May 17,2016
ATU 615 Member Update
CONTRACT UPDATE:
To date we have had no indication from the employer that they are interested in resuming talks with the intent of reaching agreement. We have been speaking to councilors who have agreed to meet with us stressing the importance of reaching settlement but as of now we have had no new items to report. We have had a meeting with Marno regarding supervisors within ATU and who potentially the city may attempt to implement outside of our bargaining unit based on their interpretation of the Saskatchewan Employment Act. All that we gathered from this discussion is that they may attempt to identify some positions within our local,but were not definitive. Positions discussed were potentially time clerks and some maintenance supervisors, but once again they did not officially identify which if any positions they might attempt to remove. Basically he was looking for us to change our promotion clause in our collective agreement to allow for them not to have to adhere to our seniority provision which states seniority will prevail if qualifications and ability are sufficient. Ironically we are going to arbitration on the Shelley Lyons grievance for precisely upholding that promotion clause. We presented our pension grievance at the arbitration hearing on April 25,26,2016, and are now awaiting a decision from arbitrator Bill Hood. Our evidence was lengthy and we are pleased with the case presentation. Thanks to our brother Len Thiessen, he kept very accurate records on our pension plan as our past pension rep. It could be anywhere from 3-9 months before a decision is rendered. If successful, the potential to deem the pension changes a violation of our CBA ,would mean that changes cannot be made without our consent.
Darcy, Tyson and I attended a pension conference in Regina hosted by the Sask Federation of Labor on May 3,4, 2016. Kevin Skerrett , a pension expert from Cupe National Ottawa was a keynote speaker and presenter. He is very familiar with our pension plan as both he and Mark Janson assist their locals in pension related issues. We had a chance to inform Kevin of our fight to maintain our defined benefit plan and he re-confirmed our position that signing the same deal as the other locals would shift all the risk on our backs we would have a target benefit plan no longer guaranteed by the city. The potential for benefits to be reduced in the future even for those currently retired could be a possibility if the current law were changed just like in New Brunswick. Two of our Cupe brothers from Saskatoon were also present at this conference and were of the opinion that they still have a defined benefit plan. Not only did we converse with them privately about our plan, but so too did Kevin, who reiterated the fact that they now have a target plan. It seems obvious that other members of our plan from other locals and associations are accepting Murray Totlands statements that they still have a defined benefit plan. This is simply not accurate. Educating these plan members with the facts is vitally important. Some of our own members are accusing us of fearmongering our members about the possibility of reducing benefits for ourselves and our retirees in the future. If we signed the deal as it is ,the potential could exist at some point. If we don’t sign the deal as it is and maintain what we have had since 1964, then there would be no threat of reducing benefits for anyone. The city would remain the legal ,liable sponsor of the plan and GUARANTEE benefits would not change. There is a big difference between benefits promised and benefits guaranteed. Our members need to hear the truth so that all the facts are on the table. We believe the potential still exists for our other locals in this pension plan to reexamine their positions in the next round of bargaining as it relates to pension. We have and will continue to fight for fairness for ATU members, but we also recognize that if all locals stand together on common issues such as what Regina did for their pension, then it magnifies our strength.
BRIDGES HEALTH COMPANY:
In case you are not aware, the city has hired Bridges Health to act for the city by administering the Disability Assistance Program on their behalf.I have received numerous complaints from members that have been contacted by Bridges in relation to abscense from work. I have been informed that once our members have been identified as having 10 or more abscences in a 12 month period, they are automatically triggering a call from Bridges. Do not be fooled into thinking that Bridges is not the employer. They are acting as the employer and from our perspective are no different. They tell you that anything you tell them is confidential and will remain as such. We have stated opposition to this so called pilot project and already have reasons to challenge the tactics Bridges is using to administer this for the city. Issues such as calling people at home just to see how they are doing ,because they noticed a leave of abscense no pay. Contacting night shift workers in the morning after working the night before. Seeking members (voluntarily of course) to sign a form enabling them to contact your doctor directly. Demanding members to go see their doctor on the day that they are off sick at home, even though they are too sick to come in to work, or they may not receive sick pay. These are just some of the issues that have been brought to our attention. On top of this, our employer is now refusing to pay for our union reps to attend these meetings with our members, claiming these are intake meetings and not investigative or disciplinary.This has prompted us to file a grievance against the city for failing to pay for representation when our member requests a union rep to attend. We highly recommend that you take a union rep with you when summoned for a meeting with Bridges.This is no different if one of our supervisors calls you for a meeting to discuss attendance issues. You are entitled to have a rep present with you and both you and your rep should be paid to attend. ATU members are the guinea pig union that the city isn using to test this pilot project out. Given the concerns and complaints from members back to us, we will be addressing these issues in all available avenues. This is just one more example of the employer forcing us to deal with issues that we didn’t create. They did and now we must spend more time and money to fight for fairness once again.
