News

 

Hudak stands by right-to-work proposal

Liberals claim his party isn't behind him

Tim Hudak isn't backing down from his right-to-work proposal.

It would make union membership optional for workers.

The Progressive Conservative leader has come under fire for the idea, with some members of Hudak's own party questioning it.

The Liberals says some Tory MPPs voted against legislation 17 years ago. They also pointed to MPP John O'Toole and Niagara Falls candidate Bart Maves questioning the proposal. The party turfed Essex candidate Dave Brister after he spoke out against the idea.

Hudak says there needs to be labour reform so manufacturing jobs aren't lost to the U.S.

Leave a comment:

showing all comments · Subscribe to comments
Comment Like
  • 16
  1. Jack posted on 02/05/2014 03:03 PM
    Any platform that involves weakening the strangehold that unions have on innocent people's lives (and wallets) is a platform that will guarantee my vote. HUDAK FOR PREMIER.
  2. don was right posted on 02/05/2014 03:08 PM
    Tim. Tim Tim. Get elected first. Make all sorts of wild promised likeWynne does. THEN bring out the big anti union guns. Remember Daltons " no new taxes promise. Peopel voted for him in droves. THEN he bruaght in HST and Health tax. Learn from the master. Learn from Harper. Once you have a majority you can ram anything through. And 4 years without dues will kill most unions.
  3. Angry Bill posted on 02/05/2014 04:32 PM
    Sigh. Thanks, Tim, for once more invalidating yourself as a candidate to kick the fiberals out of office.

    This is just not viable. Not like this. Making union dues optional? Can't work. Here's why:

    Joe and Bruce work together in a union factory. (yeah, I know.. fantasy scenario because all the factories have moved out of the country.. but still.. run with me on this). Joe is a dues paying member, Bruce is not, because it's optional. Bruce is hired to do the same job as Joe, and has the same pay and benefits as Joe.. that Joe's union fought for in the past, and now everyone enjoys as a result. Joe supports the union that got him his high wages and benefits, and Bruce does not. Yet he does not turn down the same union benefits that he gets for free, without supporting the union that got him those benefits.

    Whether you support unions or not (and generally, I do not), you can see this is not a fair scenario. If Bruce wants to enjoy the union benefits, he can darn well pay into the union. Otherwise, he should not have any of those bargaining rights.

    There are much better ways to fight unions if you don't like them. You can't legislate an inherent non-equality in the work place. Whatever solution you come up with needs to be fair across the board. It can be draconian if you want, but make it fair.

    When I talk about how unions have driven companies either out of business or out of the country, people often self-righteously come back with statements like "How do you enjoy your high wages? How do you like your sick days, and your vacation? How do you like your benefits? You can thank a union for fighting for that so you can have it." Of course, they are correct. Without union actions decades ago, we would still all be slaving in mines and factories for 14 hours a day, with no workman's comp.

    However, my response to that is, when you break a leg a cast is a mighty useful thing to have in order for that leg to heal. However, once that leg is healed, continuing to wear that cast for the rest of your life after it is no longer needed can get mighty cumbersome mighty fast. And that has been where unions have been for quite a few years, now. Driving jobs out of the province and out of the country. They have now become cumbersome.
    1. bill posted on 02/05/2014 06:55 PM
      @Angry Bill I just don't get why unions would chase their own jobs away, just don't make sense to me......see if I bought a house to protect me from the elements, the wind, the rain , the cold, I wouldn't sell that house, the minute I felt warm an comfy now would I ? ( I think this is a more reasonable comparison that that ridiculous cast story)
    2. Mike posted on 02/05/2014 07:17 PM
      @bill A union is like cancer, or a virus. All it ever does is spread and grow and consume, demanding more all the time and never giving anything back. As they blackmail their employers, the cost of whatever it is the company does naturally goes up and up, until it's no longer profitable to run the company; the union prices it's members right out of a job, then makes a sad face and an angry noise when the company moves somewhere more affordable. Just look at Detroit, as a prime example.
    3. donny p. posted on 02/05/2014 08:20 PM
      @Angry Bill Unions were the only way for the uneducated, unskilled workers to achieve middle class status. Economic globalization putan endto this and there`s no need tosay any more. People will now work for whatever they can get, Robby`s acceleration to privatization will just drive more workies into poverty.
    4. bill posted on 02/05/2014 09:15 PM
      @Mike @mike I was going to refute your argument re: unions, but whats the use? If you truly believe that unions are responsible for the failed social experiment that was Detroit, Well then you're in need of more learnin' that I can supply
    5. Jack posted on 02/06/2014 10:47 AM
      @donny p. "Uneducated and unskilled," exactly the people who HAVEN'T EARNED A MIDDLE CLASS EXISTENCE.
    6. Angry Bill posted on 02/06/2014 01:39 PM
      @bill Hi bill. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

