Local News
Jews from Ukraine who have settled in Winnipeg offer conflicting opinions about the Russian invasion

By BERNIE BELLAN With the war in Ukraine still raging, its effects are being felt especially closely by individuals who have relatives or friends in that country.
Such is the case with several newer members of our own Jewish community in Winnipeg, who either came to Winnipeg directly from Ukraine, or who emigrated first to Israel, then to Winnipeg.
Wanting to learn more about the attitudes of former Ukrainians who are now members of our Jewish community here, I contacted Dalia Szpiro, who is the GrowWinnipeg Director at the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg, to inquire whether she could put me in touch with one or more of those individuals.
Subsequently, I spoke with two men of Jewish Ukrainian origin on Tuesday, March 22. The first, Alexey Guider, was quite willing for me to use his name, but the second individual asked me not to mention his name. The reason for that, as you’ll see if you read on, is that he was not totally unsympathetic to the view that Russian-speaking Ukrainians would not be opposed to seeing a part of Ukraine transferred to Russian control. He was worried that taking a position that might not be all that popular here was something that he didn’t want to lead to potential backlash against him or his family.
My primary purpose in speaking with both men was to try and find out what they are hearing from friends and relatives still in Ukraine. Further, I wondered what their attitudes were toward the war that is currently going on in Ukraine.
Alexey Guider explained that he and his wife (from whom he is now separated) came to Winnipeg 11 years ago, directly from Kiev, which is where he and his wife lived for 10 years before emigrating to Winnipeg. He noted that they were both planning on making aliyah to Israel, but they “decided to come to Canada instead.” Their two children were both born in Winnipeg, Alexey noted.
Alexey said that he’s a business analyst working at New Flyer Industries. He added that he has “a small business as well.”
I asked Alexey how many family members he still has in Ukraine?
His parents were living there until quite recently, he answered – in a town close to Kiev called Irpin . His “siblings live in Israel,” Alexey said.
I asked whether Irpin was under attack?
“I’m not sure at the moment,” Alexey answered. “It was captured, liberated, and captured again,” he said. “I’m not 100% sure what’s going on right now –but it’s not suitable for life at the moment.”
“Have you been in touch with your parents?” I asked.
Alexey explained that his parents were able to leave Ukraine shortly before Russia invaded, and go to Germany, where his grandfather had been living. “They went there in the middle of February – just before he died,” Alexey said. “They were able to say good bye – and then the war started…they were lucky.”
Alexey added that his mother-in-law is still in Ukraine – in the western part. “There’s no heavy fighting there,” he noted, “although at least twice a day there’s an air raid alert – so she has to run for safety.”
The rest of Alexey’s family, other than his siblings in Israel, live in other parts of Europe, he said.
“But what about your friends?” I asked. “You must still have many friends who remained in Ukraine?”
“Yes, I have lots of friends,” Alexey said. “Some of them escaped before the war. Some of them went to Poland. I have one friend who went to Spain with her kid. She was able to get her parents there too. I talk to her every day. She’s very anxious. Her husband is still in Ukraine. A man can’t leave Ukraine. “ (Men between the ages of 18-65 are not allowed to leave and must report for military duty.)
Alexey mentioned that he and his parents had been very involved with the Jewish community in Ukraine. His father, he said, was director of a Reform congregation in that country, while his mother was a program coordinator for the congregation.
Even though they’re in Germany now, “they have been helping members of the Jewish community to get out of Ukraine to Poland…not just Jewish people,” Alexey added.
I said to Alexey that I had read that most Ukrainian Jews who are able to leave that country prefer to go to Germany, rather than Israel.
“People are hesitant to go to Israel because it’s a similar situation there (as Ukraine),” he suggested. “There was shelling all over Israel.”
Something that Alexey told me though which took me somewhat by surprise was when he said that “most people who have left Ukraine (and who are still leaving) “are planning on returning when the war’s over.”
