# Canada Post to go on strike on May 25th...



## tubetwang (Dec 18, 2007)

heads up guys from my broker...

Think twice before you ship with Canada Post...


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

I had the same thing today from my carrier. I asked the outlook, she said not very clear...they could be out 1 to 3 weeks, could be legislated back to work, many different scenarios could play out. This affects my work greatly as a large percentage of ag customers still pay by cheque in the mail, I collect the accounts.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

:_) I wonder if it is regional across Canada. When I worked this past election as a poll clerk I had MANY people look at me blankly when I said "addressed mail such as hydro or telephone" and those that got past the blank look said "who doesn't do that online digitally?"

Needless to say, I saw 1 bill and that was a photocopy and we shrugged and said 'go vote' lol not a single other person had any form of 'addressed mail' on them or at their homes.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

We still get some mailman delivered mail, magazines, bills (mostly local), financial statements, cards, some specifically addressed flyers (Staples for example), and small packages (my custom pick order, the odd book). An actual letter I haven't seen in quite a while. Electronic communication and billing is king. I happen to believe that mass communication is an national treasure of sovereign importance and should be protected by national legislation, but to remain important means remaining competitive and current. Solution? Ain't got one.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Canada Post .. Hmm let me think of what I do get myself. I get a paper statement of my account from my bank and never ever even open it. In three years I have opened one once and that was to show my daughter what it was. We are right now really questioning why we even get it. I get my cell phone bill by paper and only because they like to mess the numbers up and I like to call them on it and I cannot read that much text in one go on a computer monitor (kills my eyes). I also get Taylor's Wood and Steel magazine. The only other mail with my name on it that I get are my eBay and other online retailer purchases.

I don't get "personal" mail in the mail much ever. In a decade or more I have received one Christmas card once. I think "mail" in the traditional sense has very much become like "horse and buggy" in the traditional sense, more and more the province of an increasingly smaller portion of the population.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

One time they went on strike and were legislated back, I was living in an apartment, and the mail carrier would dump the mail in the garbage--I found a bunch of it one day.

The Apartment manager called Canada Post and we had a new carrier the next day.

I think that first one was still disgruntled.

Don't know what happened to him though.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

zontar said:


> I think that first one was still disgruntled.
> 
> Don't know what happened to him though.


i saw him the other day, on a poster i saw on the subway. he was crawling out of a hobo's skin


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

cheezyridr said:


> i saw him the other day, on a poster i saw on the subway. he was crawling out of a hobo's skin


Thanks, that's good to know...


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Cogeco is all over it



> Dear Client,
> 
> Canada Post employees are discussing a possible strike, which would begin on June 3, 2011.
> Please note that a strike may delay the delivery of your Cogeco paper bills.
> ...


----------



## ThePass (Aug 10, 2007)

What a drag.

I hate to see anybody on strike.

It's a necessary evil however. I hope they get what they deserve. Wish I had a union where I work.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Hey guys. I work for Canada Post and I can tell you quite a bit EXCEPT I can't tell you what is happening as of yet...the information that I have is that Winnipeg is going on strike tonight and that will be followed by 'rotating' strikes which are a different city/region each day (or other specified period of time). That said, I had heard that if Winnipeg does strike tonight that the corporation plans a Nationwide lockout.

The news (Canada Post is the source) says that it is about wages and sick leave and once in a while they will mention other issues almost ALWAYS they mention that their offer includes seven weeks of vacation. It is not about wages. The wage issue that is being negotiated is the start rate for new hires. 

When you are first hired, sure you get $24 per hour but you are casual so not only do you not have any guaranteed hours, you don't have ANY vacation and NO benefits either. You may only get 5 hours per week. You may get nothing for months and yes, you may get some weeks that you work 40 hours. You will likely be casual for 2 years. Often what happens is that you will get a call at 11pm asking if you will come to work for 1am and work until 6am. There you go, 5 hours and thanks for coming out - wait by the phone and we'll call you when we call you.

Then you get to be part-time and that's when they consider you a permanent employee. You get 3 weeks vacation and benefits when you become a permanent employee. You will be on midnights but you will get 20-28 hours per week. Good luck with that second job working midnight until 5 am. You will likely stay part time for 2 more years depending on which city that you live in. If you get full time inside you'll be on midnights for 10 more years and if you go outside as a letter carrier -GOOD LUCK. My mail route was 18 km and 3700 stairs. I felt like I should be in the hospital most days and the morgue on other days...and I am the person who most people will mention if they are talking about the person who they know that is in the best shape.

The 7th week of vacation only comes after 28 years of service.

Now our employer has made changes to our work that threatens our health and safety (how much is a chronic condition or an injury worth-is that 'worth' $24 per hour?), harasses us, spent money hand over fist and wasted it on things that mean nothing to the business and NOW have decided that they want to take back benefits that we have had for decades in the name of fiscal responsibility and financial viability.

Furthermore, the 'negotiations' have been going on for 8 months and the corporation has only decided to come off of many of their ridiculous benefit rollbacks in the past week. They started with about 10 or 15 rollbacks with only about 4 things that they really want...so they 'give-in' on the ones that they don't really want as a smoke screen to make people think that they are being 'reasonable'. They haven't moved on any of the big things that they REALLY want to roll back.

One of those things is to replace the sick leave plan with a Short Term Disability Plan. Perhaps that doesn't sound terribly unreasonable in that many businesses today have gone to something similar, however, Canada Post has also put in place a dangerous work method for many of its employees (aforementioned 'made changes to our work that threatens our health and safety') and that will cause more injury and more sick leave being used...so they just don't want to deal with the consequences of their own actions. It was learned today that they have decided to address this area in the future but they still have not made any mention of changing the work method(s) that will cause the injury(ies) so...how much is an injury worth? I tell you that being injured SUCKS. It doesn't matter if you get to stay at home - injuries suck.

Anyway, it also sucks to have 'work disruption'...the contract is null and the benefits are cut off...even pre-booked annual leave is canceled. The powers that be within the union are backing up a philosophy though I suppose and given that the corporation has been profitable for 16 years and has provided those profits to the government (and in turn the taxpayers) without any infusion of tax dollars they seem to have decided that this is the time to fight rollbacks and fight efforts to make the working conditions worse. 

Perhaps it is true that some people do not use the mail at all but I'll tell you that I must see a million pieces of mail per night. The 'junk mail' is typically handled in another department so I don't see much of that...I see a lot of bank statements and other business mail for Burlington though! <------keeperofthegood!!

The general public definitely seems uninformed about Canada Post so if anyone has any questions about the mail I can probably come up with an answer of some kind-I'll do my best anyway.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

Hey smorg... As someone who is a union member (I drive a city bus in Guelph), firstly let me say that the grass is always greener - by which I mean people always say how easy we union members have it laying about doing nothing all day for inflated wages - so don't let the right wing crap about how we're sucking the public well dry get you down, brother. Sour grapes are just that. 

Secondly, having just been through an incredibly disappointing contract negotiation (my first as a member of a union), as much as it sucks to go on strike you're much better off flexing your muscles today than you would be letting the politicians have their run all over your paycheck. I wish our union had the stones to stand up for what we deserve. The general public often has NO IDEA the working conditions we face in the service of the public. I thought that when I got a gov't job that my health and safety would at least be a priority, if not priority number one. I was COMPLETELY mistaken. Instead, it essentially works that the gov't positions for relatively unskilled workers is to hide behind all kinds of quiet legal loopholes to get work out of people that they wouldn't be able to easily otherwise (people don't believe me when I tell them that as a city bus driver I'm exempt from much of the labour standards act, and also key points of the Highway Traffic Act. For instance, city bus drivers are exempt from Hours of Service legistlation. I routinely work 10 hour shifts, with only a single 30 minute break, and with only 8 hours off between shifts. Truckers, GO and Greyhound bus drivers, taxi cabs, heck FORKLIFT drivers can't do this). I have no doubt that Canada Post, as a Federal organization, can skirt many laws that protect even 7-11 employees and have built this fact into their profitability.

Anyways, to sum up, I'm behind you guys 100% even tho I've got guitars to mail and etc. It'll be an inconvenience for me, but I think that Canada needs workers who are paid half decently and who have a chance at a family life if we're to succeed as a nation. The pols and the networks have been completely bought and paid for, and its a foolish person indeed who believes what they have to say in this day and age.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I think if you have a job in Canada that pays $24 or more an hour, you should quietly go to work everyday and be thankful. I can't really comment on the job conditions at Canada Post, but it can't be much worse than most jobs paying $10 / hour.

The idea of unionized labour is a vestige of the past. No offense to anyone who works at Canada Post, but frankly they can stay on strike until the cows come home. I won't lose any sleep over it.

We just closed a plant, largely because of a militant and uncooperative union that rendered the plant uincompetitive in todays market.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Thanks for the support fudb...the thing is that we aren't out over our pay. The media reports that we have been 'demanding 3.3% in the first year' but that is based upon abolishing a 'bonus system' that is about (you guessed it) 3.3% per year...so actually we are saying that we will remain the same this year and even save the accounting time and effort to administer the bonus, along with save the printing for the fancy little paper that they hand around to us every year with our names on it and the amount. 

My mail route was excruciating and when they 'remade it' they added all kinds of stuff to it to make it longer. The guy doing it now said that he only hopes that he can do it for a few more years until he retires. It was that bad that I had to go back to working inside to preserve my health...and I had to 'drop back' to part time to avoid working midnight shift. I have worked many midnight shifts since I graduated high school in 1986 and it is something that can impact your life to a degree that is difficult to express verbally. 

Anyway, I will likely have to sell my house and I am planning to try to take some upgrading and then decide on what route to take as far as education is concerned and make a career change. Unfortunate, yes, but I see Canada Post as not caring whether or not I live, live injured, or die and every other job that I have worked in my life including being the '********' at a welding shop in Medicine Hat Alberta for $9 per hour in 1997 has treated me with more respect (as a person and as it relates to health & well-being). So, I go from 'thinking that I'll never need to look for a job again' in 2002 to having my eyes pried wide open and finding out what it is like to work for Canada Post.

As for your guitars that are in the mail, as I understand it the strike is 'rotating' so you may just be in for a slight delay. I'll likely know more after tonight as I have a shift scheduled for 7pm. I'll post back when I know more.

Milkman...I know there are plenty more people who agree with you 100% so there's nothing I can really say but the union for the postal workers (CUPW) is trying to get Canada Post to negotiate the safety of the work method(s) put in place and that seems to be the one area that the corporation doesn't want to move on. With many people not using the mail system for much anymore, the public opinion of the mail being antiquated seems like one that will only get more popular but the people on my mail route used to get mail up the ying yang...and many of them would say "just junk again today" and I'd nod, smile and say "terrible isn't it" as I recalled that the previous day there was 3 financial statements, 2 letters and a partridge in a pear tree. 

I'm just glad I'm not out there doing it any more - but in a way I don't blame the public for 'not knowing how hard it is' to work at Canada Post...I thought that it was going to be great too - after all, that is the public perception and I thought that too before I worked for them.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

Milkman said:


> I think if you have a job in Canada that pays $24 or more an hour, you should quietly go to work everyday and be thankful. I can't really comment on the job conditions at Canada Post, but it can't be much worse than most jobs paying $10 / hour.
> 
> The idea of unionized labour is a vestige of the past. No offense to anyone who works at Canada Post, but frankly they can stay on strike until the cows come home. I won't lose any sleep over it.
> 
> We just closed a plant, largely because of a militant and uncooperative union that rendered the plant uincompetitive in todays market.


You, I'm afraid, are sadly misinformed. I get $24 an hour, and after taxes and union dues, that equates to about $700 a week, this new contract will have us break $50k a year. About as much as I'd make as a manager for a medium to large retailer, but with admittedly much better benefits (I know a lot of people want me to feel bad because I get 100% dental coverage, and no cost prescriptions. Yah. I feel real bad. What I get is what we ALL should get. 

That is enough to buy a $200k house, and to go on a trip once in a while. I'm certainly not complaining about my wage, it's enough to actually get by in this world. I am most certainly NOT getting rich, I can't afford a boat, or a cottage, or private school for my eventual children. 

I work very hard for this money. I do long shifts in a very high stress job. My back has never been so sore. My ass hurts all the time, too. My belly is getting bigger because I can't get out of the seat long enough to satisfy the requirements of good health as laid out by any doctor you'd care to mention. While the wage is certainly fair, it's NOT NEARLY enough to cover for the loss of my good health. This is why I'm in the process of getting out of this "great job".

Your plan closed because of subsidized gas prices making worldwide shipping of goods artificially cheap, and because of tax laws that outright incentivize medium to large corporations to move their plants overseas. If you think it was because of a "militant and uncooperative union", then frankly you're buying into exactly what your corporate leaders want you to buy into so that they don't have to explain why they run their companies in such a way as to disenfranchise the workers at every step. 

I don't expect that you're going to change your viewpoint tho... maybe you should investigate what the big bosses make a year, in relation to your unionized employees.


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2011)

Whatever. Not worth it.


----------



## dwagar (Mar 6, 2006)

I've heard mention of all the injuries from dangers in the workplace. There must be lots - why hasn't WCB gotten involved in this?


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

In 1983 I was hired on at the GM foundry in St Catharines. I was 23 at the time and I cant remember the hourly rate but I was making around 40K a year with full benefits to start. We went on strike about 3 weeks after I started. We were only out about 4 days. Every contract after that the company would say that they were losing money and that the benefits and pension plans could not be sustained with the current and expected future load on them. The union simply said "no" to any concessions whatsoever. We were always told that being number 1 in quality and productivity would protect us from any closures or consolidations.

One morning in the Spring of 1992 the machines were ordered stopped and we were gathered into meeting areas and the Superintendent announced that due to reasons known only to corporate that the foundry had been selected as one of the 10 plants that were scehduled to be closed over the next 2 years. There were 3300 people working there at the time. GM had announced the closure of 10 plants and the trimming of up to 70,000 jobs world wide that spring. The union immediately formed the "fight back committee" to save our jobs. I think they are still meeting monthly at a bar somewhere.

The first day I started there I was given a 70 lb jackhammer and told to get "inside" a ladle attached to an automated pouring machine that delivered the molten iron to the molds that were used to make the parts. It was empty of course and the spout had to be hammered out and replaced. This was done on a weekly basis. However they remained hot enough that you could not stand in it for more than a few minutes at a time and you would work with two guys and keep jumping back and forth to cool your feet. Shortly after that I wondered what the hell I had gotten myself into and why I never stayed in school. By the end of that following year I was in night school and studying. I took every course offered by the company as well. By the time they made the announcement to close the place I was managing all the suppliers to the foundry for quality and delivery. 

We had air conditioned lunch rooms the size of portable school rooms all over the plant. We had guys that would run hot dog and sausage consessions by using the furnaces in back to create BBQ's and had at least a 100 "janitors" that would sweep the lunchrooms 3 times a day and sleep the rest. You had to carry 3 extra people on every line to cover piss breaks. If you were lucky enough to be one of them you worked maybe 2 hours a day. There were makeshift beds all over the plant. On midnights if you went up to the changeroom you had to fight to find a bench to sleep on. They were full. We could order free, 3 pairs of high quality steel toe boots a year. Two pair of prescription sunglasses per year. In all the time I was there I dont think I ever paid for any kind of prescription or health care period. We even had paid legal services for many things including purchasing a home. I was almost burnt to death by a drunk that was operating a ladle one time. He had been fired 3 times before for being drunk on the job and the union fought to get him back in. I still have some scars on my leg from that one. 

In the 60's when my Father was working for GM at the now defunct axle plant in St Catharines he got trench mouth from drinking from a dirty water fountain. They had no refrigerators for their lunches and if you ever tried to decline a work assignment you were blackballed. He was called a *** openly by many supervisors including the **** themselves. 

Well we all know what happened to the auto companies. You can say it was bad management and thats true. You can say that in a global marketplace that the contracts, wages and benefits of those times are outdated and unsustainable and thats true. Its a different world and a different time.

I managed to get out of there in 1994 and went on to a management position at another smaller foundy and machining operation. Which by virtue of the big 3 getting out of the manufacturing sector quickly went from 300 employees to 4000 and triple the plants in 5 years. I got out of there in 2008 after 3 consecutive strikes at the plants and the closing of three. They are currently running at about a third of where they were in the good times and more than half of the workforce was let go. They eventually built a plant in China to be able to compete and make a profit.

I hope that Canada Post can come to some agreement. But it is clear that the ceiling has been reached in North America in terms of unionized wage and benefit packages. They will only ever go down from here on.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

fudb said:


> Your plan closed because of subsidized gas prices making worldwide shipping of goods artificially cheap, and because of tax laws that outright incentivize medium to large corporations to move their plants overseas. If you think it was because of a "militant and uncooperative union", then frankly you're buying into exactly what your corporate leaders want you to buy into so that they don't have to explain why they run their companies in such a way as to disenfranchise the workers at every step.


You my friend are misinformed. I work in the business of getting goods moved in North America and from the Orient. The cost of shipping is NOT cheap! (it is contributing to the reason everyone wants cheap stuff from Aisa) I happen to work for one of those large retailers and let me tell you, our management makes Well more than 50K per year. I have good benefits, a good health plan and decent hours. No way would I ever work for a union shop! From what I read, Postal workers are striking due to Automation of some processes and the Internet changing the way we do business. Wow, sounds like progress to me. may be a tough pill to swallow, but in my line of work I am the one expected to keep up with changing paradigms and to keep current for today's business models. If I become redundant, that is my own fault.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...at some point in our history, $24 per hour was probably a decent wage.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

david henman said:


> ...at some point in our history, $24 per hour was probably a decent wage.


I think you are right. That was about the wage I was making back at GM in the 80's but the sad fact is that today that is considered a top paying job.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

fudb said:


> Milkman said:
> 
> 
> > I think if you have a job in Canada that pays $24 or more an hour, you should quietly go to work everyday and be thankful. I can't really comment on the job conditions at Canada Post, but it can't be much worse than most jobs paying $10 / hour.
> ...


Well, one of us is definitely misinformed. I'll clarify basic economics after I finish work today.


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2011)

david henman said:


> ...at some point in our history, $24 per hour was probably a decent wage.


Like this point in history? Here are median _household_ incomes from Stats Can. $24/hr is $49,920/year. That's just one salary. So two people in a household working, at that rate, are doing well in most provinces. Now consider you can earn that wage with a highschool diploma and you don't have to absorb $50,000++ of higher education costs to get in to that bracket -- another bonus and not just because of the cost, you also get some 4-8 years of a leg up on your higher education peers when it comes to making a proper living wage. Then add in the fact that _you continue to get paid forever_ once you've hit your pensionable years of employment (nothing like that exists outside of unionized labour) and it's looking very good. Adjust that salary up to take the pension contributions in to account and it's a Good Deal by today's employment standards.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

I am a Casual Letter Carrier with Canada Post (going on 4 years service) and I have posted this comment on a few boards:

Canada Post new hires are classified as Casual Temporary Employees and must endure a probationary period. Even though the starting wage is indeed $23 per hour, Canada Post Temps only work 3 or 4 months of the year mainly during the winters for the first 3 to 5 years of their career on a call in as needed basis. Most Casual Canada Post Letter Carriers only earn $15,000 to $20,000 per year for the first few years after being hired. The notion that new hire Letter Carriers at Canada Post earn $49,000 per year as a starting wage is completely false. Remember too that Casuals are paid 4% in lieu of benefits and do not receive the benefit plan unitl they are of permanent status. Casuals are also not entitled to any vacation. 

Consider this: If a person working as a Canada Post Letter Carrier Casual intends to stick around until they are offered a permanent position a few years down the road, they must endure being available on a reasonable call in as needed basis. Most Canada Post Casuals end up quitting before they are hired permanently as it is such as low and unpredictable wage and eventually find it impossible to be available under such circumstances.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Hey prodigal_son...I hear you loud and clear. There are many problems and one of the biggest ones that I see is that the public knows nothing about the postal system. Generally, they think you get hired at $24 per hour, 40 hours per week, get full benefits and 7 weeks of vacation.

I have been trying to straighten out a lot of people along the way but I have come to realize that most people have already made up their minds. Most of the ones who are taking the shots at postal workers on the news sites and Canada Post's website just don't know the reality of the situation and have latched on to a few bits of information (normally that the corporation has released) & are running ANGRY with it. The corporation has completely mastered the art of misleading people by using a basic truth - they like to leave out the details as that would lead to knowledge and you know what knowledge does...

Best of luck in the casual letter carrier department - I know my time as a casual carrier wasn't very good at all but I had already given up my private sector job that paid more and I knew that there was no turning back. I was very 'fortunate' in that when I ceased taking assignments as a casual carrier I was able to take a full time job with a subcontractor in a railyard in Calgary. After I was on the full time job for a few months I got my 'part-time' status and took a midnight to 5am position sorting. So, I'd work from 11am until 8pm and then rush home to try to get a 3 hour power nap, then to the post office for midnight. When I would get off at 5am I would rush home and try to get another 4 hours sleep. My minimum week was 65 hours and I had a couple of 80 hour weeks. I even recall a 4 day week in which I worked 65 hours. It was heavy duty and I did it for 6 months before giving up the railyard job.

As hard as it was I am awfully glad that I didn't start as a casual inside...I see some casuals who get a shift and then I don't see them for a month. Brutal...it reminds me of my 7 weeks off leading up to Christmas 2002. 

Anyway, I hope that they can get some headway with the 2 bundle system. Injuries have increased by 15% using that new method.

To the poster who asked where WCB is in all of this...I don't know...perhaps it is because they get so many claims from Canada Post workers already that it isn't an imminent issue. The new delivery system is not in place in every city yet but they are doing one city at a time so the injuries will likely continue to increase as they include new cities.

...and for clarification's sake:


iaresee said:


> Like this point in history? Here are median _household_ incomes from Stats Can. $24/hr is $49,920/year.


 I was a full time postal worker for years prior to dropping back to part time in April. Last year I worked full time and *my 2010 earnings put me below median income for EVERY PROVINCE (and I had over time)*. 

I'm telling everyone...and I wish the public could know this...I thought that it was going to be a great job with lots of money for less work too. I can say in 100% honesty that it is the most over-rated pay and the most under-rated work job as far as general public knowledge. I thought that it would be easy and it is anything but. Like I said, I just wish that the public knew it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2011)

smorgdonkey: here's an honest request for information. What's the highest, lowest median and average salary for the unionized workers? Average retirement age? Those are the important numbers. While you may not have made much, the cost of the entire unionized labour force employed by Canada Post are the relevant numbers.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

iaresee said:


> smorgdonkey: here's an honest request for information. What's the highest, lowest median and average salary for the unionized workers? Average retirement age? Those are the important numbers. While you may not have made much, the cost of the entire unionized labour force employed by Canada Post are the relevant numbers.


There are some maintenance workers who work on the machines and heavy duty mechanics who look after the fleets of vehicles and I have no idea what they make. I would guess $30 per hour but that is just a guess. The postal workers who sort or deliver make $24.15 per hour and forklift drivers make $0.10 more or maybe $0.15 more. The sort and/or delivery rate is essentially the starting rate and the people starting get their vacation pay as they go since they have no benefits or alloted vacation leave.

As to the cost of the entire unionized labour force...I bet it is a big number. The corporation says that all of the costs associated with the labour equals 2/3 of their operating expenses. I don't know if I can believe that but taking the pension into account it could be true although with the vehicles and the fuel, the property taxes...it is a big operation. 

The key point is that the corporation does not use tax dollars but does generate profit for the Canadian government & in turn, the Canadian tax payers (and has for the past 16 years). The profit in 2009 at 'the height of the recession' was over $400 million. 

I don't know of the average age of retirement either but most go with 35 years of service if they started working for the corporation right out of high school.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...at some point in our history, $24 per hour was probably a decent wage.


It would be to me. I get less than that, and have never had any type of benefits my entire work life.



> You, I'm afraid, are sadly misinformed. I get $24 an hour, and after taxes and union dues, that equates to about $700 a week, this new contract will have us break $50k a year. About as much as I'd make as a manager for a medium to large retailer, but with admittedly much better benefits (I know a lot of people want me to feel bad because I get 100% dental coverage, and no cost prescriptions. Yah. I feel real bad. What I get is what we ALL should get.
> 
> That is enough to buy a $200k house, and to go on a trip once in a while. I'm certainly not complaining about my wage, it's enough to actually get by in this world. I am most certainly NOT getting rich, I can't afford a boat, or a cottage, or private school for my eventual children.
> 
> I work very hard for this money. I do long shifts in a very high stress job. My back has never been so sore. My ass hurts all the time, too. My belly is getting bigger because I can't get out of the seat long enough to satisfy the requirements of good health as laid out by any doctor you'd care to mention. While the wage is certainly fair, it's NOT NEARLY enough to cover for the loss of my good health. This is why I'm in the process of getting out of this "great job"


You guys got to understand a lot of people work a lot harder for a lot less than that. I know I do. Which is why people get angry. I don't really care what any of you do and I don't feel any anger towards you. I just think people should be really appreciative of what they have nowadays. Things are tough. Especially when it comes to things like benefits. 