      My cast story is not ridiculous, as you state. I could equally state that your house comparison is ridiculous. Because it doesn't exactly equate, either. Houses aren't supposed to work against your best interests after you buy it and move in. Unions do. To you, unions are a warm, comfy place, apparently. To me, they're a scary, self-serving and short-sighted place. A place that has a tendency to shoot themselves in the foot.

      Look at the Canada Post strike a couple of years ago. Crazy.. these guys don't live in the same reality as us. Canada Post is on a downward spiral at light speed, becoming less and less relevant, and losing money hand over fist. So much so, that they are significantly raising the price of stamps to a ridiculous level. And the union thinks it's a great idea to go on strike... riiiight. I would not call a burning house "warm and comfy". So I maintain that my cast analogy is far less ridiculous than the house one.

      Ok, I'm going to cut to the quick.. I have an example that illustrates perfectly what is wrong with unions, and why they have had a large hand in destroying companies' growth, and as a result our economy. Everyone knows a picture is worth a thousand words, but I think this old joke expresses the sentiments quite adequately. I'm sure you've heard it before:

      Four men were bragging about how smart their dogs were.

      The first man, an engineer, had a dog named "T-Square". The second man, an accountant, had a dog named "Slide-Rule". The third man, a chemist, had a dog called "Measure". The fourth man was a Union member.

      To show off, the engineer called to his dog, "T-Square, do your stuff." T-Square trotted over to a desk and, with a pen, promptly drew a circle, a square and a triangle onto some paper.

      Everyone agreed that that was pretty good. The accountant, though, insisted his dog could do better. He called to his dog and said, "Slide Rule, do your stuff." Slide Rule went out into the kitchen and returned with a dozen cookies. He proceeded to divide the cookies into four equal piles of three each.

      Everyone agreed that that too was pretty good. The chemist, though, proclaimed that his dog could do even better. He called his dog and said, "Measure, do your stuff." Measure got up, walked over to the fridge, took out a quart of milk, got a ten ounce glass from the cupboard, and then poured exactly eight ounces into the glass without spilling a drop.

      Everyone agreed that that was pretty good, as well. Then, they all turned to the Union member and said, "Hey, pal, what can your dog do?"

      The Union member stood up, called his dog and said, "Coffee Break, do your stuff." Coffee Break jumped to his feet, ate the cookies, drank the milk, defecated on the paper, screwed the other three dogs, claimed he'd injured his back while doing so, filed a grievance report for unsafe working conditions, put in for Workers' Compensation, and then went home on sick leave.
    7. Jim posted on 02/06/2014 02:03 PM
      @Angry Bill I'm going to have to remember that bit with the dogs, it's spot-on! Here's another one:

      As part of a home-defense program, the police start giving guns and bullets to civilians. An officer went to a banker's house and gave him a revolver with six bullets, and said "Don't use these unless it's an emergency." The banker said "I hope I never have to," and locked them in his safe.

      The officer went to a cook's house next, gave him the gun and bullets, and said "Don't use these unless it's an emergency." The cook said "I hope I never have to," and hid them in a jar on top of his fridge.

