Perspectives on the Lockout: Towards the Commodification of Higher Education
- The Weldon Times
- 7 days ago
- 6 min read
Updated: 11 hours ago
Editor’s Note: The full version of this article has been a massive undertaking – and our writer needs a bit more time to get you the best piece possible. Keep your eyes on our social media for updates on this piece and all the details you could hope to divulge at the family dinner table this holiday season.
On August 18, 2025, the Dalhousie Board of Governors (BoG) notified the Dalhousie Faculty Association (DFA) that they were going to be locked out before faculty, librarians, instructors, and counsellors voted on the BoG’s latest offer.¹ This was the first time a U15 university locked out its faculty,² but it is part of a concerning trend of Canadian university lockouts that began in 2007.³ While universities are workplaces, they are also special institutions with a distinct collegial governance structure situated in a wider political and economic context. The BoG’s use of the lockout has been condemned by N.S. Federation of Labour, and I agree. The lockout was unjustified.
Background on Labour Law
Under clause 2(1)(o) of Nova Scotia’s Trade Union Act (TUA), a lockout includes when an employer suspends employees’ work, and consequently, prevents employees from being paid, accessing tools (ex. email access cut this summer), or delivering services.⁴ A lockout is a disruptive negotiation tactic intended to pressure unions into agreeing to less preferable terms in a new Collective Agreement (CA), which would last for the next three years.
A defensive strike, like the one the DFA began on August 22, 2025 after the lockout announcement,⁵ is a counter-measure to a lockout. Lockouts and strikes are typically last resort tactics in a labour dispute when parties have exhausted all amicable resolution options.
The TUA’s preamble underscores the need for good labour relations through “co-operative efforts to develop good relations and constructive collective bargaining practices.” Good relations are in the best interests of not just one workplace but the entire province of Nova Scotia. As a result, pre-conditions on lockouts and strikes in the TUA include several steps that encourage settlement through a collective bargaining process. Collective bargaining occurs when a representative union negotiates, on behalf of their workers, with management to decide the terms of the CA.
Sections 47 to 49 of TUA outline restrictive preconditions that must be met before a strike or lockout is legally permissible, such as a 14-day waiting period, conciliation, a report, and 48-hour notice. Although strikes and lockouts are categorized together under the TUA, workers’ right to strike is protected under section 2(d) of the Charter, while lockouts do not have the same constitutional significance.
Strikes allow workers with less bargaining power to advocate for themselves through collective action, but lockouts allow the more powerful party, the employer, to flex their dominant position (as employers do not need workers the way workers need employers to survive) and sacrifice short-term profit for the sake of long-term savings. Lockouts and strikes are not equal tactics, especially in a situation where the university still profits from tuition revenue and sacrifices relatively little when the burdens of lost grants, scholarships, and labs are suffered by the academic workers.
The Lack of Collective Bargaining
This summer, the BoG’s conduct undoubtedly soured good relations between the university and its faculty and, as a result, good relations with students. The DFA President described BoG negotiations as “uncharacteristically aggressive,” and pointed to the BoG leaving the conciliation meeting “prematurely” without informing the provincially-appointed conciliator or DFA right before declaring the lockout notice.
Significant conversation through bargaining was seemingly missing as the DFA and BoG only met a total of eight times before the lockout was announced. The BoG departed from the ordinary bargaining process,⁶ which consists of tabling non-monetary proposals in the summer and waiting to negotiate monetary proposals once enrollment numbers are finalized in the fall.⁷ Instead, the BoG tabled both monetary and non-monetary proposals in four bargaining meetings in the last week of May, applied to the Minister of Labour for conciliation on June 2nd (conciliator thought it was too early to meet), had one more meeting on June 20th, and after three conciliation talks in July, they walked out early before announcing the lockout.⁸ The BoG appeared determined to implement a lockout at the outset before negotiations came to an impasse, as inferred from the timeline of bargaining.⁹ The lockout was probably not inevitable since there was such little negotiation, marked by unusual choices, and was indeed the first of its kind.
