For 40 days and 40 nights, not a bus was seen wobbling anywhere on Halifax wintry streets. Extending from early February to mid-March, the city’s first transit strike since 1998 left commuters cranky, politicians polarized and businesses bickering.

The strike also raised questions about the best way to handle labour disputes and, in particular, the value of binding arbitration. In future, the recent Metro Transit strike will be used as a manual on what not to do.

The Amalgamated Transit Union, after watching its members walk a cold and often snowy picket line, mumbled something about accepting binding arbitration. But Halifax mayor Peter Kelly, who has announced he will not run again after 27 years in public office, said, “No deal.” He dug in both his heels, declaring the city would not bend on the rostering issue (a form of scheduling) and would not consider binding arbitration.

Nova Scotia’s pro-labour provincial government also distanced itself from the controversy. NDP Premier Darrell Dexter repeatedly said back-to-work legislation was not on the table and that the issue belonged to the municipality, not the province.

Public pressure finally forced both politicians and the union to reconsider. Stories ran daily in the media about the strike’s unfair impact: some university and college students had to drop out of school because they couldn’t make it to classes; employees had to quit jobs because they simply couldn’t get to work.

And for what? In the end, union members will receive an 8% raise over the five years of the contract. They wanted 10%. Rostering, the “line in the sand” issue, has proved to be a major issue written in invisible ink: it’s still in the contract, although changes have been made that make it acceptable to union members and at least livable for city hall.

Much was made of the huge sums Metro Transit was saving by not paying more than 700 bus drivers during the strike. Well, that money has been returned to the workers in the form of a $4,000 signing bonus for each union member.

Clearly, compromise was within reach. Yet, it took more than a month of posturing that left Haligonians upset, frustrated – and looking more favourably upon binding arbitration as the best option for key public services such as transit.

Typically, binding arbitration has favoured unions (although this is changing in the wake of the global economic recession), so the city’s reluctance to give up the right to dig in its heels seems obvious. It’s equally obvious that the contract the city signed with the union gives them much of what they wanted in the first place.

The city will also be forking out more money in the wake of the settlement. For the 16 days following the strike, no fares will be charged, Metro Transit announced.

Of course, we’ll all pay the price when the city runs into more red ink and decides its only option is to raise fares, cut routes or reduce hours of service. One option it will not consider, however, remains binding arbitration.

© 2012 Investment Executive. All rights reserved.