Canadian Autoworkers Union Summary

PROFILE OF A UNION

Canadian Autoworkers Union

By:
Rania Dakik 6378797
Amber Wadhawan 6049689
Victoria Mihalic

ADM3334: Industrial Relations
Section: A
Date: December 1 2014

Table of Content
Executive summary…………………………………………………………………….
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………
History……………………………………………………………………………………
Structure…………………………………………………………………………………
Representation and Growth…………………………………………………………….
Bargaining Priorities……………………………………………………………………
Key Challenges and Achievements………………………………………………………………………….
Risk of Strike………………………………………………………………….
Dealing with Concession……………………………………………………
The issue of Raiding…………………………………………………………..
The future for the CAW………………………………………………………………………
Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………
Appendices………………………………………………………………………
Work Cited…………………………………………………………………………

Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION
The Canadian Autoworkers Union, in other words the CAW, was created in 1985 after its separation from the United Autoworkers union. Since its separation it grew to become one of Canada’s largest private sector unions with around 200 000 participating members. The CAW has continue to grow and
distinguish itself from the rest by constantly merging with other unions to represent all labour work forces within Canada. Members that are part of the Canadian Autoworkers Union come from such trades as health care, manufacturing, and even fishing. The primary goal of the CAW is to represent every sector in the Canadian economy, and properly fight for the rights of the workers. Currently the CAW is part of a much larger union called Unifor, which is also comprised of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, also known as the CEP.
HISTORY
In 1935 a group of labour workers in the United States of America came together to form the United Autoworkers Union. Soon after the reach of the UAW extended into Canada in 1937. However, after a series of a long arguments, negotiations, and various discussions the CAW was split from the UAW in 1985. This was considered one of the most important decisions made by Canadians because they gained autonomy from international union and created their own standard for workers’ rights. There are various reasons that people use to defend the split of the CAW from the UAW, however there are a few key issues that pushed this motion into play. One of these main key issues was due to the uneven geographical development of both management and labour that led the CAW to have better set of collective bargaining objects than its U.S. counterpart. During the 1980’s there were lots of major power moves being made in the automotive industry, and these moves differentiated the difference between how Canadians and Americans perceived priorities and workers’ rights. The rise of the Japanese automotive force and the global recession, also led to the split of the CAW from the UAW. Bob White the director of the UAW at the time, along with associates Buzz Hargrove and Bib Nickerson, were the original founders of the CAW. In December of 1984 the decision was finalized and the split was put into work. It was clear that both unions had different priorities, the CAW felt that the U.S. giving away too much in the way of concessions during bargaining phases, such as profit sharing. This was a beneficial act for both the Canadian automotive work force and the leaders who made this possible.
STRUCTURE
The structure of the CAW strongly resembles that of the Government of Canada, or various other democratic governments. A series of nominations and elections are used to delegate specific individuals to be the voice of the people. As mentioned above the primary goal for the CAW is to represent each economic sector and safeguard the rights of the workers. The perfect way to ensure that this goal is achieved is through a democratic structure, a voice of the people for the people. Workers from the bottom of the employment chain to the top all have an equal say and equal right to ensure that together the CAW remains the largest private sector union in Canada.
Similar to how the government of Canada has municipalities, provincial office members, and a federal office of members, as does the CAW beginning with its Local unions. These individual local unions also follow the democratic structure however some may deviate their operations process. They all aim to reach the same goal is its larger parent union, the CAW, and each member has the same opportunity to express their voice on any working conditions or working contracts as they see fit. This is made possible by a series of elections to find Council Delegates and members for a Local Union Executive Board. This board is comprised of delegated members that participate in meetings, and are responsible for collecting, filtering, and taking care of any complaints or comments made by the workers. The members of the Executive board get together and elect a Local Union President, similar to the mayor of a municipality. The Local Union President has the responsibility for attaining representing the Local Unions at the next stage of the structure, the National Executive Board.
The National Executive Board, is comprised of various Local Unions throughout the country. This is the most powerful authority in the larger parent unions, the CAW. The purpose of the NEB is to create appropriate representation for workers of different sex, race, or color. The NEB is categorized not in localities but in regions and sectors, and since the early 90’s they have followed this structure without problems. These members of the NEB meet around four to five times a year to discuss regular matters, and correctly distribute authority within the smaller local unions.
After the National Executive Board, comes the CAW Council and the Quebec Council.
These councils are responsible for the negations of workers contracts and other major union issues. The members of the CAW Council are elected through a democratic process from delegates of the Local Unions. The reason for the difference in the CAW Council and the Quebec Council is due to different legal practices in Quebec and the rest of the country. The CAW Council meets three to four times a year and the Quebec Council meets with the CAW Council once every three years. These democratic parliaments of the CAW are accountable for leadership and staffing issues in the Local Unions. These two councils also hold regular workshops to help workers develop leadership skills, and help to assemble union
activists.

