Labour Relations

Case Study- Chapter 3- U n i o n s : O b j e c t i v e s , P r o c e s s e s , S t r u c t u r e , a n d H i s t o r y

Licensed practical nurses (LPNs) in British Columbia hospitals are represented by the Hospital Employees Union (HEU). There were approximately 5000 LPNs in British Columbia in 2009. LPNs take a one-year course and receive an average starting salary of just under $25 an hour. The British Colombia Nurses Union (BCNU) represents registered nurses in the province. Registered nurses have a four-year degree, and their starting wage is approximately $29 an hour. In 2009, the BCNU started a raid of the LPNs. A raid is an attempt by one union to take away members from another. Such an action is generally frowned upon in the labour movement. To justify the raid, the BCNU claimed that the LPNs would receive higher wages, pay lower union dues, and obtain more competent leadership who did not engage in radical conflict with the government. The HEU had been in a bitter confrontation with the provincial government in 2002 that was only resolved when back-to-work legislation was enacted. To defend against the raid, the HEU launched an outreach campaign to convince its members to stay. A business manager for the HEU said, BCNU has been unsuccessful in restricting what the LPNs are able to do, and we believe this is about BCNU trying to control and restrict by other means. One HEU official stated, The BCNU ought to be quite disappointed with the raid campaign. They have spent a lot of money and used up a lot of peoples time and it looks as though they may not have much to show for their efforts. On November 30, 2009, the BCNU filed an application for certification for the LPNs in the province with the Labour Relations Board. But on January 18, 2010, it applied to 70 C h a p t e r 3 withdraw the application when it became apparent that it would not have enough of the LPNs signed up as members to succeed. The BCNU claimed it had not been possible to accurately determine the number of LPNs in the province because of their different locations. An unsuccessful application would mean that a 22-month time bar on a second application would be imposed.

Questions:

1. What concerns, if any, would hospital employers have in this situation?

2. What arguments can be made in criticism or in defence of raiding?