      The officer went to a teacher's house next, gave her the gun and bullets, and said "Don't use these unless it's an emergency." The teacher immediately walked outside, killed six people, and went on strike to protect her constitutional entitlement to six murders per year.
  4. Sam posted on 02/05/2014 05:12 PM
    most on the other side hope mr. Hudak stands by his platform.
    as long as he and this brand of policies are what the conservatives will run on mr. Hudak will continue to be the NDP and Liberals best friend.
    except after this time there won't be another time for him.
  5. Todd posted on 02/05/2014 05:41 PM
    I'm all for unions in the private sector, but public unions funded by the tax payers are getting hosed with unrealistic pay and pensions. We need our governments running smaller, leaner and meaner to get things rolling again. I'm all for paying high salaries for a highly effective construction worker, super star teacher or hydro one worker, but not for a group mentality for doing the minimum. We are 30 years behind in transit and infrastructure projects and I believe the public union sucked up all the funding in the last 30 years with their gold plated pensions. I'm not saying the bloated public managers are not the problem too, but I know some union people who shouldn't be making 6 figures.
  6. KarenW_5 posted on 02/05/2014 07:54 PM
    Oh Tim, you are so blowing the Conservative's chance of ever getting back to power. Make noise about the real problems with this province, loss of jobs, gutting the public unions, slashing the bureaucracies.
    There are 2 types of unions, private and public. Private unions, such as those protecting employees whose jobs are going down south because the company says "play our way or no way", are in trouble and loosing or have lost control or have made heavy concessions to remain viable. In Ontario, the public unions on the other hand have been made powerful by a weak, spineless government who have used this alliance to their own benefit and to the detriment of every taxpayer of this province, now and in the future.
    1. Jack posted on 02/05/2014 07:58 PM
      @KarenW_5 The employees of those private unions aren't losing their jobs because the companies are a bunch of big meanies, as you seem to believe. The companies HAVE to move the jobs elsewhere, because between those private sector unions demanding higher and higher wages and the public sector unions driving up taxes with the same demands, it's becoming too difficult to turn a profit here.
    2. KarenW_5 posted on 02/05/2014 10:20 PM
      @Jack Jack, Jack, Jack, Jack - My father was a union executive most of my life, my husband just retired after 35 years in a union, I was born and raised in Windsor, ON so please, please don't tell me about unions. What you missed was my point. Private unions have had to take concessions over the last 15 years, whether it be in the pensions, in the benefits, in the uniforms (if incl), in wages, vacation and sick time, in order to keep jobs here. NOT SO with public unions.
  7. HP posted on 02/06/2014 07:59 AM
    "Right to Work" is a euphemism for war on the middle class. Although unions are now redundant, mostly representing the persecuted public sector workers, they have turned a symbiotic relationship into a parasitic one where they have priced themselves out of the global market (except the public service where taxpayers are on the hook and held hostage). However, "Right to Work" will create and employment environment where the person willing to work fort he lowest wage will get the job.

    Look to the deep south in America if you want a good example of where Hudack and the Fords want to take Ontario. People work for less than the minimum wage by being called contractors...$5.00/hr is not unusual for unskilled labour. Louisiana, the richest state in America in natural resources and secondary industries like refineries and chemical plants has the lowest average income in the U.S.. "Right to Work" was initiated by the Republicans to benefit the rich corporate owners, betraying the workers in the name of free enterprise.

    Not saying it's a bad thing, but kiss the middle class goodbye, and the service sector (70% of the economy) will be decimated.
showing all comments

Your GTA

Sign Up For Breaking News Alerts

Becoming a member only takes 60 seconds! Members get access to exclusive information and products that non-members do not, including concert ticket presales, trips, advance notice on upcoming entertainment events, movie screening passes, music giveaways and more!

Login with Facebook

Stay connected 24/7! Receive breaking news and programming alerts right to your inbox. CLICK HERE to sign-up.

Today's Poll

In light of the attacks that happened in Ottawa, do you feel safe in your city?

Voting is restricted to one vote every 24 hour(s) VoteResults

Top Stories

Facebook

Twitter