REPRESENTATION AND GROWTH
The Canadian Auto Workers union represents more than 300,000 workers spanning 20 sectors of the economy. CAW primarily represents the manufacturing, communications, transportation, as well as health, education, and transit sectors (Financial post, 2013). Over the last 25 years, the CAW has more than doubled in size and evolved into a diversified general workers union. Through over 45 new ventures and mergers, CAW aims to recruit non-traditional members and win over members from representing a stable employment environment, providing benefits, establishing balance and satisfying the needs of Canadians so they can achieve reasonable standards of living (Financial post, 2013). The mergers with CALEA, FFAW, CBRT & GW, and RWC unions have had an immense impact on the growth and development of CAW. On July 1, 1985 the first major merger with the Canadian Airline Employees Association (CALEA) was established. This merger was significant, as it brought in nearly 4,000 new members and was the starting point, which lead to pursuing partnerships with other unions. Three years later in November, CAW gained an impressive 24,000 members from the merger with Fisherman, Food, and Allied Workers Union (FFAW). In June of 1994, a substantive 34,000 members were brought in from the merger with the Canadian Brotherhood of Railway, Transport and General Workers Union (CBRT & GW). The merger with Retail, Wholesale Canadian Union took place in November 1999 and acquired 23,000 new members (CAW, 2007). Each merger has impacted CAW and has contributed to the overall growth of the union. The Canadian Auto Workers Union has grown to be Canada’s largest private sector union representing workers in practically all sectors. In Appendix 1, table 1 illustrates the various sectors of CAW. The main sectors include auto assembly, aerospace, fisheries, etc. but also expand into airlines, mining, retail, and healthcare. In Appendix 1, table 2, it is evident that the CAW is concentrated in the Ontario region. Additional facts regarding CAW and their representation include the following:
Nearly 30 percent of women represent total membership
A significant amount of over 27,000 members are skilled trades workers
All members are arranged into 254 local unions and bargains over 1,500 collective agreements (CAW Bargaining Philosophy 2012)
Through various mergers and acquisitions the Canadian Auto Workers Union has developed into one of the most nationally prominent private sector unions.

BARGAINING PRIORITIES
The CAW holds their bargaining philosophy to the highest degree as it influences future bargaining power and shapes their union’s identity. CAW represents various sectors of the economy however remains consistent with their bargaining tactics throughout. Their bargaining standards form a democratic structure for their members and continue to raise standards for all workers expanding individual rights (CAW Bargaining Philosophy, 2012). Pattern bargaining plays a pivotal role in the CAW as it emphasizes that members take on leadership roles as well as expressing concerns, voting, and other commentary. Pattern bargaining entails negotiating a deal in one setting that can then be applied to other workplaces or a specific employer. The end goal of pattern bargaining is to improve common standards in various units across an industry while focusing on bargaining power without sacrificing members.
The second priority is wage solidarity, establishing both equal pay for equal work and removing labour costs from competition. CAW’s objective is to demonstrate parallel wages for comparable jobs in the workplace while maintaining similar wages, pensions, and benefits. The third priority is opposition to two-tier wages. The CAW is tremendously resistant to perpetuating this technique as it contradicts their stance on equality. Two-tier wages have lead to falling morale, internal competition, and an overall weakened union composition. The next prime concern is deadline bargaining. CAW feels that the pressure of a strike deadline can concentrate on the employer as well as reaching an agreement before the expiration of contracts. Three-year agreements pose to be a reasonable time frame to achieve stability while keeping up with environmental changes. A long-term agreement can take away bargaining power and further distance workers from relevant decision-making. Finally, the intention is to resist employer demands, to ensure they play a leadership role in bargaining, and visualizing future goals. CAW will continue to make progress in the labour environment while keeping members’ best interests in line with bargaining efforts throughout diverse sectors. (Eaton & Verma, 2006).
CHALLENGES AND ACHIEVENTS
There are four key challenges and achievements associated with CAW union. The first being, the risk of strike, secondly dealing with concession, thirdly the concern of raiding, and lastly, what the future of CAW will lead to.
Risk of Strike
The issue of strike has become a growing concern for many firms. The Canadian Auto Workers union threatened to pursue a strike in August 2012 if they were not provided with a new deal with the automobile manufactures. The three largest automobile manufactures, known as the Big 3(Ford, General Motors, Chrysler), had been holding back from major concessions from the Canadian operations. However, Ford was the first of the Big 3 to fall apart. They began to negotiate a contract at the start of September with all three automakers, they imposed a large demand in order to resume work. On September 16 2012, the CAW union had successfully agreed to a four year (2016) deal with Ford Motor Company. This agreement offered:
Provided the 800 employees who were recently laid-off to obtain their position while also creating 600 new openings within the Canadian firms. it will cover employees costs of living as well as sanctions Moreover, after the agreement that Ford signed with the Union, it only took four days for the General Motors to arrange a deal with CAW. This agreement was identical to the one that Ford signed, which lead to having the laid-off workers put back to work and new jobs created (Jones, 2012). Lastly, CAW was able to achieve a new collective agreement with Chrysler on September 26 2012. They agreed to match the wages paid and the benefits provided to the employees with the agreements that Ford and GM signed with the Union, while also offering to maintain the five shifts of operation for 7,500 Canadian employees for the next two years. The technique used by the three automobile companies; to mimic the same deal with the union, referred to as pattern bargaining, was very effective for the CAW. The negotiations for better pay and benefits lasted approximately three weeks, and resulted in the CAW union winning the agreement from all three major automobile companies, making the auto manufacturing market more competitive than ever before (Keenan, 2012)

