Please read the case study I have posted below "Airport Authority and Air Traffic Controllers Union" and answer the following questions posted below. Please answer both questions clear and directed to the case study. Here are pictures of the case study in order.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS UNION (Based on NAV Canada and CAW-Canada, 2003) In this case, the parties had been bargaining for a collective agreement for nearly three years and had several major outstanding issues. The parties disagreed on the interpretation of the legislation that determined whether a strike or a lockout is permitted. The employer asked the labour relations board to refer the outstanding contract issues to bind- ing arbitration so that the collective agreement could be settled, as provided for in the relevant labour legislation. The union argued that such a referral would be premature as long as a legal strike or a lockout could be used by one of the parties to support its bargaining demands, and that the employer had not yet proven that a strike or lockout was forbid- den under the provisions of the legislation. The labour relations board scheduled a hearing to address the questions of whether the outstanding contractual issues should be referred to arbitration. Case Facts effect, two significant changes had occurred in the parties' The bargaining relationship between the employer and its relationship. The workers remained in the same bargain- workers had existed for six years. A first collective agree- ing unit, but had affiliated themselves as a local of a larger ment was negotiated a year after the union was certified, national union. Also, the employer was no longer part of the but despite its acceptance by management and the union's federal government and had become a private sector orga- executive board, the union membership refused to ratify it. nization. However, the bargaining relationship between the Collective bargaining resumed, and a lack of progress led parties was still regulated by the same federal legislation. to the appointment of a federal conciliation commissioner a The parties were in the process of negotiating the year later. The commissioner's report was released after six collective agreement that would replace the existing months of investigation, but both parties disagreed with dif- one. Bargaining sessions began three months before the ferent recommendations in the report and were reluctant to collective agreement expired, and the parties had met accept it as the framework for a new collective agreement. for 40 to 45 days since then. The union initially presented However, the parties then became aware that the federal 600 contract demands, but had reduced that number tounion argued that such a referral would be premature as long as a legal strike or a lockout could be used by one of Ine parties to support its bargaining demands, and that the employer had not yet proven that a strike or lockout was forbid- den under the provisions of the legislation. The labour relations board scheduled a hearing to address the questions of whether the outstanding contractual issues should be referred to arbitration. Case Facts effect, two significant changes had occurred in the parties' The bargaining relationship between the employer and its relationship. The workers remained in the same bargain- workers had existed for six years. A first collective agree- ing unit, but had affiliated themselves as a local of a larger ment was negotiated a year after the union was certified, national union. Also, the employer was no longer part of the but despite its acceptance by management and the union's federal government and had become a private sector orga- executive board, the union membership refused to ratify it. nization. However, the bargaining relationship between the Collective bargaining resumed, and a lack of progress led parties was still regulated by the same federal legislation. to the appointment of a federal conciliation commissioner a The parties were in the process of negotiating the year later. The commissioner's report was released after six collective agreement that would replace the existing months of investigation, but both parties disagreed with dif- one. Bargaining sessions began three months before the ferent recommendations in the report and were reluctant to collective agreement expired, and the parties had met accept it as the framework for a new collective agreement. for 40 to 45 days since then. The union initially presented However, the parties then became aware that the federal 600 contract demands, but had reduced that number to government was prepared to legislate a collective agree- about 225. Some items had been settled, but many were ment if they could not agree on one themselves, and thus still outstanding, including wage increases. they returned to bargaining with greater motivation to finish. The parties last had a formal bargaining session four A collective agreement was concluded and ratified months earlier. They had an informal meeting two months four months after the commissioner's report was released, later, at which the union offered an unspecified "creative and its term ran for two years. Since the agreement took proposal" to settle the impasses that existed. The union's Aa300 CHAPTER 10 . Third-Party Intervention during Negotiations chief negotiator said, however, that he needed to consult previous decisions, a small number of the bargaining unit with the bargaining unit on certain aspects of the proposal. members had the right to strike. Then the employer's request for referral to arbitration was The employer's chief negotiator, Jerome Ferrier, filed just after the informal meeting, so no further negotia- told the board that he had been involved in negotiations tions or meetings occurred. between the parties since the bargaining for the first A further complication in the situation was the