NEGATIVITY IN THE WORKPLACE:
We recognize that there is a high level of frustration in the workplace and that is precisely what Marno and company like to see. He is not the one that is living on 2012 wages and he and his counterparts have stated publicly that they intended to lock us out to force economic pressure on us to give into his demands.We continue to stand firm in our fight for fairness but there are concerns that we need to speak out about that have potential to impact our fight for fairness.
There are a segment of ATU members within our organization and workplace that have not supported this current executive right from the outset of the last election in 2013 and quite frankly no matter what we have or can do on behalf of our union will never be good enough for them. Many of these same people are now already 7 months before our next election in December, spreading their cheer throughout this membership, making claims of this executive having QUOTE (no balls) misspending money on lost time, not knowing how to bargain, withholding and not providing details of where and how your money is spent on legal fees, and basically behind the scenes attempting to convince our membership that they have better solutions and are more capable of running our union. Our financial information is available to anyone who wants to come down to the office, as is our 6 month audits that are sent to our International for verification. There is nothing to hide , so feel free to contact your executive anytime to set up an appointment.
On top of this negativity, two supervisors have brazenly engaged our members questioning why they made comments at our private union meetings or why they would assist this executive in our fight for fairness. One supervisor went as far to insinuate that I have been misleading our members about our pension plan. He has since written an apology to the union for those comments and I have raised the issue of the supervisor questioning our members about their involvement at the union meetings. The reasons for bringing this to your attention is to raise awareness as to how important this pension- wage agreement is to this employer. There is potentially millions of dollars at stake over this pension liability. The city is just hoping and waiting for our union to burst at the seams and simply self destruct and give in. They are actually directly or indirectly assisting that process by having supervisors engage our members. One has to ask the question, Who and how does our employer find out who said what at our private union meetings? Marno and management together with whomever is providing our intimate union meeting discussions, are watching with glee, as they likely believe they are winning the battle. Marno ,you are wrong. I use the analogy of the employer throwing a loaf of bread in the middle of 400 starving families and sit back and watch them harm each other to get a piece of the bread. Watch them fight each other so that they can divide and conquer them all and won’t focus their attention on the bread thrower.(remember the lock out-starve into submission). These tactics are not new. Unionbusters have used these and similar techniques to interfere with strength and solidarity, and attack unions from within. Not only do these tactics work, if left unchecked it could destroy a union. Do you really think the employer will take us seriously and want to conclude bargaining if they think they can burst our bubble of strength and solidarity? If someone is feeding them information from within, are they also telling them that our strength is weakening?
I want to express to you, that even amidst all the negative comments directed our way, that this current executive is steadfast in fighting for fairness and will continue to do so, until you have your opportunity at the end of this year to decide otherwise. Prior to that, we ask that if you can agree with us that internal negativity does nothing but harm us all at this most critical time, then challenge that negativity in a respectful manner when it occurs. If the majority agree with this statement then for your own interests (not the executives)you need to speak out on the potential damage to our own workplace environment,and struggle to achieve a fair collective agreement. This is not an issue on whether you do or do not support this executive, it is about staying strong together so we can show our employer we are not giving in and ready to burst. We are not even remotely close to election mode, and all of this negativity at this time could feasibly do more harm than good. You will all have your opportunity in due time to cast your ballot. Let us not forget the years(not long ago) that ATU members spent more time fighting each other and the consequences of that. I close in once again using the phrase in our constitution, UNITED WE BARGAIN DIVIDED WE BEG
Solidarity,
Jim YakubowskI
President/Business Agent ATU 615
Amalgamated Transit Union Local 615 