In the blood.

Repeating a Harper Majority Government (™,®,but especially ©...) mantra that already glitters with either the polish of hard wear or that sparkly Twilight vampire crap, the federal anti-labour minister has ordered Air Canada's flight attendants' union straight to a procedurally-sketchy Industrial Relations Board arbitration tomorrow. Do Not Strike. Do Not Pass Go. Definitely Do Not Collect $200.

She opines (again) that these people must not be allowed to hurt the economy. Probably better than when she opined that "cancer is sexy," huh?

"These people" took a 15 per cent pay cut back in the day when Air Canada was hurting, and are still starting out at a monthly wage that barely covers a so-so one-bedroom apartment in downtown Ottawa, never mind the food and utilities. Forget cable. Even basic.

But, hey! If you could afford that hookup, the new retrosoap Pan Am's success would prove that the job's glamour still totally makes up for the poverty, obscene shifts, and antediluvian management. Right?

Apparently it's okay for these people to hurt, as long as "the economy", usually limned as some kind of shadowy, all-powerful, yet strangely fragile third person, does not. This quasi-person must be protected with the kind of dumb, short-term union-shafting tactics that, down the line, inevitably will lead to bunch of (here's an economic term, for, ummm, trained economists...) pent-up demand. From labour.

It has apparently not yet dawned on too many Harper Majority Government (™,®,but especially ©...) types that the economy is made up of individuals. Like, say, flight attendants. And that if you pull this shit enough, they'll eventually get pissed enough to come back at ya.

About the first time Lisa Raitt started dropping legislative howitzer rounds on any union that even smelled like it might be thinking about a strike, she began to tell interviewers that she grew up in an old-school union family in Nova Scotia, that her affinity with labour was "in the blood".

Was it really only this past June that she could still pull that one straight-faced? At the time, the great grey Glob said she was "an awkward foil for critics portraying the Conservative government as an enemy of Canada’s labour movement."

To establish that article's background (and to launch my now-trademark digression, a full nine paragraphs late in my books...) one must note that its top photo is of Ms. Raitt, sportin' what looks, to my jaundiced yellow eye, suspiciously like a blue sweater, and, ummm, cuddling an expedient kitten.

In retrospect, that should have been the only tell that we really needed, to give context to her poker-faced claims to blue-collar cred...

A vexing vortex

This test, passed to me by The Sage Scribe, is very brief with only one question. But it's a very important one, especially considering the news of the past month. By giving an honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally.

The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation in which you will have to make a decision. Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous. Please read slowly and give due consideration to each line.

THE SITUATION:

You are in Ottawa. There is chaos all around you caused by a huge mid-December storm with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical proportions. You are a photo-journalist working for a major Canadian newspaper, and you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making photos.

There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing into the water of the Ottawa River. Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.

THE TEST:

Suddenly, you see four men in the water. They are fighting for their lives, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer ... Somehow, the men look familiar ...

You suddenly realize who they are ... It's Stephen Harper, Stephane Dion, Jack Layton, and Gilles Duceppe!

You notice that the raging waters are about to take them under forever. You have two options: You can save lives or you can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize-winning photo, documenting the death of the country's most powerful men at possibly one of Canada's most important historical moments!

THE QUESTION:

Here's the question, and please give an honest answer ...

Would you select high contrast colour film, or would you go with the classic simplicity of black and white?