I would kill for your benefits, as would a lot of other people. I suffer from chronic migraines, and between the chiro treatments and meds, I shell out about $400 a month. No private health plan will cover any of that. Your plans would.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I can't comment on how hard anyone's job is, but to earn more than $20. an hour with full benefits with only a high school education is like falling ass backwards into a pile of money.

One income like that plus a more modest (and typical) job for your spouse and you should have a good living.

Oh, and blaming your big gut on your desk job is pretty lame.
I work 50 to 60 hours a week either at a desk or on the road and still manage to get to the gym at least five days a week.

I won't waste time now on an explanation of why unionized workforces are a key factor in the demise of manufacturing jobs in Ontario.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Paid benefits are slowly becoming extinct. Not many places at all do that anymore. If anything it is a co-pay but the days of fully paid (by the company) benefits are numbered.


----------



## bagpipe (Sep 19, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Paid benefits are slowly becoming extinct. Not many places at all do that anymore. If anything it is a co-pay but the days of fully paid (by the company) benefits are numbered.


Couldn't agree more. Unless you're in the Guv'mnt, those kind of juicy perks are long gone. Bigger private companies now prefer to throw a couple of percent of your salary at you and its your problem to figure out what you do with it.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

bagpipe said:


> Couldn't agree more. Unless you're in the Guv'mnt, those kind of juicy perks are long gone. Bigger private companies now prefer to throw a couple of percent of your salary at you and its your problem to figure out what you do with it.


Its extemely expensive for companies. I looked into getting health insurance here at the shop, since we dont have any coverage now other than OHIP. I got a quote for over $10,000 a year and most everything on it had low limits and co-pay. I said no thanks. I will pay for the $100 in prescriptions we get a year. God forbid one of us gets really ill.


----------



## davetcan (Feb 27, 2006)

I'll just comment on the 7 weeks of vacation. I work for one of the largest defence companies in the world, I have a great job, Engineering Manager, and I've been with the company since 1987. I get 4 weeks of vacation, period. I'll never get any more, that's the max. Used to be 5 weeks about 8 years ago but that was stopped. Hell, even our wages have been capped, we now qualify for cash bonuses instead of wage increases. Of course to get one you have to be one of the top performers, and no, they're not big bonuses, just small cash incentives. I don't like it but I understand why they're doing it. If we don't control rising costs we will quickly become non-competitive and then we'll be gone. It's a cruel new world out there and unfortunately it's sink or swim.

Not a union member now but I was when I was younger. Didn't like it then, don't agree with most of them now. There used to be an absolute need for them, without a doubt, but those days are long gone. People have rights in the work place with or without union representation. I'm with Milkman all the way on the impact they've had on industry in recent years.

If the PO doesn't get it's costs in line, and improve it's service, you won't have to worry about wages and benefits much longer. I'm sure there's a hell of a lot more to it, there always is, and inspite of my opinions I wish you guys the best of luck. Times are tough everywhere, not just the PO.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

Starbuck said:


> You my friend are misinformed. I work in the business of getting goods moved in North America and from the Orient. The cost of shipping is NOT cheap! (it is contributing to the reason everyone wants cheap stuff from Aisa) I happen to work for one of those large retailers and let me tell you, our management makes Well more than 50K per year. I have good benefits, a good health plan and decent hours. No way would I ever work for a union shop! From what I read, Postal workers are striking due to Automation of some processes and the Internet changing the way we do business. Wow, sounds like progress to me. may be a tough pill to swallow, but in my line of work I am the one expected to keep up with changing paradigms and to keep current for today's business models. If I become redundant, that is my own fault.


Um. OK. So the fact that I can buy 3 pounds of plastic imported from China for under $4 means that shipping is expensive? You're utterly contradicting yourself in your own post by the way.

Also, are you defending both your complete lack of job security and your management's expensive salaries as justified? I've been a worker and I've been a manager. Guess which one is more work? I'll give you a hint, it's the one that pays less. And I hope you never find yourself in a redundant job.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2011)

smorgdonkey said:


> As to the cost of the entire unionized labour force...I bet it is a big number. The corporation says that all of the costs associated with the labour equals 2/3 of their operating expenses. I don't know if I can believe that but taking the pension into account it could be true although with the vehicles and the fuel, the property taxes...it is a big operation.


This is what I was gunning for actually. That you'd see that the number is really big and the largest part of Canada Post's operation expense. That number, 2/3, is not a lie. Not in the least. The largest expenditure most businesses of even small size make are on the loaded costs of carrying staff. Salaries, insurance (both for the staff and workplace insurance), and all the other stuff that comes along with keeping humans in a business environment is very, very, very expensive. Far more expensive than gas in the trucks even in this day and age.

Consider this: lets say you make 50,000 in your final year guaranteeing you a pension of 50,000 for the rest of your natural life. Lets say you started at 25 and you get to retire at 55. If you died at 85 that's 30 years at 50,000 or 1,500,000 (that's right ONE POINT FIVE MILLION) dollars the pension fund that Canada Post keeps has to pay out to you. If we assume inflation rises at 3% every year how does that work? Well, they have put aside money while you're employed all those years. How much money? These days, you're lucky if your pension fund can pull 3-4% interest given the state of the economy. You need *more* than that to account for inflation. For that kind of payout the target goal when you hit 55 would be about $3,650,000 in the pension fund _just for you_. Or about $4,000/month for the next 30 years of your employment with Canada Post -- $1,200,000 dollars. You only make 24*40*4 = $3200/month right now and yet they have stash more than that aside to cover the retirement promises. It's actually worse than this, because your final salary in your final year isn't going to be the salary you started out with they have to adjust up to make sure the pension fund covers the final, promised salary you earn (or however your agreement is stated). And it's guaranteed money. If the economy tanks the government and tax payers are on the hook to pad the pension fund to make up the shortfall.

That's a bit crazy even in prosperous times, the likes of which we are definitely not in right now.

Now multiple that by a workforce of what? 15,000 working and retired Canada Post employees -- see how these numbers add up? If even only half that 15,000 is active and they all make 50,000/year then Canada Posts pension obligations sit at about $31,500,000/month -- $378,000,000 a YEAR. Gulp. And they have to pay that in no matter what the monthly or yearly revenue happens to be. Having cash in the bank to cover shortfalls is an absolute must.

These are big, big numbers. A pay raise of 3% a year might seem like nothing to you. That's only $0.72/hour! But when you take in to account that it has to be matched in your pension, and then multiplied by all the working Canada Post employees, it starts to mean $10,000,000's/year for Canada Post.



> The key point is that the corporation does not use tax dollars but does generate profit for the Canadian government & in turn, the Canadian tax payers (and has for the past 16 years). The profit in 2009 at 'the height of the recession' was over $400 million.


That's not really much. And where does Canada Post profit go? I ask honestly, as I don't know. Is it returned and applied against the federal government's deficit? Or is it kept in the bank. Somehow I doubt all of it sits in the bank like a non-government corporation like Apple or Microsoft can do with their profit. But even so, $400M isn't a lot of profit. You can't spend every penny you make. That's a recipe for fiscal disaster. You have to bank a good chunk of money just to weather storms. What happens when the fleet of vans suddenly breaks down? There needs to the slush for the unexpected. More so if your business is shrinking (and lets face it: Canada Post isn't exactly growing their business any more). You need the extra to cover pension shortfalls because even if people stop sending letters, the Canada Post pension fund has to keep paying out until the last member dies.



> I don't know of the average age of retirement either but most go with 35 years of service if they started working for the corporation right out of high school.


So that means my math isn't that far off.

All this is perhaps something you know already but the point is to say: it's a very, very high cost to employ someone at Canada Post the way they do. The salary is only a piece of it. Literally less than half of the cost. Take in to account all of that and, as Milkman said, for a high school diploma that's a load of cash of land in. They are good jobs. All work is hard, not all work pays that well and continues to pay that well after you stop working there.



GuitarsCanada said:


> Paid benefits are slowly becoming extinct. Not many places at all do that anymore. If anything it is a co-pay but the days of fully paid (by the company) benefits are numbered.


I guess I haven't changed jobs enough to notice. My last employer had a pretty standard health care plan and I think we paid $10 on prescriptions and that was it. Dental wasn't great, but it covered most things.

Now that I'm self employed I definitely know how much it costs to carry this stuff. Insurance for my family of 4 is not cheap. 



davetcan said:


> Not a union member now but I was when I was younger. Didn't like it then, don't agree with most of them now. There used to be an absolute need for them, without a doubt, but those days are long gone. People have rights in the work place with or without union representation. I'm with Milkman all the way on the impact they've had on industry in recent years.


My sentiments as well: I think they served a place in time and history but are far beyond their usefulness now. When the world was isolated pockets and workplace atrocities were easier to hide.



> If the PO doesn't get it's costs in line, and improve it's service, you won't have to worry about wages and benefits much longer. I'm sure there's a hell of a lot more to it, there always is, and inspite of my opinions I wish you guys the best of luck. Times are tough everywhere, not just the PO.


And there's the rub and one of the things I don't get: the striking workers perhaps don't realize that their jobs can disappear if Canada Post goes away. The post office isn't an institution that's immune to changes any more. I think I can count on one hand the number of stamps and letters I buy and send in a year.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

torndownunit said:


> You guys got to understand a lot of people work a lot harder for a lot less than that. I know I do. Which is why people get angry. I don't really care what any of you do and I don't feel any anger towards you. I just think people should be really appreciative of what they have nowadays. Things are tough. Especially when it comes to things like benefits.
> 
> I would kill for your benefits, as would a lot of other people. I suffer from chronic migraines, and between the chiro treatments and meds, I shell out about $400 a month. No private health plan will cover any of that. Your plans would.


I perfectly understand that. I spent 15 years slogging it out in the retail trenches. No benefits, no money, no respect. Why is it a bad thing that unionization brings medical and dental benefits?


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

Milkman said:


> I can't comment on how hard anyone's job is, but to earn more than $20. an hour with full benefits with only a high school education is like falling ass backwards into a pile of money.
> 
> One income like that plus a more modest (and typical) job for your spouse and you should have a good living.
> 
> ...


To make more than $20 an hour with only a high school education (ignoring for a minute that getting my AZ and then my BZ were both post-secondary training) isn't that hard to do at all. Become a roofer you can make 3 times what I make if you hustle. I've worked commission sales jobs that I made more than that (on a good month at least, lol) without having to work too hard, as well. There's lots of other ways too if you're bright and have a little hustle.

I don't have a spouse. Anyone else notice that this part of the world is becoming set up more and more so that success is dependent on double incomes? And we wonder why the kids are turning out so violent with no one home to raise them. 

As to my big gut. I got it while trucking, and 50 to 60 hours a week in that job is almost part-time. I'm very slowly losing at the bus driving gig, due to careful choices in my diet. BUT. working out? heh. Tell you what, take that office chair of yours, break it so that it wobbles loosely on it's base and then strap it on the top of a mechanical bull and then sit in it for 10 hours a day with only one 30 minute break (and no it's not illegal, there's a specific loophole in the labour laws for public transit drivers, and of course anyone working for a federal corporation works under a VERY different set of laws) and see how you like going to the gym (I try to get active on my days off). Oh and while you're up on that bull, let's say we have people pop out and random and try and kill you and themselves and the 40 people in the bleachers watching your every minute of every day. Oh and every 15 or twenty minutes some jerk will walk up and start either arguing with you, insulting you or trying to beat you up.

I'm underpaid in my opinion.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2011)

fudb said:


> I'm underpaid in my opinion.


I once derided a co-op student for answering the question, "Do you feel you're adequately compensated for you job here?" with "yes". We are *all* underpaid. Every single one of us. I honestly cannot think of a sum where I would think I was no longer underpaid for the value I bring to a workplace.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

Oh and. Unionized workforces are a key factor in the demise of manufacturing in Ontario, if by that you mean that they keep wages high here such that it is more expensive to make a product here than it is in Korea (here's that artificially low price of gas at play again) and ship here to sell. So since you've save that time, perhaps now you can explain to me why Canada should be run like Korea so that we can compete? 

Anyways, I don't mean to attack you nor anyone else here, so I hope that's not how I'm coming across. I do strongly disagree with your viewpoint so far tho, and while I'm not an economist, I like to think I've got a pretty good general idea of how things work.. filtered through a very old-school punk rock kind of "question authority" "screw the man" point of view....

I'll leave this thread alone now


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

iaresee said:


> This is what I was gunning for actually. That you'd see that the number is really big and the largest part of Canada Post's operation expense. That number, 2/3, is not a lie. Not in the least. The largest expenditure most businesses of even small size make are on the loaded costs of carrying staff. Salaries, insurance (both for the staff and workplace insurance), and all the other stuff that comes along with keeping humans in a business environment is very, very, very expensive. Far more expensive than gas in the trucks even in this day and age.


Yes, it is a lot of money but it began as a public service and it is still a service more than a pure business. Even though the corporation has been eroding the service for years now while the employees have been protesting that. 



iaresee said:


> Consider this:


I can't consider that because the numbers are WAY out of whack!! If I go full length to retirement my pension will only be $2000 per month...BUT I want IN on that pension that pays me the same salary retired as when I worked. 
I am not ignorant of financial matters and I know that things all have associated costs but consider this:
In the recession, the CEO not only 'green lighted' the bonus plan (so she could get her $400 000.00 before she left for Britain), she also had flat screen TVs installed EVERYWHERE, in every facility in the country that display corporation rhetoric. Then a few months ago they finished installing video cameras EVERYWHERE and had them all wired up. They say 'for mail security'. So NOW they want to roll back benefits about 3 decades...and they were still VERY profitable this year. Another thing of note: most employees are crippled by the time they are retired.

The biggest issue is the health and safety of the workforce. The 'new' mork methods are dangerous and have caused a large increase in injuries in the areas which they are now being used. Canada Post had 9000 approved WCB claims last year...that is 20% of the injuries in a mere 6% of the 'government employees' (notice the ' marks there). 



iaresee said:


> So that means my math isn't that far off.


Whether the math is far off or dead on, there is no denying that this is a huge outfit which has been around a long time and has massive infrastructure. To deregulate mail and open it to competition and/or privatize it would be disastrous for any rural area which depends upon 'real' mail.



iaresee said:


> All this is perhaps something you know already but the point is to say: it's a very, very high cost to employ someone at Canada Post the way they do. The salary is only a piece of it. Literally less than half of the cost. Take in to account all of that and, as Milkman said, for a high school diploma that's a load of cash of land in. They are good jobs. All work is hard, not all work pays that well and continues to pay that well after you stop working there.


Well, oil field workers get paid really well and can do the job with a grade 8 education. I have worked in the oilfields so I do know what they do. The 'conditions' on the rigs are not as good as being an inside worker at Canada Post but as a carrier (you may already have read me say it) I felt like I should have been in the hospital EVERY DAY after I did it for about 4 months. Seriously...3500 stairs and 18 km while carrying 20-30 pounds (sometimes more). After a day running rod and casing, sure there was fatigue but NOTHING like being a letter carrier on my old route. So...perhaps the oil workers should get $10 per hour less and the big oil execs can trim $50 grand off of their bonuses (there were receptionists getting $50 G bonuses 6 years ago) and we can all pay $0.40 per liter of fuel again. The YEARS that it takes to get the 40 hours per week job with Canada Post is NOT a 'lucky' sitaution to be in. As I have also stated...I have had 2 jobs in the private sector which paid more than Canada Post. 



iaresee said:


> I guess I haven't changed jobs enough to notice. My last employer had a pretty standard health care plan and I think we paid $10 on prescriptions and that was it. Dental wasn't great, but it covered most things.


Caqnada Post's benefits are not that great...also, my benefits packages that I had with 3 other employers were all superior. I worked for Ingenia Polymers and the dental there was 100%.



iaresee said:


> My sentiments as well: I think they served a place in time and history but are far beyond their usefulness now. When the world was isolated pockets and workplace atrocities were easier to hide.


I have many ideas which are not pro-union, however, after you see how this corporation works you realize how much you need the union for protection against them. They are NOT on our side but they love to say 'team' a lot. I have had a supervisor accuse me of something and escalate the matter to make a huge issue out of it - and it all stemmed from me making extra effort to charge only 20 minutes of overtime instead of an hour and a half. Great managemnt. I have had to report multiple members of management to a third party which handles workplace conflict. I have never had even an informal councilling session in my career until I got this particular supervisor...and I have used one sick day in about 3 years. 



iaresee said:


> And there's the rub and one of the things I don't get: the striking workers perhaps don't realize that their jobs can disappear if Canada Post goes away. The post office isn't an institution that's immune to changes any more. I think I can count on one hand the number of stamps and letters I buy and send in a year.


We know it isn't impervious to change...in fact we often try to influence some of the change or suggest thing to keep service levels high but the corporation ignores it. There have been times while working for them that the majority of employees were convinced that they were trying to sabotage their own business.

I may have said this before too but the 3.3% raise was based on a plan that DELETED the bonus which is about the same amount so in effect our union (yes, the big greedy union) was asking for a ZERO raise in year one and the 2+ in the other 2 years.

Perhaps the most important part of all of this is that the people who make LESS should be making more...the postal workers shouldn't be making less. I like this example: if I 'just worked for Canada Post' and I was able to start at 40 hours per week and continue that...I probably wouldn't even be able to buy this house that I live in now. I happened to have equity in another property that I could use as collateral but there's no way that my 'big money' postie job would have put me in this house.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

I do appreciate hearing everyone's opinions and perspectives. It is interesting though, the main thing that it confirms for me is that people know very little about Canada Post. There are shortfalls of the union are many but perhaps the biggest one is their lack of an information campaign. 

If it was as good as people THINK that it is, *I would not be getting the ducks in a row to be leaving it. *


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

iaresee said:


> I once derided a co-op student for answering the question, "Do you feel you're adequately compensated for you job here?" with "yes". We are *all* underpaid. Every single one of us. I honestly cannot think of a sum where I would think I was no longer underpaid for the value I bring to a workplace.


Check your quotes on that one...I didn't say that.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

smorgdonkey, I think it's important that you and others know that it's not that all people have it in for Canada Post employees. There are just a lot of people going through hard times employment wise nowadays and they will vent. It's human nature.

Like I said, in my case I hold no resentment towards any Canada Post worker. But from my position in life, I just think they should remember to be very thankful for what they DO have. Anyone who has a decent paying job with any benefits and any pension nowadays should remember to keep some perspective. Those are job perks that just don't exist for a lot of us anymore. The benefits you consider 'not great' would be a dream for someone like me (if I told you what I pay for my private plan, which crappy coverage, you'd choke). And some of the things posted pointing out the downsides of the job to people in this thread are absolutely nothing compared to what people go through at their own jobs. And, they go they through it with no benefits, no pension, and less wage. I know very very few people my age who haven't had to take on more duties or work more hours at their jobs to get through this economy. It's just a fact of the hard times.

I try not to waste my time worrying about comparing my position in life to other peoples and just do the best I can. But that's just me. You guys have to understand why some people will get upset over this issue.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

I've been a unionized worker for over 25 years for different companies working underground. I'm one of those guys who came out of highschool and landed a good paying job. Those of you who chose to persue post secondary education did so by choice and had the option not to also. I applaud you for doing so, but I shouldn't be berated for making my choice not to. I didn't fall "ass backwards" into a pile of money, I earned it. I take offense to that comment. Come down underground, see how "easy" it is.
Unions were formed to give a worker a safe place to work, protect their wages and benefits when negotiated. These days, a union has turned out to be more protection against multi-national conglomerate corporations coming into Canada, buying everything up and wanting to run the place like in their home countries where they have free reign. 
I think that the problem starts with the government letting these outfits come in here, scoop up our natural resources and try and get whatever they can out of the workers pocket. Mining and the oilsands are two good examples. Furthermore, the elimination of the "anti-scab" law in all but two provinces is another problem. That's what makes a union antiquated and toothless. 
I'm going on a year of work after a year long strike. Yes, one year. In that time, there were three offers given to us, all generally the same garbage with the same consessions. I've saw more action in negotiations in '89 when we were out for 100 days in Manitoba. As I see it, one of the main problems was the lack of legislation against "replacement workers". If nobody but staff is going through the gate, and there's no production, contracts seem to get hammered out a lot quicker. This is again, thanks to our government. I sat on the picket line and watched vehicle after vehicle go through every day going into the plants and doing our jobs. That's why we were out for that long. This is a company that makes billions of dollars profit in a quarter and pulled off record profits in the Canadian division also. So what happens in hard times? Don't give me the economic down-turn argument because as I said, billions in profit. I've got no problem with consessions if the company is hurting, sure why not if it will save jobs, but corporate greed is not something that I can get on board with. We ended up with a 90 cent raise over 5 years, from the original offer and lost many times that in the hit we took in the profit sharing. Again, corporate greed in action. While the strike was going on, the president of the Canadian division recieved a multi-million dollar bonus, on top of his huge salary. Is that fair?
The government sat idly by and watched this drag on and on. Yes, it should be worked out within the union and the company but two offers in over six months, come on now. Protect your people please Mr. Government. I'm certain that Tony Clement had his pockets filled by more than one corporation. It was found that they did breach the agreement that they signed when they bought the company out and nothing was done about it.
This turned out to be a real rant on the government but it is what it is. I had a bit of a rant in the other thread about CP but that's about the system, not the workers.
I wish you people the best in your efforts at CP.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

sulphur, I am not going to debate you I just want to bring up a point. You really don't think the unions share some of the responsibility with their own greed, bad management, and shortcomings in a lot of cases? They seem the be blameless in your analysis which I think is far from the fact.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

fudb said:


> To make more than $20 an hour with only a high school education (ignoring for a minute that getting my AZ and then my BZ were both post-secondary training) isn't that hard to do at all. Become a roofer you can make 3 times what I make if you hustle. I've worked commission sales jobs that I made more than that (on a good month at least, lol) without having to work too hard, as well. There's lots of other ways too if you're bright and have a little hustle.
> 
> I don't have a spouse. Anyone else notice that this part of the world is becoming set up more and more so that success is dependent on double incomes? And we wonder why the kids are turning out so violent with no one home to raise them.
> 
> ...


60 hours a week is part time? Let me guess, you used to walk 10 miles to school everyday, up hill in both directions in your fathers pyjamas, before chopping wood to heat the school.

We can go back and forth all day abouit how hard our jobs are. Mine is tough, demands a lot of hours, a college education, travel almost every week and pressure coming out the ying yang. Plus I travel to some VERY dangerous places.

But guess what. I love it. I negotiate my compensation with my management as an individual. I sink or swim based on my efforts and merit, not on the collective clout of a coercive collective bargaining unit.

I've worked at my present employer for 17 years and have never taken a sick day. I have job security because I'm of value to my company, not because I hold a gun to their heads.

Being in shape is up to you. Don't blame your occupation. That's just an excuse, but that's not really the point of this thread after all. Lots of guys in my occupation and in every occupation get out of shape. I did and decided to fix it.

Yes, two incomes are needed to have a decent living. My wife stayed at home when the kids were young and went back to work part time after they were a bit older. If you decide to have kids you have to make choices about your lifestyle. Anyway, if you don't have a spouse or kids, your cost of living can be much lower than someone who does.

You won't see much sympathy for people who have a job such as the ones we're discussing when they go on strike. It's not the job people have a problem with. It's the idea of going on strike itself.

I guess to sum it up, if I had to walk in front of my office carrying a sign complaining that I was being treated unfairly, just io get a decent deal, why the FU#K would I want to work there? Even after you settle, there will always be resentment and animosity between the two sides.

I'd be inclined to find something else. Just my $0.02


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman, I appreciate the prior post and even some of the last one but there are points that I feel must be addressed.



Milkman said:


> I sink or swim based on my efforts and merit, not on the collective clout of a coercive collective bargaining unit.


The 'coercive' nature of the bargaining unit is only coercive to the degree that management is deceitful, dishonest, and would pry our fingers off of the side of a lifeboat if it came down to it. It sounds unreal doesn't it? Well, it's true. A supervisor once told me - you NEED your union. Then he said that Canada Post was like the big corporation in Futurama - I never watched that show but he likened it to a huge evil empire. They aren't out to work with us or to even be fair. I never thought that I would come to think of them like this but the more that one sees from the inside...well I can't deny what I see. 



