FR :

L'auteur se propose, dans la présente étude, de caractériser les changements survenus depuis la deuxième guerre mondiale dans les systèmes de relations industrielles des principaux pays de l’Europe occidentale. Il y insiste particulièrement sur l'évolution des contextes et des idéologies et leur incidence sur les structures et les fonctions des partenaires sociaux, patronats et syndicats. Les principaux pays étudiés sont la Grande-Bretagne, la France, l’Allemagne de l’Ouest, la Belgique, les Pays-Bas, la Suède et le Danemark.

EN :

Each of the countries under review followed its own course towards industrialization. It is therefore rather difficult, if not impossible, to assimilate them in the development of labour relations without altering to some degree the overall analysis.

Each country set its own pattern in this field and experienced its own industrial revolution in time and space. Consequently, conditions varied from one country to another according to industrialization period, to the predominating sectors of economic activity at that time ; and also to the industrial structure and the degree of technical development and industrial integration of their particular economies.

There are, however, common points characterizing the aggregate from an historical point of view ; if some countries like Sweden and Denmark have not had to undergo the same difficult industrialization phases as England or even France, it must be admitted that the lines of thinking developed in pioneer industrial societies, and the ideologies which evolved from them, were communicated abroad and in a manner of speaking, fashioned a background for the tensions and conflicts which marked as a rule the development of labour relations in the countries under review.

In spite of the expansion resulting from the First World War in most of the countries under review, enterprise in these countries was still, until the last war, centered on industrial production, while services played a relatively minor role.

Briefly then, the situation was the following : relatively few big bureaucracy-patterned complexes with widely subscribed capital as was the case in the United States at that time ; relatively low development in management technocrats who could provide an intermediate class between the owners and the labour force ; population of wage earners and mostly industrial workers, with a relatively small proportion of industrial white collar workers.

In all the countries under review, what essentially characterized the ratio of the forces opposed not only in factories, enterprise or industry but also in the political society itself, was the identification of middle class values with the values of those who held power in any form and any sector.

In the economic field as well as in the political field, the foundation of power is the patrimony. In Europe, the exercise of political rights had long been related to property. The middle class state believed in the doctrine of nonintervention in economic matters. The employer, whose values were the same as those of the community and of the political powers, decided alone the framework of the rules governing social relations within enterprise.

Until the economic depression of the thirties, government intervention in most European countries was only fragmentary in social and economic fields, without significantly altering the fundamental assumptions of capitalistic economy.

The depression of the thirties, however, modified somewhat the factors involved in the problem in that it greatly lowered the prestige of private enterprise and employers, set back markedly the dominant values, re-oriented government positions towards a greater acknowledgement of social problems.

The Ideologies

Management

Among European employers, the contexts indicated above developed in the group as a whole a very marked conservative ideology. Economies dominating politics, they were not prepared to abandon the power they held in the community, nor to share it with the labour class which, in their eyes, symbolized revolution, disorder and anarchy. They were determined to maintain at any cost their absolute control over enterprise and their influence over public bodies and institutions bearing on public opinion. During the years that preceded the Second World War, because of their refusal to respond to external pressures by public powers, trade unions and public opinion following the economic depression, a new feeling of solidarity was created among them and developed to the point that it constituted a powerful instrument of social and political resistance. This determined the creation of vast employers' associations, which were powerful and well organized to take a stand as united as possible against the organized claims of the workers.

Trade Unions

As for trade unions, which were promoting social and economic demands and confronted at the same time with the political emancipation claims of their followers and indeed of the whole of the working classes, and with what they called management-government collusion in a system of middle class domination and liberal economy, they had no alternative but to join in political agitation and far-reaching social struggle.

In Europe, they represented all of the working classes and from the very first offered the best channel for the overall aspirations of industrial wage earners and the underpriviledged generally. This was not the case in America where, during this same period, there existed almost no class distinctions and where the populations as a whole already had all their political rights.

Therefore, European trade-unionism developed or rather reflected a most pronounced class distinction. They were, rather than functional groups operating mainly on the labour market as is the case in America the expression of a class operating on the very structures of the community where they came into play.

To this end, they adopted the socialist postulates founded on class struggle. On the continent, marxist theories held sway with them and took shape in a total rejection of capitaliste frameworks and even of existing political structures. In France, it was anarcho-syndicalism; in England, it was labourism which, even though not marxist, was nevertheless dedicated to a social reconstruction involving the very foundations of traditional economy. They formed political parties or tied themselves in more or less closely with leftist political groups already formed.

Although they essentially represented a working class, their political affiliations, at least in some countries such as France, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands, became for them a divisive factor on the ideological plan, either within the socialist groups themselves or because of the religious beliefs of the different working categories represented by them. This ideological fragmentation of European trade unions constitutes a most important factor and should be noted in view of the attitudes that were taken during the years following the war in respect of co-operation and solidarity between trade unions in a concerted economy system.

Structures and Functions

Management

As was already noted, European management in general was characterized by the establishment of employer associations in almost every industrial branch, to negotiate with trade unions and to défend their interests as employers with the public powers. This was done even before the last war and, in some countries, many years before then. It was also characterized by the amalgamation of the branch or industrial associations of all these countries in vast employers' confederations at the national level, no longer in most cases (as we will see later in detail) for negociation purposes, but to ensure a certain homogeneity in the employers' attitudes in connection with the claims made by trade unions for wage policies, personnel relations and social security through negotiations or unilateral action. Another most important objective of these confederations was to represent the general interests of the employers with the public powers and public opinion in connection with legislative measures in the fields of labour and industry, national employment policies, salaries, government-operated social security plans, and all decisions at the national level that could affect their members in some way or another.

