Union wins representation fight with Telus; setting up problems at bargaining table

A dispute over geography has been settled in favour of a major telecom union, but that victory could lead to acrimony at the bargaining table. Earlier this month, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld a labour board ruling that the collective bargaining unit for Telus Corp. should not be limited to only employees of the company in Alberta and British Columbia, but also include employees in other regions of the country as the company expands. Telus had negotiated an agreement with the Telecommunications Workers Union (TWU) over representation. When BC Tel merged with Telus, the new company inherited five collective agreements with different unions. In February 2000, both labour and management agreed that there should be "one bargaining unit covering employees in Alberta and British Columbia." By June, following a vote by the workers, the TWU was certified as the bargaining agent by the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB). The TWU was of the opinion that it had won the right to represent all eligible employees of Telus, no matter where the company set up shop. The key component of the agreement was representation, not geography, it felt. The telco countered that the union was restricted to operating in the two westernmost provinces only. That matter came to a head when Telus rolled out operations in other provinces. The company appealed the CIRB ruling, known as Decision 108, raising three objections. On September 9, the Federal Court of Appeal rejected the call and sided with the union (NL Special Update, Sept. 19/02). Telus maintained that the CIRB improperly considered evidence when it decided that Telus and the TWU had not set geographical restrictions on the representation. "This argument is difficult to accept," Justice Alice Desjardins wrote in a unanimous decision. "It was within the jurisdiction of the board to interpret the agreement of February 17, 2000, and to disregard the calling of direct evidence by those individuals directly involved in the mediation process." Nor did she put much stock in Telus’ claim that the agreement fell under contract law, rather than labour legislation. "I find, on the contrary, that the agreement of February 17, 2000, came within the realm of labour law, a matter well within the expertise of the board, and that it is entitled to high deference," Desjardins continued. "This kind of agreement arises essentially in the labour context and cannot be pegged as being ‘general contract law’." She also dismissed the Telus position that by endorsing the February 2000 agreement, the CIRB could not make rulings on the matter subsequently. The failure of the two sides to reach a deal gave the board jurisdiction. Justices Allen Linden and Marc Noël concurred. "Telus is disappointed by this ruling, as it fails to uphold the February 2000 negotiated settlement between the company and the TWU," Jim Peters, executive VP and general counsel of the telco, told Network Letter in a prepared statement via email. "While Telus has complied with Decision 108 since it was rendered, we are currently assessing possible next steps with respect to the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision. Like any other business, Telus should be able to rely on freely negotiated agreements, and we feel strongly that a deal that was negotiated in good faith with the union, and should have been upheld." For its part, the union expects the ruling to influence Telus’ behaviour at the bargaining table. "They’re absolutely not happy with it," TWU VP Bruce Bell tells Network Letter. "I can’t see how they thought they were going to overturn the decision anyway, but I guess they thought they would and they didn’t. But what it has impact on is the company’s thoughts, I guess, and bargaining." The company and the union have been holding discussions for several months now (NL, Aug. 13/02). Further sessions are scheduled for this week. Peters is hopeful talks can proceed."This ruling will not alter Telus’ business strategy or current operations," his email adds. "We continue to bargain in good faith with the TWU and have negotiation dates booked right through to January 2003." That assertion is laughed at by the other side. "It hasn’t been harmonious from day one," Bell offers. "Telus brought in some hired guns from eastern Canada to try and break the union, break the existing collective agreement, and they did that right from the getgo. They didn’t even bring proposals to the table. They brought issues and objectives. Their issue, I guess, is the TWU and their objective is to break it." Both sides concede that massive changes are likely in the new collective agreement. By trying to forge a new deal out of several previous ones, the parties have many conflicting provisions that need to be harmonized. "Why are you trying to jerk the employees around, the union around, with a brand new collective agreement?" Bell asks the telco. "Sure, we understand you may want some changes to the existing agreement. Why would you come brand new with clauses that aren’t even affecting you, aren’t a problem?" Peters has a ready answer. "The issue is that the existing terms in our collective agreement prevent us from getting the kind of efficiencies we need to compete. For example, the language in our agreement dates back to the 1960s and does not reflect the changes to technology, the regulatory decisions, the evolving customer needs or the competitive environment." The CIRB decision only applies to employees who are doing equivalent work to people in existing Telus units. It does not cover workers in divisions the telco has bought out including PSINet, Williams Communications and Arqana Technologies. A dispute between the TWU and Telus over the employees of the former Clearnet Communications wireless company is currently before the CIRB. Those hearings are scheduled to continue next month.

Union wins representation fight with Telus; setting up problems at bargaining table

News | 09/23/2002 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us