Answering Questions: why haven't we filed a complaint with the labour board?

Since the strike began on May 7, with massively aggressive misconduct from AUPE right from the start, we who have no direct connection with the labour dispute have been forced to put up with crap that would never have been acceptable if these actions were not protected by the surprisingly loose definition of "labour dispute."

As time went on, we'd get more and more people saying, "why haven't you..." and throw out some suggested course of action.  Which, on the one hand is appreciated, but on the other is frustrating, because most of the time, we've already thought of them, tried and failed.

One of these is, why haven't we filed a complaint with the labour board?

Now, the Artspace and SAIL boards technically have that option, but in reality, don't, for reasons that cannot be discussed here.

The surprise was learning that individuals unrelated to a labour dispute can also file complaints.  Why didn't anyone mention that months ago?

Well, it turns out to be a moot point.

Quite a number of people have tried to, it turns out.  I will try and amalgamate some of the outcomes.

Among the problems encountered:

People who phoned labour relations and asked about filing a complaint were given contradictory responses.  Some were basically told they couldn't, because they weren't part of the labour dispute.  Others were told they could, but were given very different information about how to do so.  The police had told us that someone they spoke at labour relations to was actually willing to help people do the paperwork, but when labour relations was called and asked about that, people were told that no, they could not do that, because they were supposed to be impartial and if they helped people with the paperwork, that would mean they were no longer impartial.

Basically, people who called labour relations about filing a complaint got the run around.  In general, the people answering the phones essentially ran interference to make it as difficult and prohibitive as possible, and to discourage people from filing complaints.

So much for "impartial."

The paperwork - not forms, exactly, but more like a guide - is available online.  To say filling out this paperwork is prohibitive would be an understatement.  It would be extremely difficult and confusing for most people to fill out and gather the required information; the process even allows for including things like photos or electronic files with the complaint, which is good.  Many Artspace members who want to file complaints, however, would find it much more difficult to assemble the required information, fill out the forms, then submit them.  For some, it is physically impossible.  For others, it would be incredibly draining, both physically and mentally, to do so.  This is something that would be challenging enough for the able-bodied and in good health.  Anyone who isn't, is essentially shut out.

The system is incredibly able-ist.

The alternative is to hire a lawyer, which pretty much no-one can afford.  Certainly not anyone on AISH (people on AISH do not qualify for Legal Aid; they make too much money) or retirement incomes.  The typical cost I've heard for a decent lawyer is in the $500 an hour range, and that doesn't even count how much it would cost to have a lawyer actually go before the labour board after the complaint is filed.  Numbers I'm hearing quickly pass tens of thousands of dollars by the time the whole thing is done.  This is a community of mostly low-income people, and even those with higher incomes just can't afford it.

Of course, for AUPE, that kind of expenditure doesn't even make them blink.  They've got all those union dues paying for everything.  It's not like anything is coming out of anyone's pocket.

As for those who HAVE consulted lawyers, guess what?

They've basically been told it's not worth filing, because they will lose.

That's right.  Lawyers themselves are telling potential clients not to bother taking on the union before the labour board, because the board will rule in favour of the union.  It's one of those things were, yeah, the board is supposed to be impartial, but "everyone knows" they really aren't.

Well, that doesn't stop anyone from filing anyhow, without a lawyer.  Right?

Maybe under normal circumstances, but remember, AUPE has deliberately targeted communities of vulnerable and disadvantaged people.  Not just members of Artspace, but every time they take action against a care centre or retirement home, they are targeting people who are generally incapable of defending themselves.

It goes beyond just the mental and physical difficulty of jumping through the hoops required to submit a complaint.

Let's assume that some diligent Artspace member managed to get the paperwork done, evidence assembled, complaint filed and accepted (yeah, there's always the possibility labour relations will reject the complaint) and it finally goes before the labour board.

Then what?

