LABOUR EDUCATION IN CANADA

ASSIGNMENT 1
JOHN ALAN SUTHERLAND 2980775 6/5/2012 MAIS 650 DR. INGO SCHMIDT

[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]

Today labour education is a term which has come to mean in Canada the education and training offered by labour unions to their members and representatives (Spencer, 2002). The key words are offered by unions. This has not always been the case of educational programs for workers especially in Canada where historically labour education was more oriented to a form of adult education (Taylor, 2001). Labour education before and now has always focused on formal learning as opposed to informal or on the job learning in a workplace setting. In Canada since the 1940s labour education has had several main purposes such as preparing and training union members to play an active role in the union (Spencer, p. 17); educate members about union policy, about changes in the union environment and changes in labour law; to develop union solidarity, build common goals and share organizing and campaigning experiences (p. 17). Essentially labour education has come to mean education about the union. The main distinction between labour education and workers education is that the latter had been used to describe all of the structured or semi-structured non-vocational learning (Taylor, 2001) that adult workers undertook outside their places of employment. Labour education along with terms such as union education, labour studies and workers education refer to various types of informal, non-formal and formal educational activity among members of the adult working class (p. 3). Union education specifically refers to educational programs conducted by labour organizations for their members (p. 3). Labour studies refer to post secondary courses and programs that focus on labour and the working class and includes subjects such as labour history, labour law and the sociology of work (p. 3).

According to Taylor (2001, p. 5) the term labor education replaced the formerly used term workers education in the United States during the 1930s. This change in terms coincided with the narrowing of the focus of what was being taught to workers especially members of unions. The morphing of labour education into what was formerly referred to as union education resulted from the influence exerted by the anti-communist and anti-radical (Nesbitt, 2002) American Federation of Labor (AFL) over the Workers Education Bureau of America (WEB). The AFLs desire was to ensure that trade union educational endeavors supported collective bargaining rather than attempts to change society (p. 5) which had been the aim of workers educational movements. It has also been described as a business-unionist philosophy in which labour education became mere training and indoctrination (p. 68). In Canada the Workers Educational Association (WEA) only began to use this term labour education as international labour unions, headquartered in the United States and controlled by the AFL, began to set up locals in this country during the 1930s and 1940s. While many argue that the real purpose (Spatz, 2004) of labour education is: to prepare and train union lay members to play an active role in the union.to educate activists and members about union policy and changes in union environment(and) to develop union consciousness, build common goals and share organizing and campaigning experience (Spencer, 2002) this has not always been the situation in Canada. This model of labour education, topics being driven by union agendas, can be summarized as training in tools, issues and examining union contexts (Spencer, 2002). All union education is characterized by a commitment to the development and furthering of the unions organizational goals and the objectives of the labour movement (Taylor, p. 7). This is part of union activity which challenges the dominant power of employers and their supporters on the one hand and building worker and union capacity on the other (p. 7).

However prior to the appearance of large international unions on the Canadian labour scene the vehicle for the formal education of working men and women had been primarily through programs created and administered by the WEA which had been formed in 1918 (p. 5). The Canadian WEA had been modeled on the British WEA which had been formed in 1903 by reform minded employers and professionals to ensure that workers improved their understanding of politics, society and economics (p. 4). The WEA in Canada had through its workers education programs attempted to create a non-sectarian, militant, autonomous and critical educational movement (p. 239) which could appeal to all parts of the labour movement not only organized unions. As well the WEAs programs sought to link workers whether unionized or not to available post-secondary educational resources (p. 239). In that respect workers education in Canada prior to the 1940s was more akin to a central form of adult education, frequently attracting more participants than other non-vocational adult education formats (Carter, 2003). Union leaders perceived the WEA as a threat especially once it began teaching trade unionists about trade unionism, collective bargaining and labour law (Taylor, p. 68). As an outside organization it could not be trusted to teach union members about trade unionism (p. 68). The Canadian WEAs coordinated strategy was one of connecting mass education, trade union training and university level instruction (Taylor, p. 46). It believed it had an obligation to analyze critically the place of workers in society and to emphasize the social nature of education (p. 47). There was a belief in the WEA that the application of critical judgment to social and economic problems would lead eventually to the elimination of injustice (p. 47). This was similar in many respects to the theory of the social gospel championed by politicians like J.S.Woodsworth and Tommy Douglas. The WEA believed its responsibility was

