News   Jul 17, 2024
 371     0 
News   Jul 17, 2024
 493     0 
News   Jul 17, 2024
 1K     0 

City Workers Strike 2009

Are there accredited reports/studies that the differences are as big as you say? If they are then I guess that there would be reason for concern.

I doubt that the difference is that drastic - but I don't know.
 
I'm thinking the eventual deal will involve the City Workers agreeing to give up the bankable sick days in favour of some sort of severance package policy or whatever. Then they'll go back to work and everything will remain the same until the contract expires and they strike again.

Every time a labour dispute crops up we get into long debates about the utility of unions but, honestly, what kind of politician would be ballsy enough to actually tackle the issue head-on? Easier to just live through the dispute, find a workable solution, and let everyone forget about it.

It'd take a really powerful personality to break this cycle - and change would probably need to come from well above the municipal level.
 
Also interesting bit from The Star today:

(The Sick Day Policy) dates to a time of almost full employment, when competition for workers was high. They say the plan was intended to keep talented workers in the civil service. Politicians apparently considered it more publicly palatable than higher wages.

http://www.thestar.com/article/661074

Important to remember even now that it's assuredly not in the city's (or any other business') best interest to simply look to minimize wages/benefits.
 
Are there accredited reports/studies that the differences are as big as you say? If they are then I guess that there would be reason for concern.

I doubt that the difference is that drastic - but I don't know.


it's all here in black and white ... prime example within GTA.

http://www.nationalpost.com/scripts/story.html?id=1726873

Private or public? Guess the winner

Peter Kuitenbrouwer, National Post
Published: Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Eden Valley Drive lives up to its name, especially this week. The serpentine street near Islington Avenue and Eglinton Avenue West, developed in 1975, features fat brick homes on verdant lots. Best of all, yesterday paper bags of yard waste and grey bins sat expectantly at the ends of the driveways under the shade of the maple trees. The green bins were already empty, some lying upside down, some sideways on the curb.

Ah, to live in Etobicoke! While the rest of Toronto moves into the third day of a municipal strike that has halted garbage collection to single-family homes, garbage pickup is continuing as usual here.

In 1995 Etobicoke, then a separate city, put its garbage contract out for tender and hired a private company. The arrangement endures.

"It makes sense," said Graziano Monestier, a tiling contractor who was shirtless and mowing his wide front lawn. "If they save money and you have a good result, then why not?"

Doug Holyday was the Etobicoke mayor who hired the private contractor.

"The cost was getting out of line," recalls Mr. Holyday, now a Toronto city councillor for Etobicoke Centre. "We had a huge strike with our people and it got me thinking."

The council simply tendered the garbage collection contract, and invited the Canadian Union of Public Employees to bid, along with private operators.

"Their price was nowhere near what the private sector offered us," he says. Initially, Waste Management won the contract. "In Etobicoke we had 71 people collecting the garbage and the contractor did it with 35."

Today, Turtle Island employs unionized workers to pick up Etobicoke garbage, Tuesday through Friday, and Mr. Holyday says the company does it for $2-million less than it would cost to pick up the trash with city crews.
The beauty is that the contractor must sign a deal with labour before it can bid on the work, so there are no walkouts, he said.

Two years ago, city council voted to bring garbage collection in York, another amalgamated former metro city, in-house. City hall argued it would see a savings because, with mechanization of garbage trucks, Toronto had plenty of surplus garbage workers who needed work. Mr. Holyday calls the decision "foolish," and he has a point: Today, York has no garbage pickup.

Councillor Rob Ford (Etobicoke North) says the city should contract out all the garbage collection.

"We'd save $10-million if we contracted out," he said. "It's not antiunion, it's making the union compete. Sell the trucks off. Private companies will pick them up."

He notes that, among Ontario cities, only Oshawa, Toronto and Windsor have city employees picking up the trash. Windsor city workers have been on strike for 10 weeks.