Dealing with Concessions
Furthermore, the topic of how CAW dealt with concessions will be discussed in this section.
In 1979, with Chrysler’s financial crisis at an all time high, the United Auto Workers (UAW) union created a system to enhance equality in pay for all the auto workers, notwithstanding creating the vehicle. However , while the UAW were capable to convey equal pay between all automobile employees, the American legislation dictated that Chrysler’s workers (even those based in Canada), were to make significant concessions. This caused some conflict, because the Canadian firms of the UAW indicated that they should not have to be bound by what the Americans indicate in their legislation. In 1981, the Union- company relationship and decision making was able to be complete without the imposition of the Government and legislation in the United States. As the year progressed, a vote was held to find a solution to either condemn or advance the concessions made by the Chrysler employees. This poll was based on the combination of the Canadian and American votes, due to an international agreement that the Canadian auto workers part taking in. After the votes were tallied, it revealed that the majority of voters indicated an interest in the fostering of concessions.
However, in 1981, there was another vote held in the Windsor plant to reject the concessions, which tallied the majority of the votes, bringing an end to the international agreement within the UAW, which hence condemned the concessions in the spring that year (Gindin, 1989)

The issue of Raiding
Raiding is the solicitation of members of another union to leave that union’s representation and join your union. This is applicable in the CAW union because in the year 2000, they were brandished with the raiding of 30,000 Service Employees International Union (SEIU) workers.
While CAW denies ever intentionally soliciting SEIU workers, the president at the time, Buzz Hargrove, specified “if a group of workers decides, through legitimate dissent and debate within their organization, and decide to leave to talk to the CAW, we will be open to talk to any group of workers in the country to see if we can assist them as they go about that kind of change”. Even with these accusations of raiding, 80% of SEIU workers decided to reject the raiding attempt of CAW and remained tied to the SEIU (Solway, 2000).
The Future for the CAW The future for the Canadian Autoworkers Union looks very promising as of 2013, they have merged Canada’s two largest labour unions together; CAW with another union called communications, Energy and Paperwork Union of Canada (CEP). From this came the Union called Unifor; Canada’s largest private sector union. Currently there are over 305,000 members’ associated with this union, as well as working within every major sector of the Canadian economy.
CONCLUSION

APPENDICES
1.11

1.22

REFERENCES
Campbell, Will. "Presidents of CAW, CEP Step down as Unions Unite in Mega- merger." Financial Post. Canadian Press, 8 Aug. 2013. Web. 15 Nov. 2014.

"CAW Bargaining Philosophy." CAW Bargaining Philosophy CAW Bargaining
Philosophy (n.d.): n. pag. CAW TCA Canada, 2012. Web.

Solway. (2000, October 30). Anatomy of a Raid: SEIU Canada Tells its Story. Straight Goods,
Retrieved from http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/08/18/768858/-Unions-Launch-Air-Raid-On-Grassley-and-Blue-Cross-Democrats

"CAW, CEP Merged Union to Be Called Unifor." Financial Post Business CAW CEP Merged
Union to Be CalledUnifor Comments. Canadian Press, May 2013. Web. Nov. 2014.

Keenan, G. (2012, September 26). CAW Reaches Deal With Chrysler. The Globe and Mail.
Retrieved from www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/caw-reaches-deal-with-chrysler/article4570790/

Mackey, Jeff. "Unifor, Canada 's Newest Union." Business Canada. The Canadian Press, Aug.
2013. Web.
CAW. (2007). About the CAW. Retrieved from http://www.caw.ca/en/about-the-caw.htm
Eaton, J., & Verma, A. (2006). Does “fighting back” make a difference? The Case of The Canadian Auto Workers Union. Journal of Labour Research, 27(2), 187-212.
Jones, A. (2012, September 16). Canadian Auto Workers Strike? CAW Gives GM Surprise
Deadline.The Huffington Post. Retrieved from www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/09/20/canadian-auto-workers-strike_n_1901170.html