Milkman said:


> I've worked at my present employer for 17 years and have never taken a sick day. I have job security because I'm of value to my company, not because I hold a gun to their heads.


The 'gun to their heads' is simply not a realistic or valid visual whatsoever. Collective bargaining was part of the legal rights that were attained in the labour movement back when labour were little more than (and sometimes exactly like) slaves. If the union was gone then the corporation would gravitate as close to the 'old way' as was culturally acceptable. That is NOT an overstatement. It likely does not apply to every unionized workplace either but it applies to this one. 



Milkman said:


> You won't see much sympathy for people who have a job such as the ones we're discussing when they go on strike. It's not the job people have a problem with. It's the idea of going on strike itself.


We don't want to strike either. It is in effect, a pay cut. Whatever days we are out on strike we get no pay for. If it was a full blown strike then we would get $175 per week - I have paid my union over $5000.00 since I started working for them. Currently, because we do have strike action going on (even though it is only taking place in one province) benefits are cut off across the country, this includes vacation that may have been booked for 4 months. Our union decided that to 'disrupt' the labour is the only way to get the corporation to take some of the matters seriously.



Milkman said:


> I guess to sum it up, if I had to walk in front of my office carrying a sign complaining that I was being treated unfairly, just io get a decent deal, why the FU#K would I want to work there? Even after you settle, there will always be resentment and animosity between the two sides.


The resentment is there anyway...it is there because of the history that the corporation has built up from treating people terribly for years and years. When I started, I couldn't understand why some people said the things that they said and I heard many times...you just wait - you'll see. Those people were right. Many of those people cannot do something else, many of them have 'so much time in' that they feel to stick it out is their best option, and still others don't have the confidence in their ability to get something else. Everyone isn't made the same way. Furthermore, the worst worker(s) are treated as good as the good workers in between contract negotiations, and the good workers are treated as bad as the bad workers during negotiations.



Milkman said:


> I'd be inclined to find something else.


 That's what I am going to do, but it will take a lot of time and a lot of effort that I didn't really want to consider at age 44. Most people have families or other hurdles in life that keep them from doing it. In my area (goegraphically speaking) they have no choice. They could quit and take a job that is $12 or maybe $15 an hour but most people will 'tough it out' because they have family responibilities and the job market here is less than desirable too...not to mention that we are the highest taxed region in the country and all of the employers say "well yes, it is less money but that's because of the quality of life in the Maritimes"...what a laugh...'quality of life' when you are taxed more and make less.

torndownunit - I know how everyone feels. I worked for a pizza joint as a delivery driver, after that I worked manufacturing tires for Michelin for 9 years, then I worked on an oil rig, light home renovations and furnace cleaning, in a welding shop, a plastic factory, a cardboard factory, in a railyard...believe me...I thought that Canada Post was going to be great. We pay for our benefits plan too...but it is cheap enough that we can look at that as free but so are the coverages, and every year they give us a list of more stuff that isn't covered. 

Being on the 'inside' is different but I'll tell you that what I make IS NOT WORTH what the wear and tear of being a letter carrier is on a human. I did NOTHING for a year except carry mail. As I have stated, I felt like I should have been in the hospital every day after I did the job for 4 months...and I am the guy who only 5 years ago would climb Jumpingpound Ridge and run the ridges, then run the downhill. I did P90X the spring prior to going out as a letter carrier and at 210 pounds I was doing 25 chin ups. Anyway, I guess it is human nature to see the grass as greener but I wouldn't do it again if they said that they would pay me $40 an hour. I'd decline. What wage is worth being immobilized to the point that you cannot have a life? That's my story.

I think it was dave who commented about the vacation time...I get it Dave...I do...now this is one area of Canada Post that I agree has pretty good allowances, but it is still 14 years before you get 5 weeks with them. You get 1 week per 7 years and start with 3 weeks (not when you start working for them but when you get permanent status - so you might work a couple/few years before that...I do know people who were casual for 10 years). 

Now, in Europe, many people start with 6 or 8 or even 10 weeks because they focus more on quality of life and 'we' focus more on being like the USA ('if they do it then we have to' sort of mentality). The last week of vacation I took, I laid around waiting for my knees to stop hurting. They were still hurting when I went back to work. No projects done around the house, no travel...nothing...just pain. Not only that but after having 8 and a half years of service I still couldn't get ONE WEEK of vacation in July or August.

Now, I am inside and as I said before, I am part time. I am away in the evenings but that's fine by me. For people with families - if they go inside they likely want to be full time with family expenses but that will put them on midnight shift (midnight until 8am) for 15 years, then afternoon shift (4pm to midnight) for another 10 or maybe even 15 more.

Anyone who thinks that it is overpaid then I encourage you (if you don't make more than that already) to go fill out an application and give 'er a 'go' as we say in the Maritimes.

I can't wait to get the F out.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

This thread is getting long, I will take a read through it but I don't think anyone used the word "overpaid" yet. I certainly would not. We have had the "union" discussion on here a few times before. There are those that are pro union and those that are not. I personally see both sides to it. But there has been a change over the past 15 years or so that has forever changed the landscape. Accountability. All the major corporations that had, and still have unions has done everything in their power to switch to a system of accountabilty. The auto industry has been the leader in this area and since I spent 24 years in it on both sides of the debate, I can speak with some authority on it.

Abuse of any system has to be addressed. It cannot be allowed to fester and mutate to the point that it gets totally out of control. Many of the major "manufacturing" companies allowed these systems to get totally out of control. Not sure what its like at Canada Post or some others. The animosity that accumulates over the years between first line management and the union member comes from the give and take. Most times when the company had to "give" to the union they "took" from management to pay for it. So when you have some dude that has no union protection and he has to perform to get paid and retain his job he feels a bit shit upon when the guy he is supervising can not show up for work, show up drunk, not perform the assigned tasks, slip on a bar of soap and get every summer off paid etc etc.

These abuses never took place back in the day when hard faught negotiations resulted in basic things like mandatory breaks and lunch periods. Overtime rules, unsafe work refusals, consideration of seniority over favoritism. Not being fired or layed off due to an illness and many other basic things that today, would be normal in any shop unionized or not. No employer in 2011 would get away with these things period. There is no need for a union to "fight" for these basic things any longer. So what is left? Wages and Benefits, period.

If you walk into a auto plant today you will see every single person working and its as about as efficient as you can make it. Gone are the days of job banks, where you could essentially not be layed off due to a work shortage. You actually got to sit home and get paid. You are expected to perform your duties and are paid without harrassement for doing so. 

One of the things that has always made me giggle a bit is people that comment about how much money the company is making. Is there something wrong with that? What are they in business for? The standard in business is to maximize profit and minimize cost. The employees are entitled to be paid a fair wage for the work that they do and thats it. They are not owners/partners and they are not entitled to any profits beyond that. If you want a say in the business decisions than buy some stock and cast a vote. Every single negotiation that I ever went through the union continously trotted out the financials of the company and said "Hey, look how much money they are making" To me, people should be happy to see huge profits, it means that the company is doing well and my job is secure, provided they dont close it and move to China to save on wages and benefits.


----------



## davetcan (Feb 27, 2006)

Yeah it was me  7 weeks is excessive no matter how you cut it. I'd sure like it, don't get me wrong, but unless you're a teacher or MP, it's probably not going to happen. We start with 2 weeks at our place and can get 4 weeks after 20 years. Used to be 5 after 20 as I said earlier. My niece works for the PO, as did her father before her. She's still "part-time" or "temp" or whatever the hell they call it now, not sure how long she'll have to wait to get on full time, if ever. At the end of the day most of us who are still working after this last recession are damn lucky, if you're paid reasonably well even better. Most corporations are greedy, it's a given, that's why they're in business. Thank God I've only got a few years left, if the stress doesn't kill me first 




smorgdonkey said:


> I think it was dave who commented about the vacation time...I get it Dave...I do...now this is one area of Canada Post that I agree has pretty good allowances, but it is still 14 years before you get 5 weeks with them. You get 1 week per 7 years and start with 3 weeks (not when you start working for them but when you get permanent status - so you might work a couple/few years before that...I do know people who were casual for 10 years).


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

davetcan said:


> Yeah it was me  7 weeks is excessive no matter how you cut it. I'd sure like it, don't get me wrong, but unless you're a teacher or MP, it's probably not going to happen. We start with 2 weeks at our place and can get 4 weeks after 20 years. Used to be 5 after 20 as I said earlier. My niece works for the PO, as did her father before her. She's still "part-time" or "temp" or whatever the hell they call it now, not sure how long she'll have to wait to get on full time, if ever. At the end of the day most of us who are still working after this last recession are damn lucky, if you're paid reasonably well even better. Most corporations are greedy, it's a given, that's why they're in business. Thank God I've only got a few years left, if the stress doesn't kill me first


I get what you are saying Dave but why should people have to work their lives away and retire when they are almost dead only to be poor?

I guess my main point is that the richest of the rich shouldn't be able to be that rich and everybody should be able to have a fair standard of living and damn everyone should have a couple of months off every year - not just teachers. 

Europe has it right - quality of life. The way that everything is based on money (particularly in North America) just messes everything up. The peopel who caused the 'recession' still just kept getting richer...they never lost anything...yet all of the people who don't get paid well and don't get adequate vacation time, and don't have benefits will get to pay back a ridiculously disproportionate amount of that cost ('cost' being the cost of the recession). Meanwhile the rich institutions that caused it just look down from their ivory towers amused by the little ants running around.

...and I'm going to cut this point short because most of my posts are long & many people who check in on this thread are going to want to gag me and throw me into the stockade soon!


----------



## davetcan (Feb 27, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> II guess my main point is that the richest of the rich shouldn't be able to be that rich and everybody should be able to have a fair standard of living and damn everyone should have a couple of months off every year - not just teachers.


I think the Russians tried that, LOL. Well, except for the vacation bit.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

torndownunit said:


> sulphur, I am not going to debate you I just want to bring up a point. You really don't think the unions share some of the responsibility with their own greed, bad management, and shortcomings in a lot of cases? They seem the be blameless in your analysis which I think is far from the fact.


Don't get me wrong here, I'm not a flag waving unionist that thinks that they can do no wrong. Yes, I do agree that the union can be just as responsible, in most cases, for the situatiion that they are in. There are many unionized workers that are militant and just end up making thngs worse for everybody. 
What I consider greed is making a ton of money and asking for consessions. If you read my post it states that quite clearly. Again, what will happen in hard times with this company? I'll be out of a job, that's what.
Either side is not blameless, I never said anything to that effect. We were just trying to hold on to what we had. Most guys that I spoke with pre-strike, would have been more than happy to just continue on with what we had but that wasn't in the companies cards. Now we are making far less than before and no way to compensate that loss. 

Sure, "if you don't like it quit mentallity" gets you nowhere either and it's nothing that I haven't heard before, especially from management What about a guy with enough vested time in at a company that leaving isn't financially viable. What about the house you own, the friends, your kids friends. Just drop all of that and leave because you went on strike. That makes a lot of sense. Yes, there is resentment going back, especially after such a long strike, I've seen it. Thankfully, I work at one of the "better" plants that have few if any sh*t disturbers. Besides, I started over after the mine shut down in Manitoba and starting over fresh at a new mine isn't easy either.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

If any of my comments offended anyone, as always, I regret that and offer my apology.

I absolutely have no bone to pick with employees of Canada Post. I dislike the concept of Unionized workforces. The idea of going on strike just doesn't make any sense to me. 

I also have no problem with anyone who has a well paying job whether they have a PHD or dropped out of school. Work is work and as such has dignity and deserves respect.

I have had no choice but to be a member on a couple of occasions and both times I managed to work myself into a salaried position within months.

Regarding this strike however, for me personally I don't forsee an impact.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Milkman, I remember you from g.com years ago and jdbluesville forums. (I ended up with black betty and still have "her") 
You always seemed to be a good guy and you are entitled to your opinions, I have no problem with that.
Just a couple of comments hit close to home on a sensitive subject, that's all.
I think that this is a fairly good discussion that could have turned into a flame war on other boards.
Must be the Canadian mentality.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2011)

smorgdonkey said:


> Check your quotes on that one...I didn't say that.


Fixed. Sorry, multi-quote mess up.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2011)

smorgdonkey said:


> Yes, it is a lot of money but it began as a public service and it is still a service more than a pure business. Even though the corporation has been eroding the service for years now while the employees have been protesting that.


Once the decision was made to run it as a arms length corporation it became a full-on business. With a all the trappings and goals of a full-on business. Namely: to be profitable. One of the goals of the Postal Act, and a reason for the arms-length move, was to ensure the long term stability and viability of the corporation. To un-encumber it from any other federal service or organization. And with profits in the bank that goal is being met.



> I can't consider that because the numbers are WAY out of whack!! If I go full length to retirement my pension will only be $2000 per month...BUT I want IN on that pension that pays me the same salary retired as when I worked.


I rounded up a touch to $50k, but if you're at half of that, that reduces the numbers by about 1/3. Not out of whack at all.



> In the recession, the CEO not only 'green lighted' the bonus plan (so she could get her $400 000.00 before she left for Britain), she also had flat screen TVs installed EVERYWHERE, in every facility in the country that display corporation rhetoric.


No doubt there's some waste but let me address the CEO's bonus plan: why shouldn't she get that money? The company is profitable. It's employing Canadians. She is doing her job and being compensated for it. And she has no unilateral powers to give herself a raise. The board of directors of the corporation approved that. And they represent the shareholders (the government of Canada in this case). They felt she did her job well enough to deserve that money. That's...well...that's business. If you want what she has I suggest you go for it. We live in a country that lets you try, no matter who you are or where you came from. That's pretty awesome.

If you want me to believe that money should have been divided equally between all the workers well, on that we will always differ. I don't think all workers are equal. I don't think company profits should always trickle down. I don't think failure should be rewarded, and I think that success is most certainly worth more at the top because the risks and rewards are greater for the company. I see nothing wrong with that.



> The biggest issue is the health and safety of the workforce. The 'new' mork methods are dangerous and have caused a large increase in injuries in the areas which they are now being used. Canada Post had 9000 approved WCB claims last year...that is 20% of the injuries in a mere 6% of the 'government employees' (notice the ' marks there).


I'll admit that's not good. So why is 3.3% in raises being discussed? Why is it not just workplace safety changes? Honestly: you don't need a union to effect workplace safety changes in this day and age. The government has legislated workplace safety standards and does the enforcement.



> Whether the math is far off or dead on, there is no denying that this is a huge outfit which has been around a long time and has massive infrastructure. To deregulate mail and open it to competition and/or privatize it would be disastrous for any rural area which depends upon 'real' mail.


This is a bit out of left field. I have no idea what you're talking about when you talk about de-regulation.



> Well, oil field workers get paid really well and can do the job with a grade 8 education. I have worked in the oilfields so I do know what they do. The 'conditions' on the rigs are not as good as being an inside worker at Canada Post but as a carrier (you may already have read me say it) I felt like I should have been in the hospital EVERY DAY after I did it for about 4 months. Seriously...3500 stairs and 18 km while carrying 20-30 pounds (sometimes more). After a day running rod and casing, sure there was fatigue but NOTHING like being a letter carrier on my old route. So...perhaps the oil workers should get $10 per hour less and the big oil execs can trim $50 grand off of their bonuses (there were receptionists getting $50 G bonuses 6 years ago) and we can all pay $0.40 per liter of fuel again. The YEARS that it takes to get the 40 hours per week job with Canada Post is NOT a 'lucky' sitaution to be in. As I have also stated...I have had 2 jobs in the private sector which paid more than Canada Post.


You're not bound to the Canada Post job. They offered a rate, you accepted it. You're not indentured to them. If you don't like it, just look else where. And really, I think that's the major difference between pro-union and anti-union. If I don't like something I'm doing for a living I feel the only person responsible for changing that is me. That the workplace shouldn't be changed to suit my needs. It isn't "my job" (as *sulphur* called it when temporary workers were bussed in to the coal mine as they were striking) -- it's "the company's offer of a job" and I don't have to take that job if I don't like the terms. No one does. In fact: if no one did, the company would have to start offering better terms out of necessity. That people are lining up to undercut you shows the gravity of the times. You might feel that escape velocity is so hard as to be impossible but some of that is psychosomatic. Change is hard, but not impossible and if you want it bad enough you'll persevere. A living, without any sacrifice, is not an inalienable right.



> I have many ideas which are not pro-union, however, after you see how this corporation works you realize how much you need the union for protection against them. They are NOT on our side but they love to say 'team' a lot. I have had a supervisor accuse me of something and escalate the matter to make a huge issue out of it - and it all stemmed from me making extra effort to charge only 20 minutes of overtime instead of an hour and a half. Great managemnt. I have had to report multiple members of management to a third party which handles workplace conflict. I have never had even an informal councilling session in my career until I got this particular supervisor...and I have used one sick day in about 3 years.


I'll point to GuitarCanada's excellent post and say: I think a lot of the animosity is many, many years (like what now? 50+?) of union/management friction. I've worked in very large companies that were non-union that ran just fine. There was no blue-collar/white-collar divide in the manufacturing section. Everyone got along. It wasn't perfect. But it was far less antagonistic than what I see in the government sector here in Ottawa.



> I may have said this before too but the 3.3% raise was based on a plan that DELETED the bonus which is about the same amount so in effect our union (yes, the big greedy union) was asking for a ZERO raise in year one and the 2+ in the other 2 years.


Question: do union dues get paid on bonuses? Or just on salary? Why is pay-for-performance a bad thing? We have it my industry (semi-conductors, software, comp & elec engineering) and it's great. Work harder, earn more. Work less, get less. That seems right and fair to me. And you even get to set your own goals (which get approved by upper management of course) but the definition of "what is working harder" is within your control to some extent. Coin-operated employees can work well.



> Perhaps the most important part of all of this is that the people who make LESS should be making more...the postal workers shouldn't be making less. I like this example: if I 'just worked for Canada Post' and I was able to start at 40 hours per week and continue that...I probably wouldn't even be able to buy this house that I live in now. I happened to have equity in another property that I could use as collateral but there's no way that my 'big money' postie job would have put me in this house.


If all the people who made the least thought this way, and left, the result would be Canada Post would have to pay more to attract replacements. The union in a sense prevents this from happening by setting pay scales and rates in collective bargaining that tie the corporations hands and prevent them from attracting talent with the right amount of pay.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2011)

sulphur said:


> I think that this is a fairly good discussion that could have turned into a flame war on other boards.
> Must be the Canadian mentality.


I suspect there'll be two sides on this even at the end of this thread. But I do value all the viewpoints the union members have voiced. It's insight I don't often get (I have a father-in-law who's a city labourer and long time union member and that's about it for real direct exposure to union life).

For certain I've enjoyed the discussion.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

sulphur said:


> Milkman, I remember you from g.com years ago and jdbluesville forums. (I ended up with black betty and still have "her")
> You always seemed to be a good guy and you are entitled to your opinions, I have no problem with that.
> Just a couple of comments hit close to home on a sensitive subject, that's all.
> I think that this is a fairly good discussion that could have turned into a flame war on other boards.
> Must be the Canadian mentality.


Wow, Black Betty was a beauty. I actually had it for a few weeks. I'd still have it but I'm just not a Bigsby guy. 

Anyway, topics on unions are only one step away from religion and politics in terms of volatility.

Opinionated guys like me don't help, but I'm just voicing a point of view which I think is shared by many.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

iaresee said:


> No doubt there's some waste but let me address the CEO's bonus plan: why shouldn't she get that money? The company is profitable. It's employing Canadians. She is doing her job and being compensated for it. And she has no unilateral powers to give herself a raise. The board of directors of the corporation approved that. And they represent the shareholders (the government of Canada in this case). They felt she did her job well enough to deserve that money.


Ok. I'll concede. I will say one thing relative to it though: 
If the person in that position could have sat, done nothing and coasted and the business would have been BETTER. She cut things that built the business and she BORROWED $2.5 billion to replace machinery which processes the part of the business that is shrinking. 



iaresee said:


> I'll admit that's not good. So why is 3.3% in raises being discussed? Why is it not just workplace safety changes? Honestly: you don't need a union to effect workplace safety changes in this day and age. The government has legislated workplace safety standards and does the enforcement.


3.3% in raise for this year is being discussed because the union would like to have the bonus system scrapped (which is pretty much 3.3%...or maybe only 3%. They don't want a bonus system 'in place of wages' which is exactlty what it is. They call it a 'corporate team incentive' and with no other aspects of the corporation either working the mail or even working with the people who work the mail or even listening to the expetise of the people working the mail - there is NO TEAM. The only teamwork is the people in CUPW working together to move mail. Sometimes the workers are even that fortunate.

The government seems to be staying out of the 'enforcement of the safety' as I said, 9000 approved WCB claims last year. I think that any normal operation would have been investigated by now.



iaresee said:


> You're not bound to the Canada Post job. They offered a rate, you accepted it. You're not indentured to them. If you don't like it, just look else where.


You are right...they hired me UNDER CONTRACT so they can continue to employ me UNDER CONTRACT without taking things away from me.

I've said it before.....many people would be shocked and amazed at how this place treats its employees.

For the record, I would like the 'new sick leave plan' better...because I don't use sick time and the 'new system' offers personal days...now the personal days, I'll use but I don't lie about being sick just because I have a 'sick leave plan'. So the new one would be better for me and since I plan to be out of there entirely in a few years, all the more reason to 'not give a S...' but I am not the type of person to look out for only me. I look out for the greater good and corporate greed may indeed be the reality but it sure as he77 isn't for the greater good. I'd also dive in front of a moving vehicle to save a kid-that's just me. Getting off track a bit but the current sick leave plan is in place because the physical wear of the job is considerable. It was negotiated for and agreed to by the corporation. The contract that is negotiated is as much the corporation's as it is the union's. 

Without the union the wage would likely be $14 per hour...but we wouldn't be having this discussion because I would have never started working for them. In fact, if I knew that I was only going to work half of my first year I wouldn't likely be working for them.



iaresee said:


> If all the people who made the least thought this way, and left, the result would be Canada Post would have to pay more to attract replacements. The union in a sense prevents this from happening by setting pay scales and rates in collective bargaining that tie the corporations hands and prevent them from attracting talent with the right amount of pay.


Um...so, we are underpaid...? Please call Canada Post and tell them that.

Truth is that they don't need 'talent'...and if they did, they wouldn't recognize it anyway. They need people who will learn a job and do that job...their problem is that they don't see that the people working there have to know anything - they just think that they need a body in a position so when someone is really good at a job, they tend to change things for the worse and make that person's knowledge/ability null.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Milkman said:


> If any of my comments offended anyone, as always, I regret that and offer my apology.
> 
> I absolutely have no bone to pick with employees of Canada Post. I dislike the concept of Unionized workforces. The idea of going on strike just doesn't make any sense to me.
> 
> ...


That sums up exactly how I feel on every point. Just a whole lot better than I can put it though.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Milkman said:


> If any of my comments offended anyone, as always, I regret that and offer my apology.
> 
> I absolutely have no bone to pick with employees of Canada Post. I dislike the concept of Unionized workforces. The idea of going on strike just doesn't make any sense to me.
> 
> ...


That sums up exactly how I feel on every point. Just a whole lot better than I can put it though.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> I get what you are saying Dave but why should people have to work their lives away and retire when they are almost dead only to be poor? *That's a choice. My father in law sold shoes for an hourly wage for 40 years and retired with his house paid for and enough of a bank account to do the things he wanted to do. Granted, he wasn't touring Europe and eating caviar and drinking champagne. But he knew that he had to put some away from every paycheck, and he did - and raised 6 kids at the same time.*
> 
> I guess my main point is that the richest of the rich shouldn't be able to be that rich and everybody should be able to have a fair standard of living and damn everyone should have a couple of months off every year - not just teachers. *As someone else noted, that's been tried. Successfully? Not so much (see USSR, Vietnam, China)*
> 
> ...


Unions had their purpose and their day...but that is pretty far in the past now, with very rare exceptions. As others have noted, the standards they fought for in the 1920's-50's are mostly law now - safety, minimum wages, mandatory minimum holidays, etc etc etc. It ended up getting very overblown and the _entitlements_ that were fought for and conceded by corporations are in many cases very unhealthy for the corporations and, in turn, ultimately to those who demanded and received them in the first place.

