To suggest that elimination of seniority would automatically improve employment equity for the target groups - women, Aboriginal and visible minorities and the disabled - is an attempt to impose simplistic solutions to a complex issue. Unions recognize that seniority and employment equity are complex issues. Since "seniority only" hirings only happen in about one percent of the Saskatchewan workforce, other considerations must be taken into account such as formal education, work experience and selective training.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) and many other unions within the SFL have supported affirmative action, employment equity and pay equity for years. At the same time, however, we do not believe seniority rights of workers can be tossed aside without carefully weighing the pluses and minuses involved in these issues.

We believe that seniority and employment equity have the same objective: to limit workplace favouritism and discrimination. Many aspects of employment equity are not affected by seniority. For example: entry level hiring, which is at the discretion of the employer, most aspects of the wage system, some benefits and working conditions, and support measures like childcare or paying transportation costs for training courses.

As well, some aspects of employment equity can impact positively on seniority. For instance: recognition that workers on maternity or paternity leave should accumulate seniority and reducing the use of exaggerated qualifications to deny workers promotions because an employer doesn't like them.

It must be conceded, as Mr. Solheim claims, that seniority is an issue that has to be addressed vis a vis employment equity. For example, how do we deal with a situation where qualified visible minority workers apply for permanent, full-time jobs and are denied because casual or part-time white workers have more seniority? Or what happens when qualified female workers apply for jobs in a predominantly male unit where promotions are based on seniority? Or how do we ensure that culture and seniority do not clash?

Not easy questions to answer. But to simply disregard seniority won't work either. Eliminating a long-standing

We must first start by convincing employers to hire people from the target groups. Had employers consistently practised this in the past, on a non-sexist, non-racist basis, we would have many more people today accumulating seniority, acquiring qualifications and filling jobs regardless of race, gender or physical challenges.

Employers have had free rein regarding entry-level hiring for too long. That's where the problem originates and that's where we should begin to address it.

In conclusion, a quotation from the publication "Work Sharing as an Alternative to Layoffs by Seniority" by Summers and Love:

"...Seniority enables an employee to acquire valuable interests by his (sic) work, to capitalize his labour and obtain something more than a day's wages for his continued production. When seniority determines promotion rights, it gives the employee a claim to better jobs when they become available; when seniority determines the order of layoff, it provides the employee a measure of insurance against unemployment. Seniority does not guarantee that vacancies in higher rated jobs will be filled or that any jobs will be available; but by giving the senior employee priority when a choice is made as to who will be promoted or who will remain employed, seniority gives an employee an interest of substantial practical value. As Professor Aaron has pointed out, `more than any other provision of the collective agreement...seniority affects the economic security of the individual covered by its terms', and it has understandably come to be viewed as one of the most highly prized possessions of an employee. Seniority may be the most valued capital asset of an employee of long service".

All of us - workers, employers and members of affirmative action groups - must sincerely strive to implement employment and pay equity in every workplace. But let's try to do so without sacrificing such a "valuable capital asset".