to stand by working people and help them acquire the skills of critical judgment and it was the responsibility of other bodies(unions) to organize and mobilize workers for industrial and political action (p. 47). Historically the content and form of education for workers mirrored the difficulties facing working people in the workplace. From 1918 to 1946 workers faced a continual struggle with management for recognition of their workers organizations. Strikes were the only way to gain this recognition in the face of hostile employers and governments (Taylor, p. 17). This situation changed following the 1944 order in council of the Federal government incorporating the principle of compulsory collective bargaining in federal labour legislation (Taylor, p. 19). Whichever term is used to describe it, the history of the educating workers in Canada is cyclical as it intention has constantly sought to overcome obstacles to the growth of consciousness-raising, grassroots education (Salt, 2002) among working men and women. These obstacles are exemplified by universities and union establishment who attempt to exclude the working class from access to critical educational thinking. Spencer suggests that labour education should be essentially non-vocational, non-formal adult education with its origins rooted in the tradition of workers education (p. 17). A perfect description of the program of the WEA. If union activity including union educational activity is about challenging the dominant power of employers and their supporters on the one hand and building worker and union capacity on the other (Taylor, p. 7) then why do unions not want to educate workers about the broader issues of society? With union recognition strikes becoming a thing of the past and the use of unfair labour practices becoming the norm for worker/management relations (Taylor, p. 19) the role of

the Canadian WEA in providing a broad form of worker or labour education was marginalized by union leadership between 1947 and 1951 (Taylor, p. 239). The WEA lost its place in organization and provision of workers education, while individual unions and congresses developed more substantial internal educational capacity (Taylor, p. 61). The anti-communist hysteria that was a fundamental feature of North American society during these years permeated the labour movement (p. 61) . Unions turned inward and concentrated on survival and expansion. Unions neither needed organizations like the WEA to educate workers to think critically nor to draw allegiance away from union leaders.As well social democratic union leaders and staff wanted a political education that focused on support for the Co-operative commonwealth Federation (CCF) rather on broader public-policy issues (p. 62). For the next thirty years labour organizations in Canada developed and expanded their own educational programs designed primarily to train stewards and local leaders to participate effectively in the countrys industrial relations system (p. 239). As the position of the WEA weakened, unions and congresses cultivated direct relations with universities, the Canadian Association for Adult Education and similar bodies. In 1956 the Canadian Labour Congress was born from the merger of the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada and the Canadian Congress of Labour. This new organization, more powerful than its predecessors, represented the typical union member who was a skilled or semi-skilled male, working in the resource, manufacturing, transportation or construction industry (p. 63) . Can it be argued that this formalization and professionalization of labour education without providing a broader education on the relationships between capital and worker has proved to be a barrier to future development of the labour movement (Sawchuk, 2003)? Unions, seeking control over what their members learn, have consistently narrowed the scope of their