As to Canada Post, to me it's the same as above with all government unions. They're ingrained and not going away any time soon, but it costs us all as taxpayers way more to support the unionized environment than what it would be in an open market situation. And I honestly don't believe the good workers would be making any less, there would be so much overhead dropped that it would be easy to pay on an even keel and be ahead net dollars. Pay for performance is the way to go - I've been in that sort of environment for 27 years now and make a nice living, thank you. I try to get to know my carriers a little bit and for the most part they are great people happy to take 1-2 minutes and have a chat. I have no agenda against Canada Post or their workers, I use them lots in my work and rely on them and think service is better than the broad reputation.

I've had lots of friends in unions and, for the most part, they haven't much liked it. The biggest one that pisses me off is that they never end up with as much pension as is promised to them through the course of their career. Another big one is that unions support political AND OTHER causes that some or all workers disagree with, but they are powerless to do anything about it (even in a majority situation) and helplessly watch their money go to said causes. The union brass sure doesn't get paid like 'equality for all', do they?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Do you suppose the general public have more or less sympathy for Canada Post employees when their lives are disrupted by this strike. Do you suppose unemployed people who mailed Father's Day gifts are going to be supportive of these actions?


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

So.... I have no beef with unions or with rotating strikes or with non unions either. In the end it IS the customer that gets its in the end. This strike business has had no impact on me till now though.



> CTV.ca News Staff Canada Post has locked out its 48,000 unionized workers across the country, saying that rotating 24-hour strikes have cost the company almost $100 million.


 CTV Edmonton - Canada Post suspends operations across country - CTV News

Sooooo 100 million is a piss in the tank for Canada Post. BOO HOO they lost some CEO's golf budget. To respond by CLOSING EVERYTHING is I think far more immature than I could express in words (and I can be REALLY immature too). Now, instead of 100 Million they can cry 1 BEEEELEEEEONNNN all they want I wont be listening.


----------



## tubetwang (Dec 18, 2007)

i sold 4 amps lately and had to ship them to Hawai and California.

Luckily, they made it before the strike.

Everything is on hold now but.


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

The lack of impact this has on my life is a good indicator of this institution's rapidly accelerating redundancy.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

iaresee said:


> The lack of impact this has on my life is a good indicator of this institution's rapidly accelerating redundancy.


Yeah I think it's becoming more and more evident that snail mail is in its final phase. See, when people are forced to find alternatives to the same old, same old they suddenly discover that the alternatives are actually much better than what they've become used to. Many never come back.

This action will only serve to hasten the demise of traditional mail.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Milkman said:


> Yeah I think it's becoming more and more evident that snail mail is in its final phase. See, when people are forced to find alternatives to the same old, same old they suddenly discover that the alternatives are actually much better than what they've become used to. Many never come back.
> 
> This action will only serve to hasten the demise of traditional mail.


Certainly, in terms of bills it will have a negative impact on CP. Most every major company now offers electronic billing. So I suspect many that were not signed up probably just did. I have most of mine set up that way already. Just easier for me as I am tied to this ridiculous machine everyday.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Certainly, in terms of bills it will have a negative impact on CP. Most every major company now offers electronic billing. So I suspect many that were not signed up probably just did. I have most of mine set up that way already. Just easier for me as I am tied to this ridiculous machine everyday.


I'm in the process of doing the same. I already pay all my bills via internet banking so there's really no reason to receive paper, and honestly bills and flyers are pretty much all I receive in the mail box.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

it HAD to come at THIS moment in time.

I wanted to spend 4 dolars on this, and 4 shipping by regular mail:










[HR][/HR]







[HR][/HR][SIZE=+1]*Neosid F100B Beads*[/SIZE]  CLICK to see Neosid

[HR][/HR] [SIZE=+1]*Neosid F100B Beads*
High quality RF beads made in high frequency *F100B material*, equivalent to Philips 4E1, EPCOS U17, ISKRA 2E, and TDK K8 ferrite. Typically a single bead is rated for *20 to 50 ohms from 30 to 200Mhz*, color coded *GREEN*. Factory boxed in 3,500 and 5,000 count boxes, or available in smaller quantities. Full details on the Neosid site, size is D3,5x1,3x3. Excellent for oscillation suppression, interference reduction and RFI/EMI suppression. Very high quality parts.








Bead on a 2W resistor, showing good lead clearance[HR][/HR]LOC:IND03[/SIZE]*NEW
46,000 pcs.* *20/$1
100/$4
3,500/$105
5,000/$145*




Then there is this that I DID purchase last Friday, was mailed yesterday to me:

Home > Unique Items > Miscellaneous Items 

SALE! - Gear Drive Ball Bearing Antique Tuning Capacitor












 
 
Item Number : G17992







Unit Price: $2.99















Quantity













Refer this page to a friend


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Well, they're locked out now. Unfortunately anyone waiting for deliveries will be waiting for awhile. 
http://media.infopost.ca/en/


----------



## bagpipe (Sep 19, 2006)

Oh Man - no junk mail? Say it ain't so! ! lofu


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

I have a pedal coming up from the USA  

Since I won't ship with anything but USPS/Canada Post when coming across the boarder, I can basically stop reading the TGP emporium (maybe that is a good thing) LOL 

I'll focus on the Canadian market and use a different courier for delivery.

TG


----------



## NB_Terry (Feb 2, 2006)

Fedex ground seems to have the best rates of the couriers that I've looked at. $17 to ship a pedal east coast to west coast, 7 business days. 

I saw Canada Post people delivering to the super mailboxes today, but I would imagine that new mail going into the system isn't going anywhere.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

Is anyone here proud and appreciative of Canada, a.k.a. The (miraculously thriving) Socialist Democracy? Take a moment to think about why Canada is such a great place to live. If we sit back and let the EU's, USA's and Asia's of the world bend us over, we will only have ourselves to blame if we do not stand up and defend ourselves. Canadian worker's rights are not something to be a poseur neo-con about and should not be taken lightly. Stand up and fight while you still can because Canada is a very blessed nation and I for one intend to assist in keeping it that way for as long as I can. 

Learn the truth about what is happening with CPC and their workers. Go to cupw.ca for starters. My apologies to anyone who is offended by my previous statements. My deepest apologies to anyone who is experiencing hardships related to the issues associated with my employer. I am a hard working, educated man and I intend to stay that way. You are welcome to join me.


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

prodigal_son said:


> Go to cupw.ca for starters.


On the list of places where The Truth is told, a union's website is not among them IMO.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

iaresee said:


> On the list of places where The Truth is told, a union's website is not among them IMO.


IYO, perhaps not... I just knew there had to be some flaw in what I had to say there. Glad you found it. Got any better ideas on where to find the truth about this situation? 

I am hoping that within the next 5 to 10 years I can acquire complete and unlimited access to all information pertaining to every internet occurance from the past 30 years so that I can rule the world once and for all. Do you know where one could find THAT kind of truth? I sure as heck know where it won't be found..


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

prodigal_son said:


> IYO, perhaps not... I just knew there had to be some flaw in what I had to say there. Glad you found it. Got any better ideas on where to find the truth about this situation?
> 
> I am hoping that within the next 5 to 10 years I can acquire complete and unlimited access to all information pertaining to every internet occurance from the past 30 years so that I can rule the world once and for all. Do you know where one could find THAT kind of truth? I sure as heck know where it won't be found..


I'd say you'll probably find more truth here, but really this depends on what you believe is right. 
http://media.infopost.ca/en/

If you think this strike will benefit ANYone, be it the strikers, the public, or small businesses, I can't really imagine where you would find "truth" to validate that.


----------



## gtrguy (Jul 6, 2006)

GONE


----------



## starjag (Jan 30, 2008)

I did not know about the $3.2-billion pension deficit. You pay now or you pay later, but there is clearly no free lunch! Crazy!


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I think Canada Post is sort of in the same position that Eaton's found itself in a decade ago. The landscape is changing, and if wants to thrive and survive, Canada Post has to redefine itself in a way that keeps what is keepable, but abandons what is not sustainable, keeping in mind its obligation to the country as a public service. CUPW certainly has to play along with this and apply some of its own creativity to arrive at mutually agreeable solutions, but Canada Post management bears the larger responsibility in that regard.

I just find the actions against both postal workers and Air Canada workers over the last 24hrs suspiciously like Bush-era/Wisconsin-style union-busting. There is a pro-business aspect to this government that begins to have an anti-people or "ethically neutral" taint to it. Not a strong one. mind you. More like a saffron flavour than salt or habanero, but its there.

So when the government makes these arguments about the fragility of "the economic recovery", but then does things which might ultimately compromise the long-term full-time employment of people in the very industries it is supporting or strong-arming, just exactly _whose_ economic recovery are we talking about: regular citizens, or Bay Street investors?

Do I agree with everything these unions are fighting over? Not necessarily. But management should not be incapable of identifying mutually agreeable goals, and thinking a little laterally to meet them. Besides, if we're talking economic recovery, what helps more: investors whose money may well sit outside the country not contributing to tax revenues, or regular folks who work for Canada Post, spending money at their local restaurants, car dealerships, building supply stores, and malls, paying taxes with every purchase? This is something many people regularly forget. They look at how much a government settlement or industry outlay is going to add up to, and they forget about what happens to the money spent, and how it transforms into federal revenue by regular people spending it.

If there is anything threatening our "fragile economic recovery" it's that the strong dollar has Canadians spending money outside the country, rather than inside. Cross-border shopping and vacationing puts less money back in our treasury. You may pay HST when you bring stuff back across the border, but your purchase outside the country also paid for the wages of an employee outside Canada, not inside.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

I have been following that page as well. Agreed. However, I am willing to bet that the views of CPC's media relations department does not equal the views of the situation from the point of view of a lowly letter carrier. Imagine your employer decided to be viciously aggressive in proposing to remove a number of the staple long standing benefits your position offered while they net their highest profits ever. What is the appropriate civilized reaction? C'mon man. Tell me the truth.

Imagine your employer opted to stop contributing to your indexed pension fund because it was allegedly doing fine all on it's own. Hmm..


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

prodigal_son said:


> I have been following that page as well. Agreed. However, I am willing to bet that the views of CPC's media relations department does not equal the views of the situation from the point of view of a lowly letter carrier. Imagine your employer decided to be viciously aggressive in proposing to remove a number of the staple long standing benefits your position offered while they net their highest profits ever. What is the appropriate civilized reaction? C'mon man. Tell me the truth


Both the Union and CPC sites are obviously biased.

See, the thing about my benefits is that I negotiate those directly with my employer. I don't allow a collective bargaining unit to drag me down. Neither do I require one to prop me up.
I get good benefits and fair remuneration because I do things this way. My company prospers because we no longer have a union perpetuating an uncompetitive cost structure.

I hold no ill will toward postal workers. I'm sure many of them work hard and do a good job. In order for a union to work however, the other workers (the ones who don't work hard or do a good job) must be protected. Unless the demographics at Canada post are much different than in other union environments I've experienced, the second group may be bigger than some would like to admit.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

What are Solvency and Going Concern Deficits? | Canada's Postal Transformation Project

Here's some truth for ya laddy..


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

prodigal_son said:


> IYO, perhaps not... I just knew there had to be some flaw in what I had to say there. Glad you found it. Got any better ideas on where to find the truth about this situation?


No, I don't. But I don't think The Truth will be found on either the union's site or on Canada Post's site. They are biased towards their own interests.

Best bet? Read it all and try to sort it out for yourself.



> I am hoping that within the next 5 to 10 years I can acquire complete and unlimited access to all information pertaining to every internet occurance from the past 30 years so that I can rule the world once and for all. Do you know where one could find THAT kind of truth? I sure as heck know where it won't be found..


I actually work with a company that does spook-scale information gathering and data mining from publicly available news sources on the internet. What you seek is available, but it costs a lot of money to access this kind of technology. They can aggregate more than just text too: video, audio, images -- they can all be searched, indexed and mined for information. It's pretty cool tech. The video side of it was started here in Canada actually, an incubated sub-company of Newbridge and Terry Matthews.



prodigal_son said:


> I have been following that page as well. Agreed. However, I am willing to bet that the views of CPC's media relations department does not equal the views of the situation from the point of view of a lowly letter carrier.


I don't disagree.



> Imagine your employer decided to be viciously aggressive in proposing to remove a number of the staple long standing benefits your position offered while they net their highest profits ever. What is the appropriate civilized reaction? C'mon man. Tell me the truth.


I've had this happen. Where benefits changed while I worked for a company. I had two choices:

1. Suck it up buttercup;
2. Quit and find something else.

I opted to do both...suck it short term while finding something else. It's my time and if the terms under which I trade it to my employer change, I can trade my time for money with someone else.



> Imagine your employer opted to stop contributing to your indexed pension fund because it was allegedly doing fine all on it's own. Hmm..


See, now you're talking about stuff that _most_ of the civilized world does not enjoy: an indexed pension fund. So it's not hard for me to imagine employment where my employer doesn't contribute to any sort of retirement net. That's reality for me, has been since I joined to workforce post-university.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

And this is why I give the social institution of "retirement" about another 15 years. It will change from what we conceive of right now. The queston is how society will make the transition. Obviously, we can't just have defined benefits on a Friday, and something else Monday morning. The challenge is to plan out an orderly transition over time that doesn't hurt people.

But first you have to accept the proposition that it can't stay forever the way it is now. Unions are not quite as prepared as employers to make that shift (though that does not presume greater foresight and wisdom on the part of employers), and investment firms - the people who make their money off investing those large pension funds - are not quite so willing to let go of the old ways either.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> I'd say you'll probably find more truth here, but really this depends on what you believe is right.
> http://media.infopost.ca/en/


There are a lot of things that are opinion and opinions can vary a lot. I can say this: I have never been a 'rah rah' union person but I have worked for Canada Post for 9 years. In that 9 years I have found them to be the least trustworthy of any place that I have worked in my life, and I do have quite a varied work experience. Canada Post is a master of telling half truths for the purpose of deception. 
*Examples from their media campaign:*
-7 weeks vacation. They never provided the information that one must complete 28 years service to attain that. They just want people to think that postal workers are spoiled.
-17% decline in first class mail since 2006. That is 'first class mail delivered to the door' ONLY. They don't talk about that though because when you factor in all of the first class mail that is being delivered to new super boxes and community mail boxes the volume has actually gone up. Way up. Per capita, it is down. Then we would have to get in to the other types of mail that has 'replaced' the stuff that has disappeared. Anyway, you get the point - deception for the purpose of justifying 'drastic economic actions'.
-banked sick leave. They have never clarified that employees do not get the opportunity to get cash for these days or take an extra paid vacation 'for having saved them'. Just another omission to allow the public to jump to that conclusion.
-despite Canada Post saying that they do not want to 'become a drain on taxpayers' their new sick leave plan has in it a key element which relies on EI to sustain it in certain situations. Is that not downloading cost to the taxpayers? Furthermore, they never mention that the wages of their workers are not a product of the taxpayer.

Canada Post got suckered by the former head Moya Greene who started a postal transformation which she said they could do without borrowing any funds. That project turned into a project that had the corporation borrowing 2.5 BILLION dollars to replace machinery that is way faster but still takes the same number of people to operate and they have put in place work methods which are way harder on the body all the while never taking suggestions or input from the people who work on the machines. During this time of massive expenditure, they also installed many flat screen TVs in every facility and surveillance equipment in every facility. 

Moya took her money and ran to Great Britain and as far as I can see, the execs at Canada Post are too embarrassed that they let Ms Greene play them for suckers and heavily finance their business when she obviously has very little business sense at all. They feel (IMO) that the only way that they can save face is to say "no, she was right - let's continue on with her plans" because they would look stupid (and do look stupid to anyone who knows the score) for letting her do what she did.

The entire upper management of Canada Post Corporation should be fired.

Somewhat comforting to small business owners and others who rely on their mail is that Minister of Labour Raitt will likely legislate Canada Post back to work to end the lockout next week.

I have said it before and I'll say it again...I worked on an oil rig, I was '********' for a welding shop, I worked in tire manufacturing...I've done a lot. Working at Canada Post is an extremely difficult job. My mail route consisted of between 3300 and 3700 stairs every day and between 15 and 18 KM every day - I did not use ONE sick day during the time I was on it and I believe that I have used one sick day in 3 years. 7 of 10 letter carriers quit very early in their careers and $50 000.00 per year gross is not a lot of money. 

I think that it is time that people reset their thinking when it comes to the misconceptions of postal workers. My experience is that they are, for the most part, untrue.

That said, my plan is to leave within a few years. It isn't for me to work this hard and have a management that lives off of my work while not appreciating it at all. I don't need any pats on the back from the people who I work for but I definitely don't need the indignant attitude from them when they couldn't even polish my work boots.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

mhammer said:


> And this is why I give the social institution of "retirement" about another 15 years. It will change from what we conceive of right now. The queston is how society will make the transition. Obviously, we can't just have defined benefits on a Friday, and something else Monday morning. The challenge is to plan out an orderly transition over time that doesn't hurt people.
> 
> But first you have to accept the proposition that it can't stay forever the way it is now. Unions are not quite as prepared as employers to make that shift (though that does not presume greater foresight and wisdom on the part of employers), and investment firms - the people who make their money off investing those large pension funds - are not quite so willing to let go of the old ways either.


Judging by the amount of over 60 people I see at Walmart and behind the counters at all the fast food joints I would say it aint what it used to be.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

I feel like you are trying to one-up me. Weird. I know that if you were to talk to me in person, like; if you knew me better, you would recant some of your sentiment. You sound pretty proud of your profession. Me too. I will post later as I have to take off for a while. Hopefully I can eventually understand your position better.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Judging by the amount of over 60 people I see at Walmart and behind the counters at all the fast food joints I would say it aint what it used to be.


You got that right...and the politicians have made sure that their 'gilded' plan ism untouchable...but they are looking out for their constituents.


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

mhammer said:


> And this is why I give the social institution of "retirement" about another 15 years. It will change from what we conceive of right now. The queston is how society will make the transition. Obviously, we can't just have defined benefits on a Friday, and something else Monday morning. The challenge is to plan out an orderly transition over time that doesn't hurt people.
> 
> But first you have to accept the proposition that it can't stay forever the way it is now. Unions are not quite as prepared as employers to make that shift (though that does not presume greater foresight and wisdom on the part of employers), and investment firms - the people who make their money off investing those large pension funds - are not quite so willing to let go of the old ways either.


+1000 to this. Retirement funds were a "neat idea" but based on wholly unsound financial principals. It does not "always go up" and you cannot always beat inflation on your investments in the long term.

There are amicable exit strategies that can be worked out, but it'll require give on the part of the Union and the Corporation to find it. But first, everyone has to agree that the fund is going away at some point in the not-too-distant future because the idea and execution was flawed.


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

prodigal_son said:


> What are Solvency and Going Concern Deficits? | Canada's Postal Transformation Project
> 
> Here's some truth for ya laddy..


What about it?

I think that post says a lot about how _unsustainable_ pension funds are.

You?


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

smorgdonkey said:


> You got that right...and the politicians have made sure that their 'gilded' plan ism untouchable...but they are looking out for their constituents.


What's the politician's gilded plan you speak of?


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

iaresee said:


> What's the politician's gilded plan you speak of?


Politicians' pension plans that are paid by taxpayers regardless...and after very short service too.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Oh, its not so much that the *funds* go up and down, but that the consumer expectations of retirees and pre-retirees only go up. while the number of income-earning years, and especially the number of years between when one's major life-stage financial obligations (house, car, kids education, etc.) are out of the way and when you make the transition from earned income to pension, seem to only go down. People used to have a good 20+ years in there to save, and pissed away much less of it along the way. Not so much any more. My youngest won't be finished undergrad until I'm around 66. When I was recently chatting with a high school and college friend, who is a high-profile academic psychiatrist (whom you'd think would have wads of money), his alimony payments (something much less common when retirement first came in as a social institution) have assured that he will be working until the end, and several of his kids are still living at home (we're both 59-ish).

As near as I can tell, this puts unbearable burden on pension funds to provide wholly unrealistic ROI to compensate for what people used to save but tend not to anymore.

So, I wouldn't say the idea was "flawed", as much as it was a decent idea with a much shorter shelf life than we imagined it would have.


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

smorgdonkey said:


> Politicians' pension plans that are paid by taxpayers regardless...and after very short service too.


Interesting. Well, like all things public, we should be able to force a say in this. Though, truthfully, they represent a far smaller drain on capital funds than some place as big as Canada Post.

You definitely want to see your leaders "taking a few for the team" as the team goes down. The politicians that get that might enjoy a rise in popularity among the masses.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

smorgdonkey said:


> Politicians' pension plans that are paid by taxpayers regardless...and after very short service too.


The House of Commons and Its Members - Remuneration, Pensions and Entitlements


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

iaresee said:


> I've had this happen. Where benefits changed while I worked for a company. I had two choices:
> 
> 1. Suck it up buttercup;
> 2. Quit and find something else.
> ...


Yes, but every time an employer manages to secure concessions every other employer uses it as a reason _their _employees should also accept concessions and reduced benefits. So while you _can _change employers and "trade your time for money with someone else" eventually every employer will offer the same reduced benefits and (now suddenly standard) concessions.

"Sucking it up" does nothing, changing employers ultimately does nothing, acting collectively may achieve something real. Your two "choices" do nothing to address the structured relations of power and profit that are inherent within all labour contracts.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

iaresee said:


> Interesting. Well, like all things public, we should be able to force a say in this. Though, truthfully, they represent a far smaller drain on capital funds than some place as big as Canada Post.


Well, THEY are using OUR funds and Canada Post employees should be using Canada Post funds. To me, that is different. 



traynor_garnet said:


> Yes, but every time an employer manages to secure concessions every other employer uses it as a reason _their _employees should also accept concessions and reduced benefits. So while you _can _change employers and "trade your time for money with someone else" eventually every employer will offer the same reduced benefits and (now suddenly standard) concessions.
> 
> "Sucking it up" does nothing, changing employers ultimately does nothing, acting collectively may achieve something real. Your two "choices" do nothing to address the structured relations of power and profit that are inherent within all labour contracts.


traynor_garnet...excellent post. I don't support the 'race to the bottom'. A good life should be attainable to all...

On another note, I alluded to 'back to work legislation' and I have information that says it will be drawn up tonight and we'll be back to work Monday. For the customers who are waiting for things 'in transit'...I am very happy for you!


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

traynor_garnet said:


> Yes, but every time an employer manages to secure concessions every other employer uses it as a reason _their _employees should also accept concessions and reduced benefits. So while you _can _change employers and "trade your time for money with someone else" eventually every employer will offer the same reduced benefits and (now suddenly standard) concessions.


Nice theory. My experience says it doesn't work that way. At least in the industry I work in employers are trying to differentiate themselves from each other; fighting for minds. The money may not change from job to job, but the perks vary widely. You can always find something that meets your personal goals: vacation, lifestyle, benefits, location, salaried compensation, etc. There are far too many employers for collusion like you talk about to work at this scale. And data sharing between companies, especially when it comes to data like salaries and benefits and overall compensation, is never common or accurate. These are details companies don't want other companies to know because they're the differentiators when they're trying to hire people.



> "Sucking it up" does nothing, changing employers ultimately does nothing, acting collectively may achieve something real.


You're speaking some big absolutes here. The second option changes your life and is the only one that you have 100% control over. What more do you need than personal freedom? The third option is a roll of a dice -- there's nothing that says collective bargaining will work out in your favour. If you're not "the average employee", but rather an outlier, collective bargaining is unlikely to help you.



> Your two "choices" do nothing to address the structured relations of power and profit that are inherent within all labour contracts.


This I very much disagree with. And, I'll admit, that it's perhaps a divide between the blue collar worker and the white collar worker: I don't view my employer's relationship with me as anything other than mutually beneficial. And I wouldn't work for a company who thought different. From what we've seen said in this thread by the CP employees, Canada Post's upper echelons don't get how to make a happy work force. There should be a mass exodus from their employee to fix this. Not a strike. A company with a double digit attrition rate is not a company that'll be profitable; and a company that isn't profitable is one that starts having C-levels removed and replaced with people who'll figure out how to make happy workers stick around.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I think the difference between you and traynor_garnet, Ian, is the difference between large organizations with huge geographic distribution, and those where there is more direct contact between management and labour. It's also reflective of the difference in decision latitude between private and public sector. Within the public sector, there is generally nothing BUT collective agreements, since few citizens would stand for the fiscal consequences of doing things a different way. Should you attempt to play off one prospective employer against another, that's one thing. Were I to have the opportunity to say "Well, Fisheries and Oceans has put an offer of $$$k on the table. So what are you, Statistics Canada, prepared to do to get me?", or were your son Liam's Grade 1 teacher to have the latitude to say "This school has offered me $$$k, so what's your offer?", that has implications for you as taxpayer. Parity across the system is the name of the game. Not just for taxpayers, but for public sector employers too. Remember that they (the public sector employers) don't make money by snagging people, and they have their annual budget provided to them by provincial or federal parliaments that need to know up frot what labour costs are going to be for that year. Predictability and controllability is also the name of the game.

