|
The strike vote results were 180 for, 13 against. We don't
want more, we are just hoping to keep what we have. At issue are
seniority rules,and benefits.The company wants to increase the
deductable for dental to $100,and in 2005 have us pay 20% of the
premiums that they pay now for all benefits.They have targeted
our Union because we have the smallest membership and they are
trying to divide and conquer with a change in seniority rules
that would allow junior employees to possibly have better shifts
than senior employees.(There are more younger RTCs than older)
If we do not succeed in holding our ground and if we capitulate
to their demands, then when it is your time to settle they can
say (with a straight face) that they cannot possibly give you
more than what someone else settled for.
The wage offer for 3 years is 2%,3% and 2% which is probably okay.But
once they start eating away at benefits where will it stop? 20
% in 2005 and 100% down the line, and we are right back where
our fathers were.
As of now, the earliest we can go is around June 28, so if you
are dealing with new initials on June 29 do your jobs as professionally
as you always do, and maintain the CPR mantra of "safety
first and always". There are more issues at stake, but the
benefit issue is one that will impact all of us, whether you have
a young family that will be using the benefits that we are accustomed
to, to remain healthy, or if you are nearing retirement or pensioned
and need the benefits to keep you and your spouse above the poverty
line.
This is a personal observation and does not necessarily reflect
the opinions of the the negotiating committee.
RTC
APC
BURLINGTON, Ont., June 5 -- Members of the Brotherhood of
Locomotive
Engineers Rail Canada Traffic Controllers may soon be walking
a
picket-line. If a settlement is not reached, a strike or lockout
could
occur on the Canadian Pacific Railway as early as June 18.
The negotiations are at a stand-still. At the present time,
the parties
are not talking and the possibility of a strike or lockout is
very
probable. A strike or lockout could result in the stoppage of
train
movements throughout Canada.
The more than 200 members of RCTC-BLE perform safety critical
duties for
the railway and are held to a high standard of performance. Rail
traffic
controllers (RTC) are considered to be the eyes and ears of the
railway
system, and have a high level of responsibility and standards
that they
must adhere to. The RTC work with limited supervision and are
responsible
for the movement of trains over an assigned territory.
The position has been compared, in terms of responsibility,
to that of an
air traffic controller. The lives of individuals responsible for
the
movement of trains, rail inspection equipment and rail repair
equipment
depend on the controllers.
The negotiations between RCTC and Canadian Pacific began
on September 1,
2002 with both the union and the company serving notice to commence
collective bargaining as required by the Canadian Labour Code.
In March
2003, the union filed for conciliation due to the fact that Canadian
Pacific was placing additional demands on the RCTC and the negotiations
had stalled. The government appointed a conciliator, and the parties
had
60 days to reach an agreement. The 60-day period ended on May
27 with no
agreement reached.
The parties are presently in a "cooling off" period
and have the legal
right to impose a strike or a lockout beginning on June 18.
"There are various issues that seem to be standing
in the way of an
agreement between both parties. Our union is seeking a pay scale
similar
to that of the Rail Canada Traffic Controllers employed by Canadian
National Railway," said RCTC-BLE General Chairman J.E. Ruddick.
"We also
oppose the company’s attacks on our work rules and their
demands with
regards to changes in our benefits package.
Labour Negotiations with RCTC update
Further to our message dated May 28th, 2003 advising that
Canadian Pacific
Railway and the Rail Canada Traffic Controllers (representing
CPR's Rail
Traffic Controller employees) had entered a 21 day cooling off
period in
the negotiation process.
After a further attempt at negotiating a settlement on Friday
June 13th,
the RCTC filed notice on Saturday June 14th of their intent to
strike
effective Wednesday June 18th. CPR has responded with a notice
to the
unions on Sunday June 15th of their intent to lock out the RCTC
employees
effective Wednesday June 18th 1200 hours MDT.)
