Jean-Sebastien Gagnier

For Prof. Jeffrey Gandell’s course entitled Non-Fiction Writing

      Our road network is falling apart.  So is our construction industry.

        You are driving on one of Montreal’s roads while it is under construction.  You get into the construction zone and have to slow down to merge from three lanes into two.  As you peek through the construction drums you see five workers around a hole watching the youngest shoveling and sweating.  You now wonder: why are they all standing there like construction barriers?  This is a very frustrating scene for Quebecers who have to deal with these everlasting construction sites.  Although I’m very dedicated at work and can’t stand wasting my time, I’ve been in this situation too on a couple of days at work.  People would drive by our construction sites, slow down, and roll their windows down only to scream at us: “Travaille! C’est moi qui te paye tabarnac!”  At first it would really upset me.  It got me more and more frustrated until one day, I just got used to it.  I understood their frustration.

       The general frustration lately was fueled by the media coverage of the Charbonneau Commission.  The public saw part of the abuses that were deeply rooted in Quebec’s construction industry.  But there are some facts about construction unions that people do not have in mind when driving by construction sites.  What happens is that not all the workers are required at the same time.  Every worker has a precise specialization and task to accomplish.  When his task is done, he has to wait for the others to finish what they are doing before moving on.  This is unfortunate because most workers would be able to accomplish multiple tasks, and, therefore, work on every step of the construction, but their respective unions protect their jobs.  By creating this exclusivity of task, unions assure that their workers keep their jobs because they are the only ones who have the “competency” to do it. If the additional cost that labor unions charge for their services is no longer relevant to Quebec’s population and the workers are no longer willing to pay for union services, maybe we should abolish labor unions.

       But the abolition of union might bring up the old problems we had before unions regarding equal wages, working conditions, labor rights, etc.  The solution lies in between.  We, Quebec, have a union system that is much more controlling of the industry than the rest of Canada and even the United-States.  The unions can control the “what, when, and where” of their workers.  Every worker is under a dictatorship.

          Unions that have this much control over their labor force is a practice in construction industry well known across Canada, although it is only applied in Quebec.  It is often referred to as the “Quebec Model;” a very bad system in which unions and politicians profit from high construction costs (Duhaime).  But how do the unions work?  When you see those “non-working” workers around the hole, you see the effect of trade certification at work.  Five unions manage Quebec’s construction workforce: Centrale des syndicats démocratiques (CSD-Construction), Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN-Construction), Fédération des travailleurs du Québec (FTQ-Construction), Conseil provincial du Québec des métiers de la construction International (CPQMCI) and Syndicat québécois de la construction (SQC).  They divided the industry into 27 trades and 12 territories. 

       A worker that is registered under a certain trade and territory cannot work outside of his competence certification or outside his territory. Duhaime, political journalist, said that construction workers in Quebec work less time than the average Quebecer – 950 hours per year versus 1625 hours per year. Duhaime found that the restriction in trade and territory is responsible for most of those lost hours.  He points out that Quebec’s construction workers are not lazy at all considering the reputation of hard-working labor they built in Alberta.  William Vermeersch, civil engineering technologist for the City of Chambly, even said that most of the workers after last summer’ strike “wanted to miss fewer days of work as possible”. 

       People misconceive construction workers’ salaries.  The workers mentioned above wanted to make the money they could not get while they were on strike.  Although they are usually paid well over minimum wages, they generally end up with an average annual income.  Since they do not work as many hours as a normal worker would, they get less pay.  They also have to contribute to their respective unions that take quite an important chunk of their paycheck.  Duhaime found that all those union procedures added an extra 10.5% on the employer’s cost, not to mention the additional cost to the worker himself.  For example, the FTQ-Construction, Quebec’s most influential union, typically charges 50% to every member of their hourly income, plus 0.065% of their salary that paid by the employer directly to the union.  This contribution brings the members some insurance coverage and services that are exclusively provided by their union.  What this means is that the cost to taxpayers is even more inflated.  A study conducted by David Tuerck in the United-States showed that public projects realized with union labor inflated the cost by 12%, up to 18%.  Contractors calculate their profit margin on their costs.  If the contractors pay more for the same amount of work done, they get to make more profit on the project’s costs.  Pierre Fortin, an economist cited in Duhaime article, estimated the net lost to Quebec’s economy at $3.4 billion. 

         We have to find a more viable solution both economically and socially.  Time has changed for North American unions.  Bruemmer’s article published in The Gazette, “Labouring against Union Decline” gives us a couple of statistics on union members.  He quotes Karla Thorpe, director of human resources research for the Conference Board of Canada: “there is a sense that many of the battles unions fought – for improved wages, workplace security, pensions, pay equity – have already been won” (Bruemmer).  Unions are not genuinely bad institutions, but I think unions, as they are structured now, are becoming more and more irrelevant.  Vermeersch sees them as “a double-edged sword.” They brought the changes that were needed in the marketplace when we were at the beginning of industrialization, but we now have multiple rules and regulations imposed by the federal and provincial governments that certainly protect the basic rights of every worker.  Their role obviously changed throughout the years, but it is hard to judge whether or not we should keep these unions. As Bruemmer explains, the opinions on the economic benefits are divided.  Although unions require a lot of money to operate, it seems like they encourage higher wages among their workers, therefore creating a richer working class that can put their money into our economy.  