So if there is no room for customization within thepublic sector, then unions have no choice but to fight for parity. Smart employers adopt a more collaborative and a less adversarial approach. I do't see too many smart public employers.

The other thing that tends to heighten the adversarial nature is that management makes across-the-board decisions. That works in both directions. My own federal union is one of the smaller ones, so once PSAC and PIPSC settle with the employer, we usually reap the benefits without having to threaten strike action. At the same time, should the employer play hardball with any of the other unions, there isn't a chance in hell that we could land a better deal. So public sector uions tend to see themselves are all interdependent and linked. If one goes down, they all do....or at least that's how it can often feel.


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2011)

mhammer said:


> I think the difference between you and traynor_garnet, Ian, is the difference between large organizations with huge geographic distribution, and those where there is more direct contact between management and labour.


Maybe. But I've worked for the 50,000 head shop (at the bottom of the ranks), the 2500 head shop (throughout the ranks) and now the 15 head shop (where mostly ranks don't exist) and it's been pretty consistent throughout.



> It's also reflective of the difference in decision latitude between private and public sector.


Now that's definitely true. But I'll argue: it doesn't have to be this way.



> Within the public sector, there is generally nothing BUT collective agreements, since few citizens would stand for the fiscal consequences of doing things a different way.


And nor should they, but I think CB agreements and fiscally responsible budgeting are not mutually exclusive. I'll explain my position a little further down...



> Should you attempt to play off one prospective employer against another, that's one thing. Were I to have the opportunity to say "Well, Fisheries and Oceans has put an offer of $$$k on the table. So what are you, Statistics Canada, prepared to do to get me?", or were your son Liam's Grade 1 teacher to have the latitude to say "This school has offered me $$$k, so what's your offer?", that has implications for you as taxpayer.


I don't see the problem with this. Neither Stats Can or Fisheries has limitless pockets to attract you one way or the other so, for similar positions, you'd expect similar compensation plus or minus the perks like location, lifestyle, benefits, etc. Just like you'd see between two companies in the private sector.

Plus, I think there's much good that comes from fighting to keep good people. I want to know the teachers that are instructing my sons are there because they're the best, not because they've been coming to work the longest. Merit-based pay helps with this immensely. It also gives schools leeway to attract talent where they need it. Phys Ed programming suffering? Hire one kick butt Phys Ed teacher with your entire new hire budget instead of being forced to split it between 5 teachers. Money goes where money is needed.

Truly the cases of someone standing up in front of an existing employer and demanding more because another company will pay them a bit more are rare because unless you're very, very special and talented it's pretty unlikely someone else will pay you more. Most employers will just say, "If that's what you want to earn you should go work for them" and show you out the door. Seen it happen; didn't go so well for the guy. And, of course, see above: for lateral moves in the private sector it's rarely about the cash.



> Parity across the system is the name of the game. Not just for taxpayers, but for public sector employers too.


This is something I'm quite against. Why should the guy who just clocks in, warms the seat, and then leaves at 5 pm every day make the same as the person in the cubicle next to him who just invented the cure to baldness? Why does merely being in a job for 25 years entitle you to make more than someone who's only been there 5? I believe compensation should be based on your worth to a company, not your hours booked (well, unless your company happens to bill clients by the hour  ).



> Remember that they (the public sector employers) don't make money by snagging people, and they have their annual budget provided to them by provincial or federal parliaments that need to know up frot what labour costs are going to be for that year. Predictability and controllability is also the name of the game.


And to be fair, private sector companies don't have bottomless coffers. Employee salaries aren't limitless. There are budgets set (usually yearly) for new hires, both in terms of head count and dollars. If I have X dollars to hire new people I can spend it on one person, or I can divide it between ten. But once X is used up, I don't get to hire anyone else. There are years where X might be zero (lived through some of those not so long ago). I don't see how that could possibly not work in the public sector. From the top-down perspective you're still setting budgets. You're just not treating everyone as equal workers. Because we're not.



> So if there is no room for customization within thepublic sector, then unions have no choice but to fight for parity. Smart employers adopt a more collaborative and a less adversarial approach. I do't see too many smart public employers.


I can't see any union wanting customization, their very existence is to promote parity. So unions are completely at odds to the way I think the public sector should operate. And that last sentence is a real shame. I'll propose that if there was more inter-divisional competition for heads then lousy managers would be culled a whole lot faster. Losing heads? Well, suddenly people are going to start asking you why you can't keep people in your group. And there's only so many times a manager can blame attrition in their division on anything other than their poor management.



> The other thing that tends to heighten the adversarial nature is that management makes across-the-board decisions. That works in both directions. My own federal union is one of the smaller ones, so once PSAC and PIPSC settle with the employer, we usually reap the benefits without having to threaten strike action. At the same time, should the employer play hardball with any of the other unions, there isn't a chance in hell that we could land a better deal. So public sector uions tend to see themselves are all interdependent and linked. If one goes down, they all do....or at least that's how it can often feel.


I can't say much about that. I'm sure it happens in private companies that way too. I suspect some place like IBM is run very top-down. I don't know. I avoid working any place that structures itself like the military. I don't do well in that kind of environment. 




I said it early, and I'll repeat it: I'm definitely enjoying this conversation with everyone. I don't expect us to settle any of these very long held debates. I do appreciate everyone's different perspective on the issues of employment and compensation and unionization. I may not agree with you, but I don't have to agree with everyone I like to talk with and hang out around. I think it's good and fine and healthy to disagree.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

We'll debate further this weekend. I'll decide whether to give you the Systech board at the end....heh, heh, nyuk nyuk.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

iaresee said:


> :
> :
> :
> I said it early, and I'll repeat it: I'm definitely enjoying this conversation with everyone. I don't expect us to settle any of these very long held debates. I do appreciate everyone's different perspective on the issues of employment and compensation and unionization. I may not agree with you, but I don't have to agree with everyone I like to talk with and hang out around. I think it's good and fine and healthy to disagree.


 I realized this back in highschool. Defending and justifying our positions we hold either teaches us that our positions are for us correct or that we have been in error and need to change ourselves or risk becoming irrelivant. This can only be done when in the company of people who's opinions are not the same as our own.

So, what happens to our STUFF in the mail? Will Canada Customs just sit on it or will they return to sender at the boarder?


----------



## Guest (Jun 16, 2011)

mhammer said:


> We'll debate further this weekend. I'll decide whether to give you the Systech board at the end....heh, heh, nyuk nyuk.




Sounds good.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keeperofthegood said:


> So, what happens to our STUFF in the mail? Will Canada Customs just sit on it or will they return to sender at the boarder?


To my knowledge, anything coming through Customs will be held in Customs until the mail starts moving again. I don't think that we'll be back Monday as the 'wheels of government' turn slower than even I thought...therefor, I think that next Wednesday or Thursday might be the day that things start up again. I wouldn't mind being pleasantly surprised but I don't count on it.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

smorgdonkey said:


> To my knowledge, anything coming through Customs will be held in Customs until the mail starts moving again. I don't think that we'll be back Monday as the 'wheels of government' turn slower than even I thought...therefor, I think that next Wednesday or Thursday might be the day that things start up again. I wouldn't mind being pleasantly surprised but I don't count on it.


woo hooo  I has two of these I want to play with FM only: Low Tech FM Radios need them variable caps though!!! Though in this I think I would need to mount the cap on the outside not inside LOL


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

The bottom line here folks is that 50,000 legally unionized Canadian workers are attempting to fight for the rights of their workforce. All parties involved are now faced with a pension deficit and the union does not want to see the erosion of hard earned workers rights traded for pension solvency when it is a proven fact that the postal service is rapidly evolving and undoubtedly has the potential not only maintain the benefit plan but also continue to be a top notch public service and employer.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...it is always refreshing to get the other side of the story.



prodigal_son said:


> The bottom line here folks is that 50,000 legally unionized Canadian workers are attempting to fight for the rights of their workforce. All parties involved are now faced with a pension deficit and the union does not want to see the erosion of hard earned workers rights traded for pension solvency when it is a proven fact that the postal service is rapidly evolving and undoubtedly has the potential not only maintain the benefit plan but also continue to be a top notch public service and employer.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

This strike has now officially pissed me off.

this is MY beef with Canadapost:
In the year I've been at my new house, I've had a half dozen PACKAGES sent to the wrong house and back to the sender. This is a HUGE headache for me. this does NOT include letters which I'm sure there are lots of. I have received letters AND packages that have been sent to my house incorrectly as well. The service I am getting from my mail carriers is absurdly poor. 

tracking my packages online I've had packages marked as "delivered" in the tracking system, only to receive that package 3 days later. I've had pick up slips mailed to me 2 days after attempted delivery, most of the time I've already gone to the PO to pick up my package with no slip, only tracking information.

lately, my packages have been left on my door step instead of the secure, locked mailbox. packages that clearly fit the additional larger locked boxes.

furthermore, they are getting less and less work to do. despite rising yearly housing and mailboxes, their workload has DECREASED.

If I am getting less clients here at work, I don't walk into my boss' office and ask for a raise. The world is digital. the word load of mail carriers will only continue to decrease.

Unions used to have a place in the work place, some still do, but i firmly believe this union is NOT in the best interest of the people.

ps. yeah, it sucks about their pension deficit. thats the only thing im on the side of the union.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

No employer should be able to simply yank out a pension program from under employees' feet, since people plan their lives out with respect to what they think is going to happen for those 20 years after work. Hell, if construction, aerospace firms, or defense contractors, can sue governments for breach of contract because that government decided that some project was too costly for their tastes and win multi-billion dollar judgments, why the heck shouldn't the same fiduciary responsibility and tort arrangements exist between employees and employers?

I still think it is the case that defined-benefit pensions are getting nearer the end of their lifespan, and there is some deep collaborative thought required. But there is a difference between working out a long-term plan to gradually transition from defined benefits to defined contributions, and suddenly declaring "You know what? This arrangement isn't working out so good for our investors or bottom line, so we're gonna drop it." If the leadership in these organizations (Canada Post and Air Canada) was competent, they would have seen this coming a long time ago, announced, with regret, that adjustments would need to be made over a xx-year transitional period, and solicit ideas for how to move in that direction.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

blam said:


> This strike has now officially pissed me off.
> 
> this is MY beef with Canadapost:
> In the year I've been at my new house, I've had a half dozen PACKAGES sent to the wrong house and back to the sender. This is a HUGE headache for me. this does NOT include letters which I'm sure there are lots of. I have received letters AND packages that have been sent to my house incorrectly as well. The service I am getting from my mail carriers is absurdly poor.
> ...


I suspect some of what you are complaining about is a result of new technology brought in at great cost, by management, to "make things more efficient". If the cashier at Zellers can't get the damn scanner to work on the stuff you want to pay for, they're still doing the work, and it wasn't them that asked for the scanners to be installed. Should rank and file be obliged to take a hit for decisions made by senior management that impair their ability to provide as efficient a service as you'd like?

You are correct that more and more is digital, but there is also more and more that shows up in your mailbox of a commercial nature. At some point, mail service and newspapers will be duking it out over who doesn't have to handle flyers. How long do you figure before the person who delivers the morning paper will say "You want me to shlep 300lbs of newspapers and stuff them with flyers for _how much_?", and the papers will say "Well, we can't afford to pay more than that for the service". There will not be any end in sight any time soon to the number of people who want to sell you stuff and who cannot reach you any other way than by paper ads, coupons, etc. Somebody will bring that to you, so even if all your mail from now until you die is e-mail, there will still be stuff to deliver.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keeperofthegood said:


> woo hooo  I has two of these I want to play with FM only: Low Tech FM Radios need them variable caps though!!! Though in this I think I would need to mount the cap on the outside not inside LOL


I thought that was a bong!!



blam said:


> This strike has now officially pissed me off.
> 
> this is MY beef with Canadapost:
> In the year I've been at my new house, I've had a half dozen PACKAGES sent to the wrong house and back to the sender. This is a HUGE headache for me. this does NOT include letters which I'm sure there are lots of. I have received letters AND packages that have been sent to my house incorrectly as well. The service I am getting from my mail carriers is absurdly poor.
> ...


The service decline is exactly a mechanism of the management itself...they run with less people so that everything is done in a rush. They overstructure routes so that people are in more of a rush. They throw new people to the wolves with little to no practical training so that the quality of their work has to be attained through experience.

The parcel issues that you have had I certainly can't explain. Inconsistency like that should not be possible...so why is it that I don't know anyone personally who has had something 'lost in the mail' or delivered to the wrong address before or since my employment with Canada Post? As I said, I have no explanation.

There is NOT declining work to do...there is MORE work and less people...and we have not walked in to the boss' office and asked for a raise. I was loaded down like a pack mule when I was carrying only 2 months ago. I know a carrier who has a route in which every couple of weeks he has over 100 pounds of mail at one stop. One day it was 140 pounds...but because when they 'build the routes' they don't weigh the admail (flyers), they never see that number...and because they hold back mail during that time, they don't even see realistic numbers for the non-flyer mail.
Crooked.

Furthermore, we had 24 hour strikes in different cities...that's VERY minimal impact to the business...the corporation LOCKED US OUT to get the government to legislate us back to work. Why? To force arbitration.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

blam said:


> This strike has now officially pissed me off.
> 
> this is MY beef with Canadapost:
> In the year I've been at my new house, I've had a half dozen PACKAGES sent to the wrong house and back to the sender. This is a HUGE headache for me. this does NOT include letters which I'm sure there are lots of. I have received letters AND packages that have been sent to my house incorrectly as well. The service I am getting from my mail carriers is absurdly poor.
> ...


I know what you mean. TRUST ME!! Let me ask you a few questions. Are you in a neighbourhood with door to door delivery? Do you ever notice if the Letter Carrier is plain clothed or wearing Canada Post garb? Have you ever noticed whether the Letter Carrier is constantly someone different and never seems to be consistantly the same person, day after day?


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

it's not efficiency, it's mistakes and laziness.

scanning a package as delivered before its out for delivery to save time and not have it scanned again. not having pick up slips handy is a lack of due diligence. leaving a package on my doorstep instead of walking back to the mailbox and putting it in the proper slot for safety, all laziness.

I spoke with canadapost and complained about my lost mail. my address is in a "SW" address and its being delivered to "NW" and vice versa. they simply said they were sorry and would have the manager in my area take special care. it happened again within a month of that phone call.

Prodigal son: we have community mailboxes. the carrier only needs to go door to door with packages that do not fit or require signatures. he is in regular clothing.

my last residence was a uniformed carrier. she did a fantastic job.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

mhammer said:


> There will not be any end in sight any time soon to the number of people who want to sell you stuff and who cannot reach you any other way than by paper ads, coupons, etc. Somebody will bring that to you, so even if all your mail from now until you die is e-mail, there will still be stuff to deliver.


Hense the huge proliferation of on-line "deal of the day" websites that work through email and online (geographical) advertsing.

Groupon
WagJag
Kijiji
Dealfind

And the list grows longer everyday.


----------



## traynor_garnet (Feb 22, 2006)

iaresee said:


> Nice theory. My experience says it doesn't work that way. At least in the industry I work in employers are trying to differentiate themselves from each other; fighting for minds.


Apples to Oranges. We are talking about collective bargaining when facing cutbacks and demands for concessions; you are talking about a specific industry that is actively hiring and seeking people with specialized skills. When/if your industry stops growing, profits stagnate, or the work becomes deskilled, you will see a similar situation to that described in my first post. This isn't _just _a theory; it is supported by tons of empirical academic research. 




> You're speaking some big absolutes here. The second option changes your life and is the only one that you have 100% control over. What more do you need than personal freedom? The third option is a roll of a dice -- there's nothing that says collective bargaining will work out in your favour. If you're not "the average employee", but rather an outlier, collective bargaining is unlikely to help you.


100% control and absolute freedom are the big "absolutes" here; these terms are "nice to think" in a culture based upon individualism, but they are myths. You, as an individual, are incapable of changing the inherent structure of power inequalities between employers and employees. You may get a slightly better deal somewhere, but the very set of options available. the jobs and options you get to choose from, are all pre-structured by a host of external social forces and relations. Yes, you and I have some freedom in our lives, but it is the same freedom offered to American Idol viewers (we can _freely choose _from a set of _predetermined _contestants/options). This is all classic structure/agency debate stuff that I cannot really outline here. In class, the American Idol example tends to be the thing that gets students thinking about the limits of freedom . . .



> This I very much disagree with. And, I'll admit, that it's perhaps a divide between the blue collar worker and the white collar worker: I don't view my employer's relationship with me as anything other than mutually beneficial. And I wouldn't work for a company who thought different.


Yes, you need to work and employers need you (or me) to work for them. It is a relationship of mutual _need _but it is not a relationship of equal/mutual _benefit_. One party benefits disproportionately from the relationship. An interesting question to ask is, "where does profit come from" or "_how_ is profit possible"? Choosing to "suck it up" or "working for somebody else" does nothing to change this inherently lopsided relationship.

Anyway, I probably shouldn't have posted here and I typically stay out of these things. Invariably, the topic will keep expanding and at some point I will be accused of "pulling rank" or "elitism" (not saying by you) when I note my credentials or what I do for a living. A forum like this can make for interesting conversation and sharing of viewpoints (you are clearly thoughtful and intelligent), but there are limits to what can be accomplished in such a setting. With this I probably already sound like a stuck-up jerk but any one of the topics already raised could provide years of research and reading. At some point, it becomes apparent that this isn't the right place to really pursue that line of inquiry.

Now, where the hell is my pedal that is being shipped to me? Dam Canada Post LOL

TG


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

if you r pedal is in transit, it will probably arrive.

they are clearing out whatever mail is in the system i believe.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

blam said:


> Prodigal son: we have community mailboxes. the carrier only needs to go door to door with packages that do not fit or require signatures. he is in regular clothing.
> 
> my last residence was a uniformed carrier. she did a fantastic job.


You are talking about what is known as a Rural Suburban Mail Carrier. These are not the same workers as the uniformed Letter Carriers who are currently on strike. These RSMC folks have a seperate contract from the one currently in dispute. It is my understanding that the RSMC's are in a far more oppressive situation in terms of remuneration. I am sorry to hear about your issues with delivery. 

Honestly, this type of scenario is what I fear the privatization of Canada Post would look like.


----------



## amp boy (Apr 23, 2009)

i didn't even know this stuff was going on.......i hope my pedal from Seattle doesn't get sent back once it hits the border.
: /

I did wish the guys picketing the best when i saw them today.
Some of those folks are do their job REAL WELL, and i appreciate it.

....and some are idiots.
life.

now to find me some cheap cashews.
munch munch.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Perhaps the most enlightening couple of minutes that you could possibly watch/listen to:

The Truth About The Economy In 2 Minutes | MoveOn.Org


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Is this the phase where everybody forgets they're on strike and after a month or so with nothing happening, the government legislates them back?

Just wondering.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Is this the phase where everybody forgets they're on strike and after a month or so with nothing happening, the government legislates them back?
> 
> Just wondering.


I'm surprised they aren't legislated back already. I just heard it's looking like this Thursday.

The strike is affecting my work, and possibly my personal bottom line. That doesn't give me sympathy for the workers, it pisses me off, and not with the corporation.

That said, I have good relationships with my local carrier(s), and the mail system from my observation works great. Normal lettermail in Alberta takes 2-5 days which is fine. I've sent and received packages from coast to coast and never had one damaged or lost or delayed for delivery.

smorg, that link is a great summary of what is happening in North America, unfortunately. Moreso the USA than Canada but here too.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

yup... this is getting annoying... i can't get my new contact lenses or P90s until they are back to work.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> Is this the phase where everybody forgets they're on strike and after a month or so with nothing happening, the government legislates them back?
> 
> Just wondering.


Actually, it is the phase where all kinds of people are upset that the mail has stopped but people forget that we are LOCKED OUT after NOT EVEN A WEEK and the government has just tabled legislation today.

...but even major media is saying 'strike' so I won't get too hung up on that. There are people calling in constantly ticked off that their business depends on the mail and there are all kinds of people who are concerned because they still depend on the mail. 

Here is what took place in Halifax only hours after the LOCK OUT (remember, postal workers were still working every day until the lockout). 
[video=youtube;PqzOOmg-bnc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqzOOmg-bnc[/video]



keto said:


> I'm surprised they aren't legislated back already. I just heard it's looking like this Thursday.
> 
> The strike is affecting my work, and possibly my personal bottom line. That doesn't give me sympathy for the workers, it pisses me off, and not with the corporation.


I don't think Thursday is realistic...likely Monday.

If they didn't lock us out (even better - if they would have been fair while the negotiations had been going on) then the mail would still be flowing (as it was last Monday).

It's too bad that some people don't have sympathy for the workers because the corporation DOES win in some situations with the media and the way that things are reported. They completely halted service and they SAY that it was 'for the customer'. Just how ridiculous is that?


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> Actually, it is the phase where all kinds of people are upset that the mail has stopped but people forget that we are LOCKED OUT after NOT EVEN A WEEK and the government has just tabled legislation today.
> 
> ...but even major media is saying 'strike' so I won't get too hung up on that. *Let us not forget, a strike precipitated the action.*
> 
> ...


Re: the video - I'm sure they DO want to work, going without a paycheque sucks regardless the situation. The old 'think before you act' jumps to mind.

You are certainly right about the fact that the media can spin it however they see fit that day. I didn't see the quote you reference 'for the customer' - were they referring to long term cost savings? ie., one quote I read said the rotating strikes had cost $100M, a number I admit I found pretty hard to believe but then I also admit I didn't read far enough to delve into the math, if it was even included in the article.

Unions = entitlement, I guess that would sum up my biggest beef in a generalized way. But it's all been said before (both sides) by minds much sharper than mine so I'll leave it there. Might want to take a peek at the past 10 years of the auto industry though, to see where unions led - not that every situation is equivalent.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

Also....lest I be misunderstood, I
-do not want to see CP privatized
-do not wish ill will on any individual
-nor am I trying to 'paint all individuals with the same brush' (I don't like unions, I would never want to think like one :wave

I have seen many examples of 'above and beyond the call', where customers of mine screw up the address on the envelope but it still ends up in my hands because of great diligence on the part of carriers and/or inside workers.

Just reading some of the CUPW page discussing the issues. I woke my wife up laughing out loud, in particular:

"Postal workers have been responsible for the financial and operational successes of Canada Post." - participated, yes. Responsible for, negative on that trajectory Houston.

"Canada Post management is hoping that their $2 billion investment will enable them to reduce their payroll by $250 million per year. We believe that postal workers and the public must share in these benefits. *As postal workers, we deserve a reduced workload and improved benefits and working conditions*." wtf?

Huh? It's 2011, hello? Like I said in the post above, entitlement. Doesn't work for me. If I start a business and make a million dollars, with you working as my executive assistant and secretary that I rely on heavily, should you get half? Hellzno. That's not how business works - _there is no relationship between the profitability of the corporation and the pay of its workers._ You either make enough to be satisfied doing the job, or you don't and do your best to find a better situation. Put another way, you'd expect the same paycheque and benefits if the company was losing money, amiright? I'm gonna go ahead and be a (insert your own perjorative here) and say yes, I'm right - Canada Post has _many_ losing years in my lifetime.

Again, I'm all for "We deserve to work in safe and healthy conditions." 100%, no equivocation. It's 2011, you don't need a union for that. There are multiple government funded organizations that look after this (Labour Board, Worker's Comp, etc.).


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

keto said:


> Re: the video - I'm sure they DO want to work, going without a paycheque sucks regardless the situation. The old 'think before you act' jumps to mind.
> 
> You are certainly right about the fact that the media can spin it however they see fit that day. I didn't see the quote you reference 'for the customer' - were they referring to long term cost savings? ie., one quote I read said the rotating strikes had cost $100M, a number I admit I found pretty hard to believe but then I also admit I didn't read far enough to delve into the math, if it was even included in the article.
> 
> *Unions = entitlement, I guess that would sum up my biggest beef in a generalized way. But it's all been said before (both sides) by minds much sharper than mine so I'll leave it there. Might want to take a peek at the past 10 years of the auto industry though, to see where unions led - not that every situation is equivalent*.


