Introduction
The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) is at the forefront of the fight against the privatization of public services and has been since our union was founded in 1963. The collective power of CUPE members is our best defence against privatization, and CUPE collective agreements are a powerful tool in that fight. When CUPE members organize to achieve, and strictly enforce, contract language that prevents or restricts our employers from contracting out work, we can protect public sector union jobs and public services. CUPE collective agreements are far more likely than other union contracts to have some type of protection against contracting out. CUPE locals regularly use their collective agreement language to stop privatization in its tracks.
Contracting out is the most common form of privatization that CUPE members face. It is a threat in every sector. Contracting out involves a public sector employer (like a municipality, school board, or health authority) paying a private, for-profit corporation or non-profit organization to deliver a service that was previously provided by public sector workers. Some employers contract out to use non-union labour and lower working conditions. Sometimes the term “outsourcing” is used when it affects an entire system or department. Other forms of privatization include public-private partnerships (P3s), social impact bonds (SIBs) and alternative service delivery (ASD).
It is critical for CUPE locals to negotiate specific provisions against contracting out if they don’t have any. Locals should also review and work to strengthen existing provisions in every round of collective bargaining, and bargain contracting in language that positions the local to bring work into the bargaining unit.
Overview
This guide can be used by CUPE national representatives and local bargaining committees to develop collective agreement language to stop contracting out.
CUPE locals should take a multi-faceted approach that includes:
- Placing restrictions on the employer’s ability to contract out.
- Getting ahead of contracting out with notice, disclosure, and consultation requirements.
- Negotiating standards for contractors that deter privatization and contracting out.
- Establishing a process to reverse privatization by contracting work back into the bargaining unit.
Each section of this guide includes examples of recommended CUPE contract language that has been negotiated or arbitrated. The example may not present the contract clause or LOU in its entirety. While this guide contains examples, CUPE national representatives and researchers are well-equipped to support CUPE locals in negotiating the best language for their particular situation.
Bargaining considerations
Strong collective agreements have various provisions that work together to prevent harmful employer actions like contracting out. One strategy that can help limit the impacts of contracting out is to negotiate comprehensive layoff measures. This also protects jobs in many other situations and can discourage employers from contracting out work by making the layoff process a costly and disruptive decision. Strong layoff provisions protect CUPE members and CUPE bargaining units. Such measures can include:
- Advance notice to the union.
- The opportunity to jointly explore alternatives to layoff and for the employer to consider proposals from the union.
- Advance notice to affected workers.
- Redeployment and/or reassignment requirements.
- “Chain bumping” (the right to bump someone with less seniority).
- Supplemental unemployment benefits for laid off workers.
There is significant sectoral and regional variation for layoff and recall provisions. Consult with your CUPE national representative for the recommended layoff and recall language for your circumstances.
Language on contracting out is strongest when it’s contained in the body of the collective agreement, as these articles or clauses roll over into future agreements unless they are changed during bargaining.
Letters of intent can be useful when dealing with a particular or one-time event, like contracting back in a specific service, shift, or classification. Letters of intent can also cover a new practice or procedure being introduced on a trial basis for the duration of the collective agreement, such as disclosure and meetings regarding privatization issues. Letters of intent should be reviewed for renewal in a subsequent round of bargaining for their effectiveness, fine tuned and brought into the body of the collective agreement.
The consequences of contracting out
Collective agreement language that places restrictions on contracting out is fundamental to job security, union security and strong public services.
Without collective agreement limitations, employers can contract out work to undermine the wages, benefits, seniority provisions and other rights entrenched in our collective agreements. This poses dire consequences for CUPE members’ livelihoods.
Employers usually award contracts to the company offering the lowest price for the work, which typically relies on lower-wage, non-union workers. This often drives down wages and working conditions across an entire sector. Contracting out work and bringing in private contractors also creates a fragmented workforce. Workers performing similar work in the same workplace could have significantly different wages, benefits, and union protection.
