The strike at Deltaport is over and the trucks and trains are rolling again. Imports are arriving and exports are leaving. I have two questions: 1. Why was there a strike? 2. Who were the legitimate parties to resolve it? My understanding of "why" is because of economics and the facts as set out by the truckers that rates were too low, some had fallen, and that combined with excessively long wait times, it was making it impossible to earn a living after paying for expenses. We are talking about an average take home of less than $30,000 per independent trucker.
Who were the parties, or who should have been the parties, is more complex.
Truckers are a mix of a union and independent operators, so there are two quite different classes of "employees." Who is the employer? Is it TSI, which holds the lease to move the containers? Is it Port Metro Vancouver, a federally regulated entity? If so, Canada and the federal minister of labour get to "blow the whistle" on disputes. If it's not regulated, then over to B.C. minister of labour. Since B.C. was passing back-to-work legislation, it seems it's provincial.
However, the port is a federal undertaking, and while Port Metro Vancouver claims to be simply the landlord, the federal government seems to have the final say on what happens. Nonetheless, the federal minister of labour was absent.
Instead we had a statement by Lisa Raitt, the minister of transport, to whom the port reports. In the middle of the dispute, she said the "truckers should go back to work." That's hardly neutral. This is same minister, when replying to our mayor, who said she did not interfere with the operations of the port.
Add to this, the president of the port threatened to cancel truckers' licences in the midst of the strike. No, don't negotiate, just threaten! (That's straight from Putin School of Governance, Crimea campus.)
So what is happening, who's really in charge? If this is an essential service, then back-to-work legislation followed by an arbitrated settlement is the norm. Otherwise the parties are free to strike and lock out.
This got complicated. We had labour ministers from Canada and B.C., the provincial legislature, Port Metro Vancouver, TSI, union and the truckers' association all trying to negotiate with one another. Behind this lies a deal struck in 2005 that had been broken by the port.
In the end, the settlement contained increased "wages," fuel reimbursement and compensation for waiting time. Just around the corner is Vince Ready, veteran labour troubleshooter, with a report for May 30. Will that bring peace? I sure hope so.
This strike didn't need to happen. The autocratic attitude and arrogance of the port management was the cause, along with welching on the earlier 2005 deal, and it needs to be "taken out back." The head of the B.C. Chamber of Commerce even weighed in, saying: "The model of how the port operates... needs to be re-examined."