Yet, notwithstanding the desire of most Ukrainians who have left the country to be able to return home – and apparently the preference of most Jews who have left to move to Germany, I wondered whether Ukrainians would be eager to come to Canada if they were offered the opportunity?
The Canadian government has taken steps to expedite the immigration of Ukrainian refugees to this country, including dropping the normal visa requirement and allowing Ukrainians to obtain work permits immediately upon their arrival, although there will be a two-year maximum stay permitted for anyone coming here under the relaxation of the normal rules.
As a result, Alexey told me that he is in the process of bringing his parents here under the new provisions. They have family in Germany, he said, but this will be an opportunity for them to see their grandchildren again, so of course they’re eager to come, he explained.
In addition to his parents, Alexey will also be hosting two other friends who will be arriving within the next few weeks, he told me. “I’m going to have a full house,” he said.
He added that many Manitobans of Ukrainian heritage have been offering to take in refugees from Ukraine. (He said there’s been a Facebook group created for that specific purpose with a great many members already.)
Alexey added though that it would be great if the Jewish Federation here were to take the initiative and ask members of the Jewish community to volunteer to take in Jewish (and non-Jewish) refugees from Ukraine. I told him that I’d asked representatives of the Federation whether that is an initiative they will undertake and that I hoped the Federation would respond to my inquiry.
I did receive a response from Adam Levy, the Federation’s Public & Community Relations Director, to my query when I asked whether the Federation might want to ask members of the Jewish community whether they’d be prepared to take in refugees from Ukraine.
Here is what Adam wrote on March 25: “At this time, we are not making such an ask of the community, but continue to re-assess the situation on a daily basis as needs change and evolve. If community members wish to take Ukrainian newcomers into their homes, they can certainly do that.
“This is why we have settlement services in our community. Besides finding housing, there are many other vital parts to living in Canada that these services help to facilitate. We hope that they will utilize these resources so that their needs will be met and their transition to life in Canada will be as painless as possible.”
While Alexey Guider comes from Kiev, which is in the western part of Ukraine, and which is Western oriented in terms of its culture and politics, other Ukrainian Jews, especially those in the eastern part of the country, might have stronger connections to Russia.
Such was the case with Michael (not his real name), who told me he left Ukraine when he was 10, at which point his family moved to Israel for 20 years. He and his wife came to Winnipeg with their three-month-old baby eight years ago. (He wanted to thank the Jewish Federation for its help in bringing him and his family here. He specifically cited Dalia Szpiro’s assistance in that regard.)
Michael works in IT, having been involved in projects for companies both inside and outside Manitoba, he said.
When I asked Michael what part of Ukraine he came from, he said it was a town called Petrovsk, which is situated in the province of Luhansk Oblast. That area of Ukraine has been the scene of fighting between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian forces for the past eight years and, during Russia’s recent invasion it was taken over completely by Russian forces during the very first days of the invasion.
Two years ago, Michael noted, he was able to bring his parents and grandparents as well to Winnipeg, under a Federal sponsorship program. But, he added, “I still have a bunch of family in Ukraine.”
He said that another grandfather and an uncle of his are in Luhansk, while his wife’s mother and aunt are outside of Luhansk, in an area that has been subject to intermittent bombardment for the past eight years.
Perhaps somewhat ironically, Luhansk and the areas adjacent to it are now quiet, Michael said, as they are now totally under Russian control. “The people are working, shopping centres are open, so are restaurants,” he added.
As noted, an aunt of Michal’s left the Luhansk area with her two daughters (who are approximately the same age as Michael) eight years ago when the fighting first began there, and they moved to a town west of Luhansk.
“It’s quieter there,” Michael said. “You can’t compare to the other places, but still they have sirens in the middle of the night, they’re hiding, they’re getting some humanitarian aid – they’re volunteering in those centres. Basically, right now there is no active combat going on in that part, but there’s uncertainty where everything is going. The economy is stalled; they’re not working.”