But Mr. Holyday notes that privatizing garbage now will be tough because former mayor Mel Lastman gave the workers jobs for life.

Yesterday, even as Mayor David Miller hectored Toronto's beleaguered citizens to keep the city clean, garbage was piling up -- even in Etobicoke. Along commercial strips, city crews normally pick up the organics and recycling. Outside George the Greek, corner of Long Branch and Lake Shore Boulevard West, stood 12 piles of cardboard, five bags of bottles and cans and one commercial organics bin. An adjoining litter bin was taped shut with a sign: "Temporarily out of service. Please do not litter."

George Sklifas, the restaurant owner, said he normally pays the city $1,600 a year to remove his organics; the city removes his recycling free. But city workers haven't come this week. He said he's planning to call a private contractor to haul the stuff away. Even so, he supports the striking workers.

"These people, the garbage guys, I don't know why they have to go on strike," he said. "Whatever they ask for, they deserve it. That job is no joke. They're out on the streets, it's plus 40, it's minus 40. I like those guys."

But back on Eden Valley Drive, Mr. Monestier, whose tiling business has slowed in the recession, had no patience for the strikers, and blames Mr. Miller for giving away too much to other unions, such as police.

"I think [the strikers] deserve to be fired, and all of them," he said. "You have sick days if you are sick, but if you are not sick they don't belong to you. When I stay home, I don't have anyone to give me a penny."
 
Last edited:
I did not know before that Turtle Island employees are unionized.

Given that alot of the objections by individuals here to contract out garbage collection has to do with the 'breaking' of unions, would you still object now knowing that if the services were contracted out, it would still go to unionized staff?
 
If the City of Toronto could manage to come close to the Etobicoke model but the workers still get a fair working wage and decent benefits, I'd be all for it.
 
If the City of Toronto could manage to come close to the Etobicoke model but the workers still get a fair working wage and decent benefits, I'd be all for it.

what's your opinion of a fair working wage and decent benefits?

is the $18/hour + benefits earned by Turtle Island staff sufficient; or do you think the current $25/hour + benefits is more appropriate?

part of the Etobicoke model is being able to accomplish the same work with 1/2 the staff ... if the City of Toronto's unionized staff could do that, then I'd be okay with them maintaining $25/hour but the bankable sick days has to change for me.
 
The beauty is that the contractor must sign a deal with labour before it can bid on the work, so there are no walkouts, he said.

with this method, citizens of the city don't suffer. all the pressure is on the employers of the companies to treat their workers right. if they don't, they won't get the contract from the city to do the work. BUT, how much selection is out there? i don't think there's a bunch of companies on standby that have the capacity to do the work required in this city.
 
what's your opinion of a fair working wage and decent benefits?

is the $18/hour + benefits earned by Turtle Island staff sufficient; or do you think the current $25/hour + benefits is more appropriate?

part of the Etobicoke model is being able to accomplish the same work with 1/2 the staff ... if the City of Toronto's unionized staff could do that, then I'd be okay with them maintaining $25/hour but the bankable sick days has to change for me.

I already stated my opinion on what I believe a fair wage would be about 5 pages back.
I should also add that the job of a garbage collector is a dirty, dangerous, labour intensive and likely unhealthy job. I believe fair compensation for this type of job in our society should be paid accordingly with a good wage and a fair benefits package.
 
easy for you to say because you love taxes and seem to be well off ^^^ :mad:

I agree to a fair wage but if leads to perpetual tax increases then these people should not be getting wage increases at all especially in this economic climate.

I think the city should not increase taxes at all during this time at all. Thus it should keep it costs in check and save money like by privatizing garbage collection.

Also saying 18 dollars is not fair is crap. I know many who live and support families with such a wage and live decently. Its not the city's responsibility to pay them enough to have a "great" life. It is the responsibility of the individual to pick a job that would satisfy his money needs.
 
Then explain how many places in Europe have FAR higher unionization rates of well over 50%. Yet they have better living standards than we do. Interesting, no?

