Commentary
The ongoing postal strike bears resemblance to historical public service strikes that affected the federal government under Pierre Trudeau over 40 years ago and various provincial governments, notably Quebec.
The Crown corporation operating Canadian post offices suffers a $3 billion loss annually. Postal services are on the decline due to the internet, courier services, and modern business practices that rely less on traditional mail.
In the past, debates centered around the right to strike in essential public services. Quebec’s long-serving premier, Maurice Duplessis, famously stated in 1948 that “The right to strike against the public interest does not exist.” He implemented laws to improve working conditions without favoring labor unions.
One of the most notable labor disputes during Duplessis’s era was the asbestos workers strike in Mégantic in 1949. Despite the strike being illegal, Duplessis intervened, providing better conditions for strikers while restricting the right to strike.
It wasn’t until the 1960s that government employees in Canada gained the right to collective bargaining and striking. This was seen as progress in workers’ rights.
Related Stories
Pierre Trudeau, a longtime advocate for workers’ rights, faced challenges during his tenure as prime minister. In 1978, he had the head of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, Jean-Claude Parrot, imprisoned for defying back-to-work orders.
Premier Daniel Johnson, a follower of Duplessis, dealt with a strike by Montreal schoolteachers in 1967. Employing similar tactics to Duplessis, he enforced return-to-work orders, ensuring compliance.
This historical context sheds light on the current postal strike, emphasizing the complexities of strikes in the public sector and the importance of fair treatment for all involved.
Just like teachers’ strikes, postal strikes are not in the public interest and are often seen as a form of blackmail against parents, particularly single parents or those with both parents working. Postal strikes have always been a challenge for the entire country.
The current strike aims to advocate for gender-affirming care, increased paid medical leave, and new paid rest periods, with a focus on protection against technological advancements. While it is understandable that the declining need for the post office poses challenges, the strikers should be offered support to navigate this transition. However, demanding unlimited taxpayer funds to sustain a failing service is unreasonable.
The government should intervene to ensure a fair return to work, and reevaluate the concept of strikes in the public sector, which has proven to be ineffective. Duplessis’ stance on strikes opposing the public interest still holds true today.
Opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of The Epoch Times.
