Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T10:05:04.897Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Labour and Arbitration in the Mowat Era

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2014

Margaret E. MacCallum
Margaret E. MacCallum
Affiliation:
Faculty of Law, University of New Brunswick
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Liberal government of Oliver Mowat, which held office in Ontario from 1872 to 1896, experimented with legislation providing for a formal arbitration structure to resolve labour disputes. Although labour had not requested the initial legislation, in the context of employer resistance to labour organizations, arbitration was viewed by some labour leaders as one way to get the employer to the bargaining table. Since Mowat's legislation did not compel the submission of disputes to arbitration, it was of little use in achieving this goal. Nonetheless, the legislation was used by the Mowat government as evidence of its commitment to equal justice for all classes.

Résumé

Au pouvoir en Ontario de 1872 à 1896, le gouvernement libéral de Oliver Mowat a mis en application une législation stipulant une structure d'arbitrage officiel en vue de solutionner les conflits de travail. Bien que les syndicats n'aient pas demandé cette nouvelle législation, certains dirigeants syndicaux ont néanmoins perçu l'arbitrage comme une façon d'amener les employeurs à la table de négociation, dans un contexte marqué par l'antisyndicalisme du patronat. Toutefois, la législation Mowat ne prévoyant pas l'arbitrage obligatoire, elle a été de peu d'utilité pour atteindre cet objectif. Néanmoins, le gouvernement Mowat utilisa cette législation pour prouver son engagement pour une justice égale pour toutes les classes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Law and Society / La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société , Volume 6 , 1991 , pp. 65 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. On Mowat's success, see Evans, Margaret, “The Mowat Era, 1872–1896: Stability and Progress,” in Profiles of a Province: Studies in the History of Ontario (Toronto, 1967), 97–106Google Scholar, and Evans, “Oliver Mowat and Ontario, 1872–1896: A Study in Political Success,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 1967Google Scholar; the justice quotation is from Mowat's address “To the Free and Independent Electors of the North Riding of Oxford,” Nov 1872, quoted in Evans Ph.D., 26–27; on the province's development in this period, see Drummond, Ian M., Progress Without Planning: The Economic History of Ontario from Confederation to the Second World War (Toronto, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, chapter 7; Kealey, Gregory S. and Palmer, Bryan D., Dreaming of What Might Be: The Knights of Labor in Ontario, 1880–1900 (Cambridge, 1982), 28–36, 54–55Google Scholar.

2. Sugarman, David, “Law, Economy and the State in England, 1750–1914: Some Major Issues” in Sugarman, David, ed., Legality, Ideology and the State (London, 1983), 230–231Google Scholar.

3. Ibid.

4. Wright, Barry, “An Introduction to Canadian Law in History” in Canadian Perspectives on Law and Society: Issues in Legal History, Pue, W. Wesley and Wright, Barry, eds. (Ottawa, 1988), 7–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gordon, Robert W., “Critical Legal Histories,” Stanford Law Review, 36 (1984), 57–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Collins, Hugh, Marxism and Law (London, 1982), 19–20, 33–34, 77–90Google Scholar.

5. S.O. 1873, c. 25.

6. Martin, W.S.A., “A Study of Legislation Designed to Foster Industrial Peace in the Common Law Jurisdictions of Canada,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 1954, 79Google Scholar.

7. Palladium of Labor, 20 March 1886, 4Google Scholar.

8. Canada, Parliament, Sessional Papers, Royal Commission on the Relations of Labor and Capital, 1889, (RCRLC) Ontario Evidence, Toronto, 26 November 1887, Archibald BlueGoogle Scholar.

9. S.O. 1890, c. 40; R.S.O. 1877, c. 134; R.S.O. 1887, c. 140.

10. S.O. 1894, c. 42; The Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, S.O. 1932 c. 20., was passed in response to the Privy Council decision in Toronto Electric Commissioners v. Snider [1925] 2 D.L.R. 5 declaring that the federal IDIA was unconstitutional insofar as it purported to apply to labour disputes in industries under provincial jurisdiction. In its decision, the Privy Council referred to Ontario's Trade Disputes Act as an example of valid provincial legislation in the field.