Contracting out also means fewer bargaining unit jobs and weakens the union’s bargaining position. Job actions like strikes are less effective because contractors can be used as replacement workers. Contracting out also means fewer people contributing to our pension plans and reduces the pool of union dues available to defend our working conditions.
Public services suffer when our work is contracted out. Services become less accountable and responsive, as the community has little to no influence over the actions of private companies. Involving a private operator distorts the goals of delivering public services. The public interest takes a back seat to maximizing profits or cutting costs.
There’s a growing movement to reverse contracting out and bring work back in house. Services are often contracted in because public sector employers and governments realize that contracted out services are poor quality and in-house services cost less and offer more value.
Whether it’s preventing privatization before it takes hold, or working to bring services back in house, protecting and improving public services benefits workers and communities. This guide will help locals assess their collective agreement and develop a bargaining agenda that ensures their contract provides the best possible protection for jobs and services.
Note regarding translation: This document is available in English and French. The narrative sections have been translated. However, the collective agreement articles in the English document are taken from English language agreements and the French document contains articles taken from French language collective agreements.
Preventing privatization: restrictions on contracting out
CUPE locals should not rely exclusively on “work of the bargaining unit” provisions to prevent contracting out. While these provisions may be used to prevent non-bargaining unit employees or management from performing the work of the bargaining unit, the prevailing view of arbitrators has been that specific restrictions are necessary to prevent the employer from contracting out work.
The strongest collective agreement defence is a complete ban on contracting out bargaining unit work. CUPE has negotiated this language in various sectors and jurisdictions across the country:
In order to provide job security for the members of the bargaining unit, the employer agrees that no work or services performed by the employees shall be subcontracted, transferred, leased, assigned, or conveyed, in whole or in part, to any other plant, person, company, or non-unit employee.
If it’s not possible to get a complete ban on contracting out in the current round of bargaining, CUPE locals can restrict contracting out by limiting the extent to which, and the circumstances in which, it can be done. The next best options, in order, are:
1. No contracting out if bargaining unit members can perform the work.
2. No contracting out except in an emergency situation.
3. No contracting out if it reduces the size of the bargaining unit, reduces the number of hours, or results in layoffs.
Note: Language should protect bargaining unit work and bargaining unit positions, not just current bargaining unit members. If only present members are protected (for example, no reduction in hours or layoffs), it may not prevent an employer from reducing the bargaining unit through attrition by not replacing retired and terminated employees, while at the same time contracting out bargaining unit work.
4. No contracting out if it results in a layoff of certain employees.
One approach is to specify a group of members based on length of service or seniority:
Another approach is to specify a group of members based on employment status (such as permanent employees):
Note: This language could create tiers in the bargaining unit, where some members have inferior job security rights. CUPE locals with this type of two-tiered contracting out language should work to upgrade their language to a restriction on contracting out that protects all members of the bargaining unit. To learn more read CUPE’s policy, Collective Bargaining: Resisting Concessions and Two-Tier Proposals, and Defending Free Collective Bargaining – Moving Forward.
5. The employer can contract out but must take certain measures to mitigate the impact on employees who will be displaced.
Remember, some level of protection against contracting out is better than none and this language can be upgraded in subsequent rounds of bargaining.
CUPE national representatives can point you to negotiated language restricting contracting out in your sector and/or jurisdiction.
Preventing privatization: notice, consultation and disclosure
Bargaining a requirement for the employer to share information and engage the union in advance about plans to privatize can help CUPE and our community allies organize and challenge any privatization. The longer the notice period, the more time a local has to communicate with members, do corporate research, build coalitions, lobby politicians, and expose the false claims and hidden costs in the contractor’s pitch. Together, these steps are part of a winning campaign to keep services public. Contract language covering notice of privatization plans can include:
- All information about a service members currently provide that is under review for potential privatization.
- All information about a new service or facility that would normally be included in the range of services provided by the organization and CUPE members.
