State mediation of conflicts over work refusals: the role of the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
A key feature of occupational health and safety legislation is that it has sought to compartmentalize health and safety issues by creating structures and processes that depart from "typical" social relations of production. The Ontario Labour Relations Board, in adjudicating disputes concerning work refusals, faces the difficult, if not impossible, task of defining and maintaining a sphere in which workers have an uncommon latitude and power. Analysis of cases before the Board during the 1980s shows how it errs on the side of caution and uses criteria related to "typical" social relations of production to define convincing testimony and assess workers' entitlement to redress. Similarly, employers' interests and the requirements of the labor process are a reference point in the Board's definition of the scope of workers' rights and what constitute legitimate penalties for the "abuse" of these. Yet decisions are not wholly biased toward employers; dissenting opinions reveal important differences and progressive rulings establish precedents that could be a basis for future decisions.
Walters
V
V
Department of Sociology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
D003098:Collective Bargaining / Q000458:organization & administration; D006076:Government; D016272:Occupational Health / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D009864:Ontario; D012961:Sociology; D013317:Strikes, Employee