(Montreal) The union representing dock workers at the Port of Montreal says it has ended a long-standing hiring practice that was criticized for fostering nepotism – to the point where workers’ preschool children were put on a list of potential employees.
For decades, the Association of Maritime Employers (MEA) who use the port hired longshore workers from a list provided by the union – a list created by asking each union member to provide a single name.
But the AEM argued the list was a recipe for nepotism, resulting in few candidates or members of ethnic minorities, and in some cases children barely out of diapers.
In April, a labor arbitrator ordered a series of changes after finding it was impossible for people to get their names on the list unless they were related to current longshoremen.
“It appeared that this list contained almost exclusively the names of the family members of each of the longshoremen, without any verification of the merit or the ability of these people to do the work of longshoremen,” wrote Nathalie Faucher in her decision.
She found that the list amounted to employment discrimination based on family status, which is prohibited by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In another decision on the subject last year, Ms. Faucher highlighted the employer’s assertion that “some candidates on the union’s master list are currently children under the age of three.”
Since 2015, 50% of longshore workers have been hired from the union list – previously, all hires were drawn from the list.
Ms Faucher found that although the process has faced criticism since the early 1980s, previous attempts to change the system have resulted in lengthy conflicts. “Strong action will need to be taken to break this cycle of systemic discrimination,” she wrote.
The union affiliated with the Canadian Union of Public Employees had argued that no questions had been asked about the relationship between the person added to the list and the member who proposed it, and that it was therefore not aware of the existence of family ties. However, Faucher found that these connections were often self-evident.
The union also claimed that the association’s challenge to the list was an attempt to short-circuit upcoming contract negotiations.
Spokesman Michel Murray said the union fully respects the arbitrator’s decision in April, which ordered it to take more than a dozen steps to allow anyone qualified to put their name on the list. The arbitrator also appointed an independent monitor to ensure that his orders were respected.
Mr. Murray said the list dates back to the days when “shipping companies asked active longshoremen to arrange for their family members to join the workforce when the Port of Montreal was busy.”
Since each worker could only put one name on the list, “it was not uncommon for minors to be listed, given that it could take several years before the employer put out a call for applications,” a- he explained Tuesday in an email.
The Maritime Employers Association said it was not questioning the union’s prerogative to choose workers, but that the process must comply with human rights laws and the collective agreement.
“We are obviously satisfied with the arbitral decision in the nepotism case. Inclusion, equality and accessibility for all are important values for the AEM,” said Isabelle Pelletier, vice-president of communications and public affairs of the association.
John Corey, president of the Canadian Cargo Management Association, said that like other publicly traded companies, major shipping companies must report diversity and governance in their financial statements.
“They have an obligation to report on these issues to their shareholders, so it’s much more difficult for a company to say they’re just going to hire friends and relatives. Times have changed,” he said in an interview Wednesday.
Pier-Luc Bilodeau, professor of industrial relations at Laval University, explained that systems by which employers hire candidates selected by unions existed in other North American ports, as well as for machinists and in the construction industry, even though this practice has been banned in the construction sector in Quebec.
“As a group we want to make sure that the generation after us, our children, can have the opportunity to have good jobs – that is the logic behind the union’s approach,” he said. he summarized Wednesday in an interview.
While the presence of young children on the list may seem shocking, it follows the same logic: union members don’t know when more workers will be needed and want to ensure their children will be at the top of the list when they are able to fill jobs at the port.
Jean-Claude Bernatchez, professor of labor relations at the University of Quebec at Trois-Rivières, said the organization of work at the port of Montreal will likely be one of the central issues as the union begins negotiations on Thursday with the AEM.
“The unions want to maintain the number of jobs they have in Montreal. There are about 1,400 longshoremen and they want to keep their salaries, they want to keep their methods, so they are resistant to change,” he said.
“As for the employer, they want to reduce their costs, they want to introduce technology as much as possible to make things more efficient,” he added.