Trade Unions

For their part, trade unions, which had been established within the contexts and the ideologies outlined above, were naturally structured in conformity with these associations.

Attention should first be called to the highly centralized nature of trade unionism at the trade or industrial federation level, i.e., at the branch or economic activity sector level. The centre of trade union power is found mainly at this level.

At the enterprise level, there were relatively very few confederations as a rule and in some countries there were none at all.

Collective agreements constituted a highly centralized process at the industrial branch level, very often on the national or at least a regional plan involving all or the great majority of the enterprises operating in a given branch.

In Europe, collective agreement laws themselves required this by providing only for regulations for individual labour contracts determining minimum working and salary conditions and therefore not geared to, as a whole, the overall aspects normally covered in detail by our North American agreements.

Those are a few of the traditional characteristics of European labour relations systems at least until the last world war. An attempt should now be made to underline briefly some of the changes which these countries experienced after the last war.

The Post-War Years and the Changes in Those Years

It is interesting to note the tremendous progress made since the last world war, by most of these countries, towards greater co-operation between the agents of their respective economies. The observer is at the outset struck by the far-reaching changes, at least in osme countries, in the conditions and the spirit in which labour relations are carried out, so much so that the structures established, as was already mentioned, because of social strife, very often became the very institutional foundations for greater co-operation between the social partners and the natural channel improving the dialogue with the public powers in an increasingly « concerted » economic system.

The New Technology and the « Prosperity Economy »

In the realms of technology and economies, some important factors should be mentioned. Since the end of the Second World War, most of the countries in Western Europe have entered a « new industrial revolution ».

Industrial concentration became prevalent, technical development progressed rapidly ; investments increased and achieved greater diversification ; markets expanded with the establishment of « great units » represented by the various European « communities », of which the Common Market is the most important. The dimensions of enterprise were changed as it acquired gradually the stature of big limited and bureaucracized corporations in the hands of technocrats who were in the process of creating a new and primary functional category in modern Europe.

New salaried classes appeared : professionals, technicians, « staff » in general ; the tertiary services developed and brought about changes in employment structures and labour force characteristics.

The New Power Structures

On the « political » scene, that of the structure of powers within European communities and that of ideologies, a few essential factors of change should also be mentioned.

In connection with European management, it was already noted that the economic depression between the two wars had considerably undermined its status with public opinion ; the last war, except in England and Sweden, continued this trend.

On the other hand, brade unions, even though they had been dismenbered in numerous countries during the occupation, were very strongly invigorated after the war and enjoyed a higher status than they had ever achieved before because of their participation in the « Resistance ». They symbolized progressive forces and democratic values. They were needed for reconstruction. More than ever, public opinion was favourable to what they represented.

The public powers, for their part, had to intervene increasingly and become active partners in economic and social affairs.

The Re-orientation of Ideologies

In consequence, the ideologies of the social partners underwent changes. One of the key explanations for the change in the mentality of the participants to the industrial relations systems in the countries under review, which was in fact given by most people interviewed in these countries, was the experience of war itself. This was a ready-made melting pot for mutual aid by different interests in industrial relations faced with a common enemy, at least in occupied countries. The atmosphere of co-operation between trade unions and management and between trade unions themselves, created during the Resistance years, continued on. The parties concerned emerged from the war with changed mentalities and attitudes. The solidarity achieved during the war years was maintained in part to carry out successfully the national reconstruction program.

As a general rule, a certain decline in conservatism was observed amongst European employers, who became more « scientific » and better disposed towards an objective dialogue with the other social partners. Also, government intervention was more readily accepted.

Trade unions underwent, in our opinion, an even greater change under the new conditions prevailing in Western Europe during the last period of about 15 years. As was mentioned by B.C. Roberts during our stay in Great Britain, the term « socialism » and for that matter the term « capitalism » are now only slogans which are gradually losing any valid connotation in the present situations.

The struggle of the classes, although it is still purported in theory to be the justification for labour unions in France more particularly, gives rise to an increasing cleavage between official statements and the actual union operations in negotiations and daily discussions with enterprise and the public powers.

There seems to be a progressive detachment of labour confederations from leftist parties as unions become more diversified in the social classes they represent, more business-like and functional pressure groups rather than defenders of a class within the political community.

In connection with the structures and functions of union and management institutions since the war, we can state that, if the ideological and political environments in which they operate have changed as has been shown, they have not undergone significant changes legally and formally. Nevertheless, new legislation and modified or additional organizations were established in the last twenty odd years in Europe and this is what we will attempt to determine in a further presentation.

EN :

The philosophy of the Canadian labour movement is examined in the light of the three stages which characterize the pattern of union growth. The author shows how youthful years idealism gave way to a pragmatic philosophy over the last two decades.

FR :

INTRODUCTION

Pour comprendre la philosophie du mouvement ouvrier, il faut se référer au contexte historique dans lequel il s'insère, puisque le syndicalisme ouvrier est une institution dynamique qui connaît diverses phases de développement. Pour découvrir la philosophie qui sous-tend le mouvement, on doit s'en tenir au modèle de croissance du syndicalisme. Cet article a pour but d'examiner la philosophie ouvrière qui correspond aux trois étapes de la croissance du mouvement.

PREMIÈRE PHASE DU DÉVELOPPEMENT : LA PÉRIODE DE FORMATION

Au cours des premières années de l'organisation ouvrière au Canada, le syndicat s'offrait comme un mécanisme de protestation contre des conditions de travail insatisfaisantes, des salaires inadéquats et une perte possible de statuts due à l'effritement du caractère artisanal des tâches dans l'évolution industrielle ; le syndicat se présentait aussi comme un mécanisme de pression pour l'obtention d'une législation ouvrière favorable. Au cours de ces premières années, l'action directe du groupement portait sur des griefs qui originaient du milieu même du travail. Le syndicat surgît comme une arme collective de protestation contre ces conditions de travail.