Even if a lockout or offensive strike is legally permitted, these tactics may result in strong social polarization, potentially exacerbated by the hiring of replacement workers or unfair labour practices.¹⁰ Labour history is marked with violent conflicts due to the importance of CAs to workers’ short- and long-term livelihoods and working conditions.
A fractured union system
There is speculation the BoG’s aggressive CA bargaining with the DFA, which represents the highest paid and privileged workers’ bargaining unit among the fractured unions at the university competing for funds, might influence the BoG’s bargaining strategy with other unions (specifically, CUPE Local 3912 and NSGEU Local 77), among other consequences.¹¹ Over the summer, social polarization was everywhere on campus. While the pressure has lessened, Weldon Law Building remains uneasy as one of our faculty serves as the University’s President and Vice-Chancellor on the BoG.
While the tangible and intangible consequences of the lockout are too long to list, I can list a few just limited to Weldon:
Students lost close to a month of classes (11 school days after 3 make-ups added)¹²;
Domestic law students lost 19% of fall semester tuition or 10% full-year tuition accounting for make-up days (~$202.77 per day, total of $2,230.50 per domestic law student, international students lost ~$739.15 per day, total of $8,130.65);
Professors lost a month of semester preparation time;
Truncated classes necessarily meant lost curriculum materials, which places Schulich School of Law students at a disadvantage for the Bar and in our future practices; and
Significant stress for families and students, particularly those traveling from other provinces.
Notably, the lockout placed all the financial burden of the lockout on DFA members and students. Student loans were delayed. Payments were delayed. Rent came due. Meanwhile, the university pocketed windfall upon windfall from unpaid wages and tuition.
Financial pressures and higher education's commodification
While universities are under financial pressures, financial constraints and choices are deeply ideological. Outcomes that advance commodification of professors could be an explanation of such strong-arming. Ideological pressures and systematic underfunding from political and private actors that place profitability on the market above the safekeeping of the academic mission, that values knowledge for the sake of knowledge, are so strong that they possibly justified the lockout of faculty and significant austerity measures for the BoG, even if they are not strictly necessary.
The erosion of higher education is concerning as it has negative consequences for a democracy, as an informed citizenry is eroded in favour of a population that is obedient to the market and the state. Universities are being deprived of funds, and thanking governments for it by aligning themselves with the idea that universities exist to produce skilled workers. The lack of care, caution, or cherishing of the value of academic work signified by the BoG’s conduct demonstrate a decline in the cultural norms surrounding collegial governance at Dalhousie University.
Citations
[1] Kim Brooks, President and Vice-Chancellor, “Lockout notice issued to DFA faculty for Wednesday, August 20”
[2] Dalhousie University is part of U15 Canada, an association of the 15 major research universities across the country.
[3] For lockouts at other Canadian universities such as St. Thomas, UNB, etc. see last paragraph in blogpost by Associate Professor Ren Thomas, School of Planning, Dalhousie University, “Dalhousie will make history by locking out its faculty members,” ; For 1st US faculty lockout, see John Warner, “The Battle of LIU-Brooklyn: Whose University Is It Anyway?”
[4] For full definition of what lockouts include see: Trade Union Act, RSNS 1989, c 475, cl. 2(1)(o).
[5] For more details see CBC News, “Locked-out Dalhousie Faculty Association members reject contract offer,” August 22, 2025.
[6] For more details see DFA Media Release, August 18, 2025 - Dalhousie Board gives Faculty Members 48-hour Notice to Lockout
[7] Tabling non-monetary proposals in summer “significant departure from past practice,” DFA Bargaining Bulletin Issue #1: May 30, 2025
[8] For more detailed timeline of bargaining, see:
[10] Email to Members, Sept 5, 2025, DFA Files Amended Complaint with NS Labour Board
[11] Ibid., Prof. Thomas, “Dalhousie will make history by locking out its faculty members,”; CUPE Local 3912 also went on strike this fall on similar issues: CUPE Local 3912, Dalhousie Bargaining Updates.
[12] Dalhousie University, Labour Relations, “Suspended classes to resume Tuesday, September 23."
Comments