Chasing the Jobs Away
A very broad coalition of Nova Scotian employers has expressed concern about the proposed binding arbitration for first contracts. The premier says that their concerns are ridiculous. He should pay more careful attention to them and to the employers who we don’t hear because they have decided against being here.
For restaurants and other employers entirely dependent on local business the possibility of an externally imposed wage settlement threatens their viability if the cost cannot be passed on to customers. The public sector award of 7.1% to nurses will make it even harder for health authorities to deal with their 3% cuts. It illustrates the separation of the arbitration process from economic realities.
But a much bigger concern is with multinational employers who have lots of choice about where to put their plants. In a globalized economy these companies must evaluate all of their future costs when choosing a location. Attracting them to Canada with its relatively high wage rates and expensive currency is not easy. It can only hurt our efforts if legislation adds considerable uncertainty to future labour costs.
The premier has argued that similar legislation is found in many other provinces. Perhaps he has not noticed that the manufacturing sector in Canada has been shrinking rapidly in those provinces. Our competition is not so much in Ontario and Quebec; rather it is in Latin America, Eastern Europe, China, and Southeast Asia.
Thus it is reported that Michelin, arguably our most important rural employer, has expressed concern about the proposed legislation and downgraded Nova Scotia in its attractiveness ratings. If there is another economic downturn where will they look first if a plant has to close? If things turn up why would they invest more here?
Attracting DSME to Trenton had to overcome the ridiculous application of successor rights to a location in an entirely different business that had gone bankrupt years earlier. No wonder buckets of taxpayer money were required to get them to set up shop.
This kind of legislation might be good for unions but not for employees. In the last decade union-friendly Michigan has become an industrial wasteland as GM and Chrysler went bankrupt and Ford nearly so. In the meantime BMW, Mercedes Benz, Honda, Kia, Nissan, and Volkswagen have all built new plants in the more accommodating environments of Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee.
This step by Nova Scotia’s government is part of a pattern (no doubt to be continued) of union-friendly legislation. If a major industrial employer was considering the establishment of a Nova Scotian plant it might begin by talking to Michelin and DSME . They will hear that our labour legislative environment is unfriendly and likely to get worse. These are voices we will never hear from because they will invest elsewhere.
Is the proposed legislation solving a problem so big that it is worth these risks?

Most Recent Comments
-
-
-
View all commentsIn a have-not province that has come to believe unions are good, employers are …bad. So we have arrived at a point where employers are moving “on’. Business-friendly legislation would be the ‘right’ ”direction”. (Individual “employees” have nothing to do with it, they are not ‘organized’.)
As for panels; they’re as good as their members.
Gordon Stanfield | November 8, 2011
Bill – Do you know what are the Capital Health labour vs. O&M (including capital) annual costs? I would guess that labour must represent at least 65-75% of their costs; moreover, this is probably typical of other NS Health Authorities (HA). How can these HA (i.e., we taxpayers) afford to keep paying these high salaries and cut health costs at the same time. Perhaps the NDP Gov’t is purposely engineering a crisis situation, in which they will HAVE TO radically re-structure and substantially reduce the number of regional NS HA. But perhaps I am giving them too much credit in this regard. They must realize that services have to be reduced to meet the demands of increasing wages and cost reductions. If NS was a private entity, it would be close to and/or already filing bankruptcy. Lately I have begun to serious think about leaving NS and living elsewhere – I don’t see that a taxpayer has much economic future in this province, especially with this NDP Gov’t.
Harold | November 7, 2011
Here we go again. You elect your MLA and your government and the first thing that happens is that they start doing things that they a)never told you they were thinking of doing, or b) start doing things without asking you or even worse , c) they start implementing things without giving any chance to even hear their rationale for their decision. Here we are seeing rural NS and the small businesses in NS facing many challenges just trying to stay afloat and instead of a Minister of Government showing you the proposal, they just barge ahead and table the legislation. Having a majority means that even if the opposition tries to help you, they likely can’t because the Minister is sitting on all the information and won’t be open and transparent at all. A majority government should not be imposing policy or legislation that may hurt a business financially unless they can show you and convince you of the cost benefit . It is not a democratic process to table a new law or change a policy that was never circulated to the business owners for discussion well in advance . Do we have their document and their rationale available to view ??
PS | November 7, 2011