Have we reached the end of unions?

Air Canada's unofficial motto: We're not happy until you're not happy.

The legendary comic Yvon Deschamps will be remembered for two very special lines. The first one summarizes what Quebecers truly want: An independent Quebec within a united Canada. And the second one is a question with no simple answer: les unions, qu’ossa donne? (Quebec French that I loosely translate as “what the fuck are unions for anyway.”)

Here’s the skit. Warning: You need a good handle on Quebec French for that one…

If you got the gist of it, you’ll understand that in those days of black-and-white television, unions were still useful for many employed Quebecers. Especially the ones working in low-skilled shops, like the character played by Deschamps.

The current model of trade unionism was put in place in the United States in the mid-1930s. That’s almost a hundred years ago, and it was designed for the assembly line, in an era when any employee could be replaced by any other employee. That was the point of Taylorism. You were efficient as a manufacturer by automating tasks (and humans) as much as possible. Unions were necessary in an era where basic labour standards didn’t really exist and bad employers could blatantly abuse workers and face no consequences.

Today’s work place is — thankfully — a little different, including in manufacturing but especially in jobs where humans are needed to provide a human touch. Flight attendants aren’t just there to bring you coffee and help you shove that clearly-too-big carry-on in the overhead compartment. They are experts in de-escalating tense situations, dealing with emergencies (medical or otherwise) and handling assholes all day long.

It’s a difficult job and in addition to our best behaviour they deserve to be paid wages that allow them to live with dignity. Oh, and to be paid while they’re at work. As we all learned in recent days, that hasn’t been the case at AirCan for some time and this only serves to confirm the company’s unofficial motto: “Air Canada: We’re not happy until you’re not happy.”

Pollster David Coletto wrote an interesting piece based on his research into this issue (research that, he points out, was commissioned by the union side). He makes excellent points about public opinion related to insecurity and a precarious economy, as well as how Canadians, who are extraordinarily fair-minded as a group, agree Air Canada flight attendants should be paid for all the hours they’re at work, not just the time the plane is actually in the air. Especially as the company is profitable enough to offer exceptional compensation to its executives.

The prime minister is playing a dangerous game by forcing the striking FAs back to work, yes. But it might also be, potentially, a high-reward kind of game.

I have spent way too many years studying and writing about labour movements in Canada and the United States. I even wrote a book about how in Quebec, labour unions and nationalism replaced religion (no, really) as a unifying cultural force. I am also a Gen-Xer and my professional experience has always been harder than it should have been thanks in great part to all the unionized Boomers right ahead of me sitting — when they weren’t squatting — on all the cushy jobs. Unions also have a checkered history of slowing innovation, though in fairness they also brought some good reforms and in Quebec at least, used their weight to push for social progress.

Yep, there is a chip on my shoulder about unions. Even the ones to which I was forced to belong (and tried my best to support since I was stuck with them) never did anything useful for me. Maybe my experience is unusual, I don’t know. But I have no particular fondness for organized labour. I am pretty sure I’m not alone in this. Big unions are businesses, too. And they are far from perfect.

Most Canadians — I gladly include myself in this group — are on the side of flight attendants in this dispute. They are absolutely right to insist on being paid for the hours they work. That’s so basic it almost hurts to type it.

But there is a big but in this particular labour dispute. It’s that Air Canada serves a shit ton of people who have to go places and pay through the nose to get there on flights that are now being cancelled. Trying to rebook on a different airline is no fun, and not cheap either these days. So the conflict does seriously inconvenience a bunch of people who can’t really afford it.

The solution isn’t to force flight attendants to continue working unpaid. It may be necessary for the government to force them back to work, but it should be clear, publicly, that the government will not accept the outcome to be less than a certain minimum. Exactly what that threshold is, I don’t know, beyond “paying people a living wage for all the hours they work.”

Putting pressure on parties to resolve a high-impact conflict is fine in theory. In this case, I think most of us would agree it’s time the feds leaned on the executives at Air Canada to, well, do the right thing and pronto. There is no appetite for a strike and frankly, nobody should need a union to insist that hours at work boarding passengers count as hours at work that should be paid.

I’ve long been of the view that unions shouldn’t be needed at all, certainly not in the knowledge economy. Between legislated labour standards, basic decency and employers who aren’t dumber than a bag of hammers, it should be possible for everyone to match skills with demands for same in ways that benefit everyone without having to resort to inflexible third parties.

I wouldn’t mind this current conflict being the beginning of the end of the 1930s model of trade unionism, to be perfectly honest. I am no doubt asking too much.