De plus, les demandes des travailleurs pour le redressement des griefs et l'élimination des frustrations tendaient aussi vers une promotion des valeurs humaines au sein de la classe ouvrière, au moment même où celle-ci ressentait l'influence d'un milieu technique en voie de transformation rapide. Cet esprit humanitaire du début s'exprimait dans un intérêt marqué pour la dignité et la valeur du travailleur individuel. Chefs et travailleurs du rang étaient imbus d'un idéalisme qui contenait une vision d'une vie meilleure, sans pour cela négliger la recherche de gains immédiats.

L'esprit de croisade et le zèle missionnaire qui régnaient dans les ateliers prenaient une allure émotionnelle et moralisante, lorsque les chefs et les syndiqués tentaient de faire partager leurs convictions par les non-syndiqués. Tout en identifiant leurs griefs à des injustices qu'on retrouvait au-delà de la situation immédiate du travail, tout en considérant le syndicalisme comme une cause, au même moment, ils croyaient qu'une amélioration des conditions ne pouvait s'obtenir que par l'action économique directe dans une industrie particulière et par des réformes législatives.

Mais, à cause de l'insuccès de telles démarches, les griefs individuels cédèrent le pas à la lutte pour la reconnaissance du groupe par les employeurs, la communauté et la société. La lutte pour la reconnaissance fit face à une amère résistance et cette hostilité à l'endroit de l'action collective fit naître chez les membres un esprit militant, un esprit qui donna une vigueur au mouvement, mais qui créa aussi des dissensions entre les éléments radicaux et conservateurs au sein des unions.

Les factions radicales considéraient le syndicalisme comme un véhicule pour la révolution sociale, tandis que l'aile conservatrice regardait le mouvement plutôt comme un moyen de réformer progressivement le système existant des salaires.

D'une façon générale, ce ne fut pas une conscience de classe de caractère marxiste qui devint la force dominante du mouvement ouvrier canadien durant cette période de formation; ce fut plutôt une conscience de classe de caractère réformiste. On en vint à croire fermement que la participation dans l'élaboration des décisions n'était possible que par le truchement du syndicalisme. C'est cette croyance qui a eu le plus d'influence sur la vie des travailleurs. C'est cette attitude à l'endroit des syndicats qui devint le principe dominant et qui influença la direction du développement futur du mouvement ouvrier canadien, quoiqu'on admette que cette généralisation n'implique pas que le mouvement ouvrier fut un mouvement « pur », et son mode de croissance indique qu'il a connu une série de divisions et de réalignements.

Au cours de ces années de formation, le caractère réformiste de la conscience de classe peut être attribué à l'influence du syndicalisme anglais sur les premières organisations de métier au Canada. La perspective anglaise a coloré les attitudes et les politiques des premières unions canadiennes à l'endroit d'une durée plus courte de la semaine de travail pour s'acheminer vers une vie meilleure par l'utilisation des loisirs, à l'endroit de l'assurance-santé, de l'égalité et des droits de l'homme.

L'accent sur la législation par la procédure parlementaire et sur le support des candidats favorables aux syndicats prenait son origine dans la tradition britannique. Malgré le voisinage des Etats-Unis et ses répercussions sur le mouvement ouvrier canadien, l'influence du syndicalisme anglais a laissé sa marque.

Aujourd'hui, on reproche au mouvement ouvrier canadien une absence d'idéologie et on considère le pragmatisme comme la philosophie qui modela un mouvement social au Canada sans vitalité ni vision. Sans doute, on ne peut retrouver dans le syndicalisme canadien la forte orientation politique qui caractérise plusieurs mouvements ouvriers européens. Cependant, l'action politique n'est pas complètement absente et les syndicats ont moussé non seulement le support de candidats favorables aux ouvriers mais aussi la formation d'un parti ouvrier canadien, et cela, même avant l'organisation sur une haute échelle des travailleurs de l'industrie. Chaque fois qu'on exprima une insatisfaction à l'endroit d'un projet de législation touchant les travailleurs, des recommandations pour l'organisation d'un parti ouvrier suivirent.

Contrairement à la politique de la Fédération américaine du Travail à l'égard des partis politiques, le congrès du CMTC en 1917 proposa la formation d'un parti politique indépendant au Canada. Peu d'années après, le CMTC reprit son rôle de groupe de pression à l'endroit de la législation, rôle qu'il a continué d'exercer jusqu'au moment de la fusion avec le CCT.

En acceptant une société de concurrence imparfaite et en utilisant ses énergies et ressources pour oeuvrer au sein du système capitaliste, le mouvement ouvrier survit en s'appuyant sur son rôle économique, au lieu de recourir à des dogmes politiques conflictuels. Alors, en rejetant l'affiliation politique jusqu'en 1940, les syndicats, comme institutions économiques, se transformèrent en une structure de pouvoir, qui prit une place importante dans l'économie.

Ce fut ce sens du réalisme et du pragmatisme qui attira l'attention du public sur la nature économique des syndicats. L'apathie à l'égard de la politique de partis devint un trait plus dominant que l'intérêt sporadique à l'endroit de l'action politique, et surtout, après avoir gagné l'appui légal, les unions ouvrières se tournèrent définitivement vers la négociation collective pour réaliser leurs objectifs.