What he’s been able to do though is send money to them through Western Union – which is “deposited directly into their bank account,” Michael said.
I asked Michael whether he’s in touch with his family in Ukraine. He said that he is, through a platform called “Viber” (which, interestingly, was developed in Israel).
But I was curious to know what life was like for his relatives who are now living in areas totally under Russian control. “From what you say, life is pretty normal,” I said to Michael.
In response, he told this story about his uncle, who is still living in Luhansk: “He was going someplace, going shopping or something. He was stopped by two Russian soldiers…they were checking his passport and his papers. He took his hat off. He’s like 75. He’s like a traditional Jewish person – he looks Jewish. And they said to him, ‘Sorry father’– (a Russian expression, Michael explained) and they apologized. They said ‘You look like someone else.’ They were looking for resistance. They checked his paperwork and wished him good day, and off he went.”
“So this is fair and normal in the city of Luhansk,” Michael said.
I said I was surprised to hear what Michael just told me. I said, “So this means the Russian soldiers are behaving fairly nicely,” I suggested.
Michael agreed, adding, “The Western media. They are reporting just one side of the story. And, to be honest, I don’t know who is wrong, who is right. You know, you see all those terrible things on the TV, on Facebook, on Instagram, but on Viber – and I haven’t heard from my uncle for a week or so, he says that everything is stable, everyone is okay.”
“Isn’t that interesting?” I responded. I continued, asking Michael, “What would you say then if the Russians took over all of Ukraine, how do you think they would behave?”
Michael answered: “This is what the Western world really doesn’t understand. Ukraine is actually divided into two. The eastern part is truly Russian-speaking population. They share the same traditions, the same language – everything. Even myself, when I was in school, Ukrainian was like a foreign language. It’s like you learn French here. It’s as if Ontario and Quebec were combined together – and you called it Ukraine.
“For those areas where it’s mostly Russian-speaking people, the quality of life is not that great. They don’t really care who is in power, honestly. They just want to get to work, get paid, and feed their families. The people there are mostly farmers, miners (of coal). They don’t really have an agenda for politics. They don’t want war. They just want to lead a normal life.
“In the western part of Ukraine, it’s a different story because they’re more Polish in nature. They have stronger connections to Poland. There was always tension between Ukrainians and Russians. It’s not spoken of, but during the Holocaust the Ukrainians cooperated with the Nazis. (To which I said, “Yes, I know.”) More (Jewish) people were killed by Ukrainians than by Nazis. These days we don’t talk about that. But I don’t know who is better and who is worse (comparing Ukrainians and Russians). They both do the same.
“It’s not black and white, it’s sort of gray,” Michael suggested.
“But how do you react when you see what they (the Russians) are doing to Mariupol and to Kharkiv?” I asked Michael. “Mariupol has been destroyed.”
“Yes, absolutely,” Michael said. “How do I feel? I feel bad. How can you feel when the city is being destroyed, but the point is: Russia has its own agenda and Ukraine has its agenda. Someone is making a lot of money out of this.” (I didn’t ask him what he meant by that.)
I wanted to return to asking about Michael’s relatives who were still in Ukraine. I wondered whether any of them are trying to get out?
He explained that it’s all but impossible where his relatives are. “So,” I asked, “what can we as Winnipeg Jews do to help people like your relatives? We can help with money, I suppose,” I said.
“I guess so,” Michael said. “But he noted that the Russian army is not progressing to the centre of the country where his aunt and his cousins are living. His aunt is working part-time in a grocery store, Michael explained.
I remarked to Michael that I found his perspective totally different from Alexey’s and was rather unsure what to make of what he had told me.
Based on what he told me, I wondered whether the war could be brought to an end if Ukraine were to hand over the two eastern provinces (Luhansk and Donetsk) that are primarily Russian speaking, along with Crimea (which used to belong to Russia)?
“But,” Michael suggested, “they (the Russians) won’t stop. Sanctions mean nothing to them. What do you care about sanctions when you have nothing to begin with?”
