|
|
|
Unions!
- Thread starter Whoaccio
- Start date
Hank
Active Member
How is that possible? I don't pretend to know that much about how unions work, but don't they always have a vote on whether or not to strike? Are you saying that 85% of the union members voted against striking and CUPE went ahead and did it anyway?
Mr.Colley
Active Member
Not all members were part of the Vote. CUPE encoumpess alot of workers. The origional part of the strike was for the garbage people. Alot of them did aggree. But office workers, (and i know quite a few) didn't want to. The only reason they are pickiting is because if they don't they don't get paid... There's a lot of bs politics going on behind the scens too.
salvius
Active Member
I'm an urban planner working in the private sector.
Mr.Colley
Active Member
I see. So Yah. I can defiantly Understand where your coming from when it comes to that. But That's one example. Could you not. with experience start your own firm? And yes i know its not easy. Starting your own business is never easy. but rewarding none the less. Only bringing up a point.
kEiThZ
Superstar
This has gone way off-topic. I think we can all agree that self-employment is not practical alternative for many people for many reasons. On-topic though, what is remarkable to me, is the divergence we are getting between public and private sector unions. Consider what many private sector unions are settling for these days...layoffs, benefits and wage rollbacks...all to save their employers. Heck, some are even accepting a reduction in benefits for their retired alumni. What's the public sector union response? It starts from a position of zero concessions and then adds demands for above inflation wage increases, and perks not available by any of their private sector counterparts (the Ottawa bus strike was a great example).
The bankable sick days (that too nearly 4 weeks worth) are a liability and the city was right to eliminate it for the other unions and is right to do it this time around. They are a curse on any organization. They allow employees to take half-year long terminal leaves right before retirement or to take several months off with the simplest of doctor's notes...leaving the departments they work for in a lurch since the position is technically filled though it's unproductive. That being said, the city should have pushed for a more phased-in elimination ie. new rules for new employees and require the old ones to cash-out by a deadline and bank only so many days. For the sake of Toronto's future, I hope Miller has learned his lesson about the city's unions and does not back down from the fight.
I have a great example of how all this can work out if its not fixed.....I work in a public sector office with one position that's been similarly unfilled. When the individual came close to being terminated for performance, she claimed stress and has not shown up for work since (she got her warning in December). HR won't replace her because the union forbids replacing workers while they are away....even temporarily (thanks PSAC!). I work on a 4 man team. So this means that I have to do 33% more to make up for the person's apparent 'stress'. I find it remarkable that she never found stress in her 17 year career in the public sector but as soon as management started disciplining her, she apparently has sufficient stress to be off for half a year. And it all worked out wonderfully, because this individual was allowed to bank her sick days.
Thankfully, at other levels of government they are realizing the liability of such policies and are slowly negotiating them. These policies are terrible. If a young worker gets injured and needs time off, they might not get it because they haven't banked enough, while older workers get to abuse the system like my example above. It is much better to have a needs based sick leave system. Have a company doctor check you out and recommend some time off. Then the employer should give as much as is requested. Time to heal should not be based on how much time somebody has banked.
The bankable sick days (that too nearly 4 weeks worth) are a liability and the city was right to eliminate it for the other unions and is right to do it this time around. They are a curse on any organization. They allow employees to take half-year long terminal leaves right before retirement or to take several months off with the simplest of doctor's notes...leaving the departments they work for in a lurch since the position is technically filled though it's unproductive. That being said, the city should have pushed for a more phased-in elimination ie. new rules for new employees and require the old ones to cash-out by a deadline and bank only so many days. For the sake of Toronto's future, I hope Miller has learned his lesson about the city's unions and does not back down from the fight.
I have a great example of how all this can work out if its not fixed.....I work in a public sector office with one position that's been similarly unfilled. When the individual came close to being terminated for performance, she claimed stress and has not shown up for work since (she got her warning in December). HR won't replace her because the union forbids replacing workers while they are away....even temporarily (thanks PSAC!). I work on a 4 man team. So this means that I have to do 33% more to make up for the person's apparent 'stress'. I find it remarkable that she never found stress in her 17 year career in the public sector but as soon as management started disciplining her, she apparently has sufficient stress to be off for half a year. And it all worked out wonderfully, because this individual was allowed to bank her sick days.
Thankfully, at other levels of government they are realizing the liability of such policies and are slowly negotiating them. These policies are terrible. If a young worker gets injured and needs time off, they might not get it because they haven't banked enough, while older workers get to abuse the system like my example above. It is much better to have a needs based sick leave system. Have a company doctor check you out and recommend some time off. Then the employer should give as much as is requested. Time to heal should not be based on how much time somebody has banked.
afransen
Senior Member
It's really just a thinly-veiled bonus. I'd rather legislation that prohibits certain kinds of benefits, such as bankable sick days (ie, bonus), defined benefit (unlimited liability) pension plans, etc. If we must, let them bargain for higher wages. I'd rather the wages be determined by market forces or based on an index of comparable private sector wages. Comparing to other public sector wages is insane, as you get an inflationary spiral. Was it that transit workers or the police that had 'highest pay' clauses, where if any other union got an increase in pay, their pay would increase so as to be the highest. Positively ludicrous. It should be prohibited.
Mr.Colley
Active Member
That actually happened? I thought that was ammeneded for that very reason. If not then TO is screwed untill that contract is up
lordmandeep
Banned
Simple, we are getting into to contracts that will force the city to increase taxes "Greatly" every year just to stay afloat.
Dilla
Senior Member
It's was the police. Toronto cops have to be the highest paid in the region. So much for "negotiating".
kEiThZ
Superstar
^ Yep. Didn't you know that it's their 'right' to be the absolutely highest-paid service in the region? It's not enough that they get paid more than combat troops in Afghanistan. Apparently the productivity of Toronto Police Officers is directly tied to how much other municipalities pay their office…that or we are now admitting that Toronto is more violent than Kandahar City.
As a taxpayer I love it….a recipe for above inflation tax increases in perpetuity. I can't wait for the rest of the unions to demand the same thing. Why shouldn't a trash collector in the 416 be the highest paid trash collector in the GTA? What about his rights? Won't someone please think of the poor trash collector….
As a taxpayer I love it….a recipe for above inflation tax increases in perpetuity. I can't wait for the rest of the unions to demand the same thing. Why shouldn't a trash collector in the 416 be the highest paid trash collector in the GTA? What about his rights? Won't someone please think of the poor trash collector….
G
gabe
Guest
Sadly Unions are still need in the private sector. The company i do business with called Linamar hands out a 'termination of employment without cause' notifications on a monthly basis, their factories are revolving doors. At least with the unionised companies i have dealt with most of the time their employees and engineers are long term and skilled and know what their doing, Clearly having an education and experience in some non unionized plants is useless.
kEiThZ
Superstar
^ And that's exactly what I have said before. Unions are needed in the private sector. That's why it's unfortunate that they concentrate so much on the public sector. It's clear that big labour cares more about numbers and power than actually helping workers.
unimaginative2
Senior Member
To be fair, they're different unions. CUPE is so large and powerful because it is so large and powerful. Many private sector unions are weak because they have suffered decades of downsizing, union busting, and industry collapse.
afransen
Senior Member
The law handles that situation: employees can be terminated without cause given severance pay. That's fine with me. If you think the severance pay is not generous enough, that is a case for a stronger law, not more unionization.
Last edited: