EMERGENCY INFORMATION
MEETING
TUESDAY, MARCH 3RD, 2009
BEST WESTERN
161 CHISHOLM DRIVE
MILTON, ONTARIO
1600-2100 HRS
DROP-IN FORMAT FOR QUESTIONS
VOTING DAY
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4TH, 2009
MILTON MEMBERSHIP CENTRE
42 BRONTE STREET SOUTH, UNIT A10
0630-2000 HRS
In solidarity, Emidio.
2 comments:
Local 234 (and others who are looking),
We are in an interesting position.
Our Local Exec. seems to be somewhat handcuffed by the lack of communication from above.
The Bargaining Team wants us to accept what we have barely had a chance to absorb.
We are all tired of waiting and wanting an end to something, which, in my opinion should have been progressively resolved over the past 4 years.
No-one wants a Strike.
Bottom line, we need to have a good look at this offer and decide if we can live with it or if it is worth Striking over.
I see one major issue. You may see more or nothing at all.
Collectively, we need to do something. Perhaps there is writing between the lines, which we will discover, given time.
As a Brother from the West put it, we are a "creative" bunch and perhaps, given economic times, the lack of Public support and the fact that the "team" says they truly got the best they could, perhaps we need to step back, take what we have been offered and work with it.
How will the place work without OT? How many grievances can we put into play with the lack of properly defined terms? WSIB is not a bad word!
We make the rules, along with the Employer and we all have to live with the words in those rules.
Let's use our heads and make this work for us.
Your vote is your own and I would never deny or judge a fellow Brother or Sister in his/her vote, but the bottom line is power. Who really holds it and how can it be used to our advantage???
Whatever happens, be sure we will ultimately prevail and we need to become more cohesive and NOT become judgemental, as those above us seem to want.
Ken Sheppard
Local 234
Let’s review the dynamics and risks. Then, let’s consider the length and breadth of this offer…
The Economy in Ontario – an overview:
At the risk of sounding pedantic, the mantra of a Bargaining Team is to demand and realize huge gains with tremendous improvements to contract language WITH NO CONCESSIONS during an Employer’s boom period. For Corrections in Ontario, THIS IS THE BOOM PERIOD. The corrections industry isn’t merely recession-proof. It is recession-enhanced. When the economy takes a downturn, the offender population typically rises given the increase in property crimes and fraud. Today, offender populations at all of our provincial institutions are already at record-high levels and the U.S.-based recession has not yet taken full effect here in Ontario. In our province, the manufacturing sector (particularly the automotive industry and its’ spin-offs) will be hit hardest, followed by construction etc. While Ontario is Canada’s manufacturing maverick, it still shares Canada’s wealth in natural resources (energy, lumber, mining etc.) plus Ontario is still a banking, investment, insurance, tourism, media, service, agriculture and food technology juggernaut! Remember: Canadian banks didn’t crash like their U.S. counterparts did, thanks in part to the fact that our banks didn’t engage in the frivolous lending-spree that went unchecked in the States. No sound-minded Member should be fooled by any rhetoric spewed by the Ontario government that our Province is – or will be – impoverished. Such doom saying is purely speculative, conveniently strategic and shamelessly melodramatic. At no other time in the history of our Province has the need to rebuild corrections been so critical. Such investment isn’t capricious. It is essential. If such investment isn’t already factored into the provincial government’s budget, the province must prevail upon Ottawa to provide funds sufficient to pay provincial Correctional Workers wages similar to what Ottawa pays our federal colleagues. Of course, it mustn’t stop there. The provincial government must also agree to language in our contract that delineates the re-opening of decommissioned facilities, the expansion of existing ones, the building of new institutions and the recruitment, training and development of staff. If the Employer pleads insolvency, the Bargaining Committee must insist that the Employer’s books opened for scrutiny by an independent and/or OPSEU auditor.
Inflation and the cost-of-living:
This offer itemizes wage increases of 1.75% in the first year (plus 2% for Correctional Officers in the first year only) and 2% for each of the 3 following years. Therefore, without calculating the annual compounding of wages, total wage increases during the life of the 4-year contract would be 9.75% for Correctional Officers and 7.75% for all other Correctional Workers.