11. McCallum, Margaret E., “Mechanics' Liens in the Mowat Era,” Histoire SocialelSocial History, xix, no. 38 (Nov. 1986), 387–406Google Scholar.

12. Ontario Workman, 13 Feb 1873, 1Google Scholar.

13. Kealey, Gregory S., Toronto Workers Respond to Industrial Capitalism, 1867–1892 (Toronto, 1980), 134–138, 317Google Scholar, Table II.2; Creighton, Donald, “George Brown, Sir John A. Macdonald and the ‘Workingman’,” Canadian Historical Review, 24 (1943), 362–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ostry, Bernard, “Conservatives, Liberals and Labour in the 1870s,” Canadian Historical Review, 41 (1960), 93–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chartrand, Mark, “The First Canadian Trade Union Legislation: An Historical Perspective,” Ottawa Law Review, 16 (1984), 271–272, 291–296Google Scholar.

14. Kealey, , Toronto Workers, 325Google Scholar.

15. Ontario Workman, 6 Feb 1873, 5Google Scholar.

16. Ibid., 13 Feb 1873, 1; biographical information from Palmer, Bryan, A Culture in Conflict: Skilled Workers and Industrial Capitalism in Hamilton, Ontario, 1860–1914 (Montreal, 1979), 132Google Scholar.

17. Ibid., 6 March 1873, 1.

18. Ibid. 18 April 1872, 4.

19. Ibid. 6 Feb 1873, 4; quotation from 27 Feb 1873, 4.

20. Ibid. 20 March 1873, 1 5; 13 Dec 1873, 1.

21. Globe, 29 Jan 1873, 2; 5 Feb 1873, 2; quotation from Ontario Workman, 6 Feb., 1873, 5Google Scholar.

22. For example, see The Progressive Labour Legislation of the Mowat Government, (Toronto, 1894)Google Scholar and Ontario: The Record of the Mowat Government. 18 Years of Progressive Legislation and Honest Administration.

23. Palmer, Bryan, Working-Class Experience: The Rise and Reconslitulion of Canadian Labour, 1800–1980 (Toronto, 1983) 89–96Google Scholar; Forsey, Eugene, Trade Unions in Canada, 1812–1902 (Toronto, 1982), 82–137Google Scholar; Morton, Desmond with Copp, Terry, Working People: An Illustrated History of Canadian Labour (Ottawa, 1981), 9–34Google Scholar.

24. Mitchell, Richard, “Solving the Great Social Problem of the Age: A Comparison of the Development of the State Systems of Conciliation and Arbitration in Australia and Canada, 1870–1910,” 6, unpublished paper, University of Melbourne, 1988Google Scholar; Martin (1954), 59–60.

25. Martin (1954), 26–28; Craven, Paul, “An Impartial Umpire”: Industrial Relations and the Canadian State, 1900–1911 (Toronto, 1980), 142–43, 149–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ontario Workman, 17 July 1873, 1Google Scholar.

26. Wismer, Leslie E., ed., Proceedings of the Canadian Labor Union Congresses, 1873–1877 (Montreal, 1951), quotation at 24Google Scholar; Battye, John, “The Nine Hour Pioneers: The Genesis of the Canadian Labour Movement,” Labour/Le Travailleur, 4 (1979), 25–56Google Scholar; see also books cited in note 23.

27. Wismer, , Proceedings of the CLU, 74, 85–87Google Scholar; biographical information from Kealey, , Toronto Workers, 325, 326, 328Google Scholar.

