Work Stoppages in Social Economy Organizations: Dimension, Causes and Beyond

1. Work Stoppages in Social Economy Organizations: Dimension, Causes and Beyond Kunle Akingbola OISE, University of Toronto

2. Introduction • The study examines the scale, duration and dimension of work stoppages in SEOs in Ontario. • Explains the contextual dimension by examining the causes and implications of work stoppages for clients, employees, and community.

3. Introduction • Examines whether explanation of work stoppages in SEOs is consistent with the collective voice analysis of strikes and whether these labour disputes are indication of social movement unionism. • Provides an insight on the state of labour relations and, to some extent, HRM in SEOs

4. Defining Social Economy Organizations • The term social economy was originally coined in France and was widely used in francophone areas such as Belgium and Quebec. • Social economy is a bridging concept (Quarter, 2006)

5. Defining Social Economy Organizations • Organizations in the social economy have social objectives central to their mission and their practice. • These organizations also have, either explicit economic objectives or generate some economic value through the services they provide and purchases that they undertake. (Quarter, 2006)

6. Defining Social Economy Organizations • Social economy organizations include nonprofits and cooperatives. • In addition to sharing similar characteristics as outlined above, their economic impact, especially for nonprofits is often not recognized. (Quarter, 2006)

7. Economic and Social Contributions • Social economy organizations are an important element in the foundation of many countries. • People rely on these organizations for: • economic development • employment, • social justice • advocacy, and • mutual support.

8. Economic and Social Contributions • The 9,000+ cooperatives in Canada employ over 160,000 people • Non-financial cooperatives generated $26.2 billion in revenue in 2003

9. Economic and Social Contributions • Some of the insurance cooperatives are among the largest employer in their business (Co-operative Secretariat. 2006) • Similarly, the 161,000 nonprofit and voluntary organizations operating in Canada generated $112 billion in revenue in 2003 (Imagine Canada, (2004).

10. Theoretical Framework • Structural and institutional perspective posits that some industries and occupations are more prone to strike due to inherent social characteristics of the work that enables collective consciousness and community integration (Kerr and Siegel, 1954). • Neoclassical economic explanation • Agitator theory

11. Theoretical Framework • Two theoretical explanation of labour disputes from the structural and institutional perspective are relevant to the context of SEOs • Collective voice approach • Social movement unionism

12. Theoretical Framework • Collective voice approach • Expression of discontent • Inherent labour-capital conflicts • Asymmetrical employment relation • Changes in nonprofits mean managers have become agents of government or other funders (Akingbola, 2004; Godard, 1992; Hyman, 1989)

13. Theoretical Framework • Social movement unionism occurs when unions move away from business unionism (wages and conditions of employment) • Partnership with civil society • Role in raising consciousness about social justice, social values and community issues (Mathers et al., 2004)

14. Theoretical Framework • Is increased unionization in nonprofits an opportunity to spread social movement unionism from within the civil society? (Mathers et al., 2004)

15. Research Questions • What is the pattern of work stoppages in SEOs • Are work stoppages in SEOs associated with size (number of employees)? • Are SEOs that depend on government (those that provide public services) more prone to work stoppages than others?

16. Research Questions • Is wages and condition of service the major cause of work stoppages in SEOs? • Is service quality and advocacy issues rationale for work stoppages in SEOs? • What are the impacts of work stoppages in SEOs on clients and the community?

17. The Study • Quantitative data • Data on work stoppages between 1994 and 2005 from the Ontario Ministry of Labour • 1777 work stoppages in Ontario, 196 (11.03%) SEOs

18. The Study • Types: i) nonprofits and cooperatives; ii) private, municipal, provincial, federal and various; iii) Association Canada categories: • Simple descriptive statistics and regression analysis for research questions 1 to 3

19. The Study • Qualitative data • Media archives from 1994 to 2005 • Total of 71 media reports on labour disputes • Twenty-five (35%) were identified as SEOs • To examine research questions 4 to 6

20. Findings and Discussion

21. Stoppages by Year

22. Quantitative Results

23. Stoppages by Sector

24. Stoppages by Union

25. Findings and Discussion • SEOs lost 490,190 persons days to 196 work stoppages resulting from labour disputes. . • Sizerelated to work stoppages R² = .07. adjusted R² = .07. p<.01. * number excludes work stoppages involving more than one organization.

26. Findings and Discussion • Small organizations more prone to labour disputes. • Highest person days lost in 1996, 1998 and 2000 • Coincided with downsizing in public sector, downloading to nonprofits and new funding regime * number excludes work stoppages involving more than one organization.

27. Findings and Discussion • More work stoppages in health care organizations than in other areas of the social economy. • Small community health care organizations compared to large hospitals. • Relationship between SEOs classified as provincial by the MOL and work stoppages R² = .03. adjusted R² = .02. p <.05. * number excludes work stoppages involving more than one organization.

28. Findings and Discussion • Healthcare and MOL classification findings suggest that: • Organizations that provide public services are more prone to work stoppages than others. • Blurring of the boundaries between nonprofits and the public sector • Absence of binding arbitration as in HLDAA * number excludes work stoppages involving more than one organization.

29. Findings and Discussion • Wages and conditions of service appears to be the leading cause of work stoppages • However, these are in addition to social objectives such as advocacy, quality of care, and safety of clients in many disputes • Root cause of many of the work stoppages was funding

30. `We've asked to meet with Janet Ecker, but she says this is strictly a labor dispute. But it's more than that. This situation is due to the minister's cutbacks'' This agency's budget was cut by $1.8 million and management is taking it out on the working conditions and benefits of these low-paid people Management will not talk even though we have proposed ways to save money. And now we hear they plan to use replacement workers (CUPE President Judy Darcy).

31. Findings and Discussion • Work stoppages affect clients either directly or indirectly • Clients were left with reduced or no services • Either due to the small size, limited resources or the specialized nature of the services, the SEOs could not possibly mitigate the impact of the labour disputes.

32. Findings and Discussion • Work stoppages affect the primary stakeholders—the organization, clients, employees and the community in the short term. • However, the outcome of many of the labour disputes suggest that we could argue that they are as short term pain for long term gain.

33. Findings and Discussion • Collective bargaining gain on quality of care, workload and safety is beneficial to clients, employees, the organization and the community.

34. Findings and Discussion • Example: strike by employees of Good Shepherd Centres in Hamilton • Multidimensional benefits of collective bargaining in SEOs. • Security concerns affect clients, employees, the effectiveness and bottom line of the organization.

35. Findings and Discussion • Findings provide evidence of collective voice • Employees embracing collective voice option through work stoppages • Increased unionization creates potential for social movement unionism • Neo classical economics explanation

36. Conclusions • Funding • Managers as agents of funders • Erosion of values

37. QUESTIONS THANK YOU