Stability, respect and good work

For all the talk of societal economic stability, there's a huge difference between an economy that's doing well in numbers, and one in which individual employees actually have any stability for themselves. The Globe's Web comment features an excellent discussion on point:

Since the 1980s, many Canadian employers have responded to economic competition by shedding permanent full-time employees and replacing them with temporary employees on short-term contracts. Many companies have increased their reliance on temporary employment agencies. Hospitals, manufacturers and even universities have become increasingly reliant on these temporary employees...

For most employees, control is not based on being able to choose when, where and even whether to work, but rather on being in an employment relationship that has some degree of permanency and has a system of joint determination of compensation and working conditions.

The reality for most temporary workers is that they do not know from week to week if they will be working, where they will be working, or at what rate of compensation. For young workers, this uncertainty makes it difficult to plan a future. For workers with families, it makes it difficult to arrange child care, participate fully in their children's lives or play a role in their communities. For all temporary workers, the need to remain flexible, should work become available on short notice, makes it difficult to make fixed commitments to family, friends and society.

Obviously, there's a serious problem with a labour system effectively designed to detach employees from society at large. And what's worse is that public-sector employers are buying in: surely a public broadcaster or health-care provider, with greater social obligations itself and at least somewhat less market pressures than other employers, should be expected to be leaders in taking the wider societal implications into account.

Another point worth mentioning from the above passage is the importance of "joint determination" of many aspects of workplace life. Even among employers which provide full-time work, there's all too often a condescending view that workers should view their jobs as a privilege and accept all terms in order to keep them - see e.g. Regina mayor Pat Fiacco's "sober up" comment to city workers (which likely prevented a contract from being approved). The wrong-headed position that employees can't reasonably present a differing (and sometimes, more accurate) view of the workplace leads only to irritation on both sides.

Of course, employees and unions should be willing to accept reasonable terms of employment when offered. But so too should employers recognize not only that stability can be as much a plus for them as for workers, but also that the best solutions to most workplace issues come from both sides respecting and listening to each other. At both the CBC and City of Regina, that seems to be sorely lacking.