He said that there should be “some kind of reasonable negotiations,” but when I suggested that Zelensky has been willing to engage in honest negotiations from the very beginning, yet the Russians are engaged in some kind of charade when it comes to negotiations, he said “I don’t know. I’m not a politician.”
But after listening to Michael, I felt that I had a better understanding how Jewish Ukrainians are not all on the same page when it comes to this terrible conflict. Yet, I don’t want what I’ve written in any way to come across as a defence of what Vladimir Putin has done – and I’m afraid that someone reading this could easily extract from some of Michael’s comments exactly that. Still, I wonder if perhaps, by understanding somewhat better the divisions that exist within Ukraine between Russian speaking and Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians, we might come to the realization that a compromise solution will have to take into account those divisions.
Is a compromise possible? It would seem so, but Vladimir Putin and his generals seem determined to punish Ukrainians terribly first, and for expatriate Ukrainians like Alexey and Michael, they can only watch and wait – and hope that their relatives and friends still living in Ukraine don’t become casualties.
Postscript: Several days after I interviewed Alexey and Michael, I was troubled by the message that I discerned from what Michael had said to me. He was quite sanguine about Russia’s occupation of Ukraine, I thought.
So I decided to look further into his claims that Russian-speaking Ukrainians feel quite differently about the Russian invasion than do Ukrainian-speaking Ukrainians.
According to an article in the Washington Post, “most Russian-speaking Ukrainians feel Ukrainian.” The article went on to say that “In Ukraine, the language people speak cannot be equated with ethnic identity. A larger representative study from 2013 examining the identity of Ukrainians living in various regions of the country found that the vast majority consider their ethnic identity as Ukrainian – the lone exception was in Crimea….strong Ukrainian identification can be found in predominantly Russian-speaking parts such as southern, eastern Ukraine, and even Donbas – where 70 percent or more identify as Ukrainian.”
I thought about Michael’s relative acquiescence to the Russian occupation of that part of Ukraine where he lived – until he was 10. But that was 28 years ago. Even though he says he is in touch with relatives in that area, including his grandfather and uncle, I wonder just how much Michael’s views were shaped by his experience growing up in a country that was under Soviet occupation until1991. According to what he told me, Michael would have left Ukraine for Israel in 1994. One can well imagine how much the country has changed in the past 28 years.
But to say that “But I don’t know who is better and who is worse (comparing Ukrainians and Russians),” as Michael said; “they both do the same”, would seem to be a distortion of the reality that now exists in Ukraine.
Local News
Thoughts on Sid Green
By GRANT MITCHELL (Grant Mitchell is a well-known lawyer in Winnipeg whose father, Leon Mitchell, was Sid Green’s law partner for many years.
Following are remarks Grant delivered at the meal of remembrance which was held following Sid Green’s funeral on June 9:
Sid was a Gold medallist in law in the class of 1955.
He knew that my Dad, Leon Mitchell, was in sole practice in the Confederation Building. Leon was 13 years older than Sid but graduated just the year before. Leon had been the business agent for the Civic Employees Union of the City of Winnipeg before and during law school, and his union connections gave him a client base to start a practice.
After obtaining his call to the Bar, Sid attended Leon’s office and informed him, “You need me.”
Leon was taken aback. He was physically disabled from a major bout of Guillen-Barre syndrome, but felt fully capable of practising solo. He told Sid he didn’t need anyone.
Sid told Leon, “You don’t understand. I don’t mean you need me to advise clients, I mean I can do the physical side for you, attending court and hearings and other functions that require mobility.”
With that understanding, they became Mitchell & Green, and later Mitchell, Green and Minuk when Sam Minuk joined the firm. They were the only labour firm in Winnipeg at that time that acted exclusively on the Union side.