DEUXIÈME PHASE DF DÉVELOPPEMENT : LA CONSOLIDATION

Le cadre légal qui permet au syndicalisme d'oeuvrer au sein des structures sociales existantes a une importance considérable au cours de cette deuxième phase. Quoique le droit de former des syndicats ouvriers fût accordé aux travailleurs canadiens par le Trade Union Act de 1872 et les lois Anti-Combines amendées en 1892, une politique positive d'acceptation ne vint qu'avec la passation du « Wartime Labour Relations Régulations Act » de 1944.

Au cours de ce stage, les organisations ouvrières font encore face à l'hostilité et la résistance des dirigeants d'entreprises. Bien que des efforts soient déployés pour trouver une solution de compromis aux intérêts conflictuels par la négociation et la convention collectives, cette période est caractérisée par une instabilité des relations syndicat-direction, puisqu'elle est une période d'expérimentation. C'est d'autant plus vrai lorsqu'on assiste à une période de prospérité économique où les syndicats exigent une part toujours croissante de la richesse nationale.

L'élément de réforme qu'on retrouvait au cours de la première phase de développement n'est plus maintenant le facteur dominant, quoiqu'il ne fut jamais complètement absent au sein du mouvement ouvrier.

Le but, maintenant, est d'obtenir un faisceau de bénéfices, soit sous forme de salaires plus élevés, de règlements d'atelier ou d'avantages marginaux à un coût minimum pour les membres. C'est en ce sens que les syndicats assument la fonction dominante de « syndicalisme d'affaires », telle qu'analysée par Hoxie.

L'idéalisme des premières années est étouffé par le conservatisme qui adhère dans une mesure plus grande qu'auparavant à la forme modifiée du capitalisme actuel.

La prospérité qu'a connu le travailleur canadien a diminué chez lui la conscience de classe. Des salaires plus élevés, des meilleures conditions de logement, un éventail plus grand des possibilités de voyager et de s'adonner à des activités culturelles incitèrent les travailleurs à s'identifier à la classe moyenne.

La philosophie du mouvement ouvrier reste dominée par une phase où le pragmatisme est la force motrice de l'institution. Cette phase de consolidation du syndicalisme se centre autour des campagnes d'organisation, du processus de négociation et d'une façon plus dramatique autour des grèves et « lockouts » à la suite des efforts de médiation et conciliation en vue d'apporter une solution aux conflits d'intérêts. Un idéal de réforme ne domine pas le mouvement ouvrier au cours de ce deuxième stage, puisque le processus de la négociation collective absorbe une grande partie des énergies. A mesure que leur force augmente en négociation, les unions se développent en formant des blocs qui manipulent une force économique tout en conservant leur potentiel pour une participation toujours plus grande sur le plan politique.

TROISIÈME PHASE DU DÉVELOPPEMENT : LA MATURITÉ

A ce stage de la croissance du mouvement ouvrier, on peut se demander s'il tend à accentuer son orientation politique. Quels indices d'un réveil idéologique peut-on remarquer chez le mouvement ouvrier canadien?

Nous avons vu quelle fut l'attitude des syndicats à l'endroit de l'action politique au cours de la première phase du développement.

A son congrès de 1943, le CMTC décida d'appuyer le CCF comme arme politique des travailleurs au Canada et recommanda à ses syndicats affiliés de se joindre au parti. La fusion des deux centrales canadiennes donna naissance au Congrès du Travail du Canada. Ce dernier joua un rôle important dans la formation du Nouveau Parti Démocratique en 1961, et, depuis ce moment, on encourage les syndiqués à s'affilier à ce parti. Cependant, le Congrès du Travail du Canada n'est pas affilié au NPD, puisqu'il maintient sa position traditionnelle à l'effet qu'un mouvement ouvrier ne doit pas tomber sous la férule d'un seul parti, mais doit demeurer libre de critiquer ou de supporter n'importe quel parti.

Ce réveil idéologique tant attendu par les optimistes avec la formation du NPD n'a pas eu lieu. Dans une grande mesure, cela peut s'expliquer par le succès obtenu avec le mécanisme de la négociation collective libre ou par l'apathie politique généralisée, ou par une déception de la politique du parti, ou encore par une difficulté de la part du mouvement ouvrier à s'adapter à une forme plus positive de planification économique.

Mais l'intérêt politique ou son absence n'est pas le seul facteur à influencer la philosophie du mouvement ouvrier au cours de cette troisième phase. A mesure que la taille des organisations s'accroît, une centralisation plus poussée et l'emploi d'experts ou de spécialistes sont nécessaires pour interpréter et solutionner les problèmes divers que soulève le mécanisme de la négociation collective. Jusqu'à un certain point, on peut affirmer que les relations syndicat-direction tendent vers une plus grande stabilité, de même qu'une attitude de coopération se développe chez les deux parties.

A mesure que les structures syndicales prennent de l'envergure, les relations sociales internes changent. Avec une centralisation plus poussée et un contrôle plus prononcé sur les politiques concernant les travailleurs du rang, le problème des droits de l'individu au sein d'un groupe prend une importance nouvelle, puisque le gigantisme syndical amène une dépersonalisation des relations interpersonnelles tout comme le gigantisme industriel.

De plus, la mentalité du syndicalisme change. Le zèle qu'on a déployé à transformer de petits syndicats en de grandes structures de pouvoir et d'influence tend à diminuer. Les grandes déclarations chargées d'émotions cèdent la place à des exposés rationnels basés sur des études élaborées au sein des départements de recherche dans les grandes centrales. Les effectifs ouvriers ne sont plus aiguillonnés par des envolées oratoires remplies de convictions sociales et morales. L'esprit du syndicalisme s'exprime dans la procédure de griefs ou dans des conflits qui dégénèrent en grèves.