CPR's contingency plans of replacing the RCTC employees
with qualified
Managers and Supervisors has been put into effect. It is CPR's
continued
intention to operate "business as usual" maintaining
full operations
across our system. CPR will be fully capable of protecting the
interests of
our customers and shareholders to maintain safe and efficient
operations.
While we are disappointed that a settlement could not be
reached prior to
this job action, we will remain receptive to further negotiations
in an
attempt to reach an agreement.
Again, we are fully confident in our ability to operate
"business as
usual".
We will keep you up to date as information comes available.
If you are looking for further information please contact
your Customer
Service Representative at 1-888-333-8111.
P.A. (Pat) Pender
Vice President
Product Design and Customer Services
Canadian Pacific Railway
 |
 |
Brothers and Sisters,
Just a quick update on what Calgary has been up to since 0001
Wednesday.
We have set up a 24hr picket at Alyth yard and the all the Unions
- BLE,UTU,BMWE,CAW - have been incredibly supportive. They have
been bringing us donuts, coffee, sandwiches, etc. to keep us fed
and watered as we start our picket-for-fitness walks up and down
the road! We've all looked at this as an opportunity to de-stress
and get to know one another on an outside-work basis. The comaradarie
is terrific and we're having fun.
We've got a few provincial tours happening right now as well.
We've had about 8 of our members head to B.C. with pickets in
hand stopping at different locations talking to employees and
bringing our issues to the field. We've also got an eastern tour
planned that should have about 10 of our members stopping in Saskatchewan
at one of our locations and then heading on to Winnipeg to do
the surrounding areas and help out our members at the interlocking
in Rugby.
We've done a few locations locally, Red Deer, Medicine Hat, and
we now have people stationed at Gulf Canada Square (NMC) wearing
red shirts and handing out flyers to anyone who'll take one.
The BLE/UTU have been "doing their job" very well. With
the NMC making all decisions we have had gridlock across the system
on numerous occasions. In the last 24 hours they have only been
able to get 8 trains out of Alyth. There has also been a cardinal
rules violation on the North Subdivision and the BLE local chair
is on top of that. We've been fortunate enough to have some of
members own scanners and we've been listening to what's been going
on around Calgary. Some trains have been waiting anywhere from
2 to 6 hours for a clearance and they actually had to send someone
to check to make sure the 12th street interlocking guy was still
there because he didn't answer his radio for over 2 hours yesterday.
I know it's not easy being out on the picket line, but enjoy yourselves,
enjoy one another and have fun! We're all in this together and
we're fighting a good fight. Your Union has some big plans coming
up that we can't get into for fear of letting the cat out of the
bag, but don't worry, it's big!
Any concerns, feel free to contact me and know that we have support
from some of the biggest Unions in this country!
Fraternally,
Kari Essery
http://www.teamsters-canada.org/ENG/News/TC_En/Ble_Eng.htm
The Teamsters are supporting the Locomotive Engineers
On Thursday morning, June 26, 2003, a rally took place at Windsor
Station in Montreal, as part of a labour dispute between Canadian
Pacific Railway and its rail traffic controllers (RTC).
Robert Bouvier, Teamsters Canada President, François Laporte, Teamsters Canada Public Relations Director, and Léo Laliberté, Union Representative and Trustee for Teamsters Local Union 106, were walking side by side with rail traffic controllers and BLE members.
“The fate of our RTC colleagues is of great concern to us and we want them to know that the Teamsters are 100 % behind them,” said Robert Bouvier, Teamsters Canada President. “We feel that what they are asking for is fair and we support them in their job actions,” added François Laporte, Public Relations Director for Teamsters Canada.
It is be mentioned that the Union of Rail Canada Traffic Controllers (RCTC) and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (BLE) are presently negotiating a possible merger with the Teamsters Union.
Teamsters Canada encourages Teamster members not to cross
picket lines set up by rail traffic controllers, or to contact
their respective local union, if necessary.
