Just
some information that people should have. I think I need to clear some
things up here with regards to how things are supposed to work with in
the unionized environment. Some people believe that when an executive is
elected, they some how attain god like powers, that give them the
ability to change the working lives of the Union members at will. If
this was the case there would be no need to have negotiations or a CBA.
I
will give an example. If the union president thought it would be a good
idea to change the start times for day shift Full Time officers to
3am, he couldn't just go to the employer and say this is what the
members want so let's do it. First the item would need to be placed on a
meeting agenda, then debated by those in attendance at the meeting, and
then voted on, possibly at the next General membership meeting.
Then
if passed by the members, it moves forwards to the employer to be
discussed at the LMC meetings that are held between the union and
employer. If the company agrees to the unions proposal ( not the
presidents) then the change would go into affect. If the company did not
agree to the Unions proposal then it could be put on the demands list
for the next round of bargaining. That is how things are supposed to
get changed for the bargaining unit. It is not at the whim of the
executive. If I had an idea that I think Is great, I can't just say
let's do it. There is a process that needs to be followed independently
of what the personal opinion of the executive is.
The executive
should be there to work for the people not the other way around. The few
service the needs of the many. If the many decide that issues do not go
forward then it should be the union members that decide that, not the
executive.
12 comments:
quick question then, why when fallsview was under construction did the hours worked for full time officers change from everyone on rotation to the way it is now? there was no meeting or vote that i recall, just an officer going to senior management with an idea.
though at the time it may have been a good idea and there being no movement in our department, it has led to some of our lower senority full time officers being on straight midnights for almost eight years.
this is not my idea of a true functioning union enviroment.
you are absolutely correct, in that an officer took an idea and went directly to Managment. First, the stament that I wrote is from an excutive point of view, consurning a currnet point of missunderstanding. However, I will give you the best answer that I can, because it is a fair question. I will not give excusses for an executive that I believe I was a part of. At that time we had many issues that we were dealing with. Mostly the incredible amount of suspensions as a result of minors. we were trying to keep peoples jobs. You are also correct in saying that it was a great idea at the time. Also at that time we did not recognize or identify that as a problem because I do not recal a lot of oposition to that idea.
Also you must consider ultimatly it is the employers descision to change the schedule, we just made the suggestion. So as I stated in my previouse post the employer can deny our request even if it is voted on by mmembers. All a vote does is give the executive direction on which way to go. I can only say that's how things are supposed to go. Not much of an answer but there its, I hope it helps some.
there was actual movement back then especially with the amount of staff that was needed for both sites.
once the cutbacks started, the chance for any movement only has gone backwards.
This is only my point of view and in no way speaks for the rest of the executive. I do think that it is possible that the current rotation does have a part to play in the stagnation of movement in the department. However, I do not believe it is the only reason for there being no movement. My own personal view is that the improper application of seniority, particularly for Part time officers, has a much larger part to play.
Back in those days there was in fact a considerable amount of movement. but as stated many things have changed for the Company since then. Business has clearly slowed, the amount of staff has declined.
In order for this Local to stay Viable and affective it must evaluate itself and change things that need to be changed.
jack do you mean that the lower end full timers on midnights have a chance to schedule themselves by senority if there are days or afternoon shifts available?
What I am saying and this is my own opinion again. If the union can show that there is a necessity for full time work then there is language in our agreement to create it. If there is a necessity shown on a particular shift then it should be placed up for bid. I am not saying that anyone will be able to schedule themselves. The big problem in our department is that people confuse seniority with being fair. The Ministry of Labour doe not recognize "fair" because you can not measure fair. It does recognize Seniority as belonging to the individual, and it is something that can be measured. Seniority can protect people if it is used in the right way, and right now our department does not use it in the right way. Seniority must be protected at all costs no matter where you fall on the PT and FT lists. I do believe if we all protected our seniority no matter how minor the infraction I do believe that it would create movement in our department.
My point of view is we look at seniority in two different ways. If we applied the way that PT seniority is used to the full time schedule we would all have the same days off and work the same hours, something that is physically impossible. If we applied the way that FT seniority is used to the PT schedule the guys at the top would receive the lions share of the shifts. As I said, why two ways? From a unionized point of view we are damaging our own seniority list by allowing that to continue.
I do believe that we all need to look at scheduling options, and how we work. We need to be proactive in this and possibly come up with our own solution, before the employer comes up with one for use.
What started all of this is my belief that the executive works for the members. It is much like how the ancient monarchy system used to work. The few that are placed in a position to speak for the many must use the voice of the people that elected them. They no longer have the ability to press their own point of view. In order to understand what the members want, there needs to be a mechanism for the members to bring forward their concerns to be discussed with other members, and and with the executive. That mechanism, is the General membership meeting. If people want something put to a vote that is the forum to do it. They get their issue put on the agenda and it is voted on, if that is what is called for. We have it and it should be used. People think some of my views are radical and out of control. I have a point of view and I express it, I have that right. However, just because I have a point of view, does not mean it will become a point of fact, just because I say so. I believe in the democratic process to find an answer to an issue, even if it is against me.
The way I see it Jack, and I appreciate your comments on this page but every full-time (union paying) officer should have the option to a flexible schedule-aka rotation. If everything stays the same....and I would bet it does! In order to get off permanent midnights is to become a duel-rate supervisor.
The thing we have to focus on is we are a union and we are all equal. It has been raised with upper management by myself that this present system is having major negative effects on our members lives, physically, mentally and in relationships. We all have to get together and stand strong that we want equality. My seniority should not have that sort of effect on someones health...
As jim said, we are all equals, if the members put forward that they wish to change the way that shifts and the rotation are done then that is what should happen. I have no problem supporting that. But what has to happen to get all of that done is people have to come out to the meetings, and they have speak up. If we do not have the proper amount of people out to meetings we can not have Legit. votes and noting will happen. I get what you are saying about becoming a dual, to get off midnights that is fare.
The biggest problem the next president will face is complacency of the members. The only reason that things will stay the same is because people dont do any thing. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke) I know that this quote is a little dramatic for our case but it is the truth. If the situation is unacceptable then you need to do what ever is in your power to fix it.
looks like a lot of unhappy people , we just need a fresh start.nothing gets resolved . we just keep sliding backward ... anyone for giving opseu the boot ?lets call the c.a.w
Post a Comment