Opinion: LCBO strike could usher in long and ugly battle over who sells alcohol in Ontario

Steven Tufts is a working geographer in the School of Environmental and Urban Change at York University.

On Friday, the first strike in the history of the LCBO began. It was perhaps inevitable. Tensions have been simmering for decades. Then the Ford government’s recent changes to the liquor trade tipped the scales. We are witnessing what could be a long and ugly strike that could threaten the livelihood of unions in Ontario.

Creative thinking is now needed on the part of unions, employers and the provincial government to stabilize labour relations in the industry. Otherwise, labour disputes will become the new normal. It will not only affect workers at the Liquor Control Board of Ontario. Beer store employees, represented by the United Food and Commercial Workers, could also join the dispute.

In Ontario, the unique structure of the alcohol retail industry, with Brewer’s Retail, the company behind the Beer Store, and the LCBO, has long created conditions for unions to organize workers and secure living wages. I remember thinking as a teenager in the 1980s that the guys (and it was mostly guys back then) who worked at the beer store had it made.

However, casualization of work and “permanent part-time jobs” with lower wages have become the norm for these workers. The decentralization of alcohol distribution to wine shops, convenience stores, grocery chains and now corner stores has shifted alcohol distribution and eliminated jobs at the LCBO and Beer Store.

Meanwhile, the government’s populist strategy aims to increase consumer access to alcohol by privatizing retail, while maintaining control over wholesale to ensure some revenue stays in the government’s coffers. This puts additional pressure on liquor store workers. If the LCBO’s retail sales decline, it can close locations and liquidate the properties it owns and leases.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford says he’s giving the “little guy” among mom-and-pop shop owners a chance to make some money. It’s hard to compete with more accessible alcohol, especially when there are marijuana shops on every corner now.

But the LCBO knew the Ontario Public Employees Union would fight back this time, and came up with an extended hours plan that would close stores for two weeks, maintain online sales, restaurant and grocery sales, and reopen some retail stores if the strike continued.

OPSEU is countering the LCBO’s plan with a three-pronged strategy. First, the union is “consolidating” to protect the wages and working conditions of its current members. With one of the highest voter turnouts and strike mandates in the division’s history, members have been mobilized to fight for a rollback of casualization. There is also a demand to double severance pay to drive up the cost of branch closures and thus potentially slow the pace of restructuring.

Second, the union is pursuing a comprehensive citizen engagement strategy. The message is that the retail restructuring will cost taxpayers billions in lost revenue and only benefit private companies. It is a slick multimedia campaign that uses humor and parody to draw attention to the fact that Mr. Ford is “helping billionaires.” Citizen engagement also calls for public support online and at picket lines, as well as rallies that will escalate as the strike progresses. Here, the union is asking the public not only to read a flyer, but to hand out flyers to neighbors themselves, as part of the fight to keep the LCBO public.

The union’s third strategy is a departure from previous tactics. Rather than simply highlighting the benefits of the current retail system and its ability to efficiently regulate and distribute alcohol, the union is calling for growth and expansion with more unionized locations and new store formats like the LCBO Express. OPSEU acknowledges that the status quo is no longer acceptable to consumers, as it is a reaction to Mr. Ford’s cheap-beer-everywhere-is-populist populism.

LCBO and OPSEU have prepared for a fight and will be prepared for a long fight. The state-owned company is being forced by the government to restructure and thousands of workers are facing a threat to their livelihoods as competition in the retail sector increases. If we do not want industrial action in the next decade, the government must come up with a serious plan to deal with laid-off alcohol retailers and unions must also be given a major role in the transition.

First, the government should support union-organized training – not just retraining for workers who lose their jobs when the LCBO and Beer Store close their stores, but also training for new workers selling alcohol. Unions need a fair chance to build relationships and organize workers in convenience stores, and training is a first step. The infrastructure and funding for such training programs already exist, through union training centres and Ontario’s Skills Development Fund.

A second, more ambitious concept would be to legislate a higher minimum wage for all alcohol sellers. The wage supplement would take into account workers’ additional training needs and distribute a portion of the new revenue from alcohol sales to non-union workers in convenience stores. This could even slow the expansion of alcohol sales in convenience stores and give all parties a chance to manage the restructuring.

It is unfair to burden LCBO and Beer Store workers with the entire cost of restructuring our alcohol distribution system. Failure to negotiate a just transition for workers will only lead to endless industrial action – and perhaps a few backyard distilleries.