28. The TLC met annually from 1886 until 1956, when it joined with other labour organizations to form the Canadian Labour Congress. Beginning in 1890, delegates from Western Canada attended TLC conventions; the first Maritime delegate, from New Brunswick, attended in 1897. In its official records, the TLC cites 1883, not 1886, as its first and founding convention. See Proceedings of the Trades and Labor Congress, 1883–98 (Metropolitan Toronto Reference Library); Forsey, Trade Unions, provides a lengthy index entry of TLC concerns under the heading “Subjects Discussed by Unions,” 597–600; Morton, , Working People, 61Google Scholar, reproduces the 1898 Platform of Principles; for the exact wording of arbitration resolutions passed by the CLU and the TLC to 1902, see Forsey, Eugene, “Canadian Labour and Compulsory Arbitration 1877–1902,” Canadian Labour 10 (1965) no. 1, 21–22, 44Google Scholar.

29. At half of the TLC conventions between 1883 and 1896, Knights of Labor delegates outnumbered trade union delegates. On the KOL, see Fink, Leon, Workingmen's Democracy: The Knights of Labor and American Politics (Urbana, Illinois 1983)Google Scholar; Kealey and Palmer, Dreaming of What Might Be; Forsey, Trade Unions, chapter 7.

30. Thompson's book has been re-issued (Toronto, 1975), with an introduction by Jay Atherton. At the 1886 TLC convention, Thompson represented Local Assembly 7814 in Toronto, a mixed assembly composed primarily of journalists; see Proceedings of the TLC, 1886, 55–6.

31. Palladium of Labor, 20 March 1886, 5Google Scholar.

32. Proceedings of the TLC, 1896, 30–31.

33. Palladium of Labor, 2 Oct 1886, 1Google Scholar.

34. Ibid., 1888, 9, 13, 16, 21; biographical information from Kealey, , Toronto Workers, 326–27Google Scholar; for a hagiographic biography of O'Donoghue, see French, Doris, Faith, Sweat and Politics (Toronto, 1962)Google Scholar; on the Nova Scotia legislation, see McCallum, Margaret E., “The Mines Arbitration Act, 1888: Compulsory Arbitration in Context” in Girard, P. and Phillips, J., ed., Essays in the History of Canadian Law v. 3 (Toronto, 1990)Google Scholar; it is likely that none of the Convention delegates were aware of the Mines Arbitration Act, as the Provincial Workmen's Association which had agitated for the legislation was not affiliated with the TLC.

35. Kealey, Greg, ed., Canada Investigates Industrialism: The Royal Commission on the Relations of Labor and Capital, 1889 (Toronto, 1973)Google Scholar, Introduction, ix–xxi; Benson's evidence is in RCRLC, Ontario Evidence, Toronto 25 Jan 1888, 268Google Scholar; Ostry, Bernard, “Conservatives, Liberals and Labour in the 1880s,” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, 27 (1961), 141–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Morton, Desmond, “The Globe and the Labour Question: Ontario Liberalism in the Great Upheaval,” Ontario History, 73 (1981), 19–39Google Scholar.

36. RCRLC, Ontario Evidence, see index entries under arbitation and strikes.

37. RCRLC, First Report, 11, 57–59Google Scholar.

38. Kealey, , Toronto Workers, 323Google Scholar; Zerker, Sally, The Rise and Fall of the Toronto Typographical Union, 1832–1972 (Toronto, 1982), 120CrossRefGoogle Scholar, incorrectly concludes that the union's first written agreement in 1892 marks the “initiation” of grievance arbitration procedures by the TTU. It would be more accurate to describe the document as formalizing an arbitration procedure already in use on an ad hoc basis. See, for example, the editorial in Palladium of Labor 17 April 1886, 4Google Scholar, entitled “The ‘Globe’ Arbitration,” on a decision which went against the union.

39. RCRLC, Second Report, 79, 92–96Google Scholar.

40. S.O. 1890, c. 40; Canadian Parliamentary Guide, 1889; Ontario Legislative Assembly, Journals 5 March 1, 2, 3 and 7 April 1890; PAO, Ontario Legislative Assembly, Bills 1890, Bill #93; Globe, 2 April 1890, 9.