A mesure que le pouvoir des syndicats s'accroît, les politiques étroites centrées sur la tâche sont maintenant élargies. La tendance vers une extension des « socialized wages » est un indice de l’insistence des syndicats sur la participation dans l'élaboration des politiques qui affectent les intérêts immédiats des travailleurs organisés. C'est aussi l'indice d'un effort de la part des syndicats pour s'intégrer plus fermement dans la société en recherchant les intérêts des travailleurs en longue période.

Donc, la philosophie du mouvement ouvrier au cours de cette dernière phase de son développement est caractérisée par un pragmatisme profondément ancré, emprunté à la deuxième étape de sa croissance, et transformé au cours d'une troisième phase en une structure complexe de pouvoir.

FR :

La substance de cet article a été présentée au congrès de l'ACFAS, à Ottawa, le 7 novembre 1964. L'auteur y résume d'abord les étapes franchies par le bill 54 avant son adoption le 22 juillet 1964. Il rattache ensuite à l’évolution générale de la législation ouvrière canadienne les principales innovations introduites par le Code du travail dans trois domaines: le droit d'association, l’unité de négociation et le règlement des conflits.

EN :

The new Québec Labour Code came into effect September 1st, 1964. It replaces the former Labour Relations Act and, in full or in part, six other related Acts. It represents Title One of a future Code which will eventually comprise all Québec legislation pertaining to labour.

Bill 54 — as the proposed Labour Code was known before being adopted — was brought before the Legislative Assembly on June 5, 1963, by the Honourable René Hamel, then Minister of Labour. It was simultaneously announced that the Parliamentary Committee on Industrial Relations would be revived and public hearings were set for late June. At these hearings, objections were so strong against certain sections, and recommendations so thorough-going that the government had to abandon its first idea to pass the Bill quickly.

When the second version was tabled, January 15, 1964, it was found strikingly similar to the first one, even worse in the eyes of the labour movement. Following public manifestations which included the threat of a general strike, major amendments were made to the Bill and a third version was presented to the Legislative Assembly on April 30, 1964. The amendments were intended to wider the scope of the Code, to eliminate the legal obligation of the secret ballot strike vote and to delete a reference to the Civil Code which has been introduced in the second version of the Bill.

Meanwhile the case of public services had been set aside for separate study. In March, a special Parliamentary Committee sat to examine all sections of the Bill relating to these employees. The Committee presented its report in May, but due to further interventions of labour bodies, the government went far beyond the Committee's recommendations. The fourth version of Bill 54, presented July 9, 1964, incorporated basic amendments to labour relations in public services : it granted the right to strike to all public service employees except policemen and firemen (except also public school teachers and public servants whose cases still remain unsettled) with limited special powers to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council when public health or safety would be endangered by a work stoppage.

Seldom did a Bill provoke so many discussions between interested groups and the government and seldom did it undergo so many changes between its first « first reading » in June, 1963, and its unanimous adoption on July 22, 1964.

The main changes introduced by the new Labour Code fit properly although differently in the evolution of Canadian labour law over the past hundred years. This evolution has centered successively around three aspects of labour relations : 1 ) the right of association, which dominated the last century ; 2 ) progressive government intervention in dispute settlement, a process which began with the present century and was topped by P.C. 1003 and the Québec Labour Relations Act in 1944; 3) determination of a special type of labour-management relations through certification of labour unions, a system entrusting a union with exclusive rights of representation for bargaining purposes regarding employees of a defined unit.

RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION — The Labour Code has considerably widened the scope of application of the former Labour Relations Act, bringing under the jurisdiction of the Code new categories of employees previously deprived of such legal help in the exercise of their right to organize (s. 1, m). Among those who may now apply for certification are to be found : domestic servants, farm employees, provided they number at least three, engineers, architects, doctors, accountants and other professional employees wishing to organize, provided they do so as a separate group (s. 20). But this does not mean legal sanctioning of a real unionization of cadres : all employees with managing functions remain outside of the application of the Code.

In certain fields where unionization is already recognized but difficult, the Code provides new support. Thus the owner of any land or limit where logging or mining operations are carried on must allow any representative of an association of employees holding a permit of the Labour Relations Board to pass and have access to the camps (s. 8 and 9). From now on and by law the employer must make the check-off of union dues for all his employees members of a certified association who authorize him in writing to do so (s. 38).

Thus the recent Québec Labour Code continues the general trend of labour legislation over the last century, which has tended to give increasing protection to the right of association and to the groups organized in accordance.

BARGAINING RIGHTS AND BARGAINING UNITS — By establishing the certification system, the law has imposed a definite type of labour-management relations. A very important aspect of this relationship is the bargaining unit.

In his book on LABOUR POLICY AND LABOUR ECONOMICS IN CANADA, Professor H.D. Woods has underlined the tendency of Labour Relations Acts and Labour Relations Boards to favour single-employer bargaining units. He has pointed out the advantages of redrafting the legislation to eliminate this bias toward plant or single-employer units, in order to emphasize the importance of the judgment of the interested parties and the members of the Boards. He considers also that technological change and government economic planning call for larger bargaining units.

The provisions contained in the new Labour Code ignore the school of thought represented by Professor Woods's study. The Code recognizes no other certification unit than one-employer units (s. 20). It has even suppressed the few elements in the Labour Relations Act that gave some support to larger units.

Multi-employer bargaining and industry-wide bargaining will have to remain on a strictly voluntary basis. The few provisions in the Code that may lead in that direction (such as the inchoative status given to recognized associations already bargaining at the industry) will prove either too weak to be significant or, as in the case of the binding character of a collective agreement made by an employers' association on all its members, present and future, it may even hamper employer organization, a prerequisite to industry-wide bargaining.