This is the bottom line for a lot of people. If the workers want to know why people don't feel sympathy for them or get angry, look no further than your union. It's not the media turning people against you. The unions (and the sense of entitlement they convey as Keto mentioned) rub a ton of people the wrong way.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> Actually, it is the phase where all kinds of people are upset that the mail has stopped but people forget that we are LOCKED OUT after NOT EVEN A WEEK and the government has just tabled legislation today.
> 
> ...but even major media is saying 'strike' so I won't get too hung up on that. There are people calling in constantly ticked off that their business depends on the mail and there are all kinds of people who are concerned because they still depend on the mail.
> 
> ...


LOL, well you're locked out because of 12 days of damaging strikes, It's not like you guys were doing your jobs in a normal way. 

And it's more than "some" people not having sympathy. Honestly, I believe it's MOST people.

I would never deny that postal workers work hard. I don't know, but I believe that to be true. I work hard too. So do most people. I also know that many postal workers do not support the strike actions that led to this lock out.

I have mail stuck in limbo like most people, but as far as I'm concerned, if the government doesn't legislate the union back to work and they stay out until Christmas it will be fine. That may just provide the wake up call unions all over Canada need to finally realize it's not 1940 anymore.

I've never liked unions and this doesn't improve my point of view.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

Bank robber planned crime and punishment | bank, richard, hailed - Gaston Gazette

there you go, 17 years as a company man, look where he ended up. Yah nothing says entitlement like benefits and a working wage. The nerve of these union people....

As for the brothers and sisters in CUPW rest assured even if you lose, your solidarity will alter the plans of the big fish (sharks?) who push around your entire lives like they're game pieces on a board. The sour grapes of people who think that because they've been screwed out of any respect in the workplace means the whole world should share in their misfortune be damned. I have stuff in transit with Canada Post, I would like it to arrive... but not at the expense of Canada Post becoming yet another dead end job in a landscape littered with them.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keto said:


> "Postal workers have been responsible for the financial and operational successes of Canada Post." - participated, yes. Responsible for, negative on that trajectory Houston.


The execs make blind decisions and the workers do the work. Without mail being worked then the money does not come in. It is the workers who make Canada Post. If all of the executives disappeared tomorrow, Canada Post would still operate...the mail runs in itself with the workers there...the execs are nothing but a drain.


keto said:


> "Canada Post management is hoping that their $2 billion investment will enable them to reduce their payroll by $250 million per year. We believe that postal workers and the public must share in these benefits. *As postal workers, we deserve a reduced workload and improved benefits and working conditions*." wtf?


The reason the bold part is there is because along with the big investment and big savings the corporation has put in working methods which cause far more injuries...to reduce the injury-causing workload is the improved working conditions. As for the 'improved benefits' I don't know what they are referring to as the entire conflict has been that the union has been fighting to keep what we have and not acquire any new benefits.


keto said:


> Again, I'm all for "We deserve to work in safe and healthy conditions." 100%, no equivocation. It's 2011, you don't need a union for that. There are multiple government funded organizations that look after this (Labour Board, Worker's Comp, etc.).


If it was any other company then there would have already been a Federal investigation into the working conditions because Canada Post has had 9000 approved WCB claims in am year. That is WAY out of the norm and puts being a postal worker close to the top of 'most injured while on the job' occupations.




Milkman said:


> LOL, well you're locked out because of 12 days of damaging strikes, It's not like you guys were doing your jobs in a normal way.


Everyone was doing their jobs the normal way except the people who were on their 24 hour strike...causing a minor delay...damaging? Yeah...if you believe the corporation $100 million in 12 days. So...if 12 days means $100 million then why don't they make 20 times that per year? Because it is BS rhetoric.



Milkman said:


> And it's more than "some" people not having sympathy. Honestly, I believe it's MOST people.


You can believe what you want but I picket every day and the public response id overwhelming...my honest number would be 70% support, and if the people are INFORMED about the way things really are then it is close to 100%. Therein lies the problem - having people informed. Many people even after the facts are out for them cannot visualize what it is like to work for the corporation.



Milkman said:


> I would never deny that postal workers work hard. I don't know, but I believe that to be true. I work hard too. So do most people. I also know that many postal workers do not support the strike actions that led to this lock out.


Those are the people with the blinders on. They will probably believe the corporation's story when we go back too.



Milkman said:


> I have mail stuck in limbo like most people, but as far as I'm concerned, if the government doesn't legislate the union back to work and they stay out until Christmas it will be fine. That may just provide the wake up call unions all over Canada need to finally realize it's not 1940 anymore.


The government will legislate us back and the act tabled by the government looks like it was written WITH the corporation. The 'wake up call' that you speak of is when people look around and realize that they are trying to make it 1940 again. The back to work legislation which was tabled (and will pass with the Harper majority) is not like the typical back to work legislation and is exactly what the corporation has wanted from the beginning. It will 'cut us down' like everyone who is 'against unions' wants us to be cut down...but the execs will continue to get their big money, and their perks will grow.


Milkman said:


> I've never liked unions and this doesn't improve my point of view.


The 'never liked unions' part is the most telling. Hardly anybody starts at a place 'never liking unions' and then arrives at a place in which they think 'unions are ok'. It does happen...like when the super pro-corporation people are talking about how great the corporation is and how bad the union is for years. Then they get hurt at work and the corporation tries to get rid of them - that typically turns them around but that doesn't happen in great enough numbers to actually have a statistical impact.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> The execs make blind decisions and the workers do the work. Without mail being worked then the money does not come in. It is the workers who make Canada Post. If all of the executives disappeared tomorrow, Canada Post would still operate...the mail runs in itself with the workers there...the execs are nothing but a drain.
> 
> The reason the bold part is there is because along with the big investment and big savings the corporation has put in working methods which cause far more injuries...to reduce the injury-causing workload is the improved working conditions. As for the 'improved benefits' I don't know what they are referring to as the entire conflict has been that the union has been fighting to keep what we have and not acquire any new benefits.
> 
> ...


I can't deny I'm biased, any more than you can, but if you truly believe 70% of Canadians support this strike, I think you're only listening to those who stop and offer support. Those who don't support it aren't likely to drop by the picket line and tell you so. I think in this respect, your'e dreaming.

As for us wanting you cut down? That's nonsense. Accept the same deal you currently have, and go back to work. That's what I think most Canadians, including me would prefer.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> The execs make blind decisions and the workers do the work. Without mail being worked then the money does not come in. It is the workers who make Canada Post. If all of the executives disappeared tomorrow, Canada Post would still operate...the mail runs in itself with the workers there...the execs are nothing but a drain.
> 
> The reason the bold part is there is because along with the big investment and big savings the corporation has put in working methods which cause far more injuries...to reduce the injury-causing workload is the improved working conditions. As for the 'improved benefits' I don't know what they are referring to as the entire conflict has been that the union has been fighting to keep what we have and not acquire any new benefits.
> 
> ...


The unions have given people more than enough reason to be angry with them. No one needs to justify their reasons for not supporting them.

That 70% figure is ridiculous as well. I could walk out on the street right now and have difficultly finding one person who supports the strike. And making the assumption that anyone who doesn't support you is just not informed is ignorant. Those attitudes are a key reason people get so pissed off. We outsiders are uniformed and biased, but the union is perfect. 

I have read every single post you have posted. I have nothing against you personally or any other postal worker. And I do enjoy reading your perspective because I do like to hear both sides. But, you haven't done a think to change my view on unions in Canada, or agree with the strike.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

torndownunit said:


> The unions have given people more than enough reason to be angry with them. No one needs to justify their reasons for not supporting them.


...i agree with your first statement. your second statement, not so much.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Bottom line is its not our fight, its yours. Meaning the people that are postal workers and belong to that particular union. I was part of the UAW and the CAW for many years and there was always the "public support" side of things. 

Everyone is fighting to survive today. No job is safe be it unionized or not. We had one of the strongest unions in the world at GM back in 80's and 90's. They still managed to close a ton of plants and shed 70,000 jobs. They still managed to renegotiate and pull back on benefits and new hire wages etc etc.

The word at that time was you can play ball with us and keep your jobs "with adjusted wages and benefits" or we will close the place and re-open somewhere else with a new contract or no contract. Guess what? They did just that. We had the same Union at the last place I worked at (I was management there) and the same thing happened when the bad times hit this decade. Union took the same stance. They closed two plants and built one in China.

Believe me I wish things never changed. But they did and they changed forever. I hate to see any of this happening and do not look down on any union member. But the hard facts remain. People are fighting for anything right now. Just having a decent paying job today is a major achievement and there just is no such thing as job security anymore unless you happen to be an undertaker. 

Recent stats out from data collected in 2009 puts the poverty rate in Canada at 10% and its getting worse. Wages are not going up.

There is just no (or little) public support for such things anymore. The number of people out there that are equal with someone in a high paying,benefit paying unionized job are dwindling fast. I am not talking about your Walmart unionized employee here either. I am talking high paying jobs with benefit packages and retirement funds. Theres just not a lot of them out there anymore.

The last 15 years of my working career, before I went solo with my own business, was based entirely on performance. I was paid very well for it but you had to perform at a high level. 

Hopefully things work out for all you posties. Can you imagine what the next contract negotiation is going to be like? Think about that for a few minutes and pray that you are retired before it comes up.


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

It's probably fair to say that unions have lost a lot of stroke in recent years.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Bottom line is its not our fight, its yours. Meaning the people that are postal workers and belong to that particular union. I was part of the UAW and the CAW for many years and there was always the "public support" side of things.
> 
> Everyone is fighting to survive today. No job is safe be it unionized or not. We had one of the strongest unions in the world at GM back in 80's and 90's. They still managed to close a ton of plants and shed 70,000 jobs. They still managed to renegotiate and pull back on benefits and new hire wages etc etc.
> 
> ...


A lot of fantastic points.

Sorry for the bluntness of my last post, when when I see terms being used like "uniformed" (in caps no less), I get really frustrated. Just because someone has their own view based on their own experiences, it it does not mean they are uninformed. And to make a statement like "support would be 100% if people were informed" based on what you are hearing people tell you in the picket lines is just not an accurate survey of how people feel on any level.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I still find it ironic that "retirement" is a social institution that came about by unions bringing mandatory retirement to the table during negotiations, and governments finding themselves compelled to keep bumping pension upwards to prevent those forced out of the workforce by mandatory retirement clauses from ending up in the poorhouse. Up until darn near WWII, the assumption for most was that you worked until you were simply physically unable to anymore, and your pension and savings would see you past that. Historically, bit by bit, those public and employer-provided pensions creeped upwards so that people began to conceive of pensionable age as a point where they could voluntarily withdraw from the labour force. This is why the US pension is called "Social Security" (i.e., your safety net when you are prevented from working).

But as we saw people entering the labour force at later ages, deferring marriage, home ownership, and parenthood later and later, and with all of this "freedom 55" nonsense convincing people to retire earlier and earlier with ever-higher consumer expectations, increasingly greater burden was placed on pensions and pension plans to provide "the good life" to people for a much bigger chunk of their lives, after a shorter number of earning and income-saving years.

So here we are, locked in assorted knock-down drag-out battles over pension plans and commitments, and it was the unions who helped create that unobedient social monster called retirement in the first place!

I'm not saying people have no reason to feel like they have been double-crossed. It's just one of those historical ironies that the very social institutions (unions) that forced the issue in the first place, are now having to confront the reality that it isn't working out as well as intended or hoped for.


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

Keep in mind though that around mid century people who worked till the age of 65 (mostly men) couldn't expect to live much beyond 4 or 5 years post retirement. A decent savings (which those who lived through the depression would be quite good at) would likely carry you through to the big dirt nap. Now people are retiring younger and lasting longer (though with a host of age related problems that would likely preclude working) so now you have to account for more like 10-15 or even 20 years of "downtime". 
I can see why employers worry about this as well as the workers.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

_Hi guys.

I'm a white 42 year old male. I have a grade 12 equivalent diploma and am Certified Cook Basic (and hold my safe food handling certificate). I suffer from arthritis that fluctuates in severity from hardly noticeable to debilitating. I have hearing loss and wear an aid, and my vision is that of us older gentlemen. I cannot stand, hold, lift or carry significant amounts of weight for significant periods of time. I have no patience dealing with young people or with people that micromanage. I do not over perform, I have a life and will not work overtime or off time or at home and please forget even asking for me to volunteer; I work, you pay me, we are both happy and at the end of 40 hours we go our separate ways till the next 40 hours. Having children I am limited in my times available, either part time mid day or nights. I do not own a vehicle nor am I interested in doing so. I have no other post secondary skills or training other than as cook and that is a job my body does not allow me to do any longer.

If you have a position for me in your company I would be happy to discuss that with you. Please leave a reply here and we can talk. I would give my phone number, but in a 'grey moment' I managed to lose my phone this week.

Thank you,

T. Keeps Spencer_

The over 40 group of us have and are viewed with a very different eye when it comes to getting ourselves employed. Here in Ontario we have a unified job search agency and by them I am being told I should seriously consider just giving up my job search and going on disability pension instead. At the moment, my job assistant lady (ohh they use letters for all the positions there >.<) is arranging for me to 'volunteer' at Goodwill to asses just how much lift/carry I can do before my body flakes out. YAY I am actually looking forward to that, but I tell you she is not holding her breath on this


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Hamstrung said:


> Keep in mind though that around mid century people who worked till the age of 65 (mostly men) couldn't expect to live much beyond 4 or 5 years post retirement. A decent savings (which those who lived through the depression would be quite good at) would likely carry you through to the big dirt nap. Now people are retiring younger and lasting longer (though with a host of age related problems that would likely preclude working) so now you have to account for more like 10-15 or even 20 years of "downtime".
> I can see why employers worry about this as well as the workers.


 
Yes the spectre of the 67 year old school bus driver with his "Max Capacity 48" preschool children careening off an embankment while he has a fatal coronary is a very good reason for people to want to see a point in time a company can "retire" their workforce. To me, if you have the health you should work, but if not you should not feel you are mandated to continue (on the employee side) or that a company has to keep you till you die of old age (on the employer side). 65 by today's 'live till 85' reality may be too young, but it is not too young for effects of age to cause serious problems in many fields where awareness etc is key in being able to do your job safely


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Hamstrung said:


> Keep in mind though that around mid century people who worked till the age of 65 (mostly men) couldn't expect to live much beyond 4 or 5 years post retirement. A decent savings (which those who lived through the depression would be quite good at) would likely carry you through to the big dirt nap. Now people are retiring younger and lasting longer (though with a host of age related problems that would likely preclude working) so now you have to account for more like 10-15 or even 20 years of "downtime".
> I can see why employers worry about this as well as the workers.


Your most likely correct. My Father retired at 61 out of GM after almost 40 years of service and past away last year. He got 20 years retirement out of them. They probably threw a party when he died. But multiply my Father by the thousands and you can imagine the cost. He was gobbling probably $400 a month in pills and more doctors visits per year than a small country. All paid for. Was he entitled to that? By the contracts that were negotiated over his time there, yes. Will most of us see the same? Highly doubtful.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

Interesting points on retirement. When I travel down to our head office in the U.S., there's a file clerk there who's in his 80's and gets around with a walker - it's just something you do not see up here (P.S. - don't blame the company for him still having to work, it hasn't been around that long, and he joined in his 60's. I don't know anything about his prior life or career.). There are a few upper management members who are over 65 as well, though none as far as 70.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

keto said:


> Interesting points on retirement. When I travel down to our head office in the U.S., there's a file clerk there who's in his 80's and gets around with a walker - it's just something you do not see up here (P.S. - don't blame the company for him still having to work, it hasn't been around that long, and he joined in his 60's. I don't know anything about his prior life or career.). There are a few upper management members who are over 65 as well, though none as far as 70.



This article just popped on my facebook feed:

Man robs bank to get medical care in jail - Yahoo! News

Sometimes living long is rough when getting old sucks.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> I can't deny I'm biased, any more than you can, but if you truly believe 70% of Canadians support this strike, I think you're only listening to those who stop and offer support. Those who don't support it aren't likely to drop by the picket line and tell you so. I think in this respect, your'e dreaming.


I can deny that I am biased. I have never been pro-union because I realize that there are good things and bad things about most (perhaps all) unions. It is my intimate knowledge of Canada Post which has me on 'my' union's side. The public support has not as much to do with people stopping by, but just the people passing by...and as I said, when they are informed, even more so. 



Milkman said:


> Accept the same deal you currently have, and go back to work. That's what I think most Canadians, including me would prefer.


Our union has agreed, even asked for this but Canada Post refuses. They have insisted on many rollbacks from the beginning and negotiations have been ongoing for months (really since October 2010) with Canada Post only backpedaling on a few of their rollbacks in the final weeks leading up to the labour disruption.

Here is where Canada Post wins: they have the media experts who can get people believing things that aren't true. A great example is how they stated that they were moving to a 3 day delivery system (Monday, Wednesday, Friday) in the interest of 'providing Canadians with the postal service that they expect'. Really? 3 day delivery is what they expect? They also state that they couldn't revert to the 'current contract' because they felt that nothing would be gained by that.

Another common thing that they mention in the media is the pension insolvency...
-they TOOK money from the pension plan before when the fund had good years
-they TOOK a 'pension holiday' (a year in which they contribute nothing to the pension) in order to invest in the business
-they commonly report that the insolvency issue is one in which they are determined to address because they don't want to become a burden to taxpayers...but the sick leave plan that they want to put in place which is run by an insurance company *uses E.I. as a component*. So, you see how they 'care' about the taxpayer. They care about their own corporate BS. 



torndownunit said:


> That 70% figure is ridiculous as well. I could walk out on the street right now and have difficultly finding one person who supports the strike. And making the assumption that anyone who doesn't support you is just not informed is ignorant. Those attitudes are a key reason people get so pissed off. We outsiders are uniformed and biased, but the union is perfect.
> 
> I have read every single post you have posted. I have nothing against you personally or any other postal worker. And I do enjoy reading your perspective because I do like to hear both sides. But, you haven't done a think to change my view on unions in Canada, or agree with the strike.


So...you are informed and all...you even read all of my posts but you mention 'strike' twice. WE ARE NOT ON STRIKE - WE WERE LOCKED OUT. You want to know why we were locked out? Here's why: the corporation did everything that they could to piss off the workers, and to back the workers into a corner so that they could force a general strike but the union did not do it. The union chose instead to participate in rolling strikes - that is when the corporation got more intense by cutting hours, blocking entry of an MP to two postal facilities and cutting delivery to 3 days per week. We still were not on a general strike and the mail was moving but the corporation knew that parliament was only in session for a limited time and since they could not get us to go on a full strike they locked us out. 



GuitarsCanada said:


> Bottom line is its not our fight, its yours. Meaning the people that are postal workers and belong to that particular union. I was part of the UAW and the CAW for many years and there was always the "public support" side of things.


I enjoy the posts that you have made regarding this and the auto industry stories/references. I completely realize that it is 'our fight' but when the media reports things that are untrue or half-truths designed to make people feel a certain way and people have an opinion formed from misinformation I cannot help but try to present information which adds clarity to the issues that I know about.


GuitarsCanada said:


> Hopefully things work out for all you posties. Can you imagine what the next contract negotiation is going to be like? Think about that for a few minutes and pray that you are retired before it comes up.


Thanks for that but things won't work out. The legislation tabled by the government looks as if it has been written by the corporation itself and this is what they have wanted all along. The next contract negotiations will be horrendous and I'll have nowhere near the time required to be retired by then. Injuries are going to go through the roof in the next few years, people are going to be stressed to their limits and many, many retiring employees will be replaced with temps who will make far less money in the world that we all know keeps getting more expensive. I hope that I can find another 'career' to adjust/learn/transition to but it is indeed a tough work world out there.

I do find it odd that working people would rather see other working people 'brought down' instead of themselves being pulled up. After all of the things that have been 'won' over the years by the labour movement, you can't just drop the union which helped workers achieve those gains because the employers will take the 'gains' right back.

The rich and the super rich want everyone else at the bottom. Unions were a way to establish a middle class. The rich and super rich have achieved working class people fighting among themselves and through this will achieve their goals faster.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> I can deny that I am biased. I have never been pro-union because I realize that there are good things and bad things about most (perhaps all) unions. It is my intimate knowledge of Canada Post which has me on 'my' union's side. The public support has not as much to do with people stopping by, but just the people passing by...and as I said, when they are informed, even more so.
> 
> 
> Our union has agreed, even asked for this but Canada Post refuses. They have insisted on many rollbacks from the beginning and negotiations have been ongoing for months (really since October 2010) with Canada Post only backpedaling on a few of their rollbacks in the final weeks leading up to the labour disruption.
> ...


You were locked out as a result of rotating strikes. So how can you take offense to someone saying you are on strike? If you weren't locked out you'd, still be on strike. "Rotating" or "Rolling" strikes is still being "on strike". General strike, rolling strike, rotating strike... it's all being on strike to try to have demands met. And it shouldn't come as a surprise if one side or the other chooses to escalate things in that situation.

Regarding a corporation's use of the media, the union's do the exact same thing quite frequently.

If you really believe the second point I put in bold, you really haven't read anyone's posts in this thread. I am not going to be the one to explain this part of the argument again. Every single person posting in the thread has answered to this point several times in the thread. Just because we don't agree with how the Union's work nowadays or their effectiveness, it does not mean we want to see any worker 'brought down'.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

smorgdonkey said:


> I do find it odd that working people would rather see other working people 'brought down' instead of themselves being pulled up. After all of the things that have been 'won' over the years by the labour movement, you can't just drop the union which helped workers achieve those gains because the employers will take the 'gains' right back.
> 
> The rich and the super rich want everyone else at the bottom. Unions were a way to establish a middle class. The rich and super rich have achieved working class people fighting among themselves and through this will achieve their goals faster.


There is no doubt about this statement. We are rapidly becoming a country of those that have and those that do not. The "middle class" is dwindling quickly. My Daughter and her BF both went to college and combined they dont make close to what I made in my last job. I see this on a daily basis at our shop. People that are making $30,000 a year consider themselves to be making a lot of money. I consider that to be pretty damn close to poverty. 

Anyone that is not wearing blinders can see what has happened with manufacturing jobs in this country. In this little area alone we had at least 15,000 auto related, high paying jobs, dissapear over the last 10-15 years and they were NOT replaced. That is the key word here. Those jobs vanished and were never replaced. You took people in a flash from making $80,000 a year to $35,000 or $40,000 a year. That is a major hit.

But that goes back to what I am saying. Those people that were making that money and belonged to very strong unions are looking at this situation and saying "welcome to my world". This is where its at. Like I mentioned, I wish it never changed. If someone has a way to get it back to the way it used to be let me know, I am on board 100%


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

torndownunit said:


> You were locked out as a result of rotating strikes. So how can you take offense to someone saying you are on strike? If you weren't locked out you'd, still be on strike. "Rotating" or "Rolling" strikes is still being "on strike". General strike, rolling strike, rotating strike... it's all being on strike to try to have demands met. And it shouldn't come as a surprise if one side or the other chooses to escalate things in that situation.


First of all I am not 'taking offense someone saying you are on strike', I am correcting it. The rotating strikes was not 'to try to have demands met' they were to try to get the corporation to negotiate - which they have not been doing. The point being that having a complete work stoppage was the corporation's goal in order to get the pro-corporation government to legislate and end to the work stoppage, which they have succeeded in doing. For me to say that I was 'on strike' when I was locked out would be completely false because I was at work every day...as were the people who work at most installations across the country who work for Canada Post so that's why it isn't a strike. A strike is a work stoppage...it isn't a start/stop/start...the fact is that the mail was moving and still moving almost normally until the lockout.



torndownunit said:


> Regarding a corporation's use of the media, the union's do the exact same thing quite frequently.


I am referring to Canada Post in this instance so therefor I am referring to CUPW in this instance and they have not used the media for spreading any misinformation - the corporation has.



torndownunit said:


> If you really believe the second point I put in bold, you really haven't read anyone's posts in this thread. I am not going to be the one to explain this part of the argument again. Every single person posting in the thread has answered to this point several times in the thread. Just because we don't agree with how the Union's work nowadays or their effectiveness, it does not mean we want to see any worker 'brought down'.


I do believe the point that you put in bold and I have read every post in this thread. The statement was made as a general statement about the working class, not about anyone in this thread specifically - if it were then I would have addressed that person (or persons) by name(s). I hear it from people all of the time 'damn unions' and a bunch of negative things about unions...it's like anything else - there is bad with the good. I certainly would love to do away with the bad but if it means getting rid of the union altogether then no thanks. The union is the only avenue to take when the corporation decides that it is 'your turn' to be treated as a non-entity. 

