b'History of Provincial Bargaining in OntarioBY STEPHEN MCARTHUR AND VICTOR KIMT inmulti-employersingle- represented about seven per cent of the non- bargaining table by prohibiting individual bar-The Ontario Labour Relations Act (LRA) man-datesprovince-wideagricultural labour force and 10 per cent of totalgaining and making the only lawful collective trade bargaining for the industrial, commercialunion membership, it accounted for nearly 17agreement in the ICI sector the multi-employer and institutional (ICI) sector of the construc- per cent of the person-days lost due to strikes.agreement between the provincial ErBA and tion industryOntario. Under the currentDespite strong pressures to retain local auton- the provincial EeBA.mandatory province-wide bargaining scheme,omy, the labour relations mischiefs of the 1960sSince1977,theOLRBhasrepeatedly there can be only one bargaining agent for theand 1970s resulted in legislative reforms, trans- invalidatedunion-managementarrangements employers (ErBA) and one bargaining agentforming bargaining structure. In the end, localthatwerecontrarytotheLRAsmandatory for the employees (EeBA) for each trade. Thesebargaining patterns gave way to a province-wideprovince-wide bargaining system. The OLRB provincial bargaining agents have exclusive bar- labour relations model.has therefore made it abundantly clear that only gaining rights for the trades they represent, and thecollectiveagreementstheynegotiatewillIn 1976, an inquiry into the bargaining patternsprovince-wide agreements are valid, and any bind all employers and all unionized employeesin the construction industry was headed by Mr.agreement or arrangement reached without the in the ICI sector in Ontario.Franks and resulted in a published report calledapproval of provincial bargaining agents was Report of the Industrial Inquiry Commissionnull and void.To an outside observer, the current bargaining system in the ICI sector presents a confusinginto Bargaining Patterns in the ConstructionThecurrentversionoftheLRA(R.S.O webofrelationshipsreflectinghistory,localIndustryinOntario.Thisreportisoften1995) preserves the mandatory province-wide practice and organic evolution, devoid of anyreferredtoasFranksReport. TheFranksmulti-employer single-trade bargaining scheme logical or legal explanation. To fully appreciateReport stemmed from a recommendation fromintroduced by the 1977 Amendment.how the current system works, it is important tothe representatives from both management and understand its historical roots.unions that a system of wider-area bargainingTheintroductionofmandatoryprovince-be introduced into the construction industrywide bargaining scheme has consolidated the The current province-wide bargaining schemein response to the labour relations mischiefs.fragmentedbargainingstructureasthenew is the product of a series of legislative reformsMr. Franks engaged in an extensive series ofscheme reduced the number of negotiations in thatsoughttocurtailtheprevalentlabourconsultations with the parties and called forthe ICI sector from 250 in 1977 to 22 in 1978. relations mischiefs in the construction industrybriefs from unions, employers and a group ofAlthough success in curtailing prevalent labour duringthe1960sand1970s.Thehistorypurchasersofconstructionservices.Eachofrelations mischiefs initially seemed elusive, sig-oflabourrelationslegislativereforminthethe three briefs submitted supported a changenificant improvements in bargaining outcomes constructionindustryinOntariohasbeento province-wide bargaining by trade. As such,were achieved in the long run, and stability has anattempttoreplaceafragmentedmodelMr.Franksrecommendedaprovince-widebecome the norm in the construction industry basedonindividualemployerlabourrela- multi-employer single-trade bargaining schemesince 1977. tions with a more centralized multi-employerin the ICI sector.modelreflectingthefeaturespeculiartotheWhile strike activities in Canada as a whole construction industry.TheFranksReportresultedinthe1977have been declining since the 1980s, the decline Amendment to the LRA to address the frag- has been more pronounced in the construction Until1977,theconstructionindustrysmented bargaining structure by consolidatingindustry as reflected in terms of the number of complexity was reflected in its fragmented trad- theICIsectorcollectivebargainingonastrikes, workers involved and person-days lost. itional bargaining structure, and as such, twoprovince-wide basis by trade. The new manda-features characterized the bargaining structuretory province-wide bargaining scheme requiredHowever, it is important to note that the current in Ontario; the collective agreement applied toemployers and unions to designate province- system is not static, but rather it is continuously a local area and each trade negotiated separately.wide bargaining agents who were vested withevolving, as unions grow or decline or supplant However, this complex pattern of fragmentedexclusivebargainingrightsforthetradesone another, and as new construction methods bargaining relationships created a considerablethey represented. affect the kinds of skills and the kinds of work-degreeofinstability,inter-unionrivalryanders involved in the industry. Even to an insider industrial conflict. For example, even thoughThe newly amended LRA also put the structurelike me, every day is a new challenge under this theconstructionindustryduringthe1960sof bargaining out of reach from those at thecontinuously changing system.www.ecao.org42'