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
A response to Isha Khan’s op-ed in the August 1st, 2026 issue of the Winnipeg Free Press
By SIMONE COHEN SCOTT Ed. note: Isha Khan is the CEO of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. In the August 1st issue of the Winnipeg Free Press Ms. Khan wrote an op-ed defending the museum’s decision to mount the exhibit titled “Palestine Uprooted: Nakba Past and Present.” The Free Press has published many letters about the exhibit, but some readers of that paper are frustrated that their letters were not published. We were asked by Simone Cohen Scott whether we would print a letter that she had sent to the Free Press, but which was not published.
Since there is always room on this website to publish as many articles as we’d like, we agreed to publish Simone’s letter, which follows here:
Isha Khan states in her op-ed piece that the choices of what to exhibit, what to examine, what to feature, were made according to certain parameters, which she called a “framework.” What, specifically, comprised this so-called framework? It is obviously exclusive of elements relative to the history of the period displayed. She said the purpose of the exhibit was….”to promote reflection and dialogue.” Reflection and dialogue about what? Did the Arabs who left the area know that the United Nations had offered them a state too? If they had known, would they have wanted to accept? If, given the choice, would they have stayed and lived beside the Jews? Or, did they indeed, want five Arab nations to attack the Jews? Such questions as these would have promoted “reflection and dialogue.”
What is the understanding implicit in the exhibit? Khan quotes from a banner that hangs in the museum: Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “We are all born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Should the Jews have rights? If so, what should they be? May they have a state? When a people is attacked by 5 nations, as Israel was in 1948, wherein lie the human rights?
Why did Khan’s advisors choose to use the word Nakba in the exhibit title? The original use of the Arab word ‘nakba’, meaning disaster, was intended to depict, that in spite of being assured by the Arab/Islamic leaders that it would be a quick war and that they would win, that did not happen. The word disaster was meant to mean the shock and the disappointment. The real disaster, or tragedy, ‘Nakba’ if you will, is that the Arab/Islamic countries in the world, (and there are plenty of them), have refused to welcome refugees of a war their own leaders chose to start. They have allowed these displaced persons to stagnate in UNRWA, an industry in itself. Where are the stories of the people in UNRWA housing? Another group it would have been enlightening to hear from is today’s Israeli Arab population – the doctors, dentists, nurses, lawyers, judges, entrepreneurs, business moguls and more, the descendants of those who stayed in the country in 1948, who had and whose offspring have had the same opportunities as every Israeli citizen. There is much easily accessible research that has been neglected in the preparation of this exhibit. This blatant lack of effort is shameful.
Kahn explained, when asked, that the context of the conflict of the time is too complex to have been included. Is she saying that people who go to museums can’t handle broad, multi-faceted ideas… that she deliberately designed a walk-though soundbite, not a process for mind-expanding grasp of history?
Simone Cohen Scott,
(sent to the Free Press August 13th, 2026)
Post script from Bernie Bellan: This website has never refused to carry any post that may be critical of the CMHR, despite what some readers of this website might think. We do allow comments to articles, but anyone commenting through our “Comment” portal has to register by giving their name and email address so that we can confirm they are a real person. In addition, we welcome longer contributions from readers. Many of the posts you will find on this website come from regular contributors, such as Henry Srebrnik. If you have something you’d like us to consider publishing – and the only criteria are that it be reasonably well written and void of slanderous remarks, email to us at jewishp@mymts.net.
Local News
Young Winnipegger Dr. Yale Michaels receives $550,000 Canadian Cancer Society research grant
By MYRON LOVE It has been shown on many occasions that a teacher can have an outsized role in shaping a young person’s life. Dr. Yale Michaels’ life story is one example.
During a recent interview with the young cancer researcher – the son of John Michaels and Karen Stern – Yale recounted how a Grade 7 teacher at Grant Park High School was largely responsible for his decision to pursue a medical career in medicine.
The young Michaels attended Brock Corydon Elementary School and was a long time Massad camper. In junior high school at Grant Park, however, he recounts, “I was having a tough time staying on task. Thankfully, my Grade 7 science teacher suggested that I might find it interesting volunteering to help in a cancer research lab. He had a contact and got me in. I loved it. It was a good fit for me. I never looked back.”
