IN
THE PUBLIC INTEREST:
THE
24TH CONVENTION OF THE CANADIAN LABOUR CONGRESS
As a deluge of rain fell on Montreal in early
June this year, a deluge of candidates representing labor unions from across
the country descended on the city for the 24th annual Canadian Labor
Congress convention. With literally thousands of delegates in attendance, the
Congress demonstrated that, despite the hopes of at least some political and
corporate leaders, labor unions have not faded away. The five-day conference
examined a wide range of issues, most of which directly affect members of
NUCAUT, the CLC affiliate to which AUFA now belongs.
Perhaps the central theme of the Congress was the need to preserve labor unions
as a vehicle of democratic action in a society increasingly dominated by
marketplace considerations. Considering the CLC’s
dedication to preserving public higher education, our membership is well-served
by this new relationship.
With a dizzying array of
resolutions for debate as well as a star-studded lineup of labor-friendly
speakers, the conference agenda kept the delegates fully occupied. For NUCAUT,
the highlight was the endorsement of a resolution calling for the repeal of the
Canadian Social Transfer. This program has permitted provincial governments to
delegate money intended for the support of colleges and universities to a
variety of other purposes, in the process impoverishing higher education. The CLC went on record in support of dedicated funds for higher
education as well as social services. More than this, it called for a
Post-Secondary Education and Training Act patterned after the Canada Health
Act. Such a measure would clearly delineate federal and provincial
responsibilities, increase government accountability, aim to restore the fiscal
solvency of public universities, and reduce the financial burden on students
who currently equate attendance at university with daunting indebtedness.
Echoing resolutions against the privatization of Canadian health care and the
dilution of social services through public-private partnerships, the Congress
resolved to oppose “any and all moves toward increased privatization and
commercialization in education, including tax or funding incentives for private
or independent schools, contracting-out, and public-private partnerships.”
According to CLC statistics, per capita funding for
higher education has dropped from $100 in 1993 to approximately $47 in 2003.
Federal government policies privileging private sector interests over public
investment have translated into crushing student debt loads. While the average
student graduated in 1990 with $8000 of student debt, the average graduate of
2002 could look forward to repaying a whopping $25, 000 loan. According to CLC numbers, many students graduate under the weight of
more than $50, 000 in debt. At stake is the persistence of higher education as
a seedbed of democratic citizenship and an avenue of social mobility, both of
which are jeopardized when working-class students, many of whom are minorities,
cannot afford to attend university. This resolution offered a strong reminder
that the effort to promote faculty respect is inseparable from the wider crisis
in higher education. This crisis threatens a further decline in the quality and
availability of university instruction for young Canadians.
Some of the speech-making and hair-splitting over the resolutions left this participant wondering whether or not the Canadian Labor Congress might be more productive if it focused on a few resolutions rather than trying to overturn NAFTA, end tuitions, and oppose North American “deep integration” all at once. One might also be critical of the role that labor ‘insiders’ play in drafting the agenda and guiding debate. Even so, the degree to which rank-and-file organized workers are given the opportunity to debate issues that affect them immediately was remarkable. I was left wondering: how many of their employers welcome their opinion on workplace matters? Despite the rhetoric of Total Quality Management, how many employees exercise decision-making power at all in their place of work? The CLC Congress gives these workers a chance to be heard and respected. More than fine words, the CLC will bring those resolutions to the attention of lawmakers. Considering that the Congress represents over 3 million organized workers, it wields a bargaining power that CAUT or any union on its own cannot.
Beyond the resolutions and the
speeches by leading figures like Stephen Lewis, the CLC
convention reminded unionized employees that they are not alone. Despite
prevailing assumptions about atomized rational maximizers
pursuing their self interest in an unforgiving marketplace, the CLC Congress regenerated the sense that many are engaged in
the effort to protect workplace dignity. This effort is necessarily a
collective one, and the sense of unity that permeated the Palais des Congrès de Montréal was anything but phony, if
perhaps fleeting. The CLC cannot sustain that sense
of momentum by itself. It requires the commitment of unionists from across the
social spectrum including those who belong to AUFA. It requires the dedication
of those who believe that the union serves a larger purpose than
self-preservation.
Mike Dennis