In addition to a notice period, CUPE locals should negotiate a requirement to consult that gives the local an opportunity to engage with the employer about their intention to contract out bargaining unit work.
Contracting out is often used to privatize public services. Notice, disclosure, and consultation clauses can cover other forms of privatization the employer may pursue, such as public-private partnerships (P3s), social impact bonds or alternative service delivery. These provisions can include requiring that:
- The employer must notify the union about any P3 proposal within a specified time.
- The employer must disclose all information about a P3 proposal to the union within a specified time.
- The employer must consult with the union about the P3 proposal prior to its adoption, including providing the union an opportunity to formally respond to the proposal in writing.
If the employer has contracted out work, CUPE locals should negotiate language requiring a periodic joint review of contracted out work that could be covered under the collective agreement. This should include disclosure of information about the contractor, the length and cost of the contract, as well as the cost of negotiating, administering and supervising the contract. This information can help CUPE prepare a case to bring the contracted-out work back in house.
Making a case to contract work in should demonstrate the value of the service being delivered in house. CUPE locals should not participate in a competitive bidding process as this would conflict with our role as a bargaining agent. Submitting a bid for service delivery undermines the collective bargaining process by placing pressure on unions to reduce service costs and make concessions.
Preventing privatization: contractor obligations
Where locals haven’t achieved a complete ban on contracting out, collective agreement language mandating contractor obligations can be a significant roadblock to privatization and contracting out.Locals can negotiate a provision requiring the employer to only use contractors who meet specific standards of employment.
One approach is to bind the employer to require the contractor to employ displaced CUPE members, and in doing so recognize the CUPE local as the bargaining agent for its employees and apply the collective agreement that covered the workers before privatization.
Another approach is to require that the employer mandate any contractor to provide a certain level of pay and benefits in order to maintain a uniform standard of compensation.
Reversing privatization: language on contracting in
Contracting work back in house is another way of fighting privatization and contracting out.
Negotiating a process for contracting in typically involves securing:
- An obligation for the employer to disclose all information on currently contracted out services.
- A commitment to a joint review of contracted out work that could be performed by members of the bargaining unit.
- A commitment to consider proposals from the union to bring work back in house.
In some jurisdictions, work can also be contracted into the bargaining unit by expanding the scope, or bargaining unit recognition, clause. For example, a new subsection of the scope clause could be negotiated to include a new or expanded facility or service, or to introduce a new shift, classification or additional number of members who will perform contracted-in work. This approach must be compatible with existing certification, and what’s possible will depend on the relevant legislation.
CUPE strongly encourages locals to consult with their national representative to make sure the scope of their certification is compatible with the language to be negotiated.
Conclusion
A strong collective agreement is an essential tool in our work to protect and improve public services, and to safeguard good union jobs. Preventing and reversing privatization is an important part of the bargaining cycle for CUPE locals. It’s also part of our daily work as union activists. Every member has a role to play in protecting good jobs and quality public services.
Defending and enforcing our contracts in between rounds of bargaining is just as important as winning strong collective agreement language. Members must be on the lookout, enforcing their collective agreement and filing grievances when there are violations. Stewards play a key role in defending agreements by communicating with their local about any threats to their contract and ways to strengthen it.
Strictly enforcing no contracting out clauses and other language preventing privatization sends a strong message to employers: CUPE members will always defend good jobs and strong public services.
Ultimately, the strongest contracts have community support. CUPE members must keep building a culture of member political engagement, strengthening coalitions, and participating in campaigns with community allies to defend and promote public services. This approach builds the solidarity CUPE members need when they mobilize to use their collective agreements to fight privatization and contracting out.
Resources
For collective bargaining courses and resources to take on privatization, contact CUPE’s union education staff in your area at cupe.ca/union-education.
You’ll also find news and resources at cupe.ca/privatization, including background on the different forms of privatization, tools to help spot and act on the early warning signs of privatization, and examples of work being brought back in house. Key resources include: