Lorne Gunter describes some very valid reasons for not ordering Canada Post back to work, both tactical (a strike or lockout would increase support for eventual privatization) and practical (the Tories need not get involved in the dispute when they have a full agenda already). I would add another: it is simply wrong for the government to (further) intervene in the economy. Ordering employees back to work or ordering an employer to open back up for business is a massive intrusion into the economy and precisely the type of interference conservatives and libertarians should eschew. Too many on the Right are so reflexively anti-union that they applaud any intrusion that forces unionized workers back to their jobs.
My reason for opposing government intrusion in this postal strike:
The government should follow the law, unless there's a compelling national emergency that makes it urgent to override it.
This is not an emergency.
Governments should not pass legislation catered to solving episodes it does not like. If it considers the strike law to be the problem, then it should have the courage to amend it instead of passing legislation every time strikes are deemed inconvenient. Imagine if it passed legislation to change a tax rate for a given corporation, or a law to free a certain prisoner it considers innocent.
That's not the way the law is supposed to work.
And why should this strike be so special as to warrant government attention, but not the strike at a private company? The government is favouring its crown corporation over its competitors. That's quite an unfair advantage.