In around 1960, a Mitchell & Green client did not have the money to pay for his legal fees and offered the partially constructed cottage he was building at Big Whiteshell Lake to the firm as payment, with the excess to be refunded to the client. Sid and Leon became co-owners of that cottage. For years it had no plumbing and an incomplete ceiling. When Leon died in 1987, Sid got the cottage.
When Sid went into politics, Leon supported the move, and in fact delivered the nomination speech for Sid to be leader of the NDP when he ran against Russ Paulley and then Ed Schreyer.
When Sid was made a Cabinet Minister in the Schreyer government in 1969, Leon also left practice to go into public service, as Chair of the Municipal Board, Chair of the Mental Review Board and Commissioner in the Churchill Forest Industries inquiry. Sam Minuk became a Provincial Judge. It was the end of Mitchell Green and Minuk. That practice was the foundation of what has become the Myers firm.
Sid and Leon’s paths would cross again when Leon was mediator of the Northern Flood Agreement and Sid was the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro.
They had been professional partners with profound mutual respect, but they were also personal friends and remained so for the rest of Leon’s life.
Leon had a huge admiration for people he thought were unusually intelligent. Sid was at or near the top of that list.
At the funeral, I spoke of Sid’s relationship with my father, Leon Mitchell.
I will just add that during their years at the Confederation Building and then in the Crown Trust Building, they hired an articling student named Bill Rachman, who made Sid and Leon nervous about everything he did. When the articling period ended, Sid told Leon that notwithstanding their reservations about Bill’s ethics and practicing skills, Bill would be far more financially successful than either Sid or Leon. Leon agreed. They were correct.
When Sid returned to private practice after his time in government, the unions and he had a falling out and he found himself acting against unions rather than on their behalf
Sid’s philosophy on unions was that protective labour laws produced weak unions, who would not represent their members’ interests effectively. He felt that Wagner Act type labour legislation, now universal in North America, was a tragic compromise by unions. He believed that the recognition strike and the wildcat strike were fundamental weapons for successful trade unions, and that certification of unions, the duty to bargain in good faith and mandatory grievance arbitration were the poor cousins of the recognition and wildcat strikes. This was opposite to the position of the union movement at that time, which lobbied strenuously for union-friendly legislation in the form of greater and greater regulation of the union employer relationship.
In fact, Sid said that the only labour laws that unions should need were to protect the right to picket, and to take away a court’s power to order a person to work. These 2 provisions are found in sections 56 and 57 of the King’s Bench Act to this day, more than 50 years later, and still known to people of my generation as the “Sid Green amendments”. No injunction to enforce a personal services contract. No injunction to restrict assembly on a public thoroughfare to communicate accurate information, that is, a picket sign.
Sid supplemented professors at the law school, Robson Hall, by delivering several lectures in each term about the fundamentals of labour law. I taught that course for 22 years and I had Sid come for a guest lecture, as he had done in the labour law class when I was a student.
He had a powerful and persuasive way of making his points. For example, he felt that a legislated duty to bargain in good faith was a mistake – let the parties fight it out, and let the stronger survive. If employers don’t bargain genuinely, the response is to hold a strike, not run to the labour board.
“If I offer $1, $2, $3, $5, $10 then I’m bargaining in good faith. If I offer $10, $10, $10, $10, then I’m bargaining in bad faith. But it’s still $10!”
He didn’t like certification and preferred the recognition strike. Settle disputes through battle, not argument. Conflict rather than compromise. He particularly objected to certifying unions by card count as opposed to secret ballot vote. A card signer had no meaningful way of revoking their support for the union if they changed their mind after the union applied for certification.
Sid said, “If I buy a vacuum cleaner from a door to door salesman, under the CPA I have a month to change my mind and get my money back. But if I sign a union card, the next day may be too late to change my mind. Which is more important, having a union take over my bargaining rights, or buying a vacuum cleaner?”
Apart from representing employees against unions, Sid also built a practice of representing lawyers who faced disciplinary action from the Law Society. When he ran to be a bencher, he received more votes than any other candidate, even though he was not affiliated with any of the larger law firms. As a bencher, he would send out a “Report from a Bencher” after each Bencher meeting, giving his analysis on the decisions the Society was making, often critical of the majority.