Michaels (whose zaida, Leon Michaels, was a leading cardiologist here) spent much of his free time during his high school years volunteering in the lab. After graduation, he enrolled in Harvard –with help from the university’s financial aid program – where he earned his Bachelor’s degree. He followed that up with a Ph.D. from Oxford in 2019, followed by three years as a post-doctoral Fellow – before returning to Winnipeg in 2023 to work at Cancer Care Manitoba, as well as teach at the University of Manitoba.
“I enjoyed my time both at Harvard and Oxford,” he says. “What made England even more enjoyable is that Yale has family there. His grandparents – Leon and Joan Michaels – were born and raised in London and Yale’s time there overlapped for a few months with his brother Jamie (about whom there was a story in a July issue of the Post), who earned his Master’s Degree in Creative Writing at the University of London.
This past June, the young researcher learned that he was to be the recipient of a $550,000 Canadian Cancer Society Emerging Scholar Research Grant, covering five years of research.
Michaels’ field of research focuses on new ways of combating blood cancers – specifically in the new area of immunotherapy. He is being aided in his research by lab tech Dana Segal and graduate student Serena Dembowksi.
Michaels adds that he is collaborating with a number of other researchers from Winnipeg – and throughout Canada, including Drs. Harinad Maganti, David Szwajcer, Jody Haigh, Versha Banerji, and David Knapp.
Using the patient’s own immune cells – specifically CAR T cells -to treat blood cancers was first approved in 2017, Michaelsreports. “The treatment has shown itself to be really successful. Many patients go into remission and some may have the potential to be cured.”
One of the drawbacks, he explains, is that the treatment is prohibitively expensive. Each dose costs about $500,000 U.S.
“What we are trying to do in my lab and elsewhere is find a way to greatly reduce the cost,” he explains. “It becomes a matter of scale. Other drugs used in treating cancer can be produced in amounts of 1,000 doses per production run. But right now CAR T therapy is made on a one-off basis with an individual manufacturing run for each patient. We are attempting to instead make CAR T cells from stem cells – which can be grown in large quantities. We are trying to use genetic engineering to manipulate them so that they can be administered safely to patients.
“We (Michaels and fellow researchers) are making good progress in this area,” he adds.
He cautions that the research is still in the formative stages and that clinical trials are still several years away. “Our research so far though has shown that our treatment would seem to be effective at killing cancer cells,” he reports. “This grant from the Canadian Cancer Society will help us to further that research.”
Outside of work, Michaels notes, much of his time is spent with his family – Dr. Allison Marmel and their two-year-old daughter, Rose.
(Ed. note: We should note that Yale Michaels was also the punter for the Harvard University football team – by far his greatest achievement.)
Local News
Rabbi Kliel Rose, Etz Chayim’s spiritual leader, taking a new position in Ottawa
By MYRON LOVE It is with mixed feelings that Rabbi Kliel Rose, the spiritual leader of Congregation Etz Chayim for the past eight years, is once again leaving the community in which he grew up. Immediately after Yom Kippur, he, his wife, Dorit Kosmin, and three of their five children are moving to Ottawa, where Rabbi Rose is to become the spiritual leader of Congregation Kehillat Beth Israel (popularly known as KBI).
“My time in Winnipeg has been wonderful,” Rabbi Rose says. “It has been a privilege to have served as Etz Chayim’s rabbi and be part of the Jewish community here. Our Jewish community has a sense of solidarity that is unlike any other Jewish community in North America.”
He wasn’t actually looking to leave, Rabbi Rose explains. “Last spring, I was just having a cursory look at postings for Conservative rabbis and KBI stood out. What attracted me was not simply the opportunity to serve a larger congregation, but the chance to lead a community with such a rich history and such a strong commitment to egalitarian Conservative Judaism, Jewish learning, inclusion and community engagement. KBI is a relatively young congregation that brings together more than a century of Jewish history in Ottawa, and I was very drawn to the opportunity to help shape its next chapter.”
KBI, Rabbi Rose reports, was created in July 2016 through the amalgamation of two long-standing and storied Ottawa congregations: Agudath Israel and Congregation Beth Shalom. The merger brought together the rich traditions of both communities to create a modern, egalitarian Conservative congregation. Today, KBI is the largest Jewish congregation in Ottawa, serving more than 500 families, with a strong emphasis on Jewish learning, inclusion, community engagement and youth and family programming.
