Question 17
You asked: What is a “lock out” and how does that affect me?
Let’s get into it.
Both “strikes” and “lock outs” are job actions that are controlled, as always in a unionized environment, by the BC Labour Relations Board.
The BC Labour Code specifically determines what Unions and Employers can or cannot do during collective bargaining.
These are all of the Sections of the BC Labour Code that govern what can, and cannot, be done by Unions and Employers related to bargaining a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). Anyone who wants to be fully informed regarding the “law” in this area can go to the BC Labour Code site and read, in detail, for themselves. What I intend to provide in this blog is an “overview” that gives sufficient basic information that readers will have a good idea of what is involved.
[1] The first thing to understand is that neither the Union (with strike action) nor the Employer (with a lock out) can do so until and unless the parties have met and attempted to renew their current CBA.
[2] If they reach an “impasse” in their bargaining, meaning that neither party is willing to provide any further concession to their bargaining positions, then they can take “job action”.
[3] For the Union, they must first take a “strike vote” of their membership.
Only those union members who vote are considered in the necessary percentage required to proceed with “job action”, which is referred to as “strike action”.
They require 50% +1 to have a “valid” strike mandate. Of course, the higher the % the more able the Union is to go back to the table with what is referred to as a “solid mandate”.
It is important to understand that it is not 50%+1 of the entire Union membership, but 50%+1 of those members who actually vote.
Unions do not typically disclose “how many” of the membership voted, just the % of those who voted were in favour of a strike.
It can often be very misleading about how the ENTIRE membership feels about the state of bargaining. A very democratic Union that strives to be inclusive of as many members as possible (online voting vs voting in person at one location on one day) can make a significant difference in the end % result.
[4] If a Union gets a “strike mandate” from their membership it is “good” for 90 days. The Union is not required to “exercise” the strike mandate at all. Bargaining strategies dictate (1) when and/or (2) if the Union starts “job action” at all.
If the Union chooses to initiate ANY strike action, they must first “issue 72 hours strike notice” to the Employer.
If the Union chooses NOT to initiate ANY strike action within 90 days, their “strike mandate” will legally expire and they will be required to take another vote of their membership and, again, surpass the 50%+1 threshold to renew their strike mandate for another 90 days.
[5] Unlike the Union, the Employer does not deal with “membership votes”. They simply have to provide 72 hours notice before they can initiate THEIR version of “job action” which is referred to as “locking out” their employees.
A “lock out” is exactly what the name describes. The Employer will not allow their employees onto the property to do their regular jobs.
Of course, the employees will be without pay for the days that they do not work.
The Union employees will be on a “picket line” but their signs will read “locked out” instead of “on strike”.
The result is the same. The members/employees will not work and will not get paid for any lost time.
That is what a “strike” and “lock out” are.
However, there is an unlimited number of questions that follow.
The 3 most asked questions are:
[1] What “assistance” is available to Union members who are either on strike or locked out?
[2] What happens to an employee’s health and welfare benefits when he/she is on strike or locked out?
[3] What options are available to help resolve the “impasse” in bargaining?
In response to the first question [1], please read the following:
https://www.unifor.org/resources/our-resources/summary-unifor-strike-assistance-rules
In response to the second question [2], please note that Section 62 of the BC Labour Code provides as follows:
Continuation of benefits
62 (1) If employees are lawfully on strike or lawfully locked out, their health and welfare benefits, other than pension benefits or contributions, normally provided directly or indirectly by the employer to the employees must be continued if the trade union tenders payment to the employer or to any person who was before the strike or lockout obligated to receive the payment
(a) in an amount sufficient to continue the employees' entitlement to the benefits, and
(b) on or before the regular due date of that payment.
(2) If subsection (1) is complied with
(a) the employer or other person referred to in that subsection must accept the payment tendered by the trade union, and
(b) a person must not deny to an employee a benefit described in that subsection, including coverage under an insurance plan, for which the employee would otherwise be eligible, because the employee is participating in a lawful strike or is lawfully locked out.
(3) A trade union and an employer may agree in writing to specifically exclude the operation of this section.
This means, of course, that the Union will pay for our H&W premiums so that we maintain full coverage.
The third question [3] leads to a more advanced understanding of the Labour Code.
The strike/lockout portion of the Code is governed by Part 5 of the Code. The solutions available through the Code are found in Part 6 and Part 7 and are quite complicated.
Parts 6 and 7 read as follows:
Part 6 — Essential Services
Part 7 — Mediation and Disputes Resolution
Division 1 — Mediation and Fact Finding
The first consideration is whether or not we are an “Essential Service” and what impact that would have on either being “on strike” or “ locked out”.
At the present time we are NOT deemed an essential service. If either the Union or CMBC escalated the job action there would not be any restrictions applied.
However, IF we received an “essential service” designation from the Labour Board, it would describe in detail the minimum workforce required to service the public. If you take the time to read Part 6, Section 72 of the Code you will have a better understanding of what being designated “essential” actually means.
There is a lot of discussion on social media platforms about “mediation” and “arbitration” and “binding arbitration”. The difference between these options is quite significant.
“Mediators” are specialists who meet with the parties, usually independent of each other, and try to come to a compromise based on the outstanding issues from bargaining.
They make “recommendations” to both the parties and the Minister of Labour through the Labour Board.
Their “recommendations” are just that, they are NOT “binding recommendations”.
However, the Minister of Labour can, at his/her sole discretion, appoint an “arbitrator” and authorise that the conclusions reached by the arbitrator are “binding” on both the Union and CMBC. It is a “legislated” conclusion to the dispute between the parties.
An arbitrator with “binding authority” will usually take into consideration the “recommendations” of the mediator.
This is exactly what happened when CMBC locked out its employees in 2001 after 4 months on the picket line. The arbitrator’s name was Adams and his decision is referred to as “the Adams report”. It wasn’t really a “report”, it was a “binding arbitration decision”. There is no dispute from the Union perspective that Arbitrator Adams leaned VERY heavily on the side of CMBC.
Hopefully, this has given you a better understanding of the situation you currently find yourself in.