Can you provide links for that stat? To the best of my knowledge outside of a few Nordic countries, unionization rates in the private sector are not higher than 50%. Their higher living standards though are related to tax policies that ensure a more even distribution of wealth. Unionization has nothing to do with it. Their high taxes and highly socialized state has everything to do with it.


As long as I am not in Toronto, like I am not right now, I will continue to contribute nothing to Toronto's taxes.

Then why so passionate about a labour issue that could easily result in a 10% or higher tax increase for the residents who are contributing to the city's coffers?

I disagree that inflation is zero. Prices do keep going up. Now there is even more pressure on our wages to go down, which is scary.

It may not be zero but it's pretty close (at 0.1%) and core cpi has definitely not been as high as 3%....and it has not been anywhere near 3% in decades:

http://www.bank-banque-canada.ca/en/cpi.html

Nothing happens overnight, keep that in mind. That big scale of moving back would take years and years. You forget the time frame involved. The city would adjust, and be better with people coming back into it than going out of it. More pressure to build subway lines too. :D

In one thread you worry about gentrification and class displacement of residents but in another you advocate the very policies that would accelerate those outcomes. So do you care about class displacement or forcing the middle class to return to the 416?


Oh, I am sure that there are many people willing to do other people's work for a bit less. However, I think that society is better off if people can sleep well not being worried if someone is going to undercut them. Of course, it depends by how much someone undercuts them. Wages should not be prohibitively excessive.

With the exception of a few manufacturing jobs or call centre functions, etc. it's quite difficult to outsource many jobs. And your fear of undercutting is irrational. Supply and demand for your skills is what determines wages. As long as you provide a quality service or product at the market price, you'll be employed. If somebody is undercutting you, it means you are charging too much. That's economics 101.

But for me to compete with labor costs that are bellow the minimum wage like millions of people have to do with labor in china - no way in hell would I want that. I would tell the corporate scumbags to GTFO. Not like they would care though.

Good for you. But trash collectors are not getting outsourced to China.


Well, unionization is higher all over europe, and I think that that puts pressure on the governments, and also the companies.

It also contributes to a 'normal' unemployment rate in the double digits. Unionization has certainly worked out well for residents of the Paris banlieu. They get to experience double digit unemployment while their lighter skinned union counterparts get cushy jobs for life. Is that the policy you want to import to North America?


In 1970 er so the average CEO in the US made 50 times that of the average worker. Nowadays its 500 times more. Just one example of income inequality.
People do live worse off today. Now hey, perhaps it might depend on exactly what year, but there is much documentation that neoliberliasm, aka thatcherism or reaganomics have worsened most of the people.

And the way to fix that is through better tax policies and improved social services, all of which contributes to improved social mobility and help to lessen wealth and income inequalities. Unions don't contribute much to the process. In fact, with unions adding to significant unemployment outside their little circle, those stats could actually get worse.


Productivity is a empty bag when the other dude in china works for 50 cents an hour, for what we would make dozens an hour. It's a no brainer. We always lose. No thanks.

I am starting to wonder if you ever read an economics textbook at all. We are talking about relative productivity in the context of a global trade scenario that takes into account the cost of shipping stuff half way around the world, the cost of providing customer service in North America, etc. Those are all added costs that companies have when they off-shore in China. And if labour here still can't compete then so be it, they should be deployed to do other things. In case you haven't noticed our economy has moved on from making widgets with little value added. We leave the Chinese to do that.

But Europe has higher unionization rates. Yet they are more productive. Explain that then.

Their unions have very little to do with it. Their state policies are what promote productivity (hint: look at corporate taxes in Europe). In fact, those unions are probably hindering further productivity gains....and most socialist governments in Europe are coming to that conclusion.

-----------------------

Despite this broad discussion on unionization (which deliberately avoids dealing with the immediate labour crisis), we have a specific issue to deal with, and the rest of us would prefer to talk about that henceforth. If you have something to say about the city workers strike then contribute to that discussion instead of launching into sermons on the value of unionization to North Americans.
 
