The second week in LABR 2P93, the global labour history course I am teaching for the Labour Studies program at Brock University, addressed some key theoretical and methodological aspects of historical inquiry and the study of labour in a global framework. Posing questions to students, and a little light commentary about Karl Marx’s crazy beard and penchant for tucking his hand into his jacket for photos, helped keep us engaged. Part of our discussion moved from the question of studying work towards the study of class, and using class analysis.
I used the recent news about some Tim Hortons franchise owners reacting to the increased minimum wage in Ontario by clawing back employees’ benefits to compare the analysis of work issues with class analysis. Coverage of the story in the mainstream press has done a pretty good job of indicating the complexity of work. One example of what I mean is the three-way division of responsibility for workplace policy at Tim Hortons between the parent company, franchise owners, and the provincial government. This is not the typical tri-partite model of government, employer, and labour, and if Tim Hortons workers did unionize then it would add another layer of complexity to the situation. Actually, I think it might help simplify things by clarifying in collective bargaining language the scope of franchise owners’ responsibilities in terms of relations with employers compared with the role of corporate policy.
My point, basically, was that the complexity of workplace issues may be fruitfully analyzed without integrating the concept of class. When one does choose to do this, the scope of analysis opens up considerably, for class analysis insists on accounting for the political and social contexts for workplace issues. These broader contexts are part of the reason the Tim Hortons story gained so much attention so quickly. The Tim Hortons location at the heart of the story is owned by a billionaire couple who are also descendants of the company’s founders. They are not corporate executives (Tim Hortons is owned by Restaurant Brands International), and they may not be one percenters, but their wealth means they are not comparable to small business owners legitimately challenged by the unusually high minimum wage increase of about 20%.
Class analysis is a way of seeing issues in their social context, and recognizing power dynamics that resonate politically. The labour movement’s response to the Tim Hortons story, for example, has mobilized far beyond the Tim Horton’s workforce. This call for a Day of Action from Ontario’s 15 and Fairness campaign reveals a grassroots effort by organizations across the country to support Tim Hortons workers. The demonstrations on January 19th received a good deal of attention from Canadian media, including this article by labour reporter Sara Mojtehedzadeh, and this online Global News piece that is essentially a host for embedded news videos. Media coverage has showed a broad social response to specific workplace developments shaped by corporate priorities and government policy. The story’s social implications and political significance – in other words, its class dimensions – are what are keeping it in the news.
Citation
Nathan Smith, “Work and Class,” HIS241.com, 22 January 2018, http://www.his241.com/?p=488
