation last fall, Mr. Trudeau boasted of this accomplishment to a large and appreciative gathering of the Canadian Labour Congress.

Now that pledge is suddenly in jeopardy after the Senate voted to keep one of those two laws in place.

The Senate has amended the government’s Bill C-4 in a way that reverses part of its original intent, meaning the House of Commons must now vote on whether to accept or reject the Senate’s changes. The government is already signalling it will oppose the Senate amendments, setting the stage for a standoff between the two Houses of Parliament.

The back story of this long-running parliamentary drama dates back to the later years of the Harper Conservative government, when two private members’ bills from backbench Conservative MPs – C-377 and C-525 – managed to become law.

C-377, which received royal assent in 2015, required labour organizations to make a series of public financial disclosures, including all transactions of more than $5,000. C-525, which passed in 2014 and came into effect in 2015, forces a secret-ballot vote for any decision to certify or decertify a union.

That replaced the previous practice – known as the card-check system – in which workers could unionize by collecting union membership signatures from a majority of workers. Union leaders said the Conservative change makes it much harder to form a union, because secret-ballot votes tend to be held on the premises of a workplace and the campaigns can lead to intimidation from management.

Critics of the card-check system – including the Fraser Institute – argue a secret ballot protects workers from intimidation from pro-union organizers.

The Trudeau government introduced Bill C-4 in January, 2016. The bill’s original intent was to repeal both C-377 and C-525. The House approved the bill in October and sent it to the Senate.

But in a 43 to 34 vote, the Senate voted on Tuesday to amend the Liberal government’s Bill C-4 in a way that keeps C-525 and its secret-ballot voting requirements intact. The change was mostly supported by Conservative senators, with the support of some Liberals and independents.

“The Senate and senators have the duty and responsibility to correct this bill, which was written by the government for the sole purpose of benefiting the powerful union groups that helped it get elected in 2015 in exchange for the measures contained in Bill C-4,” Conservative Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais told the Senate in advocating for the amendments.

A spokesperson for federal Labour Minister Patty Hajdu signalled that the government would be voting to reverse the Senate changes.

Senators would then have another chance to vote on the bill when it is returned to them by the House of Commons. Traditionally, the Senate would defer to the will of the elected House, but the Red Chamber has become increasingly unpredictable since Mr. Trudeau began appointed senators who sit as independents.

Hassan Yussuff, President of the Canadian Labour Congress, said he has received assurances from the government that the Senate changes would be rejected.

“For the 60 years that the [card-check] system has been in place, nobody has ever shown any evidence that there were problems with the system that required change,” he said. “It prevents employers from intimidating and interfering. … Every time there is a vote, employers do interfere. They express their opinion. They threaten to close the workplace.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....e34714419/
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4127
Reputation: 238.1
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's because these are good changes. What is wrong with secret ballots in certification or de-certification votes?

It's a response to intimidation, and the thuggy part of unions that the activists fee justified in invoking. It allows people to vote their conscience without fear of retribution.

What is wrong with requiring the union leadership be responsible to their membership for the way they spend the members' money? A huge proportion of the members dues is spent on political ventures that the membership is in the dark about. Many of them would rather lower the dues that support the NDP. They just aren't into politics that much.

Three cheers for the Senate!
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How about that;
Independent Senators think independently?

Its a nice attempt by the Senate;
However when the Commons sends it back unchanged in a few weeks, then what?
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6244
Reputation: 228.2
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cosmostein wrote:
How about that;
Independent Senators think independently?

Its a nice attempt by the Senate;
However when the Commons sends it back unchanged in a few weeks, then what?



we are going to soon find out how truly independent the new senators really are . if there not affiliated with the liberals aren't free to vote as the feel ?

they aren't legally obligated to pass every bill the house passes . if they think something is wrong with it , they can make changes . I see nothing wrong with how they have handled this bill , it clearly had problems and was being done to gain favours with the unions and was not in Canadians best interests
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4127
Reputation: 238.1
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another of those not-very-well-thought-out decisions the Trudeau Liberals have made. It seems to be their trademark.

If these kinds of differences become normalized, there will have to be procedures to reconcile legislation down the road. It will be interesting to watch.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6244
Reputation: 228.2
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Liberals reject Senate amendments to bill overseeing unionization rules


By The Canadian Press — May 5 2017


OTTAWA — The Liberal government has set up a showdown with the Senate over whether workers should be required to unionize through a secret ballot.

The showdown is over one of the Liberal government's first pieces of legislation, Bill C-4, which sought to overturn two labour laws passed under the previous Conservative government.

The Senate agreed with a portion of the Liberal bill that ends a requirement that unions publicly post details of their spending, but voted against provisions that would require workers to sign unionization cards, known as the card check system, instead of holding a secret ballot.

Labour Minister Patty Hajdu says the Liberals won't accept the change, because it would harm labour relations.

A bill can only become law if the House of Commons and Senate agree on the same wording of a piece of legislation.

The decision outraged Conservative MPs who argue that the Liberals were acting like "tin-pot dictators" in rejecting the idea of a secret ballot.

http://www.nationalnewswatch.c.....QyXgUn2Zjp
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
In another sign of the increasingly activist role the Senate is playing in Parliament, the government’s key budget legislation is being targeted for amendments by the upper chamber for the second consecutive time.

With Prime Minister Justin Trudeau having released Liberal senators from caucus and appointed independent senators, votes no longer fall along predictable party lines. There are now three main groups: 38 Conservatives, 35 independents, and 18 Liberals, along with seven non-affiliated senators and seven vacant seats.

At least two parts of Bill C-44, the omnibus legislation that implements the government’s budget priorities, are likely to see substantial amendments when the bill arrives in the chamber next week. It’s not yet certain they have enough votes to pass, but both have some support in all three groups of senators.


http://news.nationalpost.com/n.....bill-again
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I became opposed to the idea of an elected Senate when it became clear that an elected Senate could potentially have more power than the Commons.

While the Senate arrangement was never ideal;
Generally speaking Senators understood their roles in government and that was to carry out the will of the elected Commons with some second thought and review.

The Prime Minister and his new approach to the Senate and Senate appointments has created a situation where the Senate has potentially more power than the Commons but now has no accountability to any electorate or anyone for that matter.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4127
Reputation: 238.1
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 7:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem with the Senate is that it is unelected. and it is only aping Westminster in a ritualistic way.

In England, the House of Lords represents a way of maintaining some semblance of the previous historical eras privileges, and to capitalize on their political experience. The House of Commons came later, and is a kind of interloper on the scene. It has to do with raising money for the monarch. '

It took a civil war to make the Commons dominant, even before democracy entered the picture.

But you can't translate the traditions and understandings of England to a new country, where there are no true "lords". There may be 'classes' but they aren't 'heredity-based, so our class-structure is more of a churning.

In North America, the American Senate has become an institution that balances and brokers the interests of the different regions of the US.

If we are to have an effective Senate, we should do the same.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Senate blocks liberals plan to repeal anti union law

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB