Under the title The great tumultan NFB documentary immortalized the 1972 clash between the Bourassa government and the common front of public sector unions, which culminated in the imprisonment of the heads of the three major centrals.
Ten years later, it was the Lévesque government, struggling with the most serious recession since the 1930s, which caused a new crisis by imposing temporary salary cuts of 20% on state employees.
If the Liberal Party of Quebec (PLQ) had been re-elected handily barely a year after the standoff of 1972, that of 1982 had marked the beginning of the end for the Parti Québécois (PQ). Forty years later, some still have not forgiven him.
The backlash was almost immediate. Not only had three ministers been jostled by public sector workers upon their arrival at a national council held in Quebec, but the PQ had lost four by-elections in quick succession in ridings where it had easily won in the general election from 1981.
Unlike the PQ of the time, which the unions perceived as their natural ally, the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) never claimed to have “a favorable prejudice towards workers”. Despite what many feared, the victory of the CAQ in 2018 did not lead to a merciless war between the Legault government and the unions, who attributed the worst intentions to it. All in all, the last part of the negotiations took place without too many problems.
Things are looking a lot less good this time. For months we have been witnessing a dialogue of the deaf, so much so that the common front has decided to ask its members for a mandate which would make it possible to launch an unlimited general strike if it cannot reach an agreement with the government. We are not there yet, but Prime Minister François Legault himself says he fears the outbreak of strikes in the health and education sectors starting at the end of the month.
Certainly, the tone is no longer that of 1972, when the trade union world intended to put the capitalist state on trial, or even destroy it. Likewise, if inflation is currently wreaking havoc, the economic situation has nothing to do with that of 1982, when interest rates were around 20%. There is no question of reducing salaries and no one will go to prison.
Pleading the limits of the State’s “capacity to pay” is one of the figures imposed on each negotiation, especially since the government has chosen to lower taxes and distribute checks to everyone. There is also no question of offering the same increases to everyone.
Of course, this frugality does not concern the deputies, who received an immediate increase of $30,000, nor the police officers of the Sûreté du Québec, who will be entitled to a 21% increase in five years, while the majority of employees of the State will have to settle for 9%.
Even if it is undoubtedly not a “final offer”, the gap with the union demands is such that it is difficult to imagine a compromise acceptable to all, as noted by the mediators who tried to find a way through.
If an agreement proves impossible, the danger is not that union leaders will recommend to their members to defy a possible special law ordering a return to work, as was the case in 1972, but rather of provoking widespread disaffection. throughout the public sector.
As disruptive as they may have been, the great conflicts of previous decades did not have as a backdrop the chronic labor shortage that currently afflicts public services. When it is so easy to find a job elsewhere, how can we hope to attract and retain people who feel they are not treated with the respect they deserve? Mr. Legault has often repeated: workers, including state employees, now have the short end of the stick. The dynamics of negotiations must adapt to this new reality.
In the past, it was enough to wait until public opinion had enough to pass a law that ended the strike on the conditions desired by the government. Today the result would be disastrous. The success of the recovery of the health and education networks, for which the CAQ will have to respond in the 2026 election, necessarily requires the support of those who work there. In this sense, the success of the operation rests less on the Minister of Health, Christian Dubé, or on that of Education, Bernard Drainville, than on their colleague from the Treasury, Sonia LeBel.
If there’s one thing hospitals and schools don’t need, it’s another uproar, even a small one.