Education support workers’ union defied the Ontario government’s use of the notwithstanding clause to kill bargaining with Bill 28. With support of members, other unions and the public, standing up and fighting back works.
We can change this precedent faster than the several years minimum it will take to get a Charter resolution through the courts.
Bill 89 in Quebec, coming into effect later this year, is likely to do a similar thing. Workers need to come together and resist the erosion of our fundamental rights to advocate for our working conditions as a group.
I don’t understand how they can force people back to work.
Like, will they have cops on the flights making sure the attendants put on a cheery safety briefing?
Will they drag them onto the plane in handcuffs to do safety checks?
This is usually “enforced” through fines, since unions are institutions that can be held liable for these decisions. Ultimately unlawful job action might end up leading to lawful termination though, so it takes a lot of courage to do what they’re doing.
Reagan was famous for busting air traffic controllers in the 80’s… He literally just fired everyone and replaced them.
and just the railroad strike was broken by congress recently in the same way too, by making it illegal, but with minor concessions.
« They » will tried to prove that Union Leader said that workers shouldn’t go back to work and defy the order, which they did not. Anyway that’s not the goal here, they will force the Union to go to court which will cost money to the union and the taxpayers for a judge to say what we already know : the Liberal gov overstep. Now the gov will probably not be obligated to pay the Union legal council which make them poorer.
This shit will take months maybe years
I saw a great comment somewhere else that said something like “if your job is so important that the gov makes you go to work, you deserve a livable wage.”
“Someone should tell the rich that workers banding together to present formal address of grievances is the alternative that we worked out a long ago to breaking down the factory owner’s door and beating them to death in front of their family. I feel like they forgot.”
Any politician who sides against unions can get fucked in my opinion
Any person who punches a clock for a living that doesn’t support unions is a class traitor, plain and simple.
I feel like this strike could spread to the general population.
A General Strike, if you will.
Thumbnails I’m not clicking for $500
Cool about the union, but wtf has this lady got to do with it? Am I whooshing a porn reference or something?
EDITING TO CORRECT MYSELF:
Did some more searching, even going on icky Insta, and her name is Rachel Gilmore. The pun about “huge” is likely intended, because her thing is to grab the attention of people who don’t ordinarily watch news but will watch a pretty woman for a short piece. Good on her for that.
You see a pretty lady on the internet and your mind instantly jumps to porn? Not a good look.
Well I’m a 65 year old cishet woman and I tried Lens but no name came up, maybe she’s AI (edit , she’s not) or something, but I often miss meme porn references because I haven’t seen the porn being referenced.
Edit: I’ve edited my original comment, having searched and found her name myself.
Wdym? Why would it be a porn reference?
Isn’t being Canadian and caring about worker rights enough for having “to do with it?” Does a journalist need any special reason to talk about world events?
Her pic in the thumbnail looks likes she is naked. There is a tiny line that looks like it may be a strap for a bikini top or something, but a lot of her body is being shown with no clothing visible. And she’s making over the top acting faces. If you don’t already know who she is, this 100% looks like a porn ad.
That’s messed up. Perhaps I’ve been living in blissful ignorance of what porn ads look like.
“A lot of her body is being shown with no clothing visible” doesn’t register as evidence of porn because that’s a normal way to dress oneself. “And she’s making over the top acting faces” just puts her as an average YouTuber/TikToker.
On a small screen while scrolling past, this looks just like the crap banner ads that make it through my ad blocking measures when my blocker list isn’t updated fast enough. Pretty girl, little to no clothes, surprised expresion with mouth agape, some vague words about how huge something is. I recognized Rachel amd am used to seeing her in my feed, so while I didn’t think this myself, I can fully understand how someone would misinterpret this.
The fact that a woman wearing a spaghetti-strap tank top and being expressive immediately makes you assume she’s a porn actress says a lot about you.
Is she a journalist? Because I tried to search her face without the rest of the stuff and got nothing. And there’s no source. So I thought, maybe it’s a joke about “huge”?
If you can give me her name I’ll happily edit my comment.EDIT: found her myself, changed my original comment.
There’s no joke, the word “huge” is to be interpreted at face value. There’s no pun either.
Still don’t quite get why would anyone think this could be about porn
Everything on the internet is legally required to have a title image of some idiot pulling faces at a camera. Haven’t you noticed? Just look at Youtube.
I use a clickbait remover for YouTube addon to get rid of the stupid faces. I kinda wish ublock origin is able to do it so that I don’t have to use the other addon.
How are you using ublock if not an addon?
IDK if you are being facetious or serious, but I updated the comment and typo to separate the two different addons I was talking about.
deleted by creator
You were wrong but you came to a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence you had at the time, and really not even a conclusion but a reasonably suspicious ask on consideration. I further commend you for correcting yourself when confronted with new evidence that challenged your original idea.
