mwainwright wrote:i hear you jordan, and of course you're right. however, i have lodged formal complaints in the past, albeit for transgressions less severe than the ones in the khaira case, and guess what? nothing happened. there were absolutely no negative consequences for the contractor involved, but i was out of a job and made to understand that i was not welcome back. the reality of our system is that contractors, licensees, and the ministry face next to no consequences in situations like this. the workers do, however. the reasons planters have given you for not "rocking the boat" are not excuses. they are the reality. if you dont realize that, then you've lost touch with that particular aspect of our industry.
Yes, I came off a bit harsh there MW, but of course I was looking for a reaction. I would argue that there are consequences for hte contractors and even the ministry (but you're right, none for the licensee). Of course, not every case is as successful as Khaira. With Khaira, the workers may not have paid everything they should have, butKhaira has still lost a tremendous amount of money. Of course, I can't comment on your case or why you didn't get the result you should have or may have wanted, as I don't know the details.
I think that some "reasons" for not rocking the boat are better than others, and not all are equal. Knowing only a little about your stomping grounds, I'm guessing the consequences for complaining are greater as you have a smaller pool of work to choose from. This is an important issue, and honestly I don't have a good answer for your position, although I'd definitely like to discuss it over a beer. Lodging a formal complaint in the QC or north island is a lot different than doing so in PG or Kamloops, yes? I think the latter (interior) is what I have focused on mostly. It is the larger companies that have a larger influence on the industry, and they generally set the bar for others both through influence on prices and best practices. If anything, the industry would benefit most from better education and empowerment of rookies to know their rights and stand up for them in the first place. Vets make a difference too, but I would contend that the biggest impact can be made by getting rookies (and 1st 2nd year) going in the right direction. First, this is where the prices are set and the biggest market share lies. Secondly, it shapes their attitudes for the future. Interestingly, the ombudsmans report (Roger Harris) focuses on just this- to train new worker to know their rights and assist them in protecting them. This is what I am currently involved with the industry in addressing- how do we establish best practices or programs that better educate new workers and facilitate their access to the mechanisms and bureaucracies that ostensibly protect them. This involves working with both the workpool and the agencies.
In that sense, my rant is a bit misplaced in this forum, as most participants are vets. I am familiar with many cases of planters lodging complaints, with some succeeding, and some not. It is hard to say what distinguishes the successful grievances from the unsuccessful.
There are certainly things one can do to strengthen their claims, and better ways to work the system. I would suggest that workers need to have a better grasp of these things so future legitimate greivances can be successful. I don't think it's realistic to expect vest to through down their shovels and revolt for hotel costs a bit too high or a paycheck that comes a day late, nor do I necessarily recommend such action. I do think, however, we should hold the Khaira case up as a bit of a standard and do what we can to retain the lesson.
Successful claims against mistreatment ARE POSSIBLE. And we have seen some of the most poorly equipped workers be successful (admittedly only to a degree) with their claims. There are quite a few lessons that can be drawn from how they were successful that can be shared with others. This includes how to keep proper records, how to recognize a scam when you see one, and exactly who to call and how to do it.
THanks Wainright for your input because you raise an important issue. The problems with non-compliance include a range of activities and conditions. The challenges you face for sticking it to the boss in one corner of the province are a lot different that those faced by a rookie or an new Canadian worker in the interior. We need to look at these situations differently, consider their differential impacts, and consider different ways of responding.
Mike, of course your reviews generally don't focus on non-compliance, but rather on paintaking detail of every nuance of the operation. Kind of like sitting on an airplane with someone that tells you all about thier recent personal surgery (whether you like it or not), right down to the last stitch. For the record, I think there are plenty of good contractors that would hire you. Although, they may ask you to sign a non-publication agreement :)