41. Palladium of Labor, 20 March 1886, 4Google Scholar.

42. O'Donoghue, D.J., “Labor Organizations in Ontario,” Ontario Sessional Papers 1887, no number, Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Industries, 1886, 247–48Google Scholar.

43. Proceedings of the TLC, 1889, 22.

44. Globe, 1 March 1890, 8Google Scholar.

45. Proceedings of the TLC, 1890, 30; 1891, 23.

46. Ibid., 1892, 11, 16, 25.

47. Ibid., 1893, 12.

48. Ibid., 1894, 5, 8.

49. S.B.C. 1893, c. 21.

50. Ignorance of the amendment is evident in a Toronto Mail editorial, 2 Feb 1894, 4, written in anticipation of the introduction of the 1894 bill; some members of the New South Wales Parliament did comment on the ambiguity in the identical wording of their 1892 Act; see Mitchell, , “Solving the Great Social Problem,” 21Google Scholar.

51. S.O. 1894, c. 42; Globe, 4 April 1894, 5; The Statute Law Amendment Act, S.O. 1911, c. 17, s. 43; amendments to The Trade Disputes Act in 1897 and 1902 imposed a duty on the Council of Conciliation to seek to resolve a dispute through mediation, if so requested by the employer or at least five employees, or if notified of a strike or lockout impending or in progress by the mayor of the municipality concerned. The 1897 amendments, likely inadvertently, also gave the Council power to mediate on its own initiative. S.O. 1897, c. 25; R.S.O. 1897, c. 158; S.O. 1902, c. 22.

52. B.C. repealed its 1893 legislation the following year, replacing it with S.B.C. 1894, c. 23, a revised version which, unlike the 1893 legislation, permitted arbitrators to determine wage rates to be paid in the future. See Martin (1954), 126–147. The B.C. legislation was used as little as was that in Ontario.

53. Globe, 6 April 1894, 6Google Scholar.

54. Mitchell, , “Solving the Great Social Problem,” 11–14Google Scholar; for a contemporary review of the Report of the South Wales Royal Commission, and excerpts from speeches given by the first President of the New South Wales Council of Arbitration, see Ontario Sessional Papers, 1893, #20, Report of the Bureau of Industries, 204–225.

55. Globe, 4 April 1894, 5Google Scholar; although the legislators viewed the 1894 Act as being entirely voluntary, the language used was ambiguous.

56. The Boards of Trade General Arbitration Act, 1894, S.O. 1894, c. 24; Globe, 27 March 1894, 4Google Scholar; Kittson, E.E. and Lynch–Staunton, George, “Some Points in the Law of Arbitration,” Canadian Law Times, IV, no. 12 (Oct 1884), 457–470Google Scholar.

57. Globe, 19 Feb 1894, 4Google Scholar.

58. Ibid. 4 April 1894, 5; Ontario: The Record of the Mowat Government; 22 Years of Progressive Legislation and Honest Administration, 1872–1894 (Toronto, 1894), 29–32Google Scholar; Proceedings of the TLC, 1894, 6; 1895, 22.

59. Proceedings of the TLC, 1891, 8Google Scholar; biographical information from Kealey, , Toronto Workers, 324Google Scholar; Evans (1967), 119, estimates that labour support was significant in electing Liberals in Hamilton and Ottawa in 1894, and in electing a Liberal in a by–election in London to fill the seat vacated by Meredith when he resigned after the election to take an appointment to the bench.

60. See, for example, the accounts of the Toronto Builders' Laborers strike in the Globe, 30 April, 8, 12, and 20 May, 1896; Martin, Ph.D., 154, and Anton, F.W., The Role of Government in the Settlement of Industrial Disputes in Canada (Toronto, 1962), 53Google Scholar, state that there was only one attempt to use The Trade Disputes Act, in Toronto in 1896. Martin identifies the workers involved as tailors. An article in the Labour Gazette, April 1902, 610–612Google Scholar, refers to the Act as having been used only twice since it was passed.

