Mayor in the muddle
How did David Miller fare in the 39-day walkout that shook Toronto? We sniff out the political stink.
David Miller’s big adventure
Taking on workers’ sick bank was a big gamble. It’s risky business trying to chop a long-standing benefit. Check the bad PR in the press that the resulting shemozzle has earned the mayor. Why didn’t the city take a more moderate position, i.e., grandfathering of sick day benefits, from the get-go? He needed to show financial gains to an agitated public. Keeping wages in line with other public-sector union agreements (5.6 per cent over three years) would simply not be enough to keep the wolves at bay. But did the mayor actually think labour was going to roll over?
Misleading the opposition
Miller is a big defender of public services. Did he go into negotiations thinking the unions owe him something for his past support? Under Brian Cochrane, the former head of the outside workers union, contract talks could get testy in public, but when push came to shove, a middle ground was always found. By the end last Friday, the divide between the mayor and new outside workers union head Mark Ferguson was looking more personal than professional.
The message that got away
The X factor in the great strike of 2009 has to be how the media turned completely against King David. The mayor is an eloquent speaker who has shown himself adept at making his case on the toughest issues. But somehow, somewhere along the way, something got lost in translation at that first press conference to announce a deal had been reached with the city’s unions. The communications strategy, if there was one, failed. The media got under the usually measured Miller’s skin. The deal struck with city unions on sick pay should have been saleable. It’s not as lucrative as the mayor’s naysayers would have us think. One third of the city’s 30,000 workers aren’t even eligible.
Words between the lines
Contract negotiations are by their nature a two-way street. There has to be give and take on both sides. These words needed to be said publicly and sooner by the mayor, but weren’t until it was too late. The mayor might have stressed earlier that a loyal public service is one of the hallmarks of a progressive, prosperous city. The fact that the mayor went all confrontational and fanned public resentment has only increased talk of privatization and allowed right-wing foes to score points.
No room for error
There are lots of pretenders to Miller’s throne on the current council. None of them have the stones or smarts to take on Miller. Potential outsiders so far mentioned are either retreads (see John Tory) or have higher political ambitions (see George Smitherman). The mayor’s record is an enviable one. But local politics is so often not about vision. His opponents smell blood. No matter what anyone thinks about his handling of the strike, Miller can’t afford another blemish on his resumé.
Who wins?
It’s tempting for some to imagine privatization pushers coming up smelling like roses in all the trash talk. But the bottom line is, contracting out garbage pickup, for example, would be a hard sell, if not financial folly. Where it’s been tried, corruption tends to follow. If you think dealing with City Hall is a pain in the ass when you have a complaint, try a faceless corporation. Taxpayers get more bang for their buck with publicly delivered services. That’s the reality.