BLE-RCTC strike enters its 10th day
http://www.ble.org/pr/news/newsflash.asp?id=3760
CLEVELAND, June 27 -- The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers-Rail
Canada
Traffic Controllers’ strike is entering its 10th day. The
more than 200
RCTC members went on strike on June 18.
"We will continue to support these brothers and sisters
until the issues
in question are resolved," said BLE International President
Don M. Hahs.
"We still believe that what these members are asking for
is fair and are
disappointed that the carrier has allowed things to come to this
point.
Ten days is a long time to be out on strike, but these brothers
and
sisters are standing up for what they believe in and I commend
them for
that."
The BLE-RCTC has received the support of other unions. Rallies
were held
by the BLE-RCTC in several cities on Thursdays, including Calgary
and
Montreal. The striking RCTC members were joined in both cities
by several
hundred union members from the International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
the
Canadian Union of Public Employees, the Canadian Auto Workers
and
fellow-CP Rail unions.
The negotiations between RCTC and Canadian Pacific began
on September 1,
2002 with both the union and the company serving notice to commence
collective bargaining as required by the Canadian Labour Code.
In March
2003, the union filed for conciliation due to the fact that Canadian
Pacific was placing additional demands on the RCTC and the negotiations
had stalled. The government appointed a conciliator, and the parties
had
60 days to reach an agreement. This period ended on May 27 with
no
agreement reached. A cooling off period was legally mandated and
it ended
on June 18.
No new talks have been scheduled.
RCTC Division 950 members visited 295 meeting today with an update and expressed their commitment to their decision - "We won't cave, we can live on $60 a day". Fundraising continues for their cause. 295 chips in as does a large fundraising from 355 and other divisions to the tune of 30K. Later in the week, UTU 416 votes a special dues payment. Others join in.
The RCTC negotiating team reached a tentative agreement on Thursday July 17th. Meetings were held in Calgary on July 19th, in Winnipeg July 20th, and in Montreal on Monday July 21st. The vote is taking place Tuesday July 22nd.
The following issues were resolved:
Term of Contract: 3 years
Wages: 2% December 31, 2002 - 1% following ratification
3% effective 2004
2% effective 2005
Rate level adjustments addressed.
Pensions:
Effective the first of the month following ratification, increase pension formula to 1.7%
Issue regarding moving pension formula to 1.8% to be discussed during the closed period while dealing with the disability pension.
Pension plan to be amended to reflect 60 consecutive months rather than 5 consecutive calendar years.
Letter (Appendix A-24) dealing with the re-instating of the consent provision into the Collective Agreement. Company agrees to pay $200,000 one-time payment if refused retirement at age 55.
Benefit Plan:
Co-pay demand was withdrawn by the Company on July 17th.
Union agreed to amend the Extended Health and Vision Care Benefits base reimbursement entitlement on the Least Cost Alternative and the exclusion of various categories of medications, such as, but not limited to, those medications described as “Lifestyle Drugs”.
Health Spending account for Retirees will be established for employees retiring on or after July 1, 2004.
Letters of Understanding:
Appendix A-22 - dealing with managers returning to the bargaining unit when an Article 1.1 notice under the Income Security Agreement. They must be in the bargaining unit for a year prior to being eligible for any benefits.
Appendix A-23 - dealing with the trust/relationship issue in the Calgary and Montreal NMC’s. The Company agrees to bring in a 3rd party to evaluate and try to put a process in place to improve working conditions.
Appendix - A25 - dealing with vacancies and the restricting
of seniority in order to fill them. This is an issue that could
lead to the rejection of the contract.