pro- collective agreement. He described the progress in this visions of the legislation governing the relationship round of bargaining as "painfully slow" and attributed this between the two parties. Both the workers (air traffic to the workers' new union affiliation. He characterized the controllers) and the employer (airport ownership/man- union's bargaining strategy, which it had used in negotia- agement) offered services that would have a significant tions with other employers, as completing all the steps impact on the public if they were withdrawn or reduced. that were required to be in a position to strike and then Because of this, the relevant legislation established that being prepared to strike if a collective agreement was not if a strike or lockout occurred, the parties would have concluded. When asked to describe the impact of a strike to continue to supply their services or operate their or lockout, he stated that the employees who had the services at a level that would "prevent an immediate right to strike represented only about 10 percent of the and serious danger to the safety or health of the pub- total bargaining unit membership of 2,300, and that those lic." The parties were also permitted, 15 days after the who had the right to strike are not licensed air traffic con- notice to bargain had been issued, to mutually agree trollers. He also stated that he did not think a lockout by on a list of services or operations that they considhe employer would be an effective bargaining strategy. ered essential in the event of a labour disruption, along Under questioning, Ferrier stated that the relationship with an estimate of the number of employees involved. between the union and the employer had generally shown Aa 50 ) 99 O 2:41 PM31119050599/cfi/323!/4/4@0.00:47.1 with an estimate of the number of employees involved. between the union and the employer had generally shown This list was filed with the labour relations board and was improvement over the previous few months, with the expected to be followed if a labour disruption occurred. exception of the incomplete negotiations. There had been The labour relations legislation also gives the labour general progress in how disputes were being resolved, and relations board the power to make its own essential ser- fewer grievances were going to arbitration. He attributed vice designations in the industries it regulates, if it believes this to the involvement of the union with which the workers a strike or lockout could endanger public safety. It can des- were now affiliated. ignate which supplies, operations, or services it considers Henry Gordon, the union's chief negotiator, told the necessary; designate the manner in which the union or board that the air traffic controllers represented by his employer will carry out those functions; and impose any union were highly professional employees who had other measure it deems necessary. However, if the labour expected their situation to be very different when their relations board determines that the level of activity needed to employer changed from being part of the government to maintain operations is such that any strike or lockout activity being a private corporation. Gordon said that the employ- would pose a threat to public safety, the board can refer any ees had expected that, as private sector employees, they outstanding bargaining issues to binding arbitration. would have improved collective bargaining rights and "the In an earlier case involving the same parties, the board right to withdraw [their] services." He alleged that "many was asked to outline the general principles that it would promises were made either directly or indirectly to the use to determine essential services, as this would then members" when the change occurred, creating "great indicate whether the board would permit a strike or a lock- expectations" on the part of the members. He also stated out in this particular situation. The board had indicated that that the members were "an extremely professional group, it could not make a determination without a detailed safety who study absolutely everything. For me they're the best study that would identify precisely what services could I've ever worked with-they read everything, they analyze be withdrawn without immediate or serious danger. The everything, they want to debate everything. That kind of board had commissioned this study, which was expected tells you that they're confident in themselves and the pro- to be available in approximately six months. As a result of fessional services they provide." AaGordon stated that the ability to strike was extremely The Employer's Position important to the air traffic controllers, since they needed to be The employer argued that binding arbitration of the out- sure they could get the best collective agreement possible. standing issues was needed to achieve "stability and har- When asked his opinion on the effect of a strike or lockout on mony" in the relationship between the parties. the bargaining process, he stated that he did not feel that the right to strike as currently established was extensive enough The Union's Position to be effective, but that a lockout would be very effective. The union stated that it was willing to agree to send the Gordon agreed with Ferrier that the bargaining process outstanding monetary issues to arbitration if the parties had been difficult, and also confirmed that both parties were could agree on the outstanding non-monetary issues by dissatisfied with having had the resolution to the previous themselves. set of negotiations "forced upon them" by the threat of a leg- The union was also willing to wait for the outcome islated settlement. He also agreed that the general industrial of the safety study and the board's final definition of the relations climate between the two parties was improving. union's right to strike before taking any action
