MPs clash over Bill C-377 to force public disclosures by labour unions


Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

You sure do work hard in bending over backwards to dodge the easy solution on this issue and demand that society get turned on it's ear to accommodate one individual group.

I'm not the one dodging the easy solution of enforcing existing laws.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#32
What's your solution?
 
Machjo
#33
I'd say unions should not be required to disclose to the public as they should be viewed as private institutions with no legal recognition. Not illegal, but just not recognized.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#34
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

I'd say unions should not be required to disclose to the public as they should be viewed as private institutions with no legal recognition. Not illegal, but just not recognized.

Corporations are private institutions... Should they too have opportunity to not report?
 
Machjo
#35
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Corporations are private institutions... Should they too have opportunity to not report?

To the public? No.

Now of course who would want to invest in a corporation without knowing what they're getting into? And certainly should a corporation choose to report, then of course the report ought to be true and factual and not misleading.

Same with a union. But who would want to invest in a union? However, while I think it's reasonable for a corporation, whether for-profit or not, to exist, unions are just a nuisance mostly and so I think they should not be given any more power than your average NGO. In other words, if you strike, you break your contract and you're fired or at least reprimanded.

I'm also for right-to-work legislation prohibiting anyone from being forced to join a union.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#36
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Yes legally. It's not only churches, but many "charities" are involved in political movements

A PRO-LIFE CANADA DIRECTORY INDEX

Read the rules on charities. Their charter can't be for one thing and then do another. Also there is a difference between not for profits and charities and some cross the line.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

To the public? No.

Then why allow a union do do so?

Corps pay the full tax load and do not have non-profit status thereby allowing them to contribute funds to political entities (theoritically within the bounds of the laws).

The argument that I am debating is the desire for unions to have a non-profit status (exempting them from certain taxes) AND being able to donate directly.

The CRA rules clear. You may not like them, but they are still the rules

Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

And certainly should a corporation choose to report, then of course the report ought to be true and factual and not misleading.

Corps do not have the opportunity to make a decision if they will report or not... They must

Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

But who would want to invest in a union? However, while I think it's reasonable for a corporation, whether for-profit or not, to exist, unions are just a nuisance mostly and so I think they should not be given any more power than your average NGO. In other words, if you strike, you break your contract and you're fired or at least reprimanded.

I fully agree with what you've suggested; but that is a broader issue and (obviously) subject to an individual's personal opinion.

Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

I'm also for right-to-work legislation prohibiting anyone from being forced to join a union.

I believe that in theory it does exist, although in practice, it is a myth
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#38
Interesting thing about union pension funds is that they are strongly ANTI union in their investments. Timberwest, in which the Ontario teachers have or had a significant holding fired all their union logging crews and contracted it out to the lowest bidders. Also closed ALL their Canadian mills and sell almost exclusively to the US log market.
 
petros
+1
#39
I wonder if the Cons are willing to fully fund training programs that unions buck into or fund fully?

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Interesting thing about union pension funds is that they are strongly ANTI union in their investments. Timberwest, in which the Ontario teachers have or had a significant holding fired all their union logging crews and contracted it out to the lowest bidders. Also closed ALL their Canadian mills and sell almost exclusively to the US log market.

A local union here in Regina is building a new training center because the province can't accomodate the the demand. The center is being built by non-union contractors.

The misconceptions on this board are hilarious.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#40
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

A local union here in Regina is building a new training center because the province can't accomodate the the demand. The center is being built by non-union contractors.

Is this union donating the facility to the province?
 
petros
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Is this union donating the facility to the province?

Nope. It simply opens up seats for non-union apprentices at SIAST. Why should either have to wait for an open seat due to a Govt that drags it's *** on funding and keeping up with tech? Those stuck at SIAST won't have the same hi-quality training that the union does.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Nope. It simply opens up seats for non-union apprentices at SIAST. Why should either have to wait for an open seat due to a Govt that drags it's *** on funding and keeping up with tech? Those stuck at SIAST won't have the same hi-quality training that the union does.

So, this is an investment by the union in a niche market.... I'd wager that the unions will also benefit 2-fold by acting as both the principle as well as the client relative to this facility.

In terms of the actual development of a training facility(s); I would suggest that it is the duty of private business and industry before it falls onto the shoulders of gvt
 
petros
#43
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

So, this is an investment by the union in a niche market.... I'd wager that the unions will also benefit 2-fold by acting as both the principle as well as the client relative to this facility.