Well, then you have this ordinary person, likely someone with a visible or invisible disability, with no experience in labour relations, having to defend their complaint in front of a board we are repeatedly told is not really as impartial as they claim to be, against AUPE's well funded, highly experienced goons.

Like this guy.



This is AUPE's "counsel" making all those accusations, while other AUPE employees and members play their parts.  Watching the videos, I keep expecting to see them step aside and consult their scripts or something.

This guy is one of the reasons people want to file complaints to the labour board against.  Which means that if they file a complaint based on his harassment, defamation and slander, he would be the one they'd be facing in front of the board.

When this obvious conflict of interested was pointed out to them, the people at labour relations had no problem with it, apparently.

The labour board is supposed to be impartial, but they have been so thoroughly shielded, no one's been able to file a complaint to find out if it's true.

If history is any reflection, we have no reason to believe the labour board truly is impartial.  After all, when the SAIL staff "suspended" the strike on short notice and declared they would show up for work in the morning, on a long weekend, while refusing SAIL's request for the time needed to adjust schedules (and user members themselves objected to having people they no longer trusted back into their private homes and refused them entry), then accepting a full long weekend's pay to NOT come to work, the labour board sided with AUPE and declared it an illegal lock out.

To us, that demonstrated they are severely partial towards the union.  The SAIL staff got paid for that weekend, and user members should have every right to refuse to allow people they now considered a threat to their safety and well being into their homes.

Well, I suppose we'll find out for sure soon enough.  There's still that frivolous "bad faith" complaint AUPE has filed against SAIL coming up.  It's obvious their real motives are to simply bankrupt SAIL by dragging them in front of the labour board with frivolous complaints, knowing SAIL has limited funds to defend themselves, over and over.  After all, despite AUPE's public claims to the contrary, SAIL has been transparent in regards to finances, which means AUPE knows exactly how little money there is available to mount a defense.

How's that for conflict?  Imagine having to defend yourself in a civil court against someone you are forced to give all your personal, financial information to?  It's basically the same thing, yet apparently, there's no issue with this at all in labour relations.

If the labour board were truly impartial, they'd recognise that the complaint is frivolous and throw it out.

But then, if the labour board were truly impartial, they wouldn't have allowed AUPE picketers break labour regulations for so many years to begin with.  You know, that whole "picketing the place of employment, peaceful and with no unlawful actions" thing.

Interestingly, AUPE seems to file these "bad faith" complaints (or just make the accusations) an awful lot.

So why hasn't anyone filed a complaint with the labour board?

Because everyone who's tried has been blocked, diverted or told contradictory information, and even lawyers have bluntly stated that there's no point, because they will lose.

Which means that while, technically, anyone can file a complaint with the labour board, in reality, no one can file a complaint with the labour board.

Answering Questions

The following is from a Facebook conversation. The questions asked are too much to address on someones wall, but they are legitimate questions, and ones we have asked ourselves.

Here they are, divided into three topics.

Jason wrote: "So I'm curious there have been accusation bandied about about "abuse". So if people were "held hostage in their homes" or "abused" or "tormented" then why have no charges been laid? Why are there no convictions?? Where is law enforcement on all this?? 

Jason, we've been asking ourselves that, too!  EPS has liaison officers who come here regularly.  They've had meetings with us.  Members have phoned the police, either 911 or the non-emergency number, as warranted.

The result?

Pretty much nothing. 

Many members have complained that, on calling the non-emergency number, their complaints were treated dismissively.  Several of our admins have personally called the police with complaints.  For my own experience, when talking on the phone, I've had several officers express shock over what I was describing going on, and telling me that, even as part of a labour dispute, the picketers were not allowed to disrupt the neighbourhood like that.

Eventually, someone from EPS would show up and...

Nothing.

Sometimes, it took so long for them to show up, what was going on was either over, or the activities we'd called about were done.  Other times, such as when the picketers showed up on a Sunday evening and blared loud music, screamed and yelled, a squad car showed up, the music was turned down... 

