2017/11/07
Canada Post has tabled another global offer in quick response to a counter offer from the Public Service Alliance of Canada/Union of Postal Communications Employees (PSAC/UPCE).
Here is a letter to employees from Scott McDonald about this:
Canada Post tables global offer in response to PSAC/UPCE counter
Dear colleagues,
Canada Post has tabled another global offer in quick response to a counter offer from the Public Service Alliance of Canada/Union of Postal Communications Employees (PSAC/UPCE).
Our wage proposal remains the same: increases of 1.25 per cent in the first year, 1.5 per cent in the second and third years, and 1.75 per cent in the fourth year. It still includes a single rate of pay for volume counters.
As a new collective agreement was not reached by November 2, 2017, our offer of a lump sum payment of $500 expired and was not extended.
The improvements we introduced to the Extended Health Care and Dental plans remain on the table.
No changes have been made to the Canada Post pension plan.
On job security, our new proposal keeps the job security language in Article 28 intact but includes new language to this effect: after holding surplus status for two continuous years, the employee will receive a transition support payment and their employment will end.
Even though the collective agreement with PSAC/UPCE is mature with well-established provisions, we moved where we could. Our goal remains to reach a negotiated settlement.
The full offer will be on the Negotiations Hub on Intrapost or by clicking on “I’m an employee” on canadapost.ca.
The collective agreement expired on August 31, 2016 but will continue to apply as per the terms of the Canada Labour Code.
We will continue to keep you informed of key developments through your team leaders, head office communications and updates on the Negotiations Hub.
Scott McDonald
Chief Human Resources Officer
555
555
555
555
I am looking forward to the details on the “tentative” agreement that has been reached. Patience and discussion are required in these situations.
Also, looking beyond yourself to the greater good of all and not your own agenda.
I am glad that a work disruption has been avoided, that usually ends up a lose-lose situation.
It is great to be the number one parcel company in Canada but we need to sustain it and grow it. Difficult to do when the “S” word enters into the conversation.
I am stuck in an A3 position that should be a T1. They are still using a job description from 2002. That is 15 years ago and times have changed dramatically including IT requests, reports, Tickets to JLL, Pulse etc. I came in after the 2014 collective agreement and my job was slashed down to 39,000, how fair is that? Why are they not looking at new technology and job descriptions which clearly state the amount of changes since 2002? It took a year to try to reclassify my job and at the end they said no even though my GM and VP approved it.
When you multiply any number by zero, you get zero, so a % wage increase only works when you have a wage…without Article 28…who knows who goes and who stays? Don’t be so short sighted and impatient. Let’s give this new bargaining lead a little time. As long as everyone is still talking we are working and getting paid.
If it gets to an impasse there are other steps to follow before getting to a strike vote at which point you can vote yes or no.
So…. APOC ratifies a 3 year CA, congrats to you all. Well done!!! 1.8, 1.8 and 1.9 percent wage increases too. Not bad for an association without final offer selection. Now UPCE executive, learn from this and get the contract done. Accept the article 28 proposal but ask for the same wage increases that APOC received. Make sure the 4th year has an increase similar to the first 3 years, take it to the membership and let us vote!!! Stop this crap of dragging it out. Get the deal done and lets move on.
In my opinion, the unions are ruining Canada Post. Who’s in favour of disbanding the union and just keeping the $100/month union fees in our own pockets!
I have no issue with “workforce language” in the collective agreement. Canada Post is a business and needs to be viable and requires flexibility in managing their human resources. PSAC is a business too and in order to survive they need dues and to get dues need positions. This presents a big problem since PSAC members are stuck in the middle of an antiquated labour system that does not work in a global economy. The adversarial relationship between employer and union does not work but this problem will not be solved with this contract, it requires drastic changes to the Canada Labour Code and other legislation.
PSAC members need to take responsibility by working hard, being committed to life-long continued education, being flexible and adaptable. The union needs to work more collaboratively with management to overhaul the staffing process to allow for quicker timelines ad less restrictions in hiring on merit rather than seniority.
Canada Post also has to get it’s head out of the 70’s. Customer Service jobs and other jobs done in call centres could have been handled by surplus employees any where in the country. From a CPC facility or even from their homes. Technology today allows for work performance monitoring. It was management who decided to contract out these jobs rather than investing in their current employees.