From the viewpoint of the bargaining unit, the Labour Code represents no progress from the original provisions of 1944 in that field. It even appears to run counter to present economic development and seems rather inspired by economic liberalism of the past century.

DISPUTE SETTLEMENT — The biggest change concerns dispute settlement. A new trend had manifested itself in the June, 1961, amendments to the Labour Relations Act, which had introduced a first restriction to government intervention in that sphere. The Labour Code, emphasizing that trend, reduces government intervention to almost its simplest expression : it leaves only one step — conciliation — and a shortened over-all waiting period (60 days from the notice to the Minister of a deadlock in negotiations, 90 days in the case of a first convention) before the strike or lock-out becomes legal.

These modifications correspond to a rather new way of thinking among Canadian labour experts, according to whom the best way for government to help solve industrial conflicts is, after intervening through a relatively short conciliation effort, to leave the parties free to use the economic weapon of the strike or the lock-out at their discretion. Solving the dispute is their own responsibility, to be put squarely on their shoulders.

The restitution of the right to strike to public service employees (although it appeared only in the final version of the Bill) reflects the same approach to the problem. Even where public health or safety is involved, the Cabinet has no other power than to set up a fact finding board; after the appointment of such a board, the Attorney-General may petition a judge of the Superior Court for an injunction, and the judge may grant the injunction if he considers that a work stoppage would imperil the public health or safety; but the injunction must cease not later than twenty days after the 60-day delay allowed to the board to file its report. Further than that, the government has no power, except the general power it always has to call the Legislative Assembly for ad hoc legislation, if the case would justify such an extraordinary measure.

This new approach represents a complete reversal of trend in Canadian labour legislation, which was marked, from 1900 to 1950, by ever growing and more normative government intervention.

In summary and in relation to past Canadian labour law, the provisions of the Québec Labour Code reveal the following orientations. They broaden the scope of the right of association and add new supports to its exercise. Concerning the bargaining unit, they seem to go contrary to the new forces shaping our economy. In dispute settlement, they rightfully reverse an over-saturated trend of increasing government intervention.

As a whole, they represent a liberalization of labour-management relations. In the second case, the term would have to be understood in reference to economic liberalism of the past century. Save for that exception, the new Code appears as a landmark of real social progress.

FR :

L'auteur démontre, au moyen de clauses significatives, que la seule lecture du texte des conventions collectives ne permet pas de connaître toute la portée des transformations technologiques sur les relations de travail. Une recherche menée sur le terrain s'avère nécessaire à cette fin. L'auteur étudie également le rôle des clauses d'ancienneté en cas de transformations technologiques.

EN :

GENERAL STATEMENT

The following remarks are intended to show, by way of examples, that to provide a useful assessment of the impact of technological change on collective agreements, the statistical analysis or the mere reading of collective agreement provisions is insufficient ; this analysis and reading must be supplemented by field research conducted at the place of employment. It is our belief that such research is necessary to determine : (a) to what extent do collective agreements protect workers whose jobs are affected by technological changes; (b) to what extent are collective agreements facilitating the adaptation of industrial firms to technological changes.

THE READING OF COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS IS OFTEN A SOURCE OF USEFUL BUT INCOMPLETE INFORMATION

Let us illustrate the above statement by recalling here that during the preparation of the study onCollective Agreement Provisions in Major Manufacturing Establishments (1963),¹ it has discovered that the problems resulting from technological changes and automation where too vast and too complex to be examined meaningfully on the basis of an analysis of collective agreements alone. It would indeed appear that technological change can, in fact, lead to the formulation of numerous agreement provision that will not necessarily make an open and obvious reference to the problems with which they deal.

For example, there could be in collective agreements notices of lay-off that can be granted in cases of « changes in methods of production ». When one reads such provisions, one is bound to ask certain questions : What kind of changes in methods of production are dealt with in such provisions ? Are these changes of a technological nature, or are they of a general nature ? For example, do these changes refer to the closing of a department of the plant, or to the installation of new equipment which would result in an increase in the volume of production while resulting at the same time in a decrease of personnel ? It can easily be seen that the collective agreement itself does not generally contain the answers to those questions. It is rather in the establishment where the agreement applies that such information will be found.

Incidentally, certain collective agreements might also contain special provisions dealing with the employment of older workers, provisions that could very well be the direct result of technological change without containing any reference to these changes.

The two observations that have just been made indicate that it is not only by reading collective agreements that research workers will always be in a position to determine whether the establishments in which these agreements apply have been subject to changes in technology. But another observation ought to be made. Even when collective agreements do contain specific provisions concerning problems resulting from automation or technological change, the mere reading of such provisions will not always provide sufficient information as to the effect that these provisions might have.

For example, a provision such as the one which follows is of great interest in today's context of technological change. However, the mere reading of this provision cannot satisfy research workers anxious to know what kind of impact it has. Here is the provision in question : « In the event of technological changes which affect the employees, management will inform local officials of such changes. The company will consider present employees for new jobs arising out of such technological changes before hiring from outside. — Present employees who are offered and accept such a job created by technological change and who require training in order to perform the new job effectively will be provided with such training by the company. It is understood that employees selected far such training must be willing to take the required aptitude test ».

Another example. When a collective agreement clearly and specifically provides that employees will receive straight time pay for time spent in a vocational school of recognized standing for the purpose of learning new industrial techniques, techniques which are the result of changes in technology, it can be expected that those who read such provisions wish to know how it is applied. Which are the workers who benefit from it ? How are these workers selected ? Which are the reactions of workers who are requested or who decide to take the courses ? Which are the teaching methods followed in these schools ? Finally, what kind of impact and benefits do these provisions have on the qualifications of the work force in a given establishment? Here again, it must be pointed out that collective agreements do not generally contain the answers to these questions.

