|
|
|
|
February 16, 2007
To All Urban Operations Members CUPW Local 576, North Bay
Sisters and Brothers,
North Bay Executive Recommends NO for Tentative Agreement
I will give our newer members, and members not familiar with the negotiations process a quick overview. If you are familiar with this process feel free to proceed to the heading below “Issues at Hand”.
Almost a year ago our local had a General Membership Meeting (GMM) to put forth resolutions (demands) for the upcoming negotiations. These resolutions were voted on locally, and if passed were sent to the Regional level.
All resolutions that passed locally by our regions 40 locals were categorized and tabulated by collective agreement article number or appendices. A Resolutions Committee was selected, comprised of our five full-time officers at the Regional office, and eight executive members from our locals. This committee distilled, through debate and information exchange, the 400+ submitted resolutions to approximately 170 resolutions that were sent to the National level.
The National Executive Board (NEB) then distills the resolutions from our country’s eight regions into the program of demands. During this round of bargaining the NEB saw fit to limit our demands to 72, despite many omissions. This program was voted on here in September 2006 and ultimately passed.
The Negotiating Committee (NC) was selected and comprised of 4 negotiators, 1 chief negotiator, and an advisor from our National office for a total of 6. There are also hired advisors, lawyers etc.
All negotiations performed by the NC are to pass through the NEB which is comprised of all nationally elected officers (7) and the National Director from each region in the country (8), for a total of 15 members of the NEB.
In regards to the present tentative agreement the NC recommended to the NEB to accept Canada Post’s (CPC) final offer. The decision to accept in principle this tentative agreement split the NEB with an 8 yes, and 7 no vote.
Now the tentative collective agreement will be printed, sent out to the locals to look over, and voting will begin near the end of March to accept or reject the proposal. If it is accepted by the membership we are stuck with the language for the next 4 years possibly more, and if we reject it negotiations continue with the real possibility of a strike or lockout.
Issues at Hand
On February 8, 2007 the National Executive Board (NEB) accepted the recommendation of the Negotiating Committee (NC) to agree in principle with the offer of the employer on a Proposed Tentative Agreement.
One of the main issues is CPC’s demand for us to accept the Corporate Team Incentive (CTI). This is a productivity based incentive that is in direct opposition to our Union’s constitution. In our policy section B-1 titled Free Collective Bargaining states “…the Union rejects all forms of wage restraints, whether in direct form or indirect, such as “Taxation Incentive Programs” or productivity-based increases.” These policies are created using a similar process as the negotiating process mentioned above. It was pointed out during the National Presidents meeting that in the event of such programs being introduced the Union must carry on intensive education programs to end wage controls (CTI). Which begs the question why recommend it in the first place?
Policy A-6 titled “Equal Collective Agreement For All” states “The Union will negotiate collective agreements that will provide equal benefits for all members within their bargaining unit.” Yet the CTI will not apply to temporary workers.
CPC threatened that if the Union took a strike vote all issues would be off the table and that our acceptance of the CTI was a strike issue to them. I believe the first question that should come to everyone’s mind is “Why would CPC state that our refusal to take a possible $60 million a year be a strike issue?” This should raise the hair on everyone’s neck. CPC and Moya Greene have been shouting poor from the rooftops ever since her appointment to CEO of CPC. This does not add up. Remember Moya Greene was instrumental in the privatization of CN Rail and the deregulation of the airline industry in Canada, as well as the architect of the Employment Insurance (EI) program.
Also the CTI is totally in control of CPC. We cannot question or grieve any part of the program. CPC can change the goalposts at anytime as it sees fit. It is not a guaranteed wage increase and will not compound into real wages over time. Bulletin #21 illustrated in chart form that a 0.5% increase per year, as opposed to the CTI would surpass any CTI earnings within approximately 6 years. Also the CTI is solely based on profits and not the operating budget, so essentially it costs CPC nothing. This poses another question “What is CPC’s motive for this if it does not hurt them one way or the other?” The only answer that I can come up with is “Control.”
The CTI is based on many things including our attendance and injury rates. This could lead to member against member altercations when someone is sick and stays home. As well as the opposite, when members start coming to work sick and making others ill. It could also lead to members not reporting injuries, all so that the bottom line will not be affected as members push to see the CTI payment at the end of the fiscal year. In essence the CTI has the potential to divide our membership and turn us against ourselves.
The question also must be posed, “Why is a public service offering a money incentive for performance?” Canada Post is an entity built out of nothing by our tax dollars. It was created to serve its shareholders, the general public. The Union believes that the profits should go back into that public service; to increase service to the general public and create good jobs in all communities. It should not be used as a carrot that may encourage divisive behaviour on the work floor.
And remember the CTI is already in place for CPC management, so now they have some stake in your attendance and overall performance as well. After all under the umbrella of the CTI we are all on the same “team” now.
Interestingly the CD Howe Institute, a right-wing think tank, just released a 30 page report on why Canada Post should be privatized. Coincidence? Perhaps, but after reading the report and finding statistics in there that were likely supplied by CPC, it makes the report on CBC radio stating that Canada Post has no plans for privatization seem hollow.
The other main issue that was not addressed during this round of bargaining is internal staffing (Group 1). We had many demands on the table to have a real relief complement, and ways to force the employer to backfill absences. There has been a lack of internal staffing for years, with the deletion of full-time positions etc., and this has not been addressed at all. One of the ways we could address it is by using the profits of CPC for more staff, not ghostly pay outs that may or may not appear at the end of the year.
I have attached quite a bit of reading material to this package. There are bulletins from the National Directors of the Prairie, Atlantic and Ontario regions, and some negotiations bulletins of interest. And there is a speech delivered by Moya Greene to the Canadian Bar Association, which is a must read, and much more.
The questions remain; will we end up with less if we turn this tentative agreement down and will we have to go on strike? It is possible. But to buckle under to the threats made by Canada Post over the CTI could prove to be the death knell of our past struggles.
The CTI will prove to be divisive, and is a classic union busting technique. CPC states that the CTI will be a national standard and will not be applied office to office. Perhaps for the life of this collective agreement, but what about the next round when the employer comes back with that very demand? This is a slippery slope and the time to dig our heels in is right now. It could be too late once it is in the collective agreement. It makes no financial sense for CPC to offer us money on their terms, and in the same breath state that if we do not accept, it is a strike issue.
On behalf of the North Bay local executive we urge you to vote NO on the tentative agreement. We will provide you with all the information that we can in the meantime both pro and con so that you can make an informed decision. We need to push back now so that the future of postal workers will, at least, be a tolerable way of life.
We believe this is a fight that is fundamental for a progressive labour movement and equality for all.
In solidarity,
Mark Evard President, CUPW Local 576 North Bay, ON
North Bay Executive
Rona Eckert Vice-President
Gail Powell Secretary-Treasurer
Brad Brown Grievance Officer
|
|
|
