TORONTO — Despite an increase in threatened and actual work stoppages in the health-care sector in recent years, outlawing strikes is ineffective and even counterproductive, a new study concludes.

The study by two Nova Scotia academics for the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives suggests banning strikes is too often based on the cloudy premise that the services are "essential." "Conflict is often a necessary ingredient to the resolution of labour disputes," the authors write in the study, being released Tuesday. "It cannot be eliminated by a legislative snap of the fingers."

The study, by Larry Haiven and Judy Haiven, with the faculty of commerce at St. Mary's University in Halifax, states that since 1999, almost 200,000 health-care workers have either gone on strike or threatened various forms of job action.

In some cases, the work stoppages have lasted more than a month.

Just last week, Ontario's health minister, Tony Clement, accused anesthetists at the country's largest academic science hospital of holding the system hostage by threatening to withdraw their services over a pay dispute.

The dispute could close operating rooms next month, force the postponement of surgeries, and increase waiting times for those in need of operations.

While Clement promised surgeries would go ahead, he refused to say what, if any, action he would take against the anesthetists.

Yet the study finds labour unrest in the health-care sector puts enormous pressure on governments to do something to prevent the upheaval that job action invariably causes.

"The most difficult challenge for any government is to do nothing," the study concludes.

"Governments that declare war on health-care workers risk being seen as declaring war on health care."

In examining past disputes, the study finds that bans are ineffective because "strikes happen" anyway.

And outlawing strikes or ordering workers back to their jobs and imposing settlement terms simply creates more problems, the authors conclude.

"Indeed, it often makes the groups of workers angrier and is often perceived by the public as manifestly unfair," the report says.

Despite concerns that public safety is jeopardized by labour unrest in health care, the authors note that work stoppages are never total given the fragmentation of the workers' bargaining groups.

Further, unions involved in health-care strikes always ensure emergency services are provided - something that may not happen if the strikes are illegal.

The authors also note that despite their bargaining power, health-sector unions do not always win by walking off the job.