Statistics Canada reported that, during the twelve-month between July of 2007 and July of 2008, consumer prices in Ontario climbed 3.8%, due primarily to the increased cost of gasoline and food. The general consensus among economic forecasters is that the inflation rate will be about 2.5% both in 2009 and 2010. If this holds true and we accept this offer, our “real wages” (buying power) will actually drop 0.75% in the first year (an increase of only 0.75% for Correctional Officers solely in the first year) and drop an additional 0.50% in 2010 for all correctional staff. If we were to predict that the inflation rate for 2011 and 2012 remained at 2.5% for each of those years, the total inflation increase during the 4-year life of the contract would be 10% without factoring-in the compounded nature of these annually increasing consumer prices!
If we were to accept this offer with these forecast rates of inflation, the real wages of a Correctional Officer would drop by about 0.75% while the real wages of all other Correctional Workers would plummet by about 2.75% by the end of the contract!
Seems to me that our Bargaining Team must demand the inclusion of a Cost-Of-Living Allowance (COLA) indexed to the inflation rate so we don’t need to concern ourselves about any hidden wage losses in a fluctuating economy.
Attendance Incentive Agreement:
The government’s hollow threat to ‘penalize’ sick time was simply a strategic smokescreen designed to distract correctional staff from the central issue: Gains, gains and more gains. The government came to the bargaining table with nothing but one of the biggest treasuries in the land and a burgeoning business. To their chagrin, they realized that provincial correctional staff have the legislated power to strike (unlike our colleagues in almost all other jurisdictions). Furthermore, the government realized that correctional staff are, for all practical purposes, 100% essential, especially with the current “capacity pressures” (overcrowding) of our institutions. Because of our record overcrowding, the Employer's risk management people were terrified of strike action and surely advised their masters that they can ill-afford any strike that isn’t short-lived. Should an inquiry, tribunal, auditor, inquest and/or court determine the Employer is at fault following a disturbance, fire, injury and/or death during a legal strike action, the monetary and public relations cost to the Province would be considerable. Furthermore, Central/Unified OPSEU has already settled their contract. Therefore, all of our sister Ministries are fully operational and the subsequent availability of managers from these Ministries to assist correctional operations in the event of a strike is severely compromised. Conveniently, he made no mention of atrocious sick time pervasive in other Ministries (the Ministry of Health comes to mind, but of course, they aren’t negotiating a contract). The trap was then set and, instead of aggressively demanding pay parity with the feds, COs were suddenly defensive about retaining their sick leave benefits! How is it that our Bargaining Team didn't immediately identify the Employer’s bluff for what it was and promptly dismiss it altogether and inform the Membership of this? The government then demanded a sick time concession but could not actually follow through with any real threat. Business is at an all time high, only to get even bigger and the Employer cannot properly justify a single layoff. What’s more, a strike of greatly compromised. Thus, the Employer feebly tried their best tactical defense (a good offence: specifically the threat to reign-in sick time). So, during contract negotiations, it was decided that Premier McGuinty should, through the media, tell the public and correctional staff that he is appalled with sickness absenteeism by Correctional Officers and will do moderate or lengthy duration was unthinkable to the Employer so all they had to offer was money. Instead of accepting solid monetary gains, the Bargaining Team accepted an attendance incentive plan that only pays in the unlikely event that these ambitious thresholds are met. The Bargaining Team must use their virtually unanimous Strike Mandate (a 'typical' union would regard a vote of 89% in favour of strike action to be very high. The highest our aggressive unit at CAW Local 27 had was 88%!) to threaten strike action when the Employer is at their most vulnerable position in history. Instead of ignoring this obviously intentional distraction, the Bargaining Team actually chose to address sickness absenteeism and even agree to a collective attendance incentive plan that potentially pits Correctional Officer against Correctional Officer!