In terms of the actual development of a training facility(s); I would suggest that it is the duty of private business and industry before it falls onto the shoulders of gvt

Do you really think non-union companies would buck up? You should be fully aware that skilled labour is a tough find these days in Western Canada. It's insane that training facilities can't meet demand.

It's niche? Tradesmen straight across the board are in high demand.

I'm not a big fan of useless unions that do nothing to improve the skills of their members.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#44
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Do you really think non-union companies would buck up?

If there was a dollar to be made, then the private sector would get involved.

Let's be honest here, either one of us could get the financing in place to develop and operate this facility if we had a ling-term contract in place for a customer base.

The union did the smart thing and did exactly that with themselves being the 'client'... It's smart business

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

You should be fully aware that skilled labour is a tough find these days in Western Canada. It's insane that training facilities can't meet demand.

I agree, but the catch for private business is that offering an affordable training platform is difficult unless you have some form of security for the monies that will be spent.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It's niche? Tradesmen straight across the board are in high demand.

Based on the nature of the investment into the facility, yes, it is a niche especially from the standpoint that the union will benefit greatly through increased membership (and dues, etc)

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I'm not a big fan of useless unions that do nothing to improve the skills of their members.

Make no mistake - I am not bashing unions here.
 
petros
#45
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

If there was a dollar to be made, then the private sector would get involved.

Let's be honest here, either one of us could get the financing in place to develop and operate this facility if we had a ling-term contract in place for a customer base.

The union did the smart thing and did exactly that with themselves being the 'client'... It's smart business



I agree, but the catch for private business is that offering an affordable training platform is difficult unless you have some form of security for the monies that will be spent.



Based on the nature of the investment into the facility, yes, it is a niche especially from the standpoint that the union will benefit greatly through increased membership (and dues, etc)



Make no mistake - I am not bashing unions here.

There were no loans taken out to build this facility, It's coming directly out of the dues pool. Paid for by members, for members. They won't be taking on new members unless they can employ them.

Getting the non-union shops to work together would take the formation of some sort of association to level the costs across the board. What are the odds of that happening? They may as well go union.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#46
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

What's your solution?

Enforce existing laws. If you wish to do more, then any new law should affect all charities equally.

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Read the rules on charities. Their charter can't be for one thing and then do another. Also there is a difference between not for profits and charities and some cross the line.

I understand the rules for charities as I'm on the BOD of three of them.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#47
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Enforce existing laws.


Great, then revoke the non-profit status of those unions that contravene the law.

Problem solved
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Great, then revoke the non-profit status of those unions that contravene the law.

Problem solved

Yup. Why do think the Conservatives want this new law?
 
petros
+1
#49
Whatever happened to the Ministry of Transparency?
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#50
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Yup. Why do think the Conservatives want this new law?


Ahhhhh..... Lemme guess; to put a definitive end to groups that pose as non-profit and/or charities when in fact, thay are lobby groups that seek to influence gvt for the benefit of their clients?

That sound about right?

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Whatever happened to the Ministry of Transparency?

The CBC?

They're still around
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
+1
#51
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Ahhhhh..... Lemme guess; to put a definitive end to groups that pose as non-profit and/or charities when in fact, thay are lobby groups that seek to influence gvt for the benefit of their clients?

That sound about right?

Nope. As has already been determined, the rules are already in place for charities that donate to political parties. As for non-profit and/or charities that simply lobby, there are lots that do that and the Conservatives don't seem to be interested in any of them, only the unions.

In the immortal words of Chris Berman...C'mon Man!! You're smarter than that. Let's not pretend this isn't the CPC attacking unions because the don't like them.
 
Angstrom
Liberal
#52
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Nope. As has already been determined, the rules are already in place for charities that donate to political parties. As for non-profit and/or charities that simply lobby, there are lots that do that and the Conservatives don't seem to be interested in any of them, only the unions.

In the immortal words of Chris Berman...C'mon Man!! You're smarter than that. Let's not pretend this isn't the CPC attacking unions because the don't like them.



All unions have to do is start a charity and put all funds towards it. Bam!!!!
Bypass the whole problem...

Sorry Harper Conservatives you lose.




Thread closed.....
Wish I could close a thread like a Baws Locutus style. lol
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
+1
#53
Quote: Originally Posted by AngstromView Post

All unions have to do is start a charity and put all funds towards it. Bam!!!!

Bypass the whole problem...

It's not that simple. Since union dues are tax deductible, the government sees no difference between them and donations to the CNIB...at least in theory. They've been looking the other way when it comes to unions. Unions could set up their own funds which anybody could donate to (without a tax receipt) and use that for their politicking.
 
