Home
Forums
The Soap Box
Conservatives set to table bill forcing unions to open books
Forums
The Soap Box
Conservatives set to table bill forcing unions to open books
Conservatives set to table bill forcing unions to open books
| page: 1, 2 next | |
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
I *want* a copy of this Bill being tabled...
Can we hope that the Canadian union members will have an LM2 some day? This should be fun to watch... _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2939 Location: the 'puter |
It's not often skewed motives produce something beneficial. Kudos to the MP for picking a worthy target. Quote: Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro accusing union leaders of “seeking to buy influence” Quote: However, the Conservatives are aiming to portray Mr. Topp as a “union boss” who is not looking out for all Canadians. Quote: If adopted, the bill will force unions “to apply financial disclosure rules” that are already in place for charities, _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
I am trying to find a copy of the actual Bill but I have no idea where to start. I expect that if the thing every passes it would be years before any actual Financial reports are there to see.
All political parties are influence peddlers, it's the nature of the beast. As you say, this one is the right target though. The Post had a "Back & Forth" style piece the other day: Quote: Ken Georgetti, CLC President, Sep 29, 2011
The Fraser Institute attacks trade unions for an alleged lack of transparency in how we disclose financial information. How would they know? We will gladly compare our transparency with theirs any day of the week. Our (owners) members know how and where to get their union's financial information. I have read the Fraser Institute's annual report for 2010. It does not provide a financial report, but rather selective "financial highlights." We know that they took in $10.8-million, but they don't tell us who gave them that money. The Fraser Institute is registered as a charitable organization with many of its donors receiving tax receipts with their thank you letters, but the actual list of donors and financial statements are nowhere to be seen. The board of directors, however, is comprised mainly of big business bosses. Might they just have an agenda when it comes to trying to discredit unions? I challenge the Fraser Institute to come clean on who finances their anti-union agenda. Then comes Labour's favourite pariah: Quote: Niels Veldhuis replies:Ken Georgetti misses the point in his response to our commentary on union financial disclosure. We are not anti-union; we are pro worker choice. The evidence is clear that when workers are allowed to choose whether or not to join or financially support a union, they do so in much lower numbers.
Unfortunately, workers in Canada can be forced to join and financially support a union (through dues) as a condition of employment. What's more, union members have little to no information available to them about their union's finances and how their union executives spend these dues. There is ample evidence that union executives use union dues to support political causes and activist agendas that are not supported by the broadbased union membership. Additionally, union dues are fully deductible from income for tax purposes. There is a solid case for full and public financial disclosure for unions. Finally, Georgetti's demand that the Fraser Institute provide the names of our donors is merely a smoke screen to divert attention from the labour movement's lack of transparency. The Fraser Institute is funded by voluntary contributions; no one is forced to donate to the Institute, unlike unionized workers who are forced to pay union dues. The stage is set and the player are walking on... the curtain will soon rise, this should be a lot of fun to watch. _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2939 Location: the 'puter |
Quote: no one is forced to donate to the Institute, unlike unionized workers who are forced to pay union dues. I think the article mentioned something about "the bill" remaining top secret for now 3E. I'm not sure which of the two institutions I mistrust more - fraser institute or ken georgetti, okay same same and sometimes it's hard to tell which one is which. And FTR, I know nothing of Veldhuis but I don't think I need to, good points are good points no matter who makes them. I am surprised tho, one would think a good labour pariah would know that the day Georgetti gets and/or logically responds to anything will be the same day jesus gets back. Quote: ...this should be a lot of fun _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
It has a name: Bill C-317 An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (labour organizations).
_________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
So, Labour Unions in Canada take in about 3 - 4 Billion in dues, per year- No one is too sure). The CBC wants to know:
Should unions be forced to open their books to the public? Go vote... (For the American readers, The CBC is Canada's government news agency. It is funded with public money and is sort of the opposite of FOX News.) _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2939 Location: the 'puter |
Quote: The CBC is Canada's government news agency...and is sort of the opposite of FOX News. _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
So there was a procedural challenge and now Bill 377 exists in place of 317. To be clear, for the US readers. In Canada unions are not currently required to file financial records. This Bill is trying to change that.