The fact is that unions have made GAINS for people...safety improvements, standard of living improvements and benefits which people would not have otherwise. They have made these gains NOT ONLY for union members but for non-union members as well because when a union makes a gain that is significant, non-union employers elevate their benefits to compete. Without those gains the execs would rake in more unfair earnings and the people would be disposable. Do some research on maternity leave and see where that came from. Anti-union sentiment will eventually erode the working class and put them decades behind where they have been...and that process has already been taking place for 10 or 15 years but the rate at which it happens will begin accelerating. 

If the postal workers didn't have the union, a third of us would be physically handicapped and unemployed - that's simply how the corporation works.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

Big Corporation: Thank a Union: 36 Ways Unions Have Improved Your Life


----------



## zurn (Oct 21, 2009)

Ok so what does this all mean for my 350$ pedal stuck in the mail coming in from the states ?


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

zurn said:


> Ok so what does this all mean for my 350$ pedal stuck in the mail coming in from the states ?


The Crown Corporation that employs the hard working unionized people you rely on has decided to aggressively cut costs in order to maintain pension solvency to cover the large workforce they hired back in the late seventies early eighties who now intend to retire. 

Your parcel will be delivered once the union contract negotiation process is settled.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

zurn said:


> Ok so what does this all mean for my 350$ pedal stuck in the mail coming in from the states ?





prodigal_son said:


> Your parcel will be delivered once the union contract negotiation process is settled.


Not quite true because there is no contract negotiation. The union has been trying to negotiate since last October and even though the media states that there are still ongoing talks often the corporation is not even present or responding to the union because they know that they have won...*the parcel will be moving again after the employees are back to work due to legislation which will probably be in effect for Sunday or Monday, so depending upon where it is, at least it will be 'in motion' again next week instead of 'in limbo'.*



prodigal_son said:


> The Crown Corporation that employs the hard working unionized people you rely on has decided to aggressively cut costs in order to maintain pension solvency to cover the large workforce they hired back in the late seventies early eighties who now intend to retire.


The pension insolvency has been caused by various things:
#1-when the government took Canada Post's pension out of the Superannuation pension and used the huge surplus to apply to the Federal debt.
#2-when the pension fund's investments have done well, the corporation has taken the excess and used it at their discretion (now that they are 'short' they certainly aren't going to claim responsibility).

The 'working person', even when they have enjoyed benefits from 'labour victories', etc. has always been 'used' by the people with power.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> First of all I am not 'taking offense someone saying you are on strike', I am correcting it. The rotating strikes was not 'to try to have demands met' they were to try to get the corporation to negotiate - which they have not been doing. The point being that having a complete work stoppage was the corporation's goal in order to get the pro-corporation government to legislate and end to the work stoppage, which they have succeeded in doing. For me to say that I was 'on strike' when I was locked out would be completely false because I was at work every day...as were the people who work at most installations across the country who work for Canada Post so that's why it isn't a strike. A strike is a work stoppage...it isn't a start/stop/start...the fact is that the mail was moving and still moving almost normally until the lockout.
> 
> 
> I am referring to Canada Post in this instance so therefor I am referring to CUPW in this instance and they have not used the media for spreading any misinformation - the corporation has.
> ...


You hear constantly it because it's extremely important the the negatives are kept in mind in any debate involving unions. My perspective come from someone who has worked in unions, and not worked in unions. I personally feel the negatives are outweighing any of the positive with unions nowadays. That's the bottom line for me. I don't want to see workers kept down, but I just don't think these antiquated unions are the answer to anything. But I've voiced my opinion, and there is no point in my blabbering on about it anymore.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

torndownunit said:


> You hear constantly it because it's extremely important the the negatives are kept in mind in any debate involving unions. My perspective come from someone who has worked in unions, and not worked in unions. I personally feel the negatives are outweighing any of the positive with unions nowadays. That's the bottom line for me. I don't want to see workers kept down, but I just don't think these antiquated unions are the answer to anything. But I've voiced my opinion, and there is no point in my blabbering on about it anymore.


I completely see your point. I have heard stories of corruption in the union which currently represents me (or should I see 'me as part of a workforce'?). The unions may not be 'the answer to anything' as you put it. Time will tell I suppose but right now I see them as slowing down that often talked about 'race to the bottom'. Without organized labour, the corporations will roll back benefits formerly won by organized labour. Now that this pro-corporation government is in, it is just a matter of time.

I have also worked for non-union companies and yes, I'd rather have my 'union dues' in my pocket but I cannot imagine my workplace without some sort of avenue to take when management decides 'I am the one that they want' on a given day. It has only happened once to me personally, but I have seen it all around me.

Anyway, as opposed as our points of view are, I appreciate yours nonetheless.

Here is a point of view which I agree with completely...it is less focused on the specific issue being discussed but covers the broader topic at hand:

Good jobs aren


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I have also worked in both union and non union shops.

The union shops basically held me back.

I'll never understand the "slow down. You'll work yourself out of a job paradigm"

And, I avoid any situation whereby a union could disrupt my life. I won't even source materials or commodities from unionized companies unless I have no choice.

I hate to break this to anyone, but I'm not alone by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

i worked non-union for over 20 yrs. now i'm union (local 30 sheetmetal) 
tbo, non-union work was alot less stressful, alot steadier, and the work was alot smarter. the pay sucked though. 
now i make good $$, have good bennies, but every shop i work in is full of miserable, back-stabbing, people. i just don't get it. many things are done deliberately the hard way, just to drag out the work. apprentices are treated with no respect what so ever, and everyone is job scared, so they put up with amazing amounts of B.S.
living in this town i need the $$ so i stay union for now. but it's becoming a matter of mental health for me. no amount of money is really worth this kind of stress.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Milkman said:


> I have also worked in both union and non union shops.
> 
> The union shops basically held me back.
> 
> ...


It can for sure affect sourcing decisions, Mike. You sound like you are on the buyer end of things. I was on the other side of the table, in sales. After our 3rd consecutive strike at our main machining plant GM had had enough. I was raked across the coals for months and they came extremely close to getting rid of us. In fact, that last episode was the deciding factor in building the plant in China. The writing was on the wall, anyone could put the pieces of the puzzle together.

I might point out that this company was a great place to work as well. They really took care of people. It was a family owned business for many, many years and had no union. When they made it big after the car companies got out of manufacturing they went public but remained in control. They were/are great people and they ran the place like a family. When the CAW got in there were a total of 6 strike actions over the following 10 years.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> It can for sure affect sourcing decisions, Mike. You sound like you are on the buyer end of things. I was on the other side of the table, in sales. After our 3rd consecutive strike at our main machining plant GM had had enough. I was raked across the coals for months and they came extremely close to getting rid of us. In fact, that last episode was the deciding factor in building the plant in China. The writing was on the wall, anyone could put the pieces of the puzzle together.
> 
> I might point out that this company was a great place to work as well. They really took care of people. It was a family owned business for many, many years and had no union. When they made it big after the car companies got out of manufacturing they went public but remained in control. They were/are great people and they ran the place like a family. When the CAW got in there were a total of 6 strike actions over the following 10 years.


Was listening to a radio show today concerning the subject of unions in the USA. Manufacturer after manufacturer is closing up shop and moving offshore when they can't get concessions to remain profitable from their unions. Almost universally, the members regret taking a hard stance and striking when they are either unable to find work in their field or do so at a greatly reduced rate from what they would have had to concede to. It's just a reality of the times. Unions aren't preserving the middle class, they are actively contributing to its demise.

From smorg (I don't know how to quote multiple people in one post):
"First of all I am not 'taking offense someone saying you are on strike', I am correcting it. The rotating strikes was not 'to try to have demands met' they were to try to get the corporation to negotiate - which they have not been doing. The point being that having a complete work stoppage was the corporation's goal in order to get the pro-corporation government to legislate and end to the work stoppage, which they have succeeded in doing. For me to say that I was 'on strike' when I was locked out would be completely false because I was at work every day...as were the people who work at most installations across the country who work for Canada Post so that's why it isn't a strike. A strike is a work stoppage...it isn't a start/stop/start...the fact is that the mail was moving and still moving almost normally until the lockout."

Denial - not just a river in Egypt  YOU weren't on strike, but the union was. You (collectively) took the first active step, you (you) keep wanting to dance around or deny this. As I pointed out earlier, no strike = no lockout = no legislated agreement.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

Law Enforcement, Firefighters, Nurses, Teachers, Pen Guards, Border Services, Municipal Labourers, Civilian DND, etc..

A few examples of unionized workers. I dare you to ask them if they wouldn't strike.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

prodigal_son said:


> Law Enforcement, Firefighters, Nurses, Teachers, Pen Guards, Border Services, Municipal Labourers, Civilian DND, etc..
> 
> A few examples of unionized workers. I dare you to ask them if they wouldn't strike.


See - Controllers, Air Traffic. (wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Traffic_Controller_Strike ) Not only were they all fired when they didn't report back to work after being legislated to do so, they were also permanently banned from employment in the public service. That said, they had taken an oath on hiring to not ever strike against the US government. 

I'm not saying I think entire police forces or fire departments should be canned. They shouldn't be (see below, probably aren't) allowed to strike in the first place, at least not a 100% walkout.

I would make a pretty strong distinction between government and private enterprise workforces. Society just doesn't function without many of the government ones, and there should be (and mostly are) laws against them striking. Essential services, and all that.

Teachers is one close to my heart, we have many friends who are teachers and 3 kids thru the public school system, the oldest has a year left. It pisses me off to no end that young vibrant teachers can't get or lose their jobs when old hacks (implying incompetence, for a variety of reasons) with no love for their job or the kids they work with hang on to the bitter end because they can (or can't be made to leave) due to seniority. I know of many examples from personal experience. This is not exactly doing society ('the greater good') any favours.

When I was a young pup, an older mentor taught me a very wise lesson. He handed me a glass of water that was almost full and told me to put my finger in it. He then had me pull my finger out and said 'that's how long it would take to replace you and how much you would be missed if you left', and he wasn't saying it to me as a personal insult. It applies to most of us.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keto said:


> Denial - not just a river in Egypt  YOU weren't on strike, but the union was. You (collectively) took the first active step, you (you) keep wanting to dance around or deny this. As I pointed out earlier, no strike = no lockout = no legislated agreement.


There was action, but as I said the mail was moving. The corporation was doing everything that they could to push us into a strike and we wouldn't do it. 

I understand that "no strike = no lockout = no legislated agreement" but instead it would have been continue working without a contract and it was already going on for 5 months. They would have continued doing that for months with so much uncertainty and had it hanging over our heads. Here's the thing...when there isn't a new contract signed, the corporation really treats people extra terribly because they know that they are already stressed out and it is a pressuring tactic...filing disciplinary paperwork against employees for unreasonable things and firing union stewards.

The offer was made that the 'rotating' strikes would stop if Canada Post reinstated the old collective agreement and resumed talks but that didn't fit with their agenda. Their agenda is fully met now. The legislation has taken the arbitrator right out of it now and the government has included things in the legislation which it never has before so even though you may hear that 'talks are ongoing' they really aren't. Sometimes it is reported that talks are taking place but the corporation is not even at the table.

Essentially, they have what they want so if the mail doesn't matter then why is the government being so heavy handed? That's the Harper majority I suppose.

The bottom line is that they could have easily equaled the collective agreement that was in place but they were not happy with that. They want to have the work force fighting among themselves, they want to break the union and then they want to fill the place with temps. That will allow all of the execs to earn bigger bonuses and it will also have less working class people making a decent wage. It won't matter that the jobs are injuring people because they'll mostly be temps anyway and they can just be replaced.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

keto said:


> See - Controllers, Air Traffic. Also - Reagan, Ronald.


I looked. Why did I need to see that? Some cheap anonymous internet shock value? Right on, dude.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

prodigal_son said:


> I looked. Why did I need to see that? Some cheap anonymous internet shock value? Right on, dude.


Sorry I was massively editing my post, and did so several times. Not sure what you saw, but I have a link to the event I referenced, plus a bunch of follow up thoughts above.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> There was action, but as I said the mail was moving. The corporation was doing everything that they could to push us into a strike and we wouldn't do it.
> 
> *I'm sorry your posts confuse me. See above, you DID do it...oh wait, you keep saying the rotating strike was not a strike, am I getting this now**?*
> 
> ...


My comments and questions in bold.

If so many of you are injured, how exactly is being in a union helping you on that front??? I keep seeing this and wondering at it. We have, as I said in an earlier post, Labour Standards and Worker's Comp and other organizations looking at working conditions and severely punishing transgressors....if it's that bad why are they not being informed etc? Is the union allowing too much in the contract? I just can't wrap my head around this one. Beyond that, if it's that bad WHO THE HELL WOULD WANT TO WORK THERE? Oh right, hundreds of thousands of unemployed Canadians who would kill to make $25/hr (or thereabouts, I read) plus full benefits.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

I just wanted to add one more point regarding my personal issue with unions beyond my views that a lot of them are corrupt and antiquated. I stress that this is just a personal view from my own experiences.

I have the same issue Milkman mentioned when it comes to the work philosophy the unions breed in a lot of people (again not all people by any means). I work 2 jobs, I have my own small business and I work a 'day job'. I work very hard at the day job, but I take satisfaction in that I receive rewards at my job based on my performance (raises, bonuses etc.). It also makes me loyal to that employer, and I take pride in a job well done. From working in a union at one point, and knowing a lot of people who work in them there are alarming amount of people that have a horrible work ethic and a sense of entitlement that I feel the union heavily contributes to. The "slow down. You'll work yourself out of a job paradigm" Milkman mentioned is present on an alarming level. I was brought up in a hard working family and thought to work hard and those attitudes drive me nuts. I feel people be rewarded for that attitude is responsible for a lot of problems in today's society.

I am not saying all union workers are like this in ANY way. A lot of tradesman I know in unions are the hardest workers I know. I am just saying I saw it more at a union job than I have seen it anywhere else I have worked in my lifetime. In fact, I can say honestly I never really came across it until I had some experience with unions. If you were a horrible worker with a horrible attitude at my other jobs, you'd get fired and rightfully so. Smorgdonkey obviously has an appreciation for his union and what it can provide. But a lot of people obviously take it for granted.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keto said:


> *I'm sorry your posts confuse me. See above, you DID do it...oh wait, you keep saying the rotating strike was not a strike, am I getting this now**?*


Well, to me a 'rotating strike' is not a strike. The mail moves and work only stops in particular places for 24 hours while the business goes forward as normal. I will say it again: the corporation absolutely 'moved' on NOTHING until the 72 hour notice was submitted. They also proceeded with some actions which could be against the law.



keto said:


> *They treat you EXTRA terribly? Unreasonable disciplinary filings will be dismissed, won't they? Firings usually have a reason behind them, those unjustly fired (I was once) tend to receive fairly substantial court awards.*


Unreasonable disciplinary filings may or may not be dismissed but it is harrassment and it can cause considerable stress. As for unjust firings...how do people pay their bills while waiting for the decision to be overturned and to get the 'awards'? I know in my area there are about zero jobs even though the websites seem to show many. 



keto said:


> *Again, you (collectively) need to understand that actions have consequences. Someone got their bluff called and isn't liking it very much, are they*?


It wasn't a bluff and if it wasn't a Conservative majority then we'd get a 'fair shake'...'liking it' has nothing to do with it. If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. The corporation which is crying poor TOOK MONEY FROM OUR PENSION PLAN, spent $14 million on surveillance cameras, and put expensive flat screen TVs everywhere...now they want to download some of the sick time expenses to the public by using EI as a component of the new plan...and a portion of the public is still yelling 'greedy unions'. It baffles me. 



keto said:


> *I read the legislation, as linked from CUPW, and it DOES call for arbitration. I don't think the $ in the legislation will end up being the full and final settlement.*


It isn't actually calling for arbitration. At least not arbitration as it has ever existed before. The 'arbitration' rather than looking at the issues individually and making a decision on them will have both parties submit a final offer and the arbitrator will choose one or the other in whole. That's not arbitration. Seeing as how the Conservative government will appoint the arbitrator, and they own the crown corporation...I don't really have to spell that out do I? 



keto said:


> *they have what, that they want? who wants?*


The corporation has what they want. Final offer selection binding arbitration, meaning each side tables its final offer and the arbitrator picks one or the other. Labour Minister Raitt said "If they don't like the process then they should work together to find their own and I'm more than happy to sit down and help them," but that is ridiculous because the union has been working at this for over 6 months and the corporation hasn't. It is stacked on the corporation's side because the government is on their side so therefor it only puts pressure on the union to accept rollbacks and puts no pressure on the corporation to 'find a solution' as she said.




keto said:


> *who says the mail doesn't matter? **I can say with certainty that lack of postal service is costing both my company and my customers a ton of money - commerce right across the country and in many industries is being affected.*


 Ity seems to me that any 'opponent' of the union (or unions in general) and/or people on the corporate side are saying that the mail doesn't matter. I wasn't saying that I ever said that as one of my personal beliefs. 


keto said:


> *I don't think ANYONE believes the CUPW is going to go away. *


I'll be one of the people to say that they are in trouble.


keto said:


> *Like it or not, it's a business. Businesses all have executives that are paid for efficiency gains. This is in no way unique to CP. They are going more automated, as with many if not most industries that's going to mean fewer jobs in those functions that get automated, again not unique to CP. Whether those losing jobs get placed elsewhere is a business decision, not a personal insult to the middle class *


 Actually, the 'efficiency gains' that the execs get paid extra for at Canada Post will have nothing to do with operational efficiency or the mail moving better/faster or anything like that at all. They don't care about it now and have the largest management 'disconnect' I have ever encountered. The 'efficiencies' will equate to: 'we have less people in the organization', it will not have anything to do with the amount of injuries that the extra work piled onto those people will cause. The automation is not the same as in other industries...the machines process mail twice as fast but they use the same number of people, and if they want to actually use the machines to their full capacity, they need MORE people to work them but they won't put the extra people on the machines. Instead, they run them at full speed but pressure the people to try to keep up which is nearly impossible. It is not a matter of the machines just 'processing' mail. People still have to put the mail in the machine and take the mail out of the machine...in the 'new' process, they have to put that same mail into another machine and run it two more times. The processes involved in working the machines is the exact same few motions over and over so you can get the picture. The carriers are facing much longer routes, and a ridiculous new delivery system that will also have a major impact on the injury rate. It isn't what you have stated that it an insult to the middle class, it is that the corporation is going to have the decision in its favour which dismisses the health and safety of the workers that is the insult to the middle class. 


keto said:


> *Again, nobody really thinks that way in the real world.*


It's Canada Post man...it is NOT the real world.


keto said:


> My comments and questions in bold.
> 
> If so many of you are injured, how exactly is being in a union helping you on that front??? I keep seeing this and wondering at it. We have, as I said in an earlier post, Labour Standards and Worker's Comp and other organizations looking at working conditions and severely punishing transgressors....if it's that bad why are they not being informed etc? Is the union allowing too much in the contract? I just can't wrap my head around this one.


The union can present cases that are injury related (much the same as wrongful dismissal and so on) but the big way that the union is trying to help ion that front is to have the corporation modify the new work methods that they are bringing in. They are having NO success. Are they allowing too much into the contract? Well, that's what the negotiations have been all about...despite the media saying 'wages, pension, etc' the union has been trying to get Canada POst to agree to ergonomic studies of the new methods and Canada Post has refused. When Canada Post charged that the union's contract offer would cost them $1 billion, the union asked them to show them 'the math' that made thwem think it would cost that much and the corporation refused.

As for WCB and whatever Labour...well, what more do you need that 20% of the approved claims being in 6% of the workforce? It's because it is the government's gig and the government is getting a pass from government departments. 



keto said:


> Beyond that, if it's that bad WHO THE HELL WOULD WANT TO WORK THERE? Oh right, hundreds of thousands of unemployed Canadians who would kill to make $25/hr (or thereabouts, I read) plus full benefits.


60% of letter carriers quit in their first year. Pause a moment and think about that. 'People would kill to...' yet 60% quit in their first year. Many quit in their first week.

The fact is that of the 'hundreds of thousands' of unemployed Canadians, only 40% could do the job...maybe 10% or more wouldn't WANT to do the job and the other 30% perhaps don't want to move to a city where they wouldn't remain as a casual employee for YEARS in which they get NO benefits and NO guaranteed hours. The 'starting wage' and 'benefits' means nothing until you have a couple years in...unless you live at home and can just take the call when they need you, which I have said before can be a week here, a day there, 2 months with nothing after that.

If it was a 'reasonable job', I would not have just demoted myself to part-time, and I would not be seeking another career at 44 years of age after working for them for 9 years. Seriously, I have worked in factories, I have worked on an oil rig, welding shop, and before getting inside Canada Post I thought just like all of those *'I would kill for...'* people. The bottom line is that it is NOTHING like the PR says it is, it is NOTHING like the public perception is, and it is one of the biggest eye-openers in the book of 'Canadian Job Opportunities' (fictional book-I mean this figuratively).


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

so...can i have my mail now?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

If a rotating strike is "not actually a strike", a slap in the face isn't really assault.

Sorry, but a strike is a strike.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

blam said:


> so...can i have my mail now?


We all wish that you could.



Milkman said:


> If a rotating strike is "not actually a strike", a slap in the face isn't really assault.
> 
> Sorry, but a strike is a strike.


Ok, you win. It is a strike no matter how you look at it. 

So, we offered to stop the strike which we had undertaken (which had very minimal effect on the mail and customers were still getting complete service except for designated areas for periods of one day) with the old contract in place and return to the negotiating table.

Canada Post said "no" because it has never been their intent to negotiate. They have shown us this.

Canada Post then broke a Federal Law by announcing 3 day delivery (Canada Post Act).

Canada Post announced that rotating strike was costing money and completely shut down the flow of mail by locking all employees out.


There are 2 sides to every story, and in this story, the corporation has been the liar all along, whether it has been to the public via the media or to its workers via the media or direct communication (which normally doesn't exist at Canada Post).


----------



## avalancheMM (Jan 21, 2009)

I have absolutely no desire to offend, upset, or cause any hard feelings, but here in Alberta, where I am an employer, we can't find people to work, at anything. Every employer I know is having labour troubles, simply because we can't find employees. If things are as awful, and working conditions are as bad as is being stated, why not do something else? It appears to me that if the unionized workers spent some efforts trying to find something else, and less effort trying to fix the problems that appear to be insurmountable, everyone would be better off. In the non union world, if you hate your job, hate your employer, feel unsafe, don't get along with your co workers, suffer from mental stress, etc, we find different work. 
The sense of hopelessness that accompanies some of the workers' comments, to me, is sort of frightening, it's almost like the unions have made it impossible for the employer to be the slave owner (a good thing), but instilled a sense of loyalty to the union that appears almost forced, and maybe a little brainwashed. If it is as bad as the union says, come to Alberta, get a well paid job about 10 minutes after you step off the plane, and forget about Canada Post, the union, and feel free to make your own decisions about your future and working conditions. JMO

Regards


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

avalancheMM said:


> come to Alberta, get a well paid job about 10 minutes after you step off the plane, and forget about Canada Post, the union, and feel free to make your own decisions about your future and working conditions.


I just moved away from Alberta 4 years ago because I wanted to live close to my family again. I don't know if you have ever lived away from your family but it sucks...some people do ok with it and I did too until I was away over 10 years and really came home once per year plus every funeral. Is that any way to live? It wasn't for me.

I'm not even saying that I won't, at some point, have to go back there but I'm saying that I'd rather work here and live here, be treated fairly by the people who I work for and have a normal life. 

Try presenting that 'move to Alberta' option to a person who has children, and grandchildren here in Nova Scotia for example, and they are 56 years old with a bad wrist from working for Canada Post thinking that the corporation whom they were working for while the bad wrist developed would treat them reasonably.

A couple of years ago they fired a schizophrenic during 'the year of mental health awareness'. The person did get their job back after 6 or 8 months but did not get any money as a settlement for the meantime.

Now, those two scenarios don't exactly apply to me but if the opportunities were here for the same wage but NO benefits, I'd already be gone.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

avalancheMM said:


> Every employer I know is having labour troubles, simply because we can't find employees.


That's one thing about Alberta that was markedly different from Nova Scotia, avalancheMM, the way that employers conducted themselves. Out there I found that they were saying "here, look what we have to offer...please come and work for us" whereas in Nova Scotia the employers seem to act like they are doing you a favour just to be in the room with you during an interview. 