61. Martin, (1954) 159–60.

62. Kealey, and Palmer, , Dreaming of What Might Be, 96, 111, 331–334Google Scholar.

63. Globe, 19 Feb 1894, 4.

64. Quoted in Bliss, Michael, A Living Profit: Studies in the Social History of Canadian Business, 1883–1911 (Toronto, 1974), 74Google Scholar.

65. Ibid., chapter 2 and 4; Bliss, Michael, “The Protective Impulse: An Approach to the Social History of Oliver Mowat's Ontario” in Swainson, Donald, ed., Oliver Mowat's Ontario (Toronto, 1972), 174–188Google Scholar.

66. Risk, R.C.B., “‘This Nuisance of Litigation’: The Origins of Workers' Compensation in Ontario” in Flaherty, David, ed., Essays in the History of Canadian Law, v. 2 (Toronto, 1983), 421–22Google Scholar; Risk expresses these ideas in gender–neutral terms; I use the masculine pronoun deliberately, as the law did not accord an equal responsibility and freedom to women; for a contemporary expression of this thinking, see a report commissioned by the Bureau of Industries from Toronto lawyer Armstrong, T.C.L., “Laws to Assist and Protect the Working Classes,” Ontario Sessional Papers 1887, no number, Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Industries, 1886, 228–234Google Scholar.

67. Globe, 5 Jan 1894, 4.

68. Canada Sessional Papers, 1896, #61, Report on the Sweating System in Canada, 18. On two of the many street railway strikes of the period, see Kealey, and Palmer, , Dreaming of What Might Be, 120–127Google Scholar and Palmer, Bryan, “‘Give Us the Road and We Will Run It’: The Social and Cultural Matrix of an Emerging Labour Movement” in Kealey, G.S. and Warrian, P., eds., Essays in Canadian Working Class History (Toronto, 1976), 106–124Google Scholar.

69. Craven, , “An Impartial Umpire,” 264–269, 287–289Google Scholar; William Lyon Mackenzie King, who as Deputy Minister of Labour had drafted the IDIA, was likely familiar with Wright's report, since he had written a muck–raking study of Toronto's sweatshops for the Mail and Empire, 9 Oct 1897, and subsequently an official report for the Laurier government. See Ferns, Henry and Ostry, Bernard, The Age of Mackenzie King (Toronto 1976), 39–42Google Scholar and Craven, , “An Impartial Umpire,” 70–72Google Scholar.

70. Babcock, Robert, Gompers in Canada: A Study in American Continentalism Before the First World War (Toronto 1974), 78–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Craven, , “An Impartial Umpire,” 114–16, 143–46Google Scholar.

71. Marquis, Greg, “Doing Justice to ‘British Justice’: Law, Ideology and Canadian Historiography” Pue, and Wright, , eds., Canadian Perspectives on Law and Society, 55–57Google Scholar; Morton, Desmond, “Aid to the Civil Power: The Canadian Militia in Support of Social Order, 1867–1914,” Canadian Historical Review, 51 (1970) 407–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar; the use of the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act to delay strikes and criminalize the actions of strike supporters is evidence that labour was not paranoid.

72. Mitchell, , “Solving the Great Social Problem,” 6, 22–23, 31–32, 35Google Scholar; Rickard, John, Class and Politics: New South Wales, Victoria and the Early Commonwealth, 1890–1910, (Canberra 1976), 38–52, 70–80Google Scholar, chapter 10.

73. For examples, see Palmer, and Kealey, , Dreaming of What Might Be, 96Google Scholar and Pentland, Clare, “The Canadian Industrial Relations System: Some Formative Factors,” Labour/Le Travailleur 4 (1979), 16Google Scholar.