... then the music got turned back up again, the noise continued, and the squad car left.

In other infractions, they fall under by-law enforcement.  Things like trespassing, illegal parking and the like.  Again, by the time the by-law enforcement shows up, it's usually over.

Sometimes, the liaison officer would talk to the picket captain and things would change, a bit.  But the harassment, abuse, intimidation and people feeling trapped in their homes as a hostile crowd hovered near the doors, would continue.

Why?

I'll address that next.

I mean one would have to imagine that if these individuals were suffering at the hands of striking workers that somehow there would be lawsuits, somehow there would be criminal charges, ongoing investigations of criminal activity wouldn't there?? 

In one of the meetings with the liaison officers, they were asked bluntly; are there two sets of laws; one for picketers, one for everyone else?

The answer was "yes."

The reason for this is that this all falls under the umbrella of "labour dispute."  Because of case law, what it basically comes down to is that activities that would get anyone else arrested, fined, or made to stop in some way, are allowed during strikes.  

Even when activities constituted criminal harassment, nothing was done by the police, because picketers in a labour dispute are allowed to criminally harass people, and their victims are supposed to just ignore it and not let it bother them.

We've also been told that, unless there's blood, they won't bother showing up.  

When there was a physical assault, two officers came by and saw the video.  They laughed it off and nothing was done.  

For other things, such as the video showing a striking SAIL employing threatening someone on a balcony, nothing was done because, even though the threat was obvious, the actual words used fell into a grey area.  That was another example where an officer, on seeing the video, laughed it off, adding in a tasteless and inappropriate joke.

Artspace members have lost a lot of faith in EPS and the justice system.

There should not be two laws, one for union picketers and one for their victims.

A lot of what's going on here is very much like domestic abuse.  I do not use that as an example lightly; many people living here know domestic abuse first hand.  We recognise it for what it is.

Abuse, intimidation and harassment can come in many forms, and I can speak from personal experience when I say that psychological abuse can be far more damaging than physical abuse.  I have experienced both.  Canadian criminal law recognises that, when it comes to abusive behaviour and criminal harassment, actions that would normally be legal and acceptable can be contributing factors of abuse.  For example, saying hi to someone by name would not normally be abusive.  Having a group of people who should know nothing about you, who behave in physically aggressive manners, shouting hi at you every time you leave your home, becomes abuse and harassment.  Especially when they have been told explicitly not to communicate with you in any way.  These are not friendly or polite greetings.  These are abusers demonstrating that they know things about you that they should not know; it's a form of intimidation and it is harassment.  Depending on how far it goes, it crosses over to psychological abuse and can be threatening, such as when they know personal details about your own life, the names of family members and where they live, birthdays or, most disturbing, the scheduled activities of your children.

A thing to keep in mind; while only a few of our members use the services of SAIL, there are other members who have disabilities, but either get self-managed care, or do not need outside care.  

Not all disabilities are visible.  Not all disabilities are physical in nature.  Not all who have health problems are disabled.  Our members fall all over the spectrum, from able bodied without any health problems, to having invisible disabilities, to having obvious physical disabilities, to everything in between.  Even among this blog's admins, we fall all over the spectrum.

Each of us are affected by AUPE's actions differently.  For many, the noise levels cause physical pain and mental anguish.  For others, it prevents them from medically required rest, which causes their condition to deteriorate.  Some have had to increase their pain medications, due to the stress.  Others have anxiety attacks, panic attacks or their PTSD is triggered.  

These are medically verifiable harms caused by the actions of AUPE picketers.  Worse, they are caused by the striking "care" staff, who have personal knowledge of the circumstances of user members - the people they, on the one hand, claim to care so much about, but on the other, say do not deserve their care, and complain about how terrible it is to care for the "fat, ugly cripples" - and AUPE imports who claim to be health care workers elsewhere.  

