SEPTEMBER 25, 2006

J. Coe M. Duquette
V. Morgan L.Charles
J. Paulin T. Parkes
W. Fetter J. Gillis
J. Zoldan B. Weir
L. Waine


In 2005 a Plan A structure occurred, grieved, then a “C” structure was implemented in January 2006.Resolution occurred committing to a new volume count, and new structure, volume count conducted June 19-30, 2006. Since this time there have been several issues raised.


The union started that issues have arose concerning the above whereby signature and non-signature items are not being recorded accurately. The data capture sheets do not accurately reflect signature items. Scanning of items is inaccurate.

074 printouts have been issued twice, correction required, The 038 information has not transferred properly from the palm pilots. This may well have impacted other facilities. Management states that other postal units are being reviewed.

The union stated other routes might be impacted; management advising there may be 8 to 10 walks affected. The union stated that other walks might have been impacted as a result of changes.

The union stated that the sortation rate should not be changed, volume static. The time allotted for pick-up of mails should not be altered.

Management stated that the system is a national system; responses would have to be directed to that level. The issue cannot be addressed at this level. When a change to the points of call is conducted, the delivery rate is affected.

The union stated that the obtain rate should not change, it is a standard rate. Management stated that rates are agreed upon, escalate to the national level.

The union requested that all figures should be reviewed manually to determine if the automated system is accurate.

The union states that objections were raised in June 2006, to this date no responses received. Management stated that this is the second meeting, are attempting to resolve issues. There has been progress with addressing issues.

The union inquired why the sub-delivery figures are inaccurate, no routes were touched, however value increased by 5 minutes. Management stated they would review, corrections did occur. Management stated that issues would be reviewed advising that the implementation date would be delayed. A request to postpone implementation until March 2007 was requested. The union stated that based on the responses, an answer would be provided.

The union has concerns with PCI; another concern is Seneca College, the volume count being conducted during the vacation of students. Management stated that they captured the volume at the time of the count, the union stating that the LCRMS provides a formula for addressing this type of situation.

The union raised the issue with non-variable times, original figure 45.15, and now 43.78, how did change occur. The union states that each time a 074 report is printed the variable time changes.

The union requests that the volumes be adjusted for Seneca College. Management stated they would review and advise.

The union stated that there is no value given the MLC for volumes to the RPO. Management stated that the RPO values were removed from the MLC, this is a clerk function. A difference of opinion exists with regard to whose duties this properly belongs to.


Management continues to review how the times reflected in column 8 were changed, originally believed to be a DRS patch, will provide reply as soon as determined.

The union stated that the impact might have been earlier; there may be damages for routes over 480 minutes.


Since the Parties entered into a MOA to address/resolve issues there have been difficulties, including MLC values for LVR. The union believes that since signing this MOA management has stonewalled the union in addressing issues. Management stated that issues are being addressed.


Th union stated that the Ajax MVI is fine, Pickering has resulted in varying responses, will respond quickly.


The article 50s are being reviewed with respect to process, review and determination of when will be conducted will be communicated.