Professor at the School of Industrial Relations at the University of Montreal, Mélanie Dufour-Poirier is interested in unionism and labor relations. She answered questions from The Press on the upcoming strike among teachers and school staff in the province.
You say that what is happening in Quebec at the moment are “women’s union struggles”. Would you say that these are feminist struggles?
It is not a feminist struggle, but it is still a societal choice not to fully value the work that has been accomplished by these people for years, in unspeakable conditions with very few resources. . These are people who work very, very hard. It’s difficult for me not to see this as a non-recognition of the work that is accomplished by a majority of workers.
What I find particularly shocking is that we are in Quebec, we are an industrialized society, a developed country. It is a societal choice not to fairly remunerate these workers who form the following generations. A society that does not want to invest in the salaries of people who train our children, I find that to be a questionable choice.
It’s not just having an adult in a classroom, it’s a competent adult who will train minds who will be able to continue their school career in the most favorable conditions possible, with people happy to work who feel recognized for their true value. It’s not just salary.
It is a predominantly female profession. The police men [de la Sûreté du Québec] had an offer at 21%: it’s hard not to make the connection.
Do you believe that public opinion is behind the teachers?
There is no popular disfavor. I think that people understand more than they did at a certain time that there is a fundamental issue that is powerful: the whole question of preserving our public services.
It’s sure that it will shock people. The strike will disrupt habits, that’s not fun. That’s pressure tactics. It’s been negotiating for a while and that’s what it’s made for.
It is not the promulgation of special laws that will resolve a problem of this scale. Even if we force people to return to work, they will go on slow strikes, informally, whatever.
But yes, I sense sympathy in public opinion. We can question the judicious nature, or not, of certain choices [du gouvernement]. When we talk about MPs’ salary recovery, who were they recovering compared to, when we know that they are very well paid? On the other hand, when we see the catching up that would have to be made on the side of the public sector in a period of heavy inflation…
Many union members who will soon be on strike do not have a strike fund. For what ?
It is an organizational choice. Normally, a portion of the union dues goes to the strike fund or the professional defense fund. Each union organization plans to have one or not.
A strike fund is an insurance policy, even if it is never the full salary. It’s a tool. [Ne pas en avoir], it is a choice which limits the possibilities, when we know that the debt rate is quite high. If people are already at each other’s throats, that limits the chances of conflict building up over time. I don’t like to speak in warlike terms, but it gives the employer ammunition.
Everyone is wondering if the conflict will last long. What do you foresee?
I don’t know. I can just tell you that I have spoken to a lot of organizations in recent weeks and people are decided. The ideal is not to use pressure tactics. But when it takes that to get things done…
I hope there will be enough exchanges at the tables to resolve this impasse. We must recognize the full value of these people: it’s urgent. I want an outcome that restores serenity. Otherwise, people will remain bitter and go to work elsewhere where they will be more recognized.
* The comments in this interview have been edited for brevity.