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING SETTLEMENTS RESULTING FROM TECHNOLOCICAL CHANGES OR FROM THE EXPECTATION OF SUCH CHANGES

By way of new examples, let us now have a brief look at recent collective agreements in Canada, agreements which have been obviously affected by technological changes or, at least, by the expectation of such changes. A brief reference to some of these agreements follows.

Example A : In a large firm in Western Canada, management has agreed to provide the union with as much advance notice as possible of any intention to introduce automation, new equipment or new procedures which might result in the displacement of personnel. Under the terms of this agreement, employees becoming redundant due to automation, new equipment, or new office procedures, shall be eligible for training to equip them either for the operation of new equipment or for qualifying in new positions. General retraining shall also be made available to such redundant personnel who are able to qualify for other vacancies available in the firm.

Example B : Still in Western Canada, a press agency has recently concluded a three-year agreement. It includes a clause ensuring that during the life of the agreement, there will be no lay-offs for economy reasons, or as a result of new automated processes or if a publication is sold or discontinued. Under the agreement, provision was also made for a joint standing committee to study the effects of automation in the company and to make recommendations for possible relocation and retraining of employees affected by new processes ; the company will provide the money for retraining employees.

Example C : Another important company located in Canada has recently signed a collective agreement containing a clause providing that employees with ten or more years of service will not be demoted by more than one labour grade by reason of technological change.

Example D : In a large plant located in Eastern Canada, there is a collective agreement containing a retraining provision. The following information could be obtained concerning the application of the provision in question :

a ) The plan was developed jointly by the plant management and the union over a period of eight to ten months, away from the bargaining table;

b) According to one company official, the intent of the plan is to upgrade workers so that they could hold their jobs as technological changes and the resulting changes in job content went forward ;

c) In addition to on-the-job training, maintenance workers may take related courses in the evenings at the local vocational schools. The company pays tuition fees and half the cost of textbooks, and shift workers enrolling in these courses are assigned to day work during the school term ;

d) In 1963, 88 employees took the courses, and only three dropped out. (It might be noted here that for many years, similar arrangements had been made for apprentice as well. )

It would indeed be superfluous to ask again with respect to the provisions that have just been briefly described, the questions that were asked at the beginning of this paper concerning other labour management arrangements.

ROLE OF SENIORITY PROVISIONS UNDER CONDITIONS OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE

Before concluding, let us consider briefly the role played by seniority provisions — provisions which are closely related to job security — under conditions of technological change. It will be recalled that seniority provisions on lay-off were found in almost all of the establishments covered by the study to which reference was made earlier in this article. Some of these provisions were formulated in this manner : « In the event of reduction of staff and rehiring of employees, seniority shall apply, provided the employee with the greater amount of seniority can satisfactorily perform the job he is assigned to, or can learn the job within a reasonable time ». This type of clause was, of course, classified as one which provides that the senior employees will be retained provided their qualifications (or ability) to perform available jobs are sufficient. However, one might wonder what is the real impact or meaning of such a provision in a context of technological change ? What would be management and union policies followed in applying the seniority provision in cases of technological change ? And,in the provision itself, what would « reasonable time » really mean ? Would « reasonable time » be defined by management alone ? Or by both union and management ? Also, in cases of changing occupational requirements, would it be the policy of management to give an advance notice to the employees who may become affected by these changes so as to give these workers « reasonable time » to learn the new jobs to which they would be assigned ? One can immediately realize that these questions, as vitally important as they are, cannot be usefully answered on the basis of an analysis of collective agreements only. It is only through an analysis of agreements supplemented byfield research that meaningful information could be supplied.

WHY FIELD RESEARCH IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ?

In the preceding paragraphs, we have attempted to show, with a degree of insistence, that to assess in a useful manner the impact of technological changes on collective agreements, and vice versa, an analysis of collective agreements — as important as this analysis is — must be supplemented by field research. It might, of course, be asked at this point : Why this insistence ? Personally, we are convinced that the reasons why research in the field of labour-management relations should now be intensified or even reoriented in part, are very important indeed. For unions, industrial firms and for public services, it is certainly useful to know of the existence of agreement provisions which are intended to protect workers under conditions of changes in technology, or are intended to facilitate the adaptation of industrial firms facing automation. But it might also be useful to unions, industrial firms and public services to know which are thepractical lessons that can be drawn from the application of some of those provisions. In more concrete terms, it would seem that a company and a union which are about to develop a joint program for the retraining or readaptation of employees, would have nothing to lose by learning how similar programs are working out in other firms. This company and this union might also benefit from learning what kinds of obstacles have to be overcome ; which are the training or retraining methods that are most successfully applied ; which are the kinds of training officers that are most appreciated by the workers subjected to these retraining or readaptation programs, etc., etc. It is also our belief that the knowledge of such detailed information might save time, efforts and money. This example, selected from among many others, shows clearly that research work conducted with respect to specific and concrete situations in which labour and management have jointly faced technological change and automation through their collective agreements, can be extremely useful indeed to industry in general. It is also our belief that such research is important not only to discover the ways in which automation can be met in a positive manner, but also to determine what kind of changes could be brought to our industrial relations system so that technological change and automation can really be a source of economic expansion and increased human welfare.

CONCLUSION

By way of conclusion, it will be mentioned here that the Economics and Research Branch of the Federal Department of Labour is now engaged in a detailed study of the effects of technological change on industrial relations ; this study is covering certain aspects of railway operations. We are told by the author of the study, Mr. John Millons, that the study is not only based on a careful analysis of collective agreements but also on carefully planned field work which, it is expected, will provide a general description of the adaptation of the industrial relations framework to conditions of technological change. The study will also illustrate, by way of practical examples, the ways in which specific agreement provisions have affected the work histories of men displaced through technological changes. The nature of the methods followed to prepare this study is, we believe, a significant development in the field of industrial relations research in Canada. For the good of our economy, it is to be hoped that this study will be followed by others.