I liked the three option offer better because it would benefit me but overall for everyone 28 is important because sometimes you need protection from bad management. The clause about deducting the previous severance payment is disturbing. The Corporation already had the benefit of paying out the liability and stopping accrual and now they want to claw this back at a time when an employee is most vulnerable and really needs a transition payment. If severance had remained that money would still be there and have been growing so that when the Corporation decides to give a transition payment they would only have had to think about supplementing an already good severance plan.
From PSAC website
Both parties will be back at the bargaining table on November 20th. Our PSAC bargaining team remains hopeful that a negotiated settlement, without concessions or rollbacks, can be reached. We will work diligently towards that goal.
Right under in bigger letters it reads: Stay informed and get involved
That is quite funny – We are trying to get involved but no one giving us the option to vote for this collective agreement.
If you want job security then you have to work for it. Times of everything handed to you on a silver platter are gone. If you are surplus today then take a look in the mirror and ask yourself, “have i done everything I can to obtain a permanent position”. Some can say yes, but not many. This is one reason the corporation is trying to change this. People seem to think the corporation made me surplus now they have to find me a new job?? No not likely. Its up to the surplus employee to knock on doors and drive management crazy to get a new position. Good things come to those who earn it.
The corporation has given us a chance to get that position by giving us the opportunity to do so in 2 years. That sounds like job security to me. If you can’t do that by looking at the corporation or outside the corporation then that would then be your problem, not the corporation’s.
Well its time to wake up a smell the coffee folks. Times are changing and the corporation has to change with it or we all lose, not just the few. The “entitlements” we have with our collective agreement have to and should change with the times. Instead of saying “they are taking away what we have and i want job security” then start knocking on doors now before the CA is signed.
During our last Strike, the STDP was the “hill to die on” for the corporation and we had to accept it. Now the “hill to die on” is the Article 28, 2 years for surplus. They want this and they will get it. If anything, the Union executive should be using that to get something for us. Instead we lost the $500 incentive and if this keeps going in the direction its going, we will lose more. Time to vote on the global offer before it gets whittled down further.
This is from the CPC Offer – what this means is that anyone who was on strength in 2004 and received the pay-out of their severance or deferred it would have the amount of the payout deducted from any transition payment. Double jeopardy where the employee pays twice, once by losing an accruing benefit and secondly if the Corporation deletes their job. In my opinion CPC got its money’s worth when they were able to stop the clock on severance. They shouldn’t be trying to claw it back and putting undue hardship on the back of an employee who suffers as a result of a decision they make today.
ARTICLE 28
JOB SECURITY
ARTICLE 28
November 2, 2017 (Article 28)Global Offer3
All amounts paid under this
provision are subject to applicable
statutory deductions and withholdings,
as well as deductions for any
overpayments which the Corporation is
entitled to recover. In addition, such
payment shall be reduced by any
amount already paid to the employee, or
deferred, pursuant to Article 29.07
So what is the union now considering to do, now that the terms were not met or agreed when we voted in September 2017. Our contract comes up in January 2018, so is there a chance the corporation will agree to our terms. Are we going to get that $500 (YES OR NO)? Last contract – our contract negotiation dragged for a year.
In order to help the membership cast an informed vote, Canada Post should be offering more information about the terms of transition payments. As things stand today, those on the surplus list are being asked to make an important life decision without very basic information. How will Canada Post calculate a “transition payment” for someone who has worked towards a pension for ten, twenty, twenty-five or more years?
Before you get concerned about losing the $500.00. After Tax is amounts to about $30.00 a month. Any signing bonus without three zeros is an insult to my intelligence.
Provided the key aspects of 28 are intact why wait for 2 years before offering the incentive? Some would be happy to leave with a little cash in hand, especially those close to retirement.
The language that should be massaged a bit is the language around buy-out and retirement incentive specific to a position that is bona fide redundant, not specific to resolving an existing surplus. There are rural jobs that are actually no longer necessary given technological advancements. If there is nothing within 40 kms there seems to be no workable solution – so why put someone through two years before giving them an incentive?
It seems a little ridiculous to me, why pay someone two years and then give them money to leave…just offer them one year right off the bat?
That said, PSAC employees absolutely need Article 28 to protect us from the annual “head count cull”. If upper management actually based decisions on job content, quality of work and not the buddy system we wouldn’t need protection. Unions exist because people need protection from employers and this is the avenue available to attempt to bring balance to the system.