       After considering the unions that are present here in Quebec, I would suggest that we need to get rid of the current system we have in place.  Our unions definitely have too much negative impact on our working class and they does not benefit our population anymore.  Quebecers are tired of getting fooled by unions.  The Charbonneau Commission is revealing a lot of the background connections that we could not see as the general public.  We have seen that roadwork costs were boosted by 35% because of mafia associations (Curran).  However, more controversy comes from the unions themselves.  They are supposed to work in favor of their members, but the leaders seem to be disconnected from the workers’ reality.  I have seen union representatives come close construction sites in their huge pick-up trucks. Many of them rushed towards the group of workers to tell them to leave the site as soon as possible, because otherwise they would be forced out.  They were very intimidating with their baseball bats sticking out of their truck boxes.  It is sad to see that the people working for your own union do not even bother having respect for its members, as the decision to go on strike was not agreed with by most members.

       It is no wonder as to why these union thugs looked like Hell’s Angels, after hearing the connections that these construction unions in Quebec have with criminal organizations. Jocelyn Dupuis, former Director-General of FTQ-Construction, is now awaiting his criminal trial after police have collected enough evidence of his connections with the criminal world.  Aside from manipulating the internal elections of FTQ-Construction, Dupuis also used the union fund to finance mafia-related businesses (Muise).  This is where it gets frustrating not only for the general public, but also for the workers under these unions.  They are obliged to contribute to a union, but unable to trust the ones that are managing their money for insurance coverage and retirement funds.  Most workers would rather choose their own insurance coverage instead of being forced to pay for the union’s plan.

       That being said, let’s try to find a better system in which laborers would be represented for their own interests.  As an insider in Quebec’s construction industry, Vermeersch thought that having more implication from the members would result in a union that defends better the interests of the members and of the community.  It was interesting to get this opinion from a Quebec worker, since a similar conclusion came out of a personal study from Jeff Grabelsky, Director of the Construction Industry Program at Cornell University.  Both of them thought of a similar union system although they both come from very different backgrounds and live in two very distinct realities: Quebec industry versus the United States.  Reducing the size of unions would definitely help.  As Grabelsky pointed, members tend to lose their sense of loyalty toward a union when they feel too distant and disconnected (Grabelsky). 

      A better union system would start with leaders who are more connected to the members, but who do not have all the power over decisions that influence the future of the community.  The leader would be democratically elected.  Smaller scale unions would increase the loyalty of workers toward their union but also toward the industry in general.  There should be no restriction applied as to which trade can join the union or not.  A mixed competency labor pool in a same union would also improve relations between trades and simplify bureaucracy.  Every member would have easy access to their local union bureau where they can contribute through a council to the advancement of their rights as a caring community for the industry.  Workers would have more power on their decisions.

       But most importantly, Quebec’s construction workers should have the right not to join a union.  There is no point in forcing someone to join a union, especially if we consider the improved model where personal contribution in the union council is the key.  By changing the union system, we would unclutter construction sites by requiring less “specialized” workers to accomplish simple tasks.  There would be no conflict between trades as to who can do what job, since the workers would be in the same union local.  Poor management as well as fraudulent use of union funds would be harder.  Smaller and simpler administration would decrease the shade from the administration curtain.  All of these factors would contribute in reducing construction costs for Quebec’s industry, but would also ensure that the money is spent more efficiently.

       By shifting our union system towards a better-adapted administration, we would keep the gains that were made by unions many years ago, rather than abolishing unions altogether and losing the gains. Are Quebec’s construction workers willing to make an effort to work towards such changes?  Will Quebecers accept to pay more again for unionized workers?  If the general public, as well as the construction workers, put faith in this new system, both would feel better in that cooperative environment.  Huge advantages on both the economic level and our society’s wellbeing would come out of this mentality shift. 

       And maybe with all that change we would be able to rebuild our roads, our industry, and our society.

           

 

Works Cited

Arbroath. Hell’s Angels. Digital image. Nothing To Do With Arbroath. Blogspot, 15 June 2010. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.

Bruemmer, Rene. “Labouring against Union Decline.” Montreal Gazette. Postmedia       Network, 14 Oct. 2012. Web. 29 Sept. 2013.

Commission De La Construction Du Quebec. “Codes for Regions, Trades, and   Occupations.” CCQ. Commission De La Construction Du Quebec, 2013. Web. 10            Nov. 2013.

Commission De La Construction Du Quebec. “Salary and Contribution Rates.” CCQ.    Commission De La Construction Du Quebec, 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.

Commission De La Construction Du Quebec. “Union Associations.” CCQ. Commission            De La Construction Du Quebec, 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.

Curran, Peggy. “Secret Society: A Hint of Transparency.”  Montreal Gazette. Postmedia             Network, 3 Sept. 2013. Web. 29 Sept. 2013.

Dorval, Yves-Thomas. “Opinion: Strike Would Paralyze Quebec Economy.” Montreal      Gazette. Postmedia Network, 14 June 2013. Web. 29 Sept. 2013.

Duhaime, Eric. “‘Quebec Model’ a Standard for Construction Fiasco.” Toronto Sun.        Canoe Sun Media, 26 June 2013. Web. 29 Sept. 2013.

Emard, Jeanne. Syndicats- Construction. Digital image. Jeanne Emard. WordPress, 10   Oct. 2011. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

Father T. How many workers does it take to dig a hole? Digital image. Yelp. Yelp Inc.,     12 Mar. 2013. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.

Grabelsky, Jeff. “Building and Construction Trades Unions: Are They Built to                   Win?” Social Policy 35.2 (2004/2005) : 35-39. PDF.

Muise, Monique. “Hells Angels Helped Fix FTQ Elections, Inquiry Told.” Montreal           Gazette. Postmedia Network, 31 Oct. 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.

Radio-Canada. La greve dans le secteur de la construction. Digital image. Radio-           Canada. CBC/Radio-Canada, 25 June 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

Tuerck, David G. “Why Project Labor Agreements are not in the Public Interest.”   CATO             Journal 30.1 (2010) : 45-65. PDF.

Vermeersch, William. E-mail interview. 27 Oct. 2013.