Although you've probably already heard, I thought I'd send
you what I've sent the other BLE/UTU locals in B.C. Our Memorandum
of Settlement was voted on today and the results were:
67% No to Settlement
33% Yes to Settlement
We, as a Negotiating Commitee, deliberated long and hard on whether
to bring this Settlement to our members. We had had a mandate
from the membership not to bring anything back to them unless
the four major issues were dealt with. Three of the four we felt
were dealt with and believed that the last had to be left up to
the membership to decide. We had spent countless hours explaining
to the Company that by not dealing with the seniority issue, we
were fearful that the Settlement would be voted down. We had hit
a wall with the Company and knew we could go no further until
it was voted on.
One of the Letters of Understanding is dealing with the trust/relationship
in the NMC's (Calgary and Montreal). By not dealing with the seniority
issue, they have not even begun to understand the problems in
the NMC.
Hopefully, they do now.
I'll keep you posted as to what we'll be up to next.
Take care,
Fraternally,
Kari Essery
CP Vice General Chairperson
BLE/RCTC
By KRISTEN ENEVOLD, CALGARY SUN
Police were called to diffuse a tense protest yesterday when picketing
rail traffic controllers held up traffic outside CP Rail's intermodal
facility.
The controllers, on strike since June 18, held up a line of trucks
entering the southeast facility and police were called to the
scene mainly because of traffic safety concerns.
No charges were laid, and the controller's spokesman, Darren Hudspeth
said despite some "stressed- out" people, the group
of 50 workers got their message across.
"We've been out of a paycheque for five weeks now and we
want CP Rail to know we still exist and we're going to be a thorn
in their sides until they settle with us," he said.
The controllers' main issues with their employer revolve
around pension funding and changing the retirement age for long-term
employees.
Controllers nationwide rejected a tentative settlement from CP
Rail last week.
"But a lot of the big money items have been solved already,"
Hudspeth said.
No new talks are scheduled in the dispute.
CP Rail spokeswoman Darcie Park said the pickets yesterday didn't
have a major impact on the company's operations.
"We've seen picket lines off and on since the strike began,"
she said, adding the controllers' actions didn't adversely affect
negotiations be-tween the two sides.
"Right now, it's hard to say how far apart we are -- we thought
we were a little closer when we reached the tentative settlement
with the union, but they rejected the offer, so we're no further
ahead than we were a week ago," said Park.
Another deal was reached tonight between CP Rail and the
RCTC.At this time the only change known is the 200,000 lump sum
for early retirement that is turned down will now be $50,000 per
year.Apparently some movement was also made on the seniority issues.
One would think that the 53 rule violations made sofar by the
replacement RTCs had no bearing in the company's decision.
Striking rail traffic controllers reach tentative pact with CP Rail
http://www.ble.org/pr/news/newsflash.asp?id=3772
CLEVELAND, August 1 -- After more than six weeks on strike, BLE-Rail
Canada Traffic Controllers members on Canadian Pacific Railway
reached a
tentative settlement with the carrier on July 31. The strike will
end
immediately if the memorandum of settlement is ratified.
Meetings are planned to ratify the settlement over the weekend,
meaning
that the strike could possibly end by Tuesday. The more that 200
RCTC
members began their strike on June 18.
The proposed settlement addresses wages, reinstatement of
consent
provisions of pension rules, and other rules. The tentative agreement
also
states that there will be no co-pay for health benefits. Drafting,
which
was the main cause for the previous memorandum of settlement to
be
rejected, was also addressed, according to BLE Special Representative
Darrell Arnold, who chaired the negotiating committee.
Negotiations between RCTC and Canadian Pacific began on
September 1, 2002
with both the union and the company serving notice to commence
collective
bargaining as required by the Canadian Labour Code. In March 2003,
the
union filed for conciliation because Canadian Pacific was placing
additional demands on the RCTC and the negotiations had stalled.
The
government appointed a conciliator, and the parties had 60 days
to reach
an agreement. This period ended on May 27 with no agreement reached.
A
cooling off period was legally mandated and it ended on June 18,
when the
strike began.
I will vote "no" to the Company's tentative contract
proposal. I do not believe it adequately reflects our position
of strength, nor does it fairly distribute the substantive gains
the Company will reap from the concessions inherent in this offer.
