Apparently CUPE-3906 was unable to call a strike over the pro-life events at McMaster University. But they did their best trying to disrupt the services on campus by suggesting those opposed to the events not to show up for work. E-mail notice was sent to each member informing them that "radical anti-choice groups" were to hold a public event at McMaster University. The union promised support to those choosing to refuse work on the days they believe their workplaces are "unsafe".
But how could the presence of a pro-life group on campus make one's workspace "unsafe"? Here's what the e-mail notice stated: "Several members of our local have registered their concern that... hostile imagery and language they have employed, is intimidating and that the permission of these groups to dominate public and high-traffic spaces on campus makes them feel personally unsafe." In other words, they don't like to be told (let alone shown) that abortion stops a beating heart and destroys a living person.
This year's event included a presentation from the Silent No More group. Women that actually had abortion share their life experience, warning others not to make the same mistake they did. But CUPE doesn't want their message. They'd rather believe abortion is an ordinary medical treatment such as extracting a tooth or removing a wart - fast, affordable and above all - harmless. Then they don't mind watching an abortion video and they even applaud the professor as he explains in full details how did he provoke a premature birth, destroying the child just minutes before he could have had his first breath.
But maybe the union is just worried about its members having to go through a crowd of activists whose views they oppose? Well, would they excuse a Christian employee from coming to work on one of those so called "pride days"? That looks unlikely judging on this case. The collective agreement allows employees to divert their union dues to charity if their religious beliefs prevent them from contributing to the union, but Susan Comstock was denied that right. The judge sided with the Public Service Alliance of Canada, stating that "the union's political or social cause does not force her to act in a way contrary to her beliefs or her conscience". But if contributing as much as $800 a year to an organization that denounces Susan's views as "hate speech" is not acting in a way contrary to her beliefs then what is?
The membership in the union is mandatory. The only way to stop paying union dues is quitting the job. At the same time there is no way for an ordinary employee to voice his protest when the union management spends his money on campaigns that are completely unrelated to negotiating just wages and working conditions. Let alone when some activists that run the union declare "zero tolerance" to any views but theirs, forcing people to choose between their jobs and their conscience.
Susan Comstock feels that union's political agenda made her an outcast at her job. She is treated as if her contribution in the workplace is unwelcome, inferior and of little or no positive value. That doesn't sound anything like feeling safe in the workplace, does it? The unions claim all their members are equal. But the facts show that those who stand for the right to life and the sanctity of marriage are less equal than others.
No comments:
Post a Comment