Directions to the Hyatt Regency Vancouver

Introductory remarks by Co-Chairs
8:45 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.

In this perennially popular session, leading economists review market conditions affecting bargaining, and industrial relations experts examine what the economic forecast means for setting bargaining agendas and predicting bargaining trends. Topics to be discussed include:

• Economic Climate: Is the economy really in recovery? How is the extent of the recovery measured? How is the economy of British Columbia faring compared to other western provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba)? Compared to other North American jurisdictions (Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic Canada, the U.S.)? Is the economy creating jobs and reducing unemployment? Are newly created jobs inferior to those that the economy shed in the recession (in terms of wages, job security and benefits)? What factors are driving or slowing recovery? What economic changes can be expected in the near future? Is inflation a real concern? Should growing income inequality concern public sector employers and unions?
• Government Intervention: Are governments achieving their bargaining objectives (e.g. restraining collective agreement cost increases)? In British Columbia? In other provinces? Federally? How is government success or failure in achieving these objectives affecting the economy? Are unions able to make gains in the context of government-mandated restraint? What effect will government's pursuit of deficit and debt reduction have on the economy?
• Impact on Bargaining: How will the current economic climate impact bargaining? Is economic recovery reflected in bargaining? Given the current economic climate and forecasts, what are likely to be bargaining priorities for public sector unions and employers in 2012/2013? What will be the impact on bargaining of increased government resort to back-to-work legislation combined with interest arbitration?

Governments across Canada have recently attempted to freeze the wages of government employees, or they have insisted that new collective agreements not result in increased costs to government. These measures were adopted, in part, to address perceived disparity in benefits and wage increases between the public and private sectors. But, is this disparity real or imaginary? Are the wages and benefits of public sector employees out-of-line with wages and benefits in the private sector? Our panel of experts will address these and the following questions about provincial and federal public sector employment:

• Who's "better-off"? Is it valid to say that public (including non-union) employees are generally "better-off" than private sector employees? Do they have better wages, benefits, job security, etc.?
  • Wages: Have wages for public sector employees recently increased more than they have for private sector employees? Does this reflect the historical trend?
  • Pensions: Are more public sector employees covered by a defined-benefit pension plan than private sector employees? What percentage of public sector employees have access to a defined-contribution pension plan? How many public sector employees do not have access to any employer-sponsored pension plan? How do these numbers compare to pension coverage in the private sector?
  • Extended Health Insurance: Are public sector employees more likely to be covered by extended health insurance than private sector employees?
  • Job Security: Are the jobs of public sector employees less likely to be eliminated than those of private sector employees? How does the job security of unionized public employees compare to the job security of unionized private sector employees?
• Arbitration vs. Bargaining: Given that interest arbitration occurs primarily in the public sector, does interest arbitration give public sector workers an advantage over private sector workers? Do interest arbitration awards reflect settlements or do settlements mirror arbitration awards? Are changes to the interest arbitration process likely? What pressures for change exist? Where are they coming from? How will these pressures affect future interest arbitration?
• Different Perspectives on Differing Work Conditions:Is it the case that the true difference in employment conditions is between unionized workers and non-unionized workers, not between public sector and private sector employees? Would the working conditions of private sector employees be more similar to the working conditions of public sector employees if union density increased in the private sector? Have public sector professional employees traded greater job security and/or benefits for lower wages?
• An Unjustified Burden? Are public sector workers being "scapegoated" in the wake of the last recession? To what extent did government spending on employee wages and benefits contribute to budget deficits? Will cutting spending on wages and benefits for public sector employees hasten economic recovery? Are public employees being asked to bear disproportionate wage cuts, benefit reductions and lay-offs?

Public employers often propose that the public purse can be saved if only we outsource certain public services to private companies, which will deliver services more efficiently than government. Public employees' unions contend that privatization eliminates good jobs from the economy and saves little money. Employers also attempt to lower labour costs by having certain work performed by "independent contractors" and temporary or casual workers. Are these workers really employees? Lancaster's panel of experts will wade into these debates and discuss the following issues:

• Trends: How much of a decline in public sector staffing levels are we seeing in the federal public sector? How much of a decline in projected? Are we seeing a growth or decline in public sector staffing levels in the provincial public sectors in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba? Outsourcing? How are parties dealing with bargaining issues such as contracting out, workload reductions, and reorganization?
• Ground Rules: To how much information regarding the privatization process are unions entitled? What impact will the Supreme Court's decision in Fraser have on bargaining in the areas of contracting out, downsizing and employee rights on restructuring, including the ability of governments to override collective agreements and/or act unilaterally in these areas? Does the Fraser decision offer less protection to public sector unions than the B.C. Health Services decision?
• Litigating Outsourcing/Contracting-Out:How have arbitrators dealt recently with outsourcing/contracting out? When will outsourcing/contracting out result in a successor employer being recognized under labour relations legislation? Should public service unions have successor rights following privatization/contracting out? What collective agreement provisions have been effective in providing some protection to employees vulnerable to contracting-out? (e.g. provisions preventing contracting out, provisions preserving seniority, etc.)
• Dealing with Changing and Non-Standard Employment Relationships: What contract language have unions and employers developed to deal with new classifications, reassignment or lay off, hiring part-time employees in place of full-time employees, or redistributing of duties among employees (within the bargaining unit, outside the bargaining unit, among different bargaining units)? In what circumstances have courts and tribunals expanded the definition of employee to include independent contractors or subcontractors? How are labour boards dealing with precariously situated employees such as temps or casuals?

In Fraser, a five-member majority of the Supreme Court upheld B.C. Health Services, ruling that Section 2(d) of the Charter of Rights protects a process of collective bargaining. However, the Court's decision has narrowed the meaning of that term, so that it does not include exclusive bargaining rights or dispute resolution processes. Our panel of experts will address the following issues raised by the Court's decision:

• What are the implications of the Fraser decision for public sector bargaining?
• Does the duty to collectively bargain, confirmed by the Court in Fraser, have the same meaning under the Charter as under labour relations legislation?
• Does freedom of association as defined in Fraser protect the collective bargaining process and preclude legislating terms of work, even if the government consults with public sector unions before passing such legislation?
• Is there a distinction between the way the Court will deal with challenges to government actions curtailing collective bargaining and applications requesting that governments take positive steps to facilitate collective bargaining?
• Will this decision lead to the recognition of collective bargaining rights for unions that have the support of a minority of employees in a workplace?
• Is the right to strike the next element of freedom of association the Court will recognize?
• Given the Supreme Court's continuing reliance on international law in Fraser, will the courts adopt the ILO's definition of essential services? Will government's ability to declare services essential and to unilaterally-set essential services levels be curtailed?
• What are Fraser's implications for ongoing Charter litigation in provincial and federal sectors?

Directions to the Hyatt Regency Vancouver