Newly unionized workers say they face intimidation from their employers

“Fear campaign,” “intimidation,” and agency workers to replace them: half of a newly certified union unit has faced termination of employment at the Latin American food distribution company Produits des Champs. The employer is talking about “restructuring” and is refusing to publicly defend its version of events; the National Trade Union Center (CSN) has filed a complaint with the Administrative Labor Tribunal (TAT).

These obstacles to defending better working conditions are of great concern to the trade union community and to those mainly concerned, who have precarious migratory status.

“We joined the union thinking that the law would protect us, but we just feel like we’re in the countries where we come from and where employers think they can act outside the law. It surprised me,” says Santiago, one of the dismissed workers, in an interview with DutyHe asked that his identity be withheld for fear of reprisals, still holding out hope of reinstatement in his former job at Produits Des Champs.

Most of them recently arrived in the country, six employees — out of the thirteen in the unit — were the victims of an “attempt to break the union,” says the CSN. Delivery drivers or handlers at the warehouse located in Saint-Hubert, these new arrivals say they worked long hours for wages hovering around $17 an hour.

The complaint filed with the TAT by the CSN on behalf of five of these individuals aims to demonstrate violations of the Labour Code for obstruction of union activities and intimidation as well as unlawful infringement of freedom of association. The employer allegedly used “several excuses to get rid of employees” and thus weaken the union, which is described as “retaliation” in the court documents consulted by The Duty.

According to the complaint, the employer, Produits des Champs, claims that certain contracts expired naturally and that it had chosen to turn to a placement agency to meet its needs, following a “reorganization” or “restructuring.”

The company declined our interview requests, saying it would refrain from making public comments. “This measure will allow us to focus on maintaining a constructive and respectful dialogue with our employees and union representatives, ensuring that all aspects of the process are carried out in an orderly manner and in compliance with the law,” the company wrote to Duty Julio Venegas, one of the main shareholders, according to the business registry.

Seen from the inside

On the employees’ side, the story diverges from this version. “As soon as we had a union, we started to feel pressure,” Santiago reports. Many of his colleagues “don’t know their rights here,” he recalls: “When we arrive in this country, we try to have our first Canadian work experience, that’s what all the bosses ask for.”

On April 29, a request for accreditation was filed. The following week, the human resources manager met with one of the two employees most active in the unionization campaign. She then informed him that his contract would not be renewed, mentioning a “reorganization” process.

The man in question had just been promoted in position and salary, just three weeks earlier. The day before his dismissal, he had only received a warning for wearing a cap in the warehouse, “while never before has wearing a cap been a reason for discipline,” the complaint states.

Despite this announced reorganization, positions in the warehouse are still posted on Facebook at this time.

“They used the pretext of restructuring to instill fear, there was intimidation,” Santiago said. The union also describes these weeks as a “campaign of fear” that is taking hold.

The following week, another colleague lost his job. And the following week, another one, too. The human resources director then made no secret of the fact that they would be replaced by workers from employment agencies, according to the statements reported in the court documents.

I never thought it would get this bad with them and I just hope they respect our rights now

At the beginning of June, all employees were summoned, without notice. They were then asked to sign a document to identify themselves as members of the union, which contravenes the Labor Code, according to the CSN.

For the union, it is clear that the behavior is “illicit” and the dismissals are motivated “by anti-union animus.”

Physical work

The company imports and distributes “high-end Hispanic food products from Central and South America,” according to its website description. From arepas, corn tortillas often stuffed with cheese typical of Colombia or Venezuela, to a variety of desserts, pastas, tropical fruits or alfajores: the products carry brands familiar to regulars of specialty grocery stores or Latin American restaurants.

Like other warehouses, the job at Produits des Champs involves handling, moving and placing sometimes heavy loads in trucks. Delivery drivers must also unload these same boxes from the trucks to customers, sometimes alone, sometimes accompanied by a colleague.

“It’s presented as a difficult job that will take us elsewhere afterwards, that it’s a good way when you’ve just arrived, to earn better afterwards,” says the employee who confided. “But you can’t justify everything in the poor working conditions.”

“It seems to us that the employer is taking advantage of the vulnerability of its workers,” describes Camila Rodriguez-Cea, a union advisor for the CSN.

“I never thought it would go this bad with them and I just hope they respect our rights now,” Santiago concludes, crestfallen. The hearing at the TAT is set for December 13, 2024.

To see in video

source site-40