Therefore, while offering nothing substantive in return, the Employer’s proposed attendance incentive agreement serves at least 3 purposes for the government as follows (in no particular order):
- Fulfills Premier McGuinty’s promise to the public that he’ll do something about prison guard sick time. In fact, it is only the appearance of doing something. The thresholds are unrealistically low. Consequently, they are unlikely to be met and no incentive monies will be awarded to COs. Cost to the government: $0
- Distraction. The government has nothing substantial to bargain with and can only offer substantial gains or risk a strike. So, they chose to baffle our Bargaining Unit with utter nonsense. The Employer surely reviewed many issues prior to bargaining but ultimately chose sick time for their hollow threat. This put Correctional Officers on the defensive about retaining their sick benefits. In addition, it made the Membership collectively forget that the Union, and its’ threat of strike action (during a period of record overcrowding with few available managers from sister Ministries), is in a stronger negotiating position than the government.
- Staff vs. Staff. Divide & Conquer. One of the pitfalls of collective attendance incentive plans is that it has the real potential for creating friction, and even hostility, between fellow Bargaining Unit Members when one member’s attendance falls short of another’s expectations. Obviously, such a proposal was presented (and agreed to!) in bad faith! ‘Nuff said.
Unclassified Correctional Staff:
Did the first offer not promise 250 rollovers province-wide yet the latest offer promise only 230! Also, why would our bargaining unit agree to change the contract language from “Contract” to “Fixed Term” employee? Because our Bargaining Team doesn’t want to advertise that they condone contract employees! NO union should accept that any of its’ employees are employed under contract, period. Unions are there to ensure that all of its’ employees have proper jobs with decent working wages, benefits, job security, safe working conditions and regular schedules. All current Unclassified correctional staff throughout the province must be immediately provided with Classified positions. The number of Unclassified staff is at a record high and most are strung out and debilitated from working full-time hours with irregular on-call schedules with quick shift turn-arounds and even multiple 4-hour shifts in any given week. While the Employer feels it is saving money by not paying Unclassified staff full benefits, most Unclassified are younger and consequently unlikely to use much of the medical benefits afforded to more senior Classified staff. Any actual savings are minimal and short term. Since most Unclassified staff are unnecessarily prolonged on contract for 5 – 10 years, they are embittered by this perceived or real abuse and, upon obtaining a Classified position, many are no longer loyal or trusting of their employer and seek to gain restitution for their alleged or declared mistreatment by whatever means. Therefore, in the long term, it is far more expensive for the government to maintain and prolong the Unclassified status of its’ employees. Sadly, a political party is only in power for a few years and it cares little for what the next party in power inherits. Unclassified correctional staff are not merely weekend receptionists at some American walk-in clinic. They are essential justice personnel working the front lines in Ontario’s prisons and must have the dignity and security respective to those positions. They must have full time jobs with benefits and regular schedules from the moment they start their jobs. This is the only way to invest in a healthy workforce now and for the future.
Benefits:
Where are the gains to the benefit plans? This is the best time ever to demand enhanced benefits – Where are they? I know the Membership would appreciate better prescription, therapy, dental and optical benefits but I see no mention made of them anywhere!
Vacation Time:
Where are the gains?
Parental Leave:
Where are the gains?
Bereavement Leave:
Where are the gains?
Grievance Resolutions:
The Employer must agree to immediately settle all outstanding Grievances in a manner satisfactory to the Grievor. Where is this language?
Risk:
For Correctional Workers: Strike action is the only real mechanism with teeth that a Union has to pressure an Employer to provide its’ workers with beneficial, safe and equitable jobs. Recognizing this is a fundamental responsibility of every Union Member, as is any due diligence necessary to financially prepare for a protracted strike. Given the record overcrowding of our institutions and the few managers from other Ministries readily available to assist with correctional operations in the event of a strike, the likelihood of a lengthy strike or lockout is minimal.
For the Employer: In the event of a strike, there is an unprecedented potential for disturbances, riots, escapes, fires, grievous injuries and deaths affecting inmates, managers, firefighters, police and/or the public to name a few. Such events would come as a tremendous embarrassment to the McGuinty government and any resultant legal proceedings that decide against the Employer may have irreparable damage to their political favour. As a result, the Employer’s hand is far weaker than our Union’s. As necessary, let’s force their hand…
DON’T BLINK!!
In Solidarity,
Paul McCleary
Local #108
EMDC
Post a Comment