In so many ways, he believed in a “survival of the fittest” approach to human differences. He did not care for protectionist legislation like Human Rights laws. He particularly objected to affirmative action or any other form of “reverse discrimination”.
In one case I had with him, he was acting for Nabila Malik, an economist in the Cabinet secretariat who had been laid off. I was acting for the employer. He called me to tell me that he wished to amend his statement of claim. “I want to add a paragraph to the claim to say that in letting my client go, the government violated its own affirmative action policy because the policy said that there should be more women in senior civil service positions and yet my client, a woman, was let go when many men in senior civil service positions had remained employed.
“Do you object to my amendment?” “No.”
“You don’t think I believe in that affirmative action bullshit do you?” “I don’t know.”
“I DON’T!” But I say, ‘If you are going to preach bullshit, you have to practice bullshit.’”
Sid took up hockey when he was 50. As a young man, he had been a good athlete, quarterbacking the law school football team. It was a late stage of life to learn to skate and join a new sport but Sid approached it with the same gusto he applied to everything else. When he awoke after cardiac surgery a few years later, his first question was, “Will I still be able to play hockey?” You don’t have to be great at something to love it, as I well know. And Sid loved to play hockey, indoors or out.
An employer client of mine had one of its managers vilified in the union newsletter – the “Golden Turkey Award”. My client said, “We want a lawyer for the manager, and we want that lawyer be one with the kind of reputation that when the other side sees who is threatening to sue them, they will involuntarily cringe uncontrollably.” I gave them 2 names, with Sid’s being the second one. “Sid Green, that name sounds familiar. Who is he?” “Oh, he was once the Minister of Labour in the NDP government, but after he left politics, the unions treated him as a pariah, and now he fights them regularly.” “That’s the guy we want.” Sid took the case. He got a settlement offer so generous that the manager desperately wanted to accept it: full page retraction, apology, substantial payment. He may have been a turkey, but he was not foolish. Sid said it was not enough. He got more, before yielding to the client’s wish to settle. And oh, yeah, there were no more golden turkeys awarded.
Sid loved to litigate. He would rather fight than settle. His adversaries knew that, and as a result, he achieved great settlements. Sid’s rejection of an offer was never a bluff.
He had a fundamental belief in democracy, that the rules should be made by people who were elected, not appointed. If he had the choice, he would prefer to be a law maker rather than a lawyer or judge. He also felt that if a matter was worth taking on, it was worth taking all the way. I doubt that any private lawyer has been involved in more appeals.
Others know more about Sid’s career as a politician than I do. He did love to tell one story about his time in government. In 1975, Bob “Junior” Wilson had just been elected in a Wolseley by-election, narrowly defeating Sid’s friend, D’Arcy McCaffrey. In his first appearance in the Legislative Assembly, Wilson stood up to make his maiden speech. The protocol had long been that when a member speaks for the first time, they give a benign speech about how honoured they are to serve their constituents and how they look forward to working with everyone in the house. Instead, Wilson launched into an attack on the governing Schreyer government, accusing them of every misdeed known to politics, and demanding that they immediately resign and call a general election. It fell to Sid to respond on behalf of the NDP majority.
“The Honourable Member has ignored the usual protocol for new members. I don’t mind that. I have no particular affinity for protocols. I think members should say what they genuinely feel. So I commend the Member for being so frank. I have some difficulty with his message, however. He says that we should resign and cease to govern. But that would be undemocratic. A majority of Manitobans have elected us to run the Province. That is our duty. He may not like it, but the fact is that we are his government. But if he feels badly about that, he should imagine how I feel. He is my member!!”