There are six major items in this proposal: general wage increases,
pensions, co-payment, staffing/seniority, parity with CN, and
other concessions. I will discuss each of these in turn.
1. General wage increases.
We have been offered an 8% increase over three years. Will this
match inflation? It is impossible to predict what the inflation
rate over the term of our contract will be. The consensus, though,
is that it will easily beat 8%, and it almost certainly will exceed
this figure for our Calgary members. Recent union settlements
reflect this consensus. For example, bus drivers in Calgary recently
ratified their collective agreement which provides a 10.5% increase
over 30 months. Just last week, the postal employees union negotiated
a 12.5% increase for their members spread out over four years.
They will also receive a cost of living adjustment if inflation
exceeds 9% during this period. We should consider too, that we
are starting out from a deficit: Our last contract provided a
6% increase for the years 2000, 2001, and 2002. Nationally, inflation
was 7.5% for this period, and in Alberta it was much higher, at
9.2%. We should ponder, then, whether our 8% increase will
not only keep pace with inflation, but whether it will compensate
us for our loss over the past 3 years.
2. Pensions.
The proposal before us asks us to give back the consent provision
for retirement at 55 in exchange for monetary compensation if
the Company refuses someone the right to retire. First, we should
consider that we gained this right a few years ago with out last
collective agreement. In effect, we forfeited other avenues of
improvement in return for this clause, as part of the give and
take inherent in collective bargaining.
Second, is $50,000 a sufficient penalty to deter the Company
from disallowing someone to retire?
For the time being, it probably is; we must question, however,
whether this will be adequate 10-15 years down the road, when
the baby-boomers will be expecting to retire. Demographic experts
predict that when the baby-boomers retire in mass, there will
be 1 person in the workforce for every 3 in retirement. This
will be great for my kids: they will have their choice of jobs.
It may not be great for CP baby boomers about to retire. If
our kids have their choice of jobs, will they choose CP Rail?
Who will replace us? If the Company cannot replace us, they
will not let us retire.
Third, the Company will reap considerable benefits from the removal
of the consent clause. It means that they can get away with putting
30 or 40 million into the plan this year, instead of 90 million.
Are we receiving our fair share of this bonanza in light of this
collective agreement, and in lieu of benefits we did not receive
in the last collective agreement?
3. Co-payment
We have beaten back the Company's attempt to ram the co-payment
down our throats. It took a strike to achieve this. We should
consider, though, that we have made significant compromises to
our drug and benefit plan. For example, based on the proposed
agreement, the Company can insist that we use generic drugs, and
it bans payment for "lifestyle drugs." I have no problem
with this concession. But it must be remembered this is a concession.
We are giving up a benefit we previously enjoyed. Are we getting
an adequate return? If this clause becomes a precedent for CP's
unionized employees the saving will be enormous--in the millions
of dollars. What have we received in return?
4. Staffing/seniority
This proposal asks us to give up our drafting agreement. Suffice
to say, this will hurt us financially, and it will restrict our
movement onto choice vacancies. The Company maintains that drafting
will become a moot point in the near future when they rectify
the staffing shortage in the NMC. They also maintain that drafting
only costs them $125,000 a year. I do not believe them on either
count. If they are going to fix the staffing shortage and drafting
will not be an issue, why not leave the agreement intact? I also
do not believe they would prolong a strike simply over the issue
of a $125,000 cost item on their ledger. This is poignantly ludicrous
if we consider they are paying scab bonuses which exceed $150,000
a week. Consequently, I have no faith when the Company says:
"trust us, and sign here."
