When it comes time to write, try to think, at minimum, of summarizing in a sentence or two the core argument of each essay, and then try to develop a proposition (or thesis, if you prefer) that respon

Partnership and Conflict: Canadian Social Unionism and Political PartnershipsGerald Hunt and Jonathan Eaton, “We Are Family: Labour Responds to Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual,and Transgender Workers,” in Gerald Hunt and David M. Rayside, eds., Equity,Diversity, and Canadian Labour (Toronto: UTP, 2007), 129-55.Suzanne Mills and Tyler McCreary, “Social Unionism, Partnership and Conflict: UnionEngagement with Aboriginal Peoples in Canada,” in Stephanie Ross and Larry Savage,Eds., Rethinking the Politics of Labour in Canada (Halifax and Winnipeg, Fernwood,2012), 116-131.My sense is that this is the most approachable of the reading sets in the course, and, hopefully, bynow the format is feeling manageable.When thinking about these two pieces in relation to one another, consider the question of howand why Canada’s union movement seems to have done so much better a job of partnering withgroups seeking to advance the rights of sexual minorities as compared with indigenous peoples.What is it about Canada’s model for social unionism that has been able to accommodate andadvocate for the needs of sexual minorities but has been less able to take-on the challenges ofdecolonization and reconciliation? Is there a conflict between a traditional human rights agendaand one based on collective or group rights? Do the assumptions based in traditional, rights-based unionism necessarily conflict with the requirements for decolonization?On Hunt and EatonWhen approaching the Hunt and Eaton piece, pay attention to some of the conversation aroundhow the union movement was ‘primed” to pay attention to the needs of sexual minorities? Which equity-seeking groups paved the way for sexual minorities? How, for example, didprecedents set by women and black workers, create a template for social unionism? And what dowe learn about internal union democracy from the examples these authors cite? About thedifferences between public- and private-sector social unionism? Hunt and Eaton point to legal and constitutional strategies embraced by unions as evidence of thesuccesses of social unionism. How such constitutional approaches help unions internalize ideasabout “Charter Rights” and “Charter Values?” How did the ability to identify discrimination as aworkplace issue help unions to “sell” their members onthe idea of advancing individual humanrights as core union value and priority?Why have unions been slower to take up the rights of transgender workers? Are the issue facingtransgender workers materially different from those that have historically faced gay and lesbianworkers, or is it just that unions have not yet “caught-up” with the needs of a more recentlyvisible and vocal group?Page 1 of 2 On Mills and McCrearyWhy it is that the templates for social unionism developed in relation to racial, gender, andsexual equity struggles have sometimes been problematic in Canadian unions’ relations withindigenous communities? Why have unions often dismissed indigenous issues as tangential tobroader workers’ struggles?Why have unions often been seen within indigenous communities as a colonial imposition asopposed to allies? Why have traditional union priorities around employment, seniority, etc.,sometimes placed unions on a collusion course with indigenous employers and governmentsseeking autonomy and self-determination? And why have indigenous employers andgovernments seeking to develop that autonomy and self-determination often constructed unionsas a natural enemy to sovereignty?A key to unlocking this piece might be to contemplate the difference between individual andcollective rights. Mills and McCreary observe that while relationships between unions and 1st

Nations communities and employers are often fraught, these same unions have often done a goodjob of advocating for the rights of individual indigenous workers. What does this reveal aboutthe strengths and weakness of the Canada’s union model when it comes to decolonization?What possible remedies do the authors propose to advance to make Canadian unions better allies,and perhaps even agents, of decolonization and reconciliation?From Reading to WritingRemember, these questions are intended to frame your reading, not to act as guideposts to yourreview essay. In page space that you have available to you, there is no way that you can evenbegin to address more than one or two questions or argue more than one or two points.What I will be looking for is evidence that you have tried to come to terms with the arguments ofeach of the authors and that you have made some connections between the two articles. I’m lessinterested in a narrative summary (Hunt and Eaton discuss...) than in an analytical one (Mills andMcCreary argue...).When it comes time to write, try to think, at minimum, of summarizing in a sentence or two thecore argument of each essay, and then try to develop a proposition (or thesis, if you prefer) thatresponds to the question, “What can we learn by reading these two essays together?”Page 2 of 2