I’ll close by saying that in Sid’s pre-politics practising days, there were many colourful lawyers that made being a lawyer a fascinating profession. By the time he returned to practice, there were only a few of the wild ones left. The profession needed a gadfly like Sid to make practice fun. The reason he got so many votes from the profession is that Manitoba lawyers recognized that in Sid there was a fearlessness mixed with skill, humour, joy and a profound understanding of the policy reasoning behind the letter of the law. There was no one like him, and I doubt that there will be one. I will miss him.
Local News
Sid Green – famed lawyer, one of the first Jewish provincial cabinet ministers, and first director of BB Camp – passes at age 96
By BERNIE BELLAN Sid Green, whose name was well known in so many different circles in Manitoba, passed away on Sunday, June 7, at the age of 96.
Green was perhaps best known as one of three Jewish Members of the Legislature who became cabinet ministers in the first ever NDP government in Manitoba, which came to power in 1969 under the leadership of Ed Schreyer. (The other two Jewish members who became cabinet ministers were the late Saul Cherniack and the late Saul Miller.)
Green, who had first been elected as an MLA in 1962 representing the riding of Inkster, led a challenge to then-NDP leader Russ Paulley in 1968, which eventually led to Paulley resigning as leader. The subsequent leadership race saw Green, who was only 39 at the time, facing off against a 32-year-old Ed Schreyer.
Although Green and Schreyer were later to part ways over a number of issues – especially over the issue of aid to private schools, Green and Schreyer were actually good friends.
In fact, Ed Schreyer, who is now 90, spoke at Green’s funeral, which was held Tuesday, June 9, at the Chesed Shel Emes (with interment following at the Hebrew Sick Benefit Cemetery).
In his early years, Sid Green was a very active member of the YMHA on Albert Street, serving as president of the house council for several years. A fierce athlete, Green competed in basketball and volleyball at the Y. At the age 50 he took up ice hockey – and was known for his fierce competitiveness. He was to serve on the board of directors of the YMHA for many years, right up until its closing in 1997.
Green was also the quarterback for the University of Manitoba law school football team during the early 1950s – and led them to two school championships. In a 2019 interview I conducted with Green about his early years at the YMHA, he noted that he was the only 5’6″ 150 pound quarterback in the inter-faculty league.
In 1954 Green became the first director of BB Camp, which had just moved to Town Island from Sandy Hook.
In 1955, Green graduated from the U of M law school, winning the gold medal in law that year.
He went on to become one of Manitoba’s most successful labour lawyers, subsequently pairing withfamed labour lawyer, Leon Mitchell, later to be joined by Sam Minuk (who was to become a provincial court judge) in what became the firm of Mitchell, Green & Minuk.
During his time as a lawyer, Green often represented employers – which might seem a little surprising for someone who such a staunch NDPer. But Green was staunchly opposed to entrenching laws such as anti-scab legislation or secret ballot voting to unionize. He thought it important to represent any client, including employers engaged in disputes with unions, no matter how much he might have disagreed with that client’s position, and because he was so skilful in arguing a case, he was much sought after by employers to represent them in labour disputes.
He was so respected as a lawyer, moreover, that he was often asked to represent other lawyers in cases before the courts.
Green was also very pro-Israel and extremely proud of his Jewish roots. Although not a religious man, during his many years at the Y – first on Albert Street, then later on Hargrave, Green was involved in developing many Jewish cultural programs.
In days to come we will have much more about the life of Sid Green. In the meantime, if you want to watch a video interview I did with Sid about his experiences at the Y on Albert Street, you can go to Sid Green reminisces.
Sid Green was predeceased by his wife Shleema in 2009 and is survived by his five children: Arthur, MIndy, Cathy, Sharon, and Marty, as well as 15 grandchildren.
For more about Sid Green’s career, read Grant Mitchell’s eulogy, which was delivered at the Meal of Remembrance following Sid Green’s funeral on June 9: Grant Mitchell on Sid Green
Local News
The Jewish Post Ltd.’s brand new website
Click here to be taken to our new website featuring foods you can find on Facebook Marketplace