programs by establishing their own educational programs seeking only occasional assistance from the formal educational agencies (Spencer, p. 33). The 1950s and 1960s were decades of relative prosperity and stability for organized Canadian workers (Taylor, p. 97) with the result that union educational programs were broadened and stabilized and new programs created within unions and the CLC. The Labour College of Canada came into existence as a centre of advanced union education (p. 97). But there was no return to the broad social education that was once the hallmark of the WEA. Union leaders and their education staff focused on details of grievances and arbitration, collective bargaining and contract enforcement (Taylor, p. 97). Union leaders and teams became indistinguishable from the personnel departments of large corporations. The CLC even had a political education department to provide union workers with an adequate understanding of the CLCs legislative objectives, pertinent information on current political issues, an awareness of how legislation is enacted, how various levels of government work, how the economy works and information on the various political parties (p. 98). As social and economic conditions deteriorated for workers in the 1970s and 1980s and the composition of the labour movement changed (p. 239), new voices appeared in union education to challenge the form and content of inherited practices. Environmental concerns were reflected in union education programming through the introduction of courses on pollution and occupational health and safety (p. 121). The most significant changes in this period were the increase and variety of courses for women given the significant part being played by women in the union movement and the workforce in general. This period saw a transition from a movement interested in developing critical skills among trade unionists to a system providing training for prescribed roles in the post war industrial relations regime (p. 143).

The 1980s saw changes in labour education in response to a increasingly hostile environment workers and their unions were facing (p. 193). Heightened government and employer attacks on workers coupled with more government funding for worker education brought about some changes in the focus of labour education. Many colleges and universities established labour studies programs as a result of progressive and union friendly academic staff, provincial government money for occupational health and safety and federal funding for post-secondary education (p. 194). By the 1990s a new emphasis on broad-based activist education was being expressed throughout the labour movement, promising to rekindle the sense of an educational movement that had been present in the 1930s and 1940s. Today there is a belief among labour educators that unionism can be part of the system and still be a force for building a civil society (Carter, p. 298). Labour education is capable of educating union members to draw on elements of civil society by generating social capital at a local level, engaging in strategic action within the system and forging alliances with social justice movements (Newman, 2002). This is an important area for labour education in order to allow workers and their unions to understand the global economy. Currently labour unions have taken a leading role in the preparation for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development Peoples Summit Rio +20 (Nations, 2012). There in addition to discussions on a new development paradigm, challenges for employment, social inclusion and poverty eradication in a sustainable planet trade unions will also lead discussions on sustainable access to food, energy, water, green jobs, and just transition with a special emphasis on opportunities for women and youth (Nations, 2012).

Unions remain the single most important provider of non-vocational social purpose adult education for working people (Spencer, 1995). Despite the conclusion that union education consists of three triangular contracts (Newman, 2002) (between the union, educator and participant) unions have to their detriment sought to control and narrowly focus the content of the contract between educator and participant at the expense of the working man or womans willingness to learn. Labour education should be more like labour studies: impartial, open and critical about labour in society (Taylor, p. 7). The provision and content of labour education has begun to recycle to its roots in order to make the union movement more relevant to the working man and woman (p. 239).

Bibliography
Carter, V. K. (2003). Book Review. Adult Education Quarterly Vol 53 , 297-299. Nations, U. (2012, May 29). Trade Union Assembly on Labour and Environment. Retrieved from Rio+20 Portal: http://rio20.net/en/iniciativas/ii-trade-union-assembly-on-labour-and-envrionment Nesbitt, T. (2002). Book Review. Our Times Vol 21 no 3 Jun/Jul , 38. Newman, M. (2002). The Third Contract: Theory and practice in trade union training. Sydney: Fast Books,div of Wild & Woolley Pty Ltd. Salt, B. (2002). Book Review . The Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education Vol 16 No 1 May. Sawchuk, P. H. (2003). Book Review. Labour No 51, 332-333. Spatz, D. (2004). Book Review. Labor Studies Journal Vol 28 No 4 Winter, 104-105.

9 Spencer, B. (1995). Old and New social Movements As Learning sites: Greening Labor Unions and Unionizing the Greens. Adult Education Quarterly Vol 46 No 31, 31-42. Spencer, B. (2002). Labour Education: An Introduction. In B. Spencer, Unions and Learning in a Global Economy: International and Comparative Perspectives (pp. 17-24). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing Inc. Taylor, J. (2001). Union Learning: Canadian Labour Education in the Twentieth Century. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing Inc.