** As published in The Hub Canada on October 30, 2026

It’s no secret that organized labour in Canada is facing serious challenges, including the federal government’s Bill C-39, which proposes restrictions on the right to strike. At a time like this, the labour movement should focus on unity and what matters most to workers—not symbolic political battles over foreign conflicts.

Yet the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) appears to be losing sight of one of the labour movement’s most fundamental principles: strength comes from uniting workers.

That principle means a union represents workers regardless of their politics, religion, or views on contentious issues. Solidarity cannot be conditional.

I know this principle well. I have spent nearly 50 years as a member of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union/Syndicat des Employés de la Fonction Publique de l’Ontario (OPSEU/SEFPO), including nine years as a retired member. I have served as a local president, provincial executive board member, regional vice-president, and chair of the provincial audit committee. I have served on bargaining teams and represented my union internationally.

From my first day in a union, I was taught a simple lesson: a member is a member is a member.

As I learned more about international labour rights, that principle expanded: a worker is a worker is a worker.

A worker’s rights should not depend on where they live, what government is in power, or what political ideology happens to be fashionable.

That is why I was so troubled when the CLC’s most recent national convention adopted a resolution severing ties with Histadrut, Israel’s national labour federation.

Histadrut represents more than 800,000 workers through its affiliated unions, including Jewish, Muslim, Druze, and Christian workers.

This was not a decision about a government or a foreign policy dispute. It was a decision to sever ties with another labour organization.

That distinction matters.

Delegates were presented with allegations that Histadrut had denied rights to Palestinian workers. Reportedly, they were not given a complete picture of Histadrut’s response. Histadrut maintained that applicable collective-agreement provisions concerning temporary workers from areas governed by the Palestinian Authority had been properly applied. It also stated that no workers had filed grievances alleging unfair labour practices under the applicable agreement.If a union believes another union has failed workers, the labour movement has a tried and tested response: to investigate and engage.

The CLC chose a different path: isolation.

That should concern anyone who believes international worker solidarity still means something.

It should concern Jewish union members, in particular.

Across Canada, unions and labour organizations have increasingly taken one-sided positions on the Israeli-Hamas conflict. Some have endorsed forms of boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel. Others have adopted rhetoric that, Jewish members report, has made them feel unwelcome or unsafe in spaces that are supposed to represent them.

The consequences are not theoretical.

Example: In May 2024, OPSEU/SEFPO president JP Hornick spoke at a pro-Palestinian encampment at the University of Toronto and declared, “We will be your human shields.” The comment drew criticism because of the loaded meaning of that phrase in the context of the Israel-Hamas conflict. Jewish students and others at the university also reported harassment and barriers to accessing parts of campus.

Whatever one’s views on the conflict, union leaders should understand the message this can send to Jewish members.

A union should be a place where a Jewish worker does not have to calculate whether expressing their identity will make them a target.

For those of us who are not Indigenous, it is the quintessential Canadian experience. Our families came from somewhere else, bringing their own histories, traditions and connections to other lands.

Yet Jewish workers face a very different reality.

That is why some Jewish workers have felt compelled to create Jewish labour organizations and caucuses within the movement. Others have gone further, filing human rights complaints against their own unions.

That is why some Jewish workers have felt compelled to create Jewish labour organizations and caucuses within the movement. Others have gone further, filing human rights complaints against their own unions.

Think about what that means.

When workers feel they must choose between their union and their identity, something has gone deeply wrong. It is a profound breakdown of trust and a betrayal of what the labour movement is supposed to stand for.

There is another glaring inconsistency.

For years, Israeli workers have faced rocket attacks from Hamas and Hezbollah. Their workplaces have been disrupted. Their communities have been attacked. Workers have had to seek shelter instead of going to work, and many were murdered on Oct. 7.Where was the labour movement’s solidarity with them?

If Canadian unions are prepared to take strong positions on the rights of Palestinian workers, they should be equally prepared to speak about the rights and safety of Israeli workers.

That is what solidarity means. It cannot mean defending workers selectively. The labour movement should be better than this.

It should be a place where workers of different religions and political views can stand together. It should fight discrimination, defend collective bargaining and protect workers from harassment.

It should not make Jewish workers feel that their identity is an inconvenient exception to the movement’s principles.

The CLC has an opportunity to correct course. It can return to the principle that built the labour movement in the first place: a member is a member is a member and a worker is a worker is a worker.

No exceptions. No ideological tests. No selective solidarity.

Jeff Arbus is vice-president of Ontario Public Service Employees Union (retired) and special advisor to the Canadian Jewish Labour Committee.