Important to remember even now that it's assuredly not in the city's (or any other business') best interest to simply look to minimize wages/benefits.

Why is it not in the city's best interest to minimize costs? We have a deficit that by all accounts will reach 350 million next year. I doubt the province would feel particularly generous if we haven't done everything in our power to cut costs.

When it comes to this policy though, everybody is neglecting the fact that the city is offering an alternative: a disability/illness leave program that would provide enough recovery time regardless of how much time you have in the company. This favours younger workers. The older workers, of course, despise this policy because it costs them their little end of career bonus.

In this day and age though, having policies that create huge unfunded liabilities is generally frowned upon, particularly if it reduces transparency. I say, monetize these liabilities by giving them bonuses or paying them more. I wonder sometimes, if the unions, are worried that this might actually show how much their workers are really getting paid and that's why they oppose these policies. Imagine finding out that trash collectors have an effective wage of 30-35 dollars an hour because of their bankable sick days. I wanna know how many of those sick days are used up and how many are usually cashed.
 
easy for you to say because you love taxes and seem to be well off ^^^ :mad:

I'm a middle income earner, I live a comfortable life but I'm not well off (which has a broad definition I suppose). My take on taxes has always been that I never complain about paying them so long as we have good medical care, police, EMT's, fire, infrastructure etc. in our country. When I got a calcium pill stuck above my windpipe last Thursday night at 2am both the fire department and EMT's were at my door in exactly five minutes to assist. That's our tax dollars at work.

I agree to a fair wage but if leads to perpetual tax increases then these people should not be getting wage increases at all especially in this economic climate.

I think the city should not increase taxes at all during this time at all. Thus it should keep it costs in check and save money like by privatizing garbage collection.

I believe that at best cost of living is the most they should get for the life of their next collective agreement, if any increase at all. I've never advocated anything more. Banking sick days is off the table IMO.

Also saying 18 dollars is not fair is crap. I know many who live and support families with such a wage and live decently. Its not the city's responsibility to pay them enough to have a "great" life. It is the responsibility of the individual to pick a job that would satisfy his money needs.

If each couple made that wage (about $41K gross/yr) I can see how they could get by with one or two children if they managed their money well, but a single mother or father would find it tough to live in this city with one or two children. Presumably there would be some alimony coming in which raises the income somewhat.
 
Why is it not in the city's best interest to minimize costs? We have a deficit that by all accounts will reach 350 million next year. I doubt the province would feel particularly generous if we haven't done everything in our power to cut costs.

Because minimizing costs absolutely would result in a low-skill poorly-trained city workforce. Basically, anyone with any talent would leave the public sector to go work in the private sector where they could make more money.

This is the same principle behind giving politicians pay increases - if the gap between compensation in the public and private sector gets too large, we'll have no chance of attracting top talent.

That said, this dispute seems to have revealed that the gap now greatly favours the public sector workers, so absolutely some cuts to wages are necessary over the long term. But there is a point where cutting those wages too low would be harmful.
 
Because minimizing costs absolutely would result in a low-skill poorly-trained city workforce. Basically, anyone with any talent would leave the public sector to go work in the private sector where they could make more money.

lol, right now everyone is staying put with what they have and being thankful my friend... ;)


About Public Sector wages, keep them at a good level but not at such a level that we have to keep increases taxes every year.

I'm a middle income earner, I live a comfortable life but I'm not well off (which has a broad definition I suppose). My take on taxes has always been that I never complain about paying them so long as we have good medical care, police, EMT's, fire, infrastructure etc. in our country. When I got a calcium pill stuck above my windpipe last Thursday night at 2am both the fire department and EMT's were at my door in exactly five minutes to assist. That's our tax dollars at work.

well that's why we do not care if the Police and Fire department gets good pay increases. They do their job well and are irreplaceable.

However why the city is paying a premium for Garbage collectors is beyond me.
 

Back
Top