They should know exactly the effects their actions can potentially cause people who have vulnerable health.  They should know exactly the sort of psychological damage their actions are doing.

Yet they do it, anyways.  Gleefully, even.

In any other circumstance, there would be cause for police action.

But because its done by union members on a picket line - a picket line that itself should be illegal - the police look the other way.  Apparently, so does the labour board.  So do politicians (those that aren't actively condoning the actions).  

The police openly admit that they have never encountered a situation like ours, where a labour dispute has taken on an entire community and neighbourhood, who have nothing to do with the dispute.  

As for law suits, we are a community filled with people who are low income, living on AISH, retired and living on pensions, disabled, are single parents, etc.  Lawyers cost money that we don't have.  Legal action costs money that we don't have.  

On top of that, what lawyer is willing to take on the biggest and most powerful union in the province, which has a bottomless pit of union dues financing them, etc.?

We are a bunch of individuals affected by a huge organisation with significant resources, can act with apparent impunity, and all the money they need to fight any attempts to hold them accountable for the damage they are doing.

As for the arbitrator looking at larger institutional models, again not once in my 16yrs have I witnessed an arbitrator completely ignore local circumstances and finances in favor of a Union, I'm sorry but I'm finding that line very difficult to believe because I've never met an arbitrator that irresponsible in the entire time I've been involved in Labour Relations, full stop."

You know what?  We pretty much agree with you.  It makes no sense, and yes, it's difficult to believe.

Yet that's what's happened.

Why?  How?

We'd like to know that, too.

There are a lot of things we'd like to know.  After all, even though we have nothing to do with the labour dispute, the negotiations, etc. we, as a community, are targeted by AUPE's actions.

Jason has also asked;

"On top of that who are you speaking on behalf of?? Every resident of Artspace?? The majority of Artspace residents?? Like who??"

With over 100 adults living here, plus our neighbours who have been affected, it's impossible to speak for everyone.

Who are we speaking for?

Individual Artspace members who have no other voice.  We speak for the victims of AUPE's abuse.  We speak for ourselves, our friends, our families, our neighbours who have been harmed by AUPE's actions against our community.

How many?  I couldn't even give a number.  It keeps changing, as more and more grow frustrated over what is happening to us; many of whom fear for their own safety if they speak out.

This blog was created out of that frustration; because every place we turned to for help just turned their backs on us.

This blog was created to expose what AUPE has been doing to our community, the damage they are causing, and how they are allowed to act with apparent impunity.

This blog is our voice.

The Siege Continues

We have been invaded.

In retaliation for holding out for 100 days, AUPE has shown up on our street with an illegal block party.  They have been seen cutting through our parking lot, are blocking traffic and are screaming and yelling.

They also have Fat Franks back, with a BBQ set up at the end of the street and are screaming and yelling.

They are chanting NDP NDP.

Sounds like a political rally.

People are talking about being trapped; they can't leave their homes, and are feeling threatened by the loud and boisterous crowd outside our home.

The only traffic they are letting through are their own supporters.

EPS has yet to respond to this invasion of our home.

Double Standards

Since the strike started on May 7, Artspace members have been enduring near constant bullying, harassment, intimidation, threats and even violence from AUPE picketers.

There have been numerous calls to the police over the past 12 weeks.

It took the police 3 days to do something about the air raid siren.

They've never done anything about the other constant noise.

They've done nothing about the threats, or even the physical assaults.

When AUPE showed up late on a Sunday night and held a loud party on our street, the police came and did nothing.

Today, the picketers didn't show up, though AUPE did.

So did the police.

They came for a flat tire on the AUPE van.

Now, I can understand the frustration of unexpected flat tires.  Especially when you believe that someone may have done it intentionally.  Been there, done that.

But it never even occurred to me to phone the police over something so minor.

After all, they barely show up for break ins or vandalism.

Yet, here they were, over a flat tire.

At AUPE's beck and call.

So much for "equal under the law."