In 1962, Jean Lesage declared: “The queen does not negotiate with her subjects. » By extension, the State did not stoop to negotiating with its employees.
It was another era. The Canadian was a Stanley Cup subscriber. The Labor Code did not yet exist. Strikes were prohibited in the public sector, where disputes were resolved by an arbitrator, whose award was enforceable.
Today, negotiations between the government and the unions representing public sector workers take place in accordance with a sort of ritual, long and complicated, which ends either with an agreement, more or less satisfactory, or with the adoption of a special law.
It has sometimes happened that they give rise to a real psychodrama, as happened in 1982-1983, when the Lévesque government imposed a temporary salary reduction of 20%, or again in 1996, when thousands of doctors, nurses and health technicians had been forced into retirement.
Today is the first time that a conciliator has been appointed — at the request of the Common Front — to what is called the “central table” in negotiation jargon. This obviously does not mean a return to the era of Jean Lesage. The conciliator does not have the power to impose a settlement, and his mandate excludes “heavy money”, that is to say salaries and pension plans.
The government does not intend to let a third party dictate its budgetary policy. Conciliation simply aims to bring the parties, who currently seem light years apart, closer together.
We cannot oppose virtue. Since we are entering into a strike dynamic which will considerably disrupt public services, anything which can help to relax the negotiating climate is welcome.
In reality, the appointment of a conciliator seems less aimed at finding a solution to the conflict than at demonstrating the good faith of the protagonists. That of the Common Front, which made the request, and that of the government, which accepted it.
The unions currently benefit from the sympathy of the population, but this support is not unconditional. She understands their demands, but she also expects them to be part of the solution and to put water in their wine to avoid a confrontation for which she would pay the price.
The president of the FTQ, Magali Picard, described the government’s salary offers as “crap”, but it still concerns taxpayers’ money, who expect it to be managed responsibly. No one expects union demands to be met in full.
Conversely, the Legault government has shown from the start an intransigence which gives the impression that it is insensitive to the distress of those to whom it promised our eternal gratitude during the pandemic.
Accepting the use of conciliation is intended to be proof of its openness, but the speech of the President of the Treasury Board, Sonia LeBel, is not very convincing. “The unions are not moving in my direction,” she lamented Monday, as if she herself did not have to “move.”
Mme LeBel mentions the “colossal work” on the organization which is carried out at the various negotiating tables, but the unions complain that it mainly concerns the government’s priorities.
It is quite possible that conciliation will lead nowhere. In any case, the salary question will have to be resolved one day or another, even if it means adopting a special law. Ultimately, the predictable failure of the conciliator could well provide the government with a pretext to resort to strong-arm tactics. “You see, even a neutral expert can’t make these people listen to reason…”
Before reaching this end, it has happened in the past that the Prime Minister threw all his weight into the balance and summoned the union leaders to a final meeting which resulted in a compromise.
This weight still needs to be heavy enough. The unions know very well that François Legault no longer has the ascendancy he had during the pandemic or even six months, or even six weeks ago.
There is something surreal about the current situation. As the public sector enters a period of turbulence of indefinite duration, the main subject of concern at the National Assembly, which resumes its work after a week’s break, will be the subsidy of 5 to 7 million that the government has had the crazy idea of paying an American hockey club to come and play two exhibition games in Quebec next fall.