Furthermore, I do not entirely agree that the Company would be
able to cancel the drafting agreement at its whim based on an
arbitration case involving a yardmaster. Now, I am not a fan
of the Canadian Railway Office of Arbitration, but nonetheless,
decisions are based upon the wording of the collective agreement
(we are governed by different wording than the yardmaster case),
and upon precedents. The precedent in our office has been to
pay individuals for the abrogation of their vacancy/seniority
rights when they are forced onto another position. Furthermore,
there is no way they would signed the drafting agreement in the
first place, if they believed they had any hope of winning at
arbitration. They simply would have wrung out the grievance procedure
and either made a deal on the courthouse steps, or waited for
our collective agreement to expire. They have chosen the latter
course, hoping to browbeat us into accepting their terms.
The issues, then, are whether the Company will have any incentive
to fix the staffing problem with no penalty attached to drafting,
and whether we have received sufficient compensation in exchange
for this substantive override of our seniority rights. I think
you know how I feel on this point.
5. Parity with CN
Based on this proposal, in Calgary, 46 RTC's currently being
paid level 3 rates will be bumped up to level 4, and 25 RTC's
will be bumped up to level 5. In light of our previous discussion
regarding general wage increases, this means that 71 out of 106
positions in the Calgary NMC will received step/wage increases
which may meet, or beat inflation over the next three years.
This then, is the crux of our collective agreement, and the decision,
then, is whether this is sufficient compensation for our entire
membership, in light
of the significant cost savings the Company will reap from the
other aspects of this proposal.
6. Other concessions.
The Company will also gain in other areas of our collective agreement.
The wording of article 2.06 will change to cap transfer time at
15 minutes. Ostensibly, this will not cost us, but the revised
wording positively impacts the Company. Why are we changing this?
Have we received improvements in other areas of contract language?
Commensurate with the step level increases, lunch will only be
provided to level 5 desks. This means a net loss of 9 positions
which will no longer receive a lunch break, and the elimination
of 2 lunch jobs. The 2 lunch jobs will be subsumed by the 4 new
utility pu positions, but the bottom line is that we are providing
another concession to the Company. I find it unbelievable that
we would take a step backwards in providing a dignified lunch
break for our members, but this will be the scenario if we ratify
this contract.
Conclusion
This proposal will provide the Company with the opportunity to
realize millions of dollars in cost savings, and it will adversely
affect the seniority rights of a majority of the members of our
craft. In exchange, 71 positions will be upgraded in their step
levels. We are also giving up contract language, and 9 less
people will receive lunch. The crux of the matter, therefore,
is whether this is a fair trade off. I do not think so.
We should have received these step level increases solely on the
basis of the record profits realized by CP Rail in 2002. They
should not be contingent on the loss of the drafting agreement.
We should have received these increases based on the strength
of our bargaining position, and the fact that it has been the
Company's hard-line that forced us into a strike position. In
addition to the step level increases, we should receive a dignified
share of the benefits which will accrue to CP Rail with the concessions
to our drug and pension plans. These benefits are not apparent
in the proposal we are being asked to ratify.
One final point must be considered. The Union has filed charges
against the Company for bargaining in bad faith. It has been
implicitly suggested that these charges will dropped if this proposal
is ratified. This is not acceptable. These are serious charges,
and the fact that the Company has promoted 14 of our members and
hired 2 scabs in an effort to limp along has allowed the Company
to keep us out. Without these 16 manager rtcs, could they have
lasted this long? And furthermore, when has the Company ever
given one of our members complete amnesty?
"Are you there foreman Pisio?"
My vote will be "no."
Phil
Comments welcome and directed - redirected through BLE
295 Webmaster JPaul Bellis
You are invited to express your opinions on our editorial pages
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -About us-|-Archives-|-Benefits-|-Crew Center-|-Collective Agreement-| |
| -C.R.O.R.-|-Diesel Dr.-|-Divisions-|-Editorials-|-Federal Legislation-| |
|
|
| -Local Agreements-|-Members-|-Photosection-|-Quiz-|-Timetable- |
| -Web Directory-|-Welcome-|-What's New-|-Your Voice-|-Store- |