It looks like this, with all the "parlimentary" junk picked out: Bill-377 wrote: 1. The Income Tax Act is amended by adding the following after section 149: 149.01
(1) The following definitions apply in section 149 and in this section. “labour organization” includes a labour society and any organization formed for purposes which include the regulation of relations between employers and employees, and includes a duly organized group or federation, congress, labour council, joint council, conference, general committee or joint board of such organizations. “labour relations activities” means activities associated with the preparation for, and participation in, the negotiation of collective bargaining agreements and the administration and enforcement of collective agreements to which the labour organization is a signatory. “labour trust” means a trust or fund in which a labour organization has a legal, beneficial or financial interest or that is established or maintained in whole or in part for the benefit of a labour organization, its members or the persons it represents. (2) Every labour organization and every labour trust shall, within six months from the end of each fiscal period, file with the Minister a public information return for the year, in the prescribed form and containing the prescribed information. (3) The public information return referred to in subsection (2) shall include: (a) a set of financial statements for the fiscal period, in such form and containing such particulars and other information as may be prescribed relating to the financial position of the labour organization or labour trust, including (i) a balance sheet showing the assets and liabilities of the labour organization or labour trust made up as of the last day of the fiscal period, and (ii) a statement of income and expenditures of the labour organization or labour trust for the fiscal period; (b) a set of statements for the fiscal period setting out the aggregate amount of all transactions and all disbursements — or book value in the case of investments and assets — over $5,000 shown as separate entries along with the name and address of the payer and payee, the purpose and description of the transaction and the specific amount that has been paid or received, or that is to be paid or received, including (i) a statement of accounts receivable, (ii) a statement of loans receivable, including all loans to officers, employees, members or businesses exceeding $250, (iii) a statement showing the sale of investments and fixed assets including a description, cost, book value, and sale price, (iv) a statement showing the purchase of investments and fixed assets including a description, cost, book value, and price paid, (v) a statement of accounts payable, (vi) a statement of loans payable, (vii) a statement of disbursements to officers, directors and trustees including gross salary, stipends, periodic payments, benefits (including pension obligations), vehicles, bonuses, gifts, service credits, lump sum payments, other forms of remuneration and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any other consideration provided, and a record of the percentage of time dedicated to political activities and to lobbying activities, (viii) a statement of disbursements to employees and contractors including gross salary, stipends, periodic payments, benefits (including pension obligations), vehicles, bonuses, gifts, service credits, lump sum payments, other forms of remuneration and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any other consideration provided, and a record of the percentage of time dedicated to political activities and to lobbying activities, (ix) a statement of disbursements on labour relations activities, (x) a statement of disbursements on political activities, (xi) a statement of disbursements on lobbying activities, (xii) a statement of contributions, gifts, and grants, (xiii) a statement of disbursements on administration, (xiv) a statement of disbursements on general overhead, (xv) a statement of disbursements on organizing activities, (xvi) a statement of disbursements on collective bargaining activities, (xvii) a statement of disbursements on conference and convention activities, (xviii) a statement of disbursements on education and training activities, (xix) a statement of disbursements on legal activities, and (xx) any other prescribed statements; (c) a statement showing all labour relations expenditures, as set out in the statement referred to in subparagraph (b) (ix), and all non-labour relations expenditures, as set out in the statements referred to in subparagraphs (b)(x) to (xii), including the relative amounts of the salaries paid to officers and employees as disclosed by the statements referred to in subparagraphs (b)(vii) and (viii); and (d) in the case of a labour organization or labour trust having its headquarters situated outside Canada, a statement in the prescribed form and containing such particulars as may be prescribed showing (i) amounts paid or credited to the labour organization or labour trust in the fiscal period by, on behalf of or in respect of taxpayers resident in Canada, and (ii) expenditures made by the labour organization or labour trust in the fiscal period inside or outside Canada and recorded separately in the accounts of the labour organization or labour trust as being directly related to its operations in Canada. (4) Despite section 241, the information contained in the public information return referred to in subsection 149.01(2) shall be made available to the public by the Minister, including publication on the departmental Internet site in a format that allows for word searches to be performed and for cross-referencing of data. Communication de renseignements 2. Section 239 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2.3): (2.31) Every labour organization or labour trust that contravenes section 149.01 is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine of $1,000 for each day that it fails to comply with that section. _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2939 Location: the 'puter |
It feels like Christmas. It feels like a rock and a hard place.
It's a conservative initiative so one would have to be a half wit not to know it has very little to do with what's good for the working stiff and everything to do with burning down what little of their once mighty fortress is still standing. Seriously other than some gratification in seeing where the money goes, transparency does nothing for union members without the accountability mechanism to go with it - to come first in fact. Is there a bill on the floor to fix the labour process? Thought not. C-377 Russ Hiebert. (C-337's creator - aka: the conservative guy assigned to light the match) petition. _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
For anyone who doesn't know, I am one of the "conservatives" mentioned by Sharyn, but I have more of a jag on for the abuse workers in our country face and see no reason for not being able to do both, and in fact, I do try to.
Sharyn, obviously an attempt to table a bill to "fix the labour process" was a rhetorical statement but can you agree that if this bill would pass, the workers would be in a much better place to demand accountability? I mean, if you see that the allowance for automobiles for your executive is hundreds of thousands of dollars the membership would act. That said, and to the implication that this is a corporate backed attack on organized labour, what else can the average unionized employee do except either raid in another or get rid of their union? The unions in Canada are facing a very tough climb out of the hole that they have created. Unions all over the world are facing the same challenge but Canadian unions have remained relatively more aggressive and successful (depending on your definition) than any others in the world. This sort of legislation only brings Canada into line with these other nations. The idea that Canadian unions take in towards 4 billion dollars in tax free dues every year and spend it as they see fit is not, in my mind, good for its members or our country. Monopolistic power hungry unions are the root of the problem for the smaller and smaller percentage of unionized private sector Canada, not corporate greed. (I decided to end with a low, slow one across the plate to encourage dialog) _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2939 Location: the 'puter |
Quote: Monopolistic power hungry unions are the root of the problem for the smaller and smaller percentage of unionized private sector Canada, not corporate greed. Quote: I mean, if you see that the allowance for automobiles for your executive is hundreds of thousands of dollars the membership would act. Least we forget these crooks ( union AND corporate thugs) who were convicted of violating the pension Act where millions in pension funds went south. Then walked away to defraud again another day. If stealing from members' pension funds wasn't enough to move the process to justice, I don't see it getting too excited over much else. I'm quite convinced it's quite legal to steal from the little guy and I'm even more convinced the process is constructed to uphold the practise. Give me a bill that reinstates, strengthens and protects individual rights while in a union and then we're talking. Not going to happen as long as the political circle jerk is in session. Quote: I am one of the "conservatives" mentioned by Sharyn, but I have more of a jag on for the abuse workers in our country face and see no reason for not being able to do both Anyone serious about workers' welfare would take aim at the process instead of the only mechanism by which working people have any clout within the already corporately saturated process. Watered down individual rights dare we organize and now the harper machine is coming for those. Oh for sure just feel the conservative love for the working stiff. _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
Here's a twist...
The guys who ran Ontario Conservative leader Tim Hudak's doomed election campaign, a group called Crestview, have been hired by the Canadian arm of the AFl-CIO and the Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario to run a campaign to kill 377. I would like to ask the American's in the crowd if they think the LM2 should be done away with. This Bill is the same sort of legislation. It requires unions to report their books to the government. Union disclosure bill causes stir in labour circles Bitten by the family dog. _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2939 Location: the 'puter |
Bill C-469
Mulcair wins NDP Leadership, thanks UFCW Canada I'm guessing UFCW must have had one hell of a stack of member authorization notes to pull that one off eh. Anyone know what percentage of ufcw's Canadian membership have authorized their dues for political spending? _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| unionnow |
|
|
Joined: 05 Feb 2006 Posts: 695 Location: Gettin the Hell out of retail |
If the entity is a nonprofit then the books should be open to public scrutiny because they are getting a free ride on taxes.
Transparency is great but transparency laws lacking enforcement is what is at issue for me. Many non-profits and especially unions get away with murder when it comes to using tax free money. Apolitical enforcement is what is needed for non-profits. Fat salaries for officers are not for the benefit of the people who the nonprofit is supposedly working to help. Fat perks as well. _________________ “The burden against Damascus. ‘Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap. (Isaiah 17:1-2) |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail |
| The Third Element |
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 368 |
SharynS wrote: Bill C-469
Anyone know what percentage of ufcw's Canadian membership have authorized their dues for political spending? You guys aren't Canada Labour Code, you're all Provincial. Well I don't know for sure, but I am pretty sure there are no Federally regulated UFCW units around. Anyway, that legislation only affects the CIRB, but I expect there is a lot of spending by the PSAC and CUPE, and the rest that memebers don't know about and if they did, they would squawk. _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
Home
Forums
The Soap Box
Conservatives set to table bill forcing unions to open books
Forums
The Soap Box
Conservatives set to table bill forcing unions to open books
|
Page 1 of 2
page: 1, 2 next |
||