Friday, September 09, 2005
CBC 64: "Workerbee" calls for binding arbitration
My fellow blogger CBCWorkerbee has called for binding arbitration in the dispute with the CBC. Two comments posted on the site also agree with the poor tired person (who did 16 hours on the line at a stretch on Thursday)
CBCworkerbee puts it ths way, his father explaining (without mentioning the profession) a labour dispute he was involved in:
and then goes on to:
A couple of days ago, Brit blogger Michael Bywater compared journalists to firefighters and, after reading that, based on my experience as a police reporter, I also called for arbitration or binding arbirtration.
Both sides can voluntarily agree to arbitration.
But the triumvirate (Rabinovitch, Stursberg and Chalmers) plus their enforcer George Smith apparently think they're winning, (winning what???) so, as CBCworkerbee says, they know they don't have to compromise.
I am sure the cabinet can send this to arbitration or binding arbitration, if the Prime Minister and the guys and gals around that table would stop dithering.
But there is, at this time, no political pressure to save the CBC, so they will dither, dither, dither.
The bloggers have now given the Senior Management Committee two chances to save the Canadian Broadcasting Corpoation.
The first was a Katrina related, face-saving truce.
Now we have two independent calls for arbitration. If there was an arbitration agreement we could go back to work and save the CBC while the now three sides work things out.
Reject arbitration and that is strike two. Three strikes and.....
Note to CBCWorkerbee: In another blog you said:
What I said was:
Actually Workerbee, most people did take it as a compliment and sent me e-mail to thanking me for reminding them that in this time of trouble, they do have a vocation.
When I am now emphasizing the word sometimes, I am referring to those people who sent nasty e-mail to John Doyle at the Globe and Mail saying things like only the CBC does good journalism; those who post similar nasty comments on blogs; those who sent e-mails to bloggers in the early days vehemently opposing the podcasting and other plans.
I was also thinking of the planning meeting we had in Toronto at Metro Hall for alternative broadcast and sites. There were some people there who honestly and genuinely thought the Canadian public would rise in revolt at the loss of CBC Radio. It hasn't happened.
Some of these same people thought we should do absolutely nothing.
It is now clear that what is happening now is right, we are for free, the lifeline for the CBC. That too is vocation (since most of the people working these projects exceed the mandated off picket line hours)
Put it this way (and I am using extremes here), both Desmond Tutu and Pat Robertson have vocations. The CBC vocation, to a lesser extent, follows that spectrum.
By the way, I just thought of this as I typed the last line. How about Desmond Tutu as the arbitrator?
Technorati tags
journalism, CBC, blog, news, lockout,
CBClockout,
8:48 AM posted by Robin Rowland
Permanent Link
Links to this post
CBCworkerbee puts it ths way, his father explaining (without mentioning the profession) a labour dispute he was involved in:
No," he said. "With us it could only ever go to binding arbitration." He explained to me that in a civilized country, in a civilized age, we should go about our business in a civilized fashion.
and then goes on to:
Brace yourselves: The reason they never came up with an agreement is because THEY KNOW THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO. If they were forced into binding arbitration neither side could resort to a strike or lockout. Management could not count on forcing us into a lockout situation in an effort to break the union. Both sides would be rather more motivated to come up with a deal in the time that they had. Lest an arbitrator do it for them.
A couple of days ago, Brit blogger Michael Bywater compared journalists to firefighters and, after reading that, based on my experience as a police reporter, I also called for arbitration or binding arbirtration.
Both sides can voluntarily agree to arbitration.
But the triumvirate (Rabinovitch, Stursberg and Chalmers) plus their enforcer George Smith apparently think they're winning, (winning what???) so, as CBCworkerbee says, they know they don't have to compromise.
I am sure the cabinet can send this to arbitration or binding arbitration, if the Prime Minister and the guys and gals around that table would stop dithering.
But there is, at this time, no political pressure to save the CBC, so they will dither, dither, dither.
The bloggers have now given the Senior Management Committee two chances to save the Canadian Broadcasting Corpoation.
The first was a Katrina related, face-saving truce.
Now we have two independent calls for arbitration. If there was an arbitration agreement we could go back to work and save the CBC while the now three sides work things out.
Reject arbitration and that is strike two. Three strikes and.....
Note to CBCWorkerbee: In another blog you said:
I'm one of those sad, annoying people that Robin Rowland was talking about in his Fort Confusion post who feels that working for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is bit of a vocation. (Not sure Robin quite meant it as a compliment, though...)
What I said was:
there is a core of CBC employees for whom working there is a vocation, a calling. It these people who sometimes irritate the public and even their fellows at CBC.)
Actually Workerbee, most people did take it as a compliment and sent me e-mail to thanking me for reminding them that in this time of trouble, they do have a vocation.
When I am now emphasizing the word sometimes, I am referring to those people who sent nasty e-mail to John Doyle at the Globe and Mail saying things like only the CBC does good journalism; those who post similar nasty comments on blogs; those who sent e-mails to bloggers in the early days vehemently opposing the podcasting and other plans.
I was also thinking of the planning meeting we had in Toronto at Metro Hall for alternative broadcast and sites. There were some people there who honestly and genuinely thought the Canadian public would rise in revolt at the loss of CBC Radio. It hasn't happened.
Some of these same people thought we should do absolutely nothing.
It is now clear that what is happening now is right, we are for free, the lifeline for the CBC. That too is vocation (since most of the people working these projects exceed the mandated off picket line hours)
Put it this way (and I am using extremes here), both Desmond Tutu and Pat Robertson have vocations. The CBC vocation, to a lesser extent, follows that spectrum.
By the way, I just thought of this as I typed the last line. How about Desmond Tutu as the arbitrator?
Technorati tags
journalism, CBC, blog, news, lockout,
CBClockout,
8:48 AM posted by Robin Rowland
Permanent Link