Angstrom
Liberal
#54
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

It's not that simple. Since union dues are tax deductible, the government sees no difference between them and donations to the CNIB...at least in theory. They've been looking the other way when it comes to unions. Unions could set up their own funds which anybody could donate to (without a tax receipt) and use that for their politicking.




This bill can be by-passed in some way or form.

Is that not what I said???
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#55
Quote: Originally Posted by AngstromView Post

This bill can be by-passed in some way or form.

I'm not sure. I haven't read the bill. I do know that the bill is not required for what I said in post 53 to happen
 
coldstream
+2
#56
To look at what an orchestrated attack on labour unions is in process now.. you only have to look at yesterday's vote in Michigan on the deceptively titled 'Right to Work' legislation.. which is aimed at destroying the Union movement.. this in a state where the movement prevailed and established itself in the bitter organizing movements in the auto industry at the during the first part of the 20th Century.

The vote was forced through by a lame duck legislature.. since it would be unlikely to prevail once the new session started. It was something that the Governor and no one else ran on as part of their platform.. so it was foisted on the state without a fair hearing or public debate... in fact NO hearings.. at ALL.

These are tactics of the 'New Right'.. run with money from people like the Koch brothers, libertarian (Tea Party) and commercial interests.. who have no interest but to destroy all impediments supercharging profits by exploiting and disenfranchising workers. The Unions for all of their faults.. were in fact the only counter balance left to commercial and libertarian political agency.. and it is being systematically destroyed.

This 'New Right' or 'neoconservatives'.. have nothing to do with real conservatism.. they are malignant and power debauched cabal.. NOT interested in democracy or equity.. or anything but their own grandizement.

And you would be foolish not see that such a fawning puppet of the Global Investment Organism as Harper, lacking any integrity or vision.. without any sense of nationalism or of a fair distribution of wealth.. is not fully compliant in methodically destroying Unions in Canada.. at the behest of his masters. And like his brethren in the States.. he never battles openly and bravely in public.. but uses sordid tricks to implement his dirty work.
Last edited by coldstream; Dec 12th, 2012 at 02:27 PM..
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
+1
#57
Quote: Originally Posted by LocutusView Post

One of the nastiest fights in years in the House of Commons is coming to a head as Members of Parliament prepare for a vote on the Conservatives’ bid to force labour unions to publicly disclose extensive internal information. The contentious legislation, which opponents see as an attempt to use the Canada Revenue Agency for an attack on 4.3 million union members and the government’s political foes, has been brought forward as a private member’s bill by Conservative MP Russ Hiebert.

Legislation from backbenchers is often a lonely quest with little chance of passage into law. But Hiebert has Prime Minister Stephen Harper on his side. The Prime Minister’s office is helping the British Columbia MP rewrite Bill C-377 to modify measures that have touched off an unusual outpouring of concern from Canadians.

While Hiebert has acknowledged the need to improve the bill, the new version that is expected to be rolled out in a few days is unlikely to douse opposition to C-377 or cool the antagonism it has unleashed.

“This is not the innocuous musings of an individual backbench MP,” New Democrat MP Pat Martin said. “This is a well-structured assault on trade union rights.”


more


MPs clash over Bill C-377 to force public disclosures by labour unions - thestar.com

Well, I think unions are hiding stuff. What can I say? I'm the suspicious sort. I don't think they should have to disclose absolutely everything, but it shouldn't be their choice as far as finances and a few other issues goes. Anything that affects the general public should not be withheld.
But anyway, funny that Harpy's gov't is whining about disclosure, though. lol Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

Quote: Originally Posted by coldstreamView Post

he never battles openly and bravely in public.. but uses sordid tricks to implement his dirty work.

Ah, so all the news reports of his various deeds were simply accidental and Harpy doesn't realize that the deeds of his gov't are open to public scrutiny? roflmao
Frack, you're funny sometimes,CS!
 
petros
#58
Where is the Office of Transparency? I've looked and looked but I just can't see it anywhere.

Maybe it's too transparent?
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
+1
#59
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Where is the Office of Transparency? I've looked and looked but I just can't see it anywhere.

Maybe it's too transparent?

D McKown - "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike". heheheh
 

Similar Threads

59
Public Sector Unions “Jobs For Life”
by Liberalman | Nov 20th, 2011
5
GD, speaking of unions
by Said1 | Dec 11th, 2008
no new posts