For a bunch of painted bald guys, the Blue Man Group has sure been causing a lot of ruckus on the Canadian labour scene.
Upon opening in Toronto, the group faced criticism over their employment practices. They refused to negotiate labour rules with either the Canadian Actors’ Equity Association or the Toronto Musicians’ Association. It was not the first time the Blue Man Group had grappled with unions: they also faced considerable opposition from labour groups in Las Vegas.
Equity and the TMA managed to convince some powerful allies to boycott the Blue Man Group, the most powerful being the Ontario Teachers’ Federation, who prevented the group from performing at any public schools in Ontario. The boycott was effective, and the Blue Man Group will be making an early departure in January 2007, in part due to the lack of school sales.
This episode shows the impressive power of labour unions in Ontario, particularly in Toronto. Many Canadians see unionized labour as a core institution. But how far should union power extend?
When considering powerful unions, the one that immediately comes to mind is the Ontario Teachers’ Federation. Most Ontarians will remember the 1997 walkout over the Harris governments’ education reforms. The OTF is also a partner of the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, a corporation overseeing the investment of teachers’ pension funds. The OTPP has grown into one of the largest investors in Canada-it owns majority shares in Cadillac Fairview and both the Maple Leafs and Raptors, and in 2005 the union reported net assets of $96.1 billion.
Unions are traditionally formed to protect blue-collar workers. But a union with partners as wealthy as the OTPP can cause its working-class members to feel alienated. It is no surprise, then, that the OTF’s actions are consistently criticized and sneered at by such working-class institutions as the Toronto Sun. The OTF, not unlike other powerful unions such as the Canadian Auto Workers, is struggling with an image problem. The immense amount of money involved in the OTF puts it at odds with the idea of unions as institutions standing up for the little people.
Refusals to negotiate are also tarnishing the image of unions, particularly those in the public sector. Just this May, TTC workers represented by the Amalgamated Transit Union walked off the job, causing chaos during the morning rush. Although the union cited reasonable safety concerns, many observers criticized the methods used to draw attention to the problems.
Mayor David Miller claimed that the union had not used the normal process of filing a grievance and then negotiating with employers. The inflexible position of the transit union has led many people to question its motives. When an industry such as transit or education is subsidized by tax dollars, the public has a vested interest in not only the industry’s employees, but also the employers. These unions need to show the public that they are only protecting their rights, and not trying to bankrupt already troubled public services.
The union is a vital institution in Canada. Although membership numbers are decreasing, over 25 per cent of the Canadian population still works at unionized jobs. Unions are needed as a mediator between employees and employers, protecting workers’ rights and interests. But unions should not become corporations themselves. When a union becomes involved in big business investing, like the Teachers’ Federation is, it is in danger of overstepping its purpose. And the stubbornness of unions like the ATF damages the union image both in the eyes of the public and in the eyes of employers.
Unions must be flexible and focused on their original purpose. Employers, on the other hand, must respect the right of employees to protect their interests. Whether it is the Blue Man Group, Ontario high schools, or Toronto transit, business is at its best when employee and employer work together.