Note 1: Collective Agreement Provisions in Major Manufacturing Establishments (1963) Economies and Research Branch, Department of Labour, Canada, pp 31.

EN :

The author describes the events which brought about and accompanied the Winnipeg general strike in Spring 1919, where many individual were arrested. The main interest of Mr. Greening bears upon the trials which followed. Attention is drawn on the following issues: Under what counts the persons involved in the strike were indicted by the Canadian Government? What was the content of the agreements evoked by both parties at the trial? What was the general social context in which those events took place? The interest of the author is to give a tentative answer to those questions.

FR :

Au printemps de 1919 eut lieu à Winnipeg la seule grève générale qui se soit jamais produite au Canada et l'une des rares à survenir dans un pays industriel moderne. Deux premiers groupes de travailleurs déclenchèrent un « walk-out » le 16 mai, et la grande majorité des membres de l'Union (One Big Union) en firent bientôt autant. Au cours des quelques jours suivants, la vie de la ville était menacée d'une paralysie complète. En même temps, la crise s'aggravait et l'atmosphère se réchauffait progressivement. Le premier trouble éclata au début de juin.

Après avoir suivi les événements de très près, le Gouvernement Borden intervint. Dans la nuit du 16 au 17 juin, 1919, plusieurs arrestations furent effectuées par la Gendarmerie Royale. Privé de ses chefs, le mouvement de la grève s'effrita vers la fin de juin, et les grévistes retournèrent au travail sans avoir atteint leurs objectifs.

Mais le sort des accusés souleva un vif intérêt, non seulement au Canada, mais aussi dans les pays européens et aux Etats-Unis. Au cours de l'été 1919, il apparut évident que Meighen et le Gouvernement fédéral allaient s'efforcer de prouver que les personnes arrêtées avaient été étroitement reliées à une conspiration révolutionnaire dans la ligne de Lénine et Trotsky. Depuis le début, il apparaissait que les accusés ne subiraient pas un juste procès.

Pour quelque raison inconnue, le premier à subir son procès fut Russell, en novembre 1919 : celui des autres eut lieu en janvier 1920. Mais le déroulement des deux procès et leur résultat se ressemblèrent beaucoup. L'acte d'accusation préparé par Ottawa contre les accusés était long et comprenait une longue liste de chefs d'accusation. La conspiration séditieuse fut le chef principal ; l'usurpation de pouvoir en fut un autre et on prétendit également que le « walk-out » avait été illégal selon certaines clauses de la Loi des enquêtes en matière de différends industriels.

Andrews, qui était le principal procureur du Gouvernement fédéral, utilisa des tactiques chiches et brutales dans les deux procès. Il essaya d'éveiller, dans l'esprit des membres du jury et du public en général, toutes sortes de préjugés de classes et patriotiques, en traitant les accusés d'anarchistes dangereux, d'hommes diaboliques et sinistres qui essayaient d'utiliser la grève pour en arriver à détruire toute la structure de la société dans l'Ouest canadien.

De leur côté, les accusés se dirent les martyrs des mêmes préjugés de la part des groupes de propriétaires de Winnipeg et du Manitoba, et ils prétendirent qu'il ne s'agissait pas uniquement de leur procès, mais de celui de tout le mouvement radical de l'Ouest du Canada.

De plus, on ridiculisa les prétentions de conspiration avancées par Andrews et on affirma que tout le conflit avait fondamentalement porté sur la question de la négociation collective et de la reconnaissance syndicale de l'Union.

Les procès, qui se terminèrent en mars 1920, suscitèrent beaucoup d'intérêt, comme la grève, parmi les groupements syndicaux, à la fois au Canada et à l'étranger. Dans ces milieux, on était d'opinion que les accusés n'avaient pas subi un juste procès et qu'ils avaient été victimes d'hystérie anti-radicale à la MacCarthy. On avait une preuve de plus que l'administration de la justice au Canada favorisait les classes de propriétaires.

La grève et les procès qui suivirent eurent d'importantes et de profondes conséquences dans l'histoire politique et syndicale au Canada.

Le « One Big Union » tomba vite dans l'oubli. Et ce fut la fin de toute la vague de radicalisme qui avait déferlé dans l'Ouest canadien, pendant la dernière partie de la guerre et dont le point culminant avait été les événements de Winnipeg, en mai et juin 1919.

FR :

L'histoire du syndicalisme dans le Québec est à écrire. On trouvera dans cet article le récit de la première grève d'envergure que connût la province. Elle a été menée par la CTCC dans l'industrie du textile. L’auteur y a été intimement mêlé puisqu'il était alors le président de cette centrale ouvrière et a pris part à toutes les tractations. On ne s'attend pas à ce qu'il soit impartial. Mais la valeur de son récit vient de ce qu'il présente cet événement important tel que l'a vu et vécu un des auteurs principaux.

EN :

Can we really look upon the Industrial Relations Counselor as a professional? It is significant that the question is still being raised even within the new Society of Industrial Relations Counselors which, for almost two years, has enjoyed a fullfledged legal status like other older professional groups. The purpose of this working paper is not to prove at any cost that the question should be answered in the affirmative. Quite the contrary it is in no way based on any preconceived idea, but simply attempts to furnish the principal elements of an answer to our question and to provide food for thought on the criteria of the professional status insofar as they apply to the Industrial Relations Counselors.