Your search
Results 5 resources
-
The advent of a modern workmen’s compensation system in Ontario in the mid-1910s was a moment of significant gain for injured workers. With the passage of the 1915 Workmen’s Compensation Act (WCA), injured workers would no longer have to rely on an uncertain, even hostile, judge and jury system to receive some form of compensation from their employers. The WCA was, however, a gendered, i.e., discriminatory, statute. As the paper outlines, the 1915 WCA statutorily enshrined the assumptions of the day that women’s paid work was of less value than that of men’s. The situation remained uncontested until the 1970s, when a vibrant and politically influential injured workers’ movement (IWM) emerged and, in small but important ways, began to challenge the gendered and racialized dimensions of the worker’s compensation system. As it happened, the victories secured at this juncture by the IWM that impacted on women – both as injured workers and as wives, mothers, and widows of injured workers – proved to be more symbolic than material. For while a 1982 change in the name from “Workmen’s” to “Workers Compensation Act” was symbolic of a formally gender neutral statute (continued with the passage of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act in 1997), women workers injured over the past two decades report that their claims are being processed by WCB officials who downplay the severity and the legitimacy of their injuries, on the one hand, and who circumscribe rehabilitation and job training programs with gendered notions that their jobs are secondary in importance to that of male members of their households, on the other hand. No longer totally ignored, injured women workers now confront a neo-liberal, increasingly welfarized workers’ compensation system whose formal gender neutrality does not address entrenched labour market inequalities or the regulatory and processual discrepancies between laws and their application.
-
The article reviews the book, "Code White: Sounding the Alarm on Violence Against Health Care Workers," by Margaret M. Keith and James T. Brophy.
-
The article reviews the book, "The Political Economy of Workplace Injury in Canada," by Bob Barnetson.
-
The article reviews the book, "Biography of an Industrial Town, Terni, Italy, 1831–2014," by Alessandro Portelli.
-
In the mid-1970's, workers and local union activists at Bendix Automotive in Windsor, Ontario, became aware that the brake shoes they manufactured contained asbestos and that the dust that regularly filled the air in sections of the company's two plants contained asbestos dust. Workers and local United Automobile Workers (UAW) union activists at Bendix pressured the company and the Ontario government to clean up and eliminate asbestos from their workplace. In the midst of this struggle Bendix management announced that, for solely economic reasons, it was closing down its operations in Windsor. The shutdown highlighted the tensions and contradictions confronting workers and unions in the area of health and safety. While Bendix workers wanted their workplace to be safe and healthy, they also needed their jobs. At the same time, local and national union UAW officials, while trying to secure a safe and healthy working environment for their members, confronted the possibility of the plant shutting down if they pushed too hard on asbestos. In the end, the ability of Bendix to close down its operations, with minimal legal and no statutory sanctions, demonstrated the power of corporate capital and the conflicting and constrained nature and extent of workers' choices under capitalism in the arena of worker health and safety.