“There is a tremendous amount of energy and possibility at KBI,” Rabbi Rose says. “It is a community with deep roots, but also a very strong desire to think about what Jewish life should look like in the future. That is exciting to me as a rabbi.”
As with many rabbis, Kliel Rose’s career path has been a long and winding road. The son of the revered Carol and Rabbi Neal Rose, he first left Winnipeg after graduating from Grant Park High School.
In an interview with the Jewish Post & News in 2018, shortly after he returned here to serve Congregation Etz Chayim, Rabbi Rose credited his parents with being tremendous role models. “They are a dynamic team,” he commented, “but they never pushed any of us (Kliel Rose is the middle child in a family of four brothers and one sister) in any particular direction. They were really nurturing. They were okay with anything we decided as long as we were passionate about it.”
For the longest time as a young man, he noted, he fought against going into “the family business”. But, he said, working in Jewish summer camps, people in leadership positions in the camps saw something in him and convinced him to pursue rabbinic ordination.
Thus, after graduating with a Judaic Studies degree from Gratz College in Philadelphia, Kliel Rose enrolled in the Jewish Theological Seminary.
He noted that the most important piece of advice his father gave him before he enrolled in a rabbinic studies program was the suggestion that he should work for a time in a large congregation to see what it is like – “both the joy and the underbelly,” as he put it.
“I took his advice,” Rabbi Rose said. “For two years, I worked under the umbrella of a special fellowship at Bnai Jeshurun Congregation in Manhattan. The congregation had 4,000 members at that time. It had been a dying congregation which had been revitalized by Rabbi Marshall Meyer, who had previously helped revive Jewish life in Argentina. Rabbi Meyer, with his vision of social justice, was an inspiration for me.”
Rabbi Rose also spent a year at an Orthodox yeshiva in Israel and a couple of years as a youth director at a large Conservative congregation on Long Island.
Before coming to Winnipeg, Rabbi Rose served congregations in Miami Beach (for three years), Nashville (for five years), and Edmonton (for five years).
The past eight years at Etz Chayim have certainly brought their share of challenges, but Rabbi Rose says they have also been deeply meaningful. Just two years after arriving, the COVID pandemic transformed congregational life. Then there was the congregation’s decision to sell its 70-year-old building on Matheson Avenue and move to a smaller facility in south Winnipeg – a process that was completed just over two years ago.
“It has been really challenging these past few years,” he recounts. “It was difficult leaving behind our old building with so much history. But I think Etz Chayim made the right decision, and I am proud of how our community came together to navigate these challenges and build a new future for the congregation.”
Rabbi Rose says he is particularly grateful for the relationships he has built during his eight years at Etz Chayim and throughout Winnipeg’s Jewish community. “There have been so many meaningful relationships and experiences during my time here. I feel very fortunate to have had the opportunity to serve this community and to have been part of Etz Chayim’s story during such an important period of transition.”
“I’m leaving with an enormous amount of gratitude,” he adds. “Etz Chayim has given me the opportunity to grow as a rabbi and as a leader, and I hope that I have been able to contribute something meaningful to the congregation and to the wider Winnipeg Jewish community in return.”
Another factor that made Rabbi Rose’s decision to leave difficult is that his parents moved back here two years ago and his older brother, Carnie, returned about 18 months ago to become Shaarey Zedek’s senior rabbi.
“It has been wonderful having my parents and brother here,” Kliel says. “This has been the first time that my children have had grandparents and an uncle and aunt in the same city.”
The Rose family will also miss the many friendships and connections they have made in Winnipeg.
Our community will also miss Kliel’s wife, Dorit. “My wife is a talented and caring individual who has worked in different areas of the community,” he notes. “Most recently, she was working in spiritual care at the Simkin Centre. She has made a tremendous contribution to the community and will certainly be missed.”
For Rabbi Rose, the decision to leave Winnipeg is less about leaving something behind than about embracing a new opportunity. After eight years of helping Etz Chayim navigate a period of profound change, he says he feels ready to take on a new leadership challenge while carrying with him the lessons and relationships he has gained here.
The Rose family will be leaving two days after Yom Kippur. Kliel reports that they have sold their house and have just a few things to wind up.
