203 replies to this topic

[Nparker]

...It might make sense for Oak Bay, Saanich, Esquimalt and Victoria to move to a regional recreation centre plan. 

Amalgamation by 1000 cuts.

[VicHockeyFan]

The Burnside elementary building was recently reclaimed by the school district, forcing Theatre SKAM, a small theatre company that’s been active in the community since 1995, to suddenly begin searching for a new home at the same time as Kate Rubin, Kaleidoscope Theatre, Paper Street Theatre and the CineVic Society of Independent Filmmakers. Both Paper Street and CineVic were forced from their Fort Street location to make way for a new condo development.

 

Individual artists have approached the DVBA about the issue as well, along with the new community outreach officer for the Royal and McPherson theatres.

 

The disappearance of affordable space for the arts community is also causing Victoria Coun. Pamela Madoff concern. It’s one of the issues that’s been identified in the city’s arts and culture master plan. One of the ideas being floated is designating Rock Bay as an artist district, but Madoff said it all still comes down to what’s available and the cost of rent.

 

In the meantime, arts organizations are encouraged to complete the survey to see if the DVBA should continue the discussion of a shared arts space for performances, rehearsal, set building, storage and offices — something Milton thinks is a great idea.

 

“What everyone seems to want is to have a flexible space where you can bring in tables and chairs, transform the use during the day. We see that’s kind of an incubator for people who are up and coming in that world,” said Milton, noting details have yet to be worked out, but everyone would share the rent.

 

“A lot of them are testing out their products to see if they can move into more of a traditional building, so this gives them some space so they can try out their business and would actually help everybody.”

 

The survey is open until Feb. 17 and can be found at downtownvictoria.ca or on the DVBA’s Facebook page.

 

http://www.vicnews.c.../413296393.html

 

Ah, we have a theatre, folks, and it sits empty.  Eliminate the crippling operating expense of the unionized staff, and all groups can use it using volunteer labour.

[Benezet]

^This looks to be mostly about affordable office and rehearsal space, which is what Burnside was being used for.

Edited by Benezet, 09 February 2017 - 01:10 PM.

[VicHockeyFan]

Why not rehearse in a real theatre?

[Mike K.]

That'd make sense, wouldn't it? To combine resources and use empty facilities.

[Benezet]

All good and well, but there is still the issue of affordable real estate for offices, shops, storage, etc. etc. and (reading between the lines) multiple studio spaces.

[Mike K.]

Yeah, it's tough going in that regard. Industrial land, which is ideal for storage and studio environments, is at an absolute premium right now and has even forced some companies to move up into the Cowichan Valley.

[Cassidy]

http://www.vicnews.c.../413296393.html

 

Ah, we have a theatre, folks, and it sits empty.  Eliminate the crippling operating expense of the unionized staff, and all groups can use it using volunteer labour.

I'd be interested to read how you accomplish the "elimination" of a unionized staff in British Columbia?

 

The Province of B.C. has laws that relegate the elimination of a certified workplace to the union members themselves. In other words, once a workplace is certified - only the workers within that workplace can decertify that same workplace.

 

Most collective agreements have successorship clauses in them, which put the Union upon whomever may subsequently purchase or own the business. The old wives tale that you close a business down in B.C. for a year, and that automatically gets rid of the union is ... well, an old wives tale. No such ability exists in B.C.

 

Once a workplace in B.C. is certified, it remains certified until such time as the workers in that workplace may decide to decertify.

 

Implying that a certified workplace in B.C., and the union that represents the workers in that workplace can simply be "eliminated" seems an easy solution to presumably get rid of unions and reduce costs, but in the Province of British Columbia it's entirely unrealistic.

Indeed, it's impossible.

 

​So where does that leave us?

 

For reference: http://www.labourwat...uide/bc/general

[Mike K.]

Oh, that's interesting.

 

So what happens if, say, a unionized hotel is shut down, the property sold to someone else, and they decide to open a completely different style/concept of hotel with no relation to what operated on that land before other than the physical location?

[Cassidy]

If there is a successorship clause in the original collective agreement, then regardless of how much time passes, or what changes they may make - the hotel is still a certified workplace when it re-opens, and would have the same union representing their employees.

 

Of course if a new business owner is willing to lock out their employees for many years in a row, history has shown that this can (through attrition) occasionally result in those certified employees simply giving up and moving on with their lives.

 

But most (if not all) collective agreements in B.C. have successorship clauses in them, which effectively certifies the workplace regardless of who owns it, or how often it changes owners or "directions".

 

I only bring it up because of the implications in this thread that a union can somehow be made to just "go away" ... in B.C. the law prevents that, even after many years of apparent Liberal business-centric rule.

Any business person purchasing a business that has a union certification attached to it would know well in advance of their purchase that they were dealing with a successorship clause in a collective agreement, and would normally plan to re-open with the union, and the unions members as their employees.

 

B.C. has long been known as a "labour friendly" province, with many of those "labour friendly" rules and regulations solidly entrenched in B.C. law.

 

Unions can't be made to "go away" in B.C. unless the members of that union (who are the employees of the employer) want them to.

[Matt R.]

.. or if the government wants them gone, like what happened to me when I worked for VIHA many years ago.

 

Matt.

[Cassidy]

Didn't that backfire for the government eventually Matt?

It took quite a few years, but didn't the courts find in favor of the employees affected?

 

But you're right, governments certainly have the ability to change legislation, and re-write the laws of the land to suit their platforms.

[lanforod]

BC Hydro somehow managed to get their IT outsourcing non-unionized. First step was outsourcing it to Accenture (unionized under ABSU). Then when that contract expired they continued outsourcing to Telus, who is not unionized.

[VicHockeyFan]

When the City decided to contract out the arena operation, they agreed that the new operators would not have to hire any City union employees.  Thus the hot dog servers make minimum wage, as they should.

 

Arena:   $30M

Bridge:  $120M

[AllseeingEye]

When I was an IT director at the LTSA (Land Title & Survey Authority) to 2011, which was then a statutory, not for profit body, part of the Broader Public Sector, having been carved out of core government some years previously, the org was able to set up and establish a non-BCGEU/union, but wholly controlled and owned subsidiary.

 

Staff historically of course were BCGEU and had remained so after they moved out of core government and were merged with the Surveyor-General, hence the origin of the "LTSA".

 

The subsidiary, called LandSure Systems, was set up by design in d/t Vancouver and by being non-union provided LTSA with the flexibility specifically to market its services - it was in process of breaking away from the old BC Online service portal in favor of establishing its own "myLTSA" portal - as well as project manage certain core IT functions better and more efficiently than could Shared Services BC, all the while without being subject to either government budget restrictions, or the language and constraints of a collective (union) agreement. 

I've been gone for 6 years now but my understanding is that what started off as a multi-year, multi-million dollar business transformation project in 2007 has concluded on time and on (actually under) budget, and become wildly successful setting up the LTSA for the foreseeable future on a modern, stable technology platform while positioning it to function and serve the public efficiently and economically as their core union staff is reduced organically through planned retirements, and with no discernible impact on service levels.

[Matt R.]

Didn't that backfire for the government eventually Matt?
It took quite a few years, but didn't the courts find in favor of the employees affected?
 
But you're right, governments certainly have the ability to change legislation, and re-write the laws of the land to suit their platforms.

Yah about 10 years later! Haha. Bit of a stretch to say it's "not possible".

Matt.

[Cassidy]

The B.C. Government is a legislative body with the ability to make laws (as opposed to bylaws).

B.C. Hydro is a Crown Corporation that is described in a series of legislated decisions made by the B.C. Government.

 

In general terms "union busting" isn't possible in B.C. - but as I noted above, IF you have the ability to actually change the law (as the B.C. Government does), then you can pass legislation that can pretty much say and do anything a sitting government wants to do, including altering collective agreements (although the courts will likely come back and turn those types of decisions back around).

 

To my reading, the Macpherson Theatre is none of the above, it's just a city owned theatre.

 

In doing a bit of research - it appears that the same union that represents employees in the Macpherson Theatre also represents event production employees at the Save On Foods Arena. 

 

http://www.victoriastage.com

[On the Level]

Why don't they contact the owners of the Chemainus Theatre to see of there is something, at least for every second weekend, that could breath life into the facility and help elevate the taxation issue.  Of course, Helps and Issit would need to allow non union city staff to run the facility 2 days a week and I am not sure they are allowed to do so by their sponsors.

[Mike K.]

In VIHA's case the employees hired by the private contractors that replaced GVHA employees are unionized. At least the cleaning staff are.

[Matt R.]

I believe, at the time, the BCHEU was busted, we were all fired, and non union workers were brought in. Many of the old bcheu members were offered positions at greatly reduced rates. I will say that the food we were producing in that massive commissary at RJH was exceptional. Weirdest shifts were always at the Eric Martin pavilion.

I didn't care, I was just in it for the cash and was moving on anyways. I do not recall all the details.

Matt.