The difference was obvious.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

avalancheMM said:


> I have absolutely no desire to offend, upset, or cause any hard feelings, but here in Alberta, where I am an employer, we can't find people to work, at anything. Every employer I know is having labour troubles, simply because we can't find employees.* If things are as awful, and working conditions are as bad as is being stated, why not do something else? It appears to me that if the unionized workers spent some efforts trying to find something else, and less effort trying to fix the problems that appear to be insurmountable, everyone would be better off.* In the non union world, if you hate your job, hate your employer, feel unsafe, don't get along with your co workers, suffer from mental stress, etc, we find different work.
> The sense of hopelessness that accompanies some of the workers' comments, to me, is sort of frightening, it's almost like the unions have made it impossible for the employer to be the slave owner (a good thing), but instilled a sense of loyalty to the union that appears almost forced, and maybe a little brainwashed. If it is as bad as the union says, come to Alberta, get a well paid job about 10 minutes after you step off the plane, and forget about Canada Post, the union, and feel free to make your own decisions about your future and working conditions. JMO
> 
> Regards


This is what the majority of us do. It also comes down to what people expect from an employer. I expect safe work conditions, and decent working environment, and a chance to advance through my performance and my own merits. I don't feel an employer owes me anything beyond what I haven't earned. If I wasn't receiving those things, I would look for somewhere else to work.


----------



## ThePass (Aug 10, 2007)

I'm an electrician working in the auto industry (Toyota plant in Cambridge) and it's a non-union joke.

Not because I feel we (the workers) should get away with blue murder, but to stop them (management) from doing so. I could tell you hundreds of stories.

Anyway, I want to order new tubes, but should I wait till the postal service is back to 100%?


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

ThePass said:


> I'm an electrician working in the auto industry (Toyota plant in Cambridge) and it's a non-union joke.
> 
> Not because I feel we (the workers) should get away with blue murder, but to stop them (management) from doing so. I could tell you hundreds of stories.
> 
> Anyway, I want to order new tubes, but should I wait till the postal service is back to 100%?


You could order them but United States Postal Service is not currently accepting mail destined for Canada...if you put the order in, then Eurotubes (or whoever) will just send them as soon as USPS starts to accept mail. The mail will be working next week so I would go forward with the order.

Now the 'non-union' thing...I recall my condo in Calgary's elevator was a piece of junk that was broken more than it worked. It was a brand new condo and after quite some time one of the board members told me that they had non-union installers put it in and they were getting a unionized elevator mechanic to work on it. It was like a brand new elevator was installed. THAT story always sticks with me.


----------



## ThePass (Aug 10, 2007)

Not to get off topic but I wanted to buy tubes via the link here from "thetubestore"........so I suppose it's Canada Post all the way.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

ThePass said:


> Not to get off topic but I wanted to buy tubes via the link here from "thetubestore"........so I suppose it's Canada Post all the way.


 Yes, though I suppose you could pay them extra and use courier if you're in a rush.

I just had a 'well, DUHHH' moment. CP losing 10's of millions during rotating strikes = not operational costs but lost business by people using courier services instead out of fear the strikes would elevate or that their (whatever, mostly cheques and invoices one would imagine) wouldn't be delivered in a timely manner. Put in that perspective, I definitely believe the numbers as I and my customers both have done this.

To smorg - thanks for taking time to respond to most of my stuff. I got *mildly* ranty last night, glad you didn't bust me on it as that's not my typical modus operandi. Nonetheless, I did have some serious questions that you answered articulately, thanks again. We don't see eye to eye on this, to state the obvious, but I'd still buy ya a beer any time.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keto said:


> I just had a 'well, DUHHH' moment. CP losing 10's of millions during rotating strikes = not operational costs but lost business by people using courier services instead out of fear the strikes would elevate or that their (whatever, mostly cheques and invoices one would imagine) wouldn't be delivered in a timely manner. Put in that perspective, I definitely believe the numbers as I and my customers both have done this.
> 
> To smorg - thanks for taking time to respond to most of my stuff. I got *mildly* ranty last night, glad you didn't bust me on it as that's not my typical modus operandi. Nonetheless, I did have some serious questions that you answered articulately, thanks again. We don't see eye to eye on this, to state the obvious, but I'd still buy ya a beer any time.


Canada Post also owns a major portion of Purolator so they are reaping the rewards of some of their own 'perceived' losses. I heard today that the Head of Canada Post is getting a 33% bonus for increasing profits. 

I appreciate the polite sentiment keto, but I am quite motivated to lay out information 'as I know it' since the media has been very poor throughout in my opinion. Any more people who know the facts is better regardless of what 'side' of the conflict that they put themselves on. 

One thing that 'our union' could have done WAY better is get out press releases which countered the half-truths that the corporation has been releasing and prior to 'crunch time' get some out which discussed facts rather than nuance. 

Cheers and beers.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...a lot of canadians are beating up on the postal workers when, in fact, it was canada post that locked them out.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...a lot of canadians are beating up on the postal workers when, in fact, it was canada post that locked them out.


/facepalm. Not this again. Go read the last 5 pages  Strike started it, lockout was a response. Someone will say broken down negotiations started it, and I would agree as long as we all agree the lockout was well down the chain of events.


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

keto said:


> /facepalm. Not this again. Go read the last 5 pages  Strike started it, lockout was a response. Someone will say broken down negotiations started it, and I would agree as long as we all agree the lockout was well down the chain of events.


Viciously aggressive rollback proposals in CPC's offers are what started it. Look at it this way: The union did not start negotiations by asking for radically massive increases in wages, benefits, etc.. They responded to an offer that quite literally no union would accept due to the extremely aggressive reductions it had been offered. Don't look at this situation like the union was asking for a gigantic increase because they absolutely were not. The union voted to strike because CPC proposed a number of hardline changes that focussed on downsizing and reducing. An actual strike never occured. Rotating walkouts. Say it with me.. Rotating walkouts. PEOPLE WERE STILL GETTING THEIR MAIL AND PEOPLE WERE STILL SENDING MAIL DURING THE ROTATING WALKOUTS. CUPW voted to strike but the union opted for a less disruptive form of protest. One of the main objectives of CUPW is to uphold and maintain quality of the postal service for all Canadians. Service during the walkouts had been reduced but not eliminated.

CPC decided to offer three day delivery. This was a rotating lockout at this point because CUPW workers were now losing wages. In order to push the matter to a higher power, CPC opted to lock out their employees.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

I know one thing, my dogs are starting to wonder where the mailman is. They look forward to him coming everyday and trying to get outside to tear him apart.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Well, as I have said, this will probably only serve to hasten the inevitable demise of paper mail. I know our company has found alternative methods to the few remaining snail mail interactions we had with a few suppliers and customers and won't revert once the mail resumes.

The mail will probably start flowing again sometime next week, but the damage has been done.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

This is a letter sent to and printed in a newspaper dated June 10, note that it is from a former manager:

Canada post's workplace is hostile and adversarial

As a former member of management at Canada Post, I can state with certainty that Canada Post employees deserve every cent they earn. Despite concerted efforts of the corporation, the old "Attila the Hun" style of management remains at the forefront. Equally disappointing is the needlessly adversarial Canadian Union of Postal Workers, an organization which places exposing the ineptness of management above genuinely advocating for the best interest of their employees. In fact, they regularly attack management at the detriment of individual, vulnerable employees. Stuck in the middle is an extremely diverse workforce.

As Canadians we have come to accept a right to a dignified existence. This includes working in a safe, positive, harmonious workplace. Everyone has a stake and responsibility in maintaining such a workplace. We spend more time at work with our colleagues than we do with our families. For this reason, it is important to be happy at work.

Canada Post employees have one of the highest rate of injuries on the job. Despite the nature of the work, their injury stats are comparable to the forestry sector. They also have the highest rate of absenteeism. Did Canada Post hire 72,000 incompetent slackers? Absolutely not! The workplace is extremely hostile and adversarial. This does not bode well for curbing workplace accidents and fostering an enthused workforce.

OC Transpo, the Ottawa public transportation authority, was one of the most hostile work environments. Aside from rocky labour relations issues, bullying of employees was a huge problem, particularly for employees who belonged to a racial minority group or suffered from a disability. An employee with a speech impediment was the target of unrelenting bullying from colleagues and management. All this came to a head in April 1999 when he entered his workplace with a rifle and shot and killed four people before taking his own life.

As a result of the OC Transpo shooting, an inquest was held. A number of recommendations were made regarding practices and strategies to creating a positive workplace. These recommendations included more leave from the workplace and flexible hours. Canada Post has been trying for years to restrict the use of employee sick-leave. They are also lagging behind other workplaces by not adopting greater flexibility in hours of work and job rotation. Both these practices fly in the face of the findings of the OC Transpo shooting public inquiry.

While neither side of this labour dispute is without fallacy, it is important not to begrudge individual employees, particularly Canada Post employees in the North. Virtually all the labour issues are in the south. Likewise all the decision makers are in the south. These employees deserve and safe and happy workplace. Despite the inconvenience of not being able to get my distance education materials from Athabasca University, I stand by the Canada Post employees.


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

Having worked behind the scenes with both unions and management, in both private and public sectors, it is my considered opinion that unions and management generally deserve each other.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

bw66 said:


> Having worked behind the scenes with both unions and management, in both private and public sectors, it is my considered opinion that unions and management generally deserve each other.


HAHA!! I know that sentiment ALL too well man!!

Cheers and thanks for the laugh!


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canadian mail should start moving again on Tuesday, with postal workers expected to be forced back to work by hotly debated legislation that passed the House of Commons on Saturday night.

The leftist New Democratic Party had held up the bill with 58 grueling hours of day-and-night debate but it finally made it through the House and now heads to a special Sunday sitting of the Senate, where its passage is assured because of the ruling Conservatives' domination of the upper chamber.

"After a completely unnecessary delay, I'm nevertheless pleased that very soon Canadians will again have access to their postal service," Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whose party crafted the bill, said outside the House.

Most members of Parliament -- including Harper at times -- had to sleep in their offices to avoid missing a crucial vote during the 2-1/2 days. Some played board games or strummed guitars in lounges when they were not speaking or sleeping.

The government expects the bill to become law on Sunday afternoon and postal employees would be back at work 24 hours later, said Harper press secretary Andrew MacDougall. The first full day of resumed mail service would then be on Tuesday.

Postal workers had begun rotating strikes on June 3 in a contract dispute with the government-owned Canada Post, the country's primary postal operator. That led to a lockout on June 15 that shut the mail service down completely.

The bill provides for an arbitrator to pick either the union's best final offer or Canada Post's. The most controversial feature of the legislation sets pay increases that are smaller than Canada Post had offered, though they match raises reached with another public sector union.

If its offer were accepted by the arbitrator, Canada Post would be able to offer new hires less generous salaries, pensions and vacations, providing big savings. Experienced employees currently get seven weeks of holidays and substantial sick leave.

In an age of e-mail and electronic bill payments, Canada Post says it needs to cut its costs in order to be competitive, particularly with courier companies.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers, which represents the 48,000 urban postal workers, says that the company is still profitable and that management demanded unfair concessions in wages, staffing and safety.

"The government is clearly willing to side with employers to grind down wages and working conditions," Denis Lemelin, the union's president, said in a statement.

"The Conservatives have shown themselves to be very anti-worker after only two months of majority government."

A poll this month showed that 70 percent of Canadians supported the legislation to force an end to the work stoppage.

(Editing by Paul Simao)


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

GuitarsCanada said:


> A poll this month showed that 70 percent of Canadians supported the legislation to force an end to the work stoppage.


I wonder what percentages a poll asking the question "Do you agree that the Canadian Economy no longer exists?" would result in?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Only 70%?

Seems a bit low.

For once I agree with the Harper government.

You'll never know how hard that was to say.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> Only 70%?
> 
> Seems a bit low.


It is actually probably way less than 70%. I'm not saying that the results of the poll have been altered but that the question leaves too much grey area. The reason that I say this is because many people just want the mail to move so they vote 'yes' without actually knowing what the legislation says. That's the problem with the question in the poll - that most people haven't even bothered to look at the legislation and look at the entire situation before just voting 'yes' because they want the mail to move. 

I completely disagree with Harper and it is easy to say...it would be easy to say if I was not a postal worker as well because if he wanted the mail to move all he would have had to do was to tell Canada Post to take the locks off of the doors just like the NDP was saying during the 'completely unnecessary delay' (as Harper called it). They are spinning it as if it was a move to get the mail going instead of what it actually is. As the Harper government always does, they do things for one reason and state that it was for another reason ignoring all logic and common sense.

They could have forced the workers to vote on Canada Post's 'final offer', they could have told Canada Post to lift the lock out, they could have done so many things but they did not and they want to lie about the 'why'.


----------



## Spellcaster (Jan 7, 2008)

This postal dispute is just another example of why public service jobs should be deemed "essential service". All labour disputes in the public sector should go to binding arbitration if the parties can't reach an agreement. If public service workers don't like that, they should be working in the private sector. Canadians have a right to basic services supplied by government all the time....not only during times when contract agreements have been reached. One man's opinion.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> It is actually probably way less than 70%. I'm not saying that the results of the poll have been altered but that the question leaves too much grey area. The reason that I say this is because many people just want the mail to move so they vote 'yes' without actually knowing what the legislation says. That's the problem with the question in the poll - that most people haven't even bothered to look at the legislation and look at the entire situation before just voting 'yes' because they want the mail to move.
> 
> I completely disagree with Harper and it is easy to say...it would be easy to say if I was not a postal worker as well because if he wanted the mail to move all he would have had to do was to tell Canada Post to take the locks off of the doors just like the NDP was saying during the 'completely unnecessary delay' (as Harper called it). They are spinning it as if it was a move to get the mail going instead of what it actually is. As the Harper government always does, they do things for one reason and state that it was for another reason ignoring all logic and common sense.
> 
> They could have forced the workers to vote on Canada Post's 'final offer', they could have told Canada Post to lift the lock out, they could have done so many things but they did not and they want to lie about the 'why'.


I personally think you're wrong on the first part. I've read the legislation, and I agree with it. Raise same as other public sector workers got, check - don't care that the negotiations had been at a higher point, if you're for equality well here it is. I don't especially agree with the way the arbitration's being done (one or the other, no picking pieces out of each and putting it together) but am hoping it will cause the union to bring a more sensible and acceptable offer to the table. Otherwise, you guys are going to lose big - and I'm not really all for that, figure the truth/best lies somewhere in the middle.

The delay was unnecessary - what was the point of holding up the inevitable for 2 days + and subjecting all MP's to losing a weekend, a ton of sleep, etc etc? Don't think I follow the logic and common sense part...the government wasn't going to go partway to resolving it (back to work but no agreement), no government in our history would have (the Libs have done back to work legislation in the not so distant past). The point IS to get the mail moving, again I just don't understand what you are seeing that is not this?


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keto said:


> I personally think you're wrong on the first part. I've read the legislation, and I agree with it. Raise same as other public sector workers got, check - don't care that the negotiations had been at a higher point, if you're for equality well here it is. I don't especially agree with the way the arbitration's being done (one or the other, no picking pieces out of each and putting it together) but am hoping it will cause the union to bring a more sensible and acceptable offer to the table. Otherwise, you guys are going to lose big - and I'm not really all for that, figure the truth/best lies somewhere in the middle.


Well, the money was never the issue. There is still the matter of mail was still moving and THEY shut down the mail yet WE are being legislated back to work? WE were still at work. In any fair situation the legislation and arbitration would favour us. The union has already tabled many fair offers and we are definitely going to lose big. The legislation was written as if the corporation wrote it themselves and there was no incentive to work out a deal (like what happened with Air Canada) because the parameters are already there. The corporation just says "well, all we have to do is stand pat, wait a few days and we will get what the legislation dictates". The corporation *will not address any health and safety concerns *so there is no way that the union could water down their position enough for the government appointed arbitrator to choose their contract offer. 



keto said:


> The delay was unnecessary - what was the point of holding up the inevitable for 2 days + and subjecting all MP's to losing a weekend, a ton of sleep, etc etc? Don't think I follow the logic and common sense part...the government wasn't going to go partway to resolving it (back to work but no agreement), no government in our history would have (the Libs have done back to work legislation in the not so distant past). The point IS to get the mail moving, again I just don't understand what you are seeing that is not this?


The NDP likely felt a responsibility to working people and along with that the Labour Minister said that she was open to amendments (which was obviously a lie) so they had to continue. They would still be continuing if the head of CUPW hadn't contacted Layton and thanked him telling him that 'since the legislation was introduced there has been no movement from the corporation at all'. Aside from that, people should oppose things that are not right. Having the legislation dictate all of that stuff is not right and they wouldn't even amend the type of arbitration.

We are going back with the old contract in place until the arbitrator chooses...that is typically 90 days. The union offered this before the lockout and the corporation refused. Anyone who can read and think/analyze can see that the corporation wanted this because they knew that they would be favoured by the government. So...having 'lift the lockout' legislation and regular arbitration would be democratic. This 'option' is not. If the 'point is to get the mail moving again' then they could have negotiated in the first place and never locked us out.

It will come out that Canada Post has a truck load of money. All of the execs will get huge bonuses and the government will make even bigger gains from their dividends than before...meanwhile, the temps who were trying to work themselves toward actually having a job there will likely be completely dismissed in favour of hiring 'new ones' at the 'new rates'.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

double post *I find that the site is really messing with me as of late* In try to post and it doesn't allow me...it keeps asking me if I want to stay on the page or leave the page...


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Mail will begin being processed Monday at 4pm so delivery should resume Tuesday June 27. 

I hope everyone gets their 'stuck in shipping' stuff as soon as possible and I hope that everyone enjoys their July 1st weekend!!


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

smorgdonkey said:


> double post *I find that the site is really messing with me as of late* In try to post and it doesn't allow me...it keeps asking me if I want to stay on the page or leave the page...


:C be careful with the cancel on that too. Sometimes it works and sometimes it shuts my browser off for me!!



AND a lot of times the post HAS posted when that box pops up too. Have to open the thread all over again in a new tab to see if it has or not otherwise you can double or more post :C :C :C


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

keeperofthegood said:


> :C be careful with the cancel on that too. Sometimes it works and sometimes it shuts my browser off for me!!
> 
> 
> 
> AND a lot of times the post HAS posted when that box pops up too. Have to open the thread all over again in a new tab to see if it has or not otherwise you can double or more post :C :C :C


Ya I am having all the issues mentioned fairly frequently.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

keto said:


> /facepalm. Not this again. Go read the last 5 pages  Strike started it, lockout was a response. Someone will say broken down negotiations started it, and I would agree as long as we all agree the lockout was well down the chain of events.


 
...you are ignoring one rather salient point: during the strike, the mail was still getting delivered. and although i'm not much on conspiracy theories, i smell one here - a strategy orchestrated by canada post and the harper government to discredit unions.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

david henman said:


> ...you are ignoring one rather salient point: during the strike, the mail was still getting delivered. and although i'm not much on conspiracy theories, i smell one here - a strategy orchestrated by canada post and the harper government to discredit unions.


You are very correct david. 

Also, one major point that the government and the corporation slipped by the public is that they will now be paying for part of the sick time of the Canada Post workers. The new plan uses E.I. as a major component...so all of the people who were on the corporation's 'side' of this (whether it is dislike of unions or thinking postal workers have too many perks) are now going to foot some of the bill.

That's what corporations do...and that's what pro-corporation governments do.

I also expect that the corporation will dismiss all of the casuals even if they have been working there for 2 years, so that they can hire people at the low wage that they have put in their offer. It will save them millions and it will be like pressing 'reset' in a sense.

Then they'll save big money on the 'legislated' wage increase...I think $35 million over the life of the contract.

Harper once left politics for a while and was in a group whose #1 priority was to 'de-unionize labour'. He just really believes in it and is carrying it through with him now that he has rejoined politics. The legislation is worded as if the corporation wrote it themselves...and they probably did so in a back room somewhere with some of the Harper cronies. The senate has shown once and for all that it is useless...when was the last time that the senate stopped any piece of legislation? They could have at least amended it to include 'normal' arbitration and sent it back to the house.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...you are ignoring one rather salient point: during the strike, the mail was still getting delivered. and although i'm not much on conspiracy theories, i smell one here - a strategy orchestrated by canada post and the harper government to discredit unions.



One can only hope


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...you are ignoring one rather salient point: during the strike, the mail was still getting delivered. and although i'm not much on conspiracy theories, i smell one here - a strategy orchestrated by canada post and the harper government to discredit unions.


So is the corporation now allowed to respond to strike action? Or to appease Smorgdonkey, "rolling walkout' action? When action like that is taken, it's inevitable one side or the other will escalate things.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

torndownunit said:


> So is the corporation now allowed to respond to strike action? Or to appease Smorgdonkey, "rolling walkout' action? When action like that is taken, it's inevitable one side or the other will escalate things.


I've said that, in different wording, about 5x in this thread. There's not much admission or ownership or accountability on the union side. Without their first step (which, again, the union wont 'see' as a first step), we don't have the subsequent steps that put us where we are today.

Is there not some clause somewhere that takes negotiations to binding arbitration at some point when they break down? Or does/did that only happen once walkout/lockout action has/had been taken? You (I) used to hear that all the time 'the two sides will go to binding arbitration to fashion the settlement', but I don't recall hearing it in (?) years now. No, I'm not talking about the arbitration that is in the current back to work legislation, even I'm not in favour of that methodology.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

keto said:


> I've said that, in different wording, about 5x in this thread. There's not much admission or ownership or accountability on the union side. Without their first step (which, again, the union wont 'see' as a first step), we don't have the subsequent steps that put us where we are today.


The corporation 'escalated' it by cutting hours (which you could say was MORE than 'rolling lockouts') and hiding mail to justify it. When there was no response they 'escalated' it again by dropping to 3 day delivery even though the Canada Post Act states that 5 day delivery is necessary. The key point being that the corporation was going to do anything that it could do to get a full work stoppage. Perhaps people can't see that from the outside but it was clear from the inside. The union applied for a conciliator but got no action so they applied for a mediator and still got no action. Canada Post's goal from the beginning was to get a full work stoppage so that they could get arbitration from the Conservative majority. It just so happens that this is the first time that a lock out was followed by back to work legislation. 



keto said:


> Is there not some clause somewhere that takes negotiations to binding arbitration at some point when they break down? Or does/did that only happen once walkout/lockout action has/had been taken? You (I) used to hear that all the time 'the two sides will go to binding arbitration to fashion the settlement', but I don't recall hearing it in (?) years now. No, I'm not talking about the arbitration that is in the current back to work legislation, even I'm not in favour of that methodology.


We don't have the benefit of such a clause. We will have an arbitrator appointed by Harper and that arbitrator will choose the corporation's submission. That is it. THAT is why we had rolling strikes...because the employer was not taking the bargaining process seriously. They are supposed to bargain in good faith but they didn't because they wanted the government to have its opportunity to start breaking things down. The corporation is crooked and the people running it just use it as a way to get rich off of the working person with little regard for their health & safety even though they trumpet health and safety all of the time.

...and they are crooked enough to start making the public pay for part of the sick time. I betb the execs bonuses will be huge after this one.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

Told you, torn 

Yet again, there's something I don't understand, the part about sick pay coming from EI. They have to be off long enough to qualify for EI, as a normal worker would, don't they? If yes, isn't it pretty much 6 of one/half dozen of the other because both EI and CP are government and the money all comes from essentially the same pool? I mean, I know it's offloaded from CP's books - or do they have an insurer for that, whereby they would be getting lower premiums? You, me, and all of us are paying for it one way or another, what's the big deal here?


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

keto said:


> Told you, torn
> 
> Yet again, there's something I don't understand, the part about sick pay coming from EI. They have to be off long enough to qualify for EI, as a normal worker would, don't they? If yes, isn't it pretty much 6 of one/half dozen of the other because both EI and CP are government and the money all comes from essentially the same pool? I mean, I know it's offloaded from CP's books - or do they have an insurer for that, whereby they would be getting lower premiums? You, me, and all of us are paying for it one way or another, what's the big deal here?


A lot of this is related to the concept of 'bankable' sick time, a concept which I am completely against. More and more places are eliminating it, and I completely agree with that.

I have read about the "STD" plan (unfortunate name) that Canada Post wanted to implement (or maybe has now?) and it sounded completely reasonable and on par with what the majority of the rest of the workforce has to go through regarding extended leave and amount of vacation days per year. And my opinion on that was formed from reading both Canada Post and CUPW sources on the issue. 

Just one other point on the issue of worker health since it's constantly mentioned. If you you a physical or repetitive job, you are going to get injured at some point. It's inevitable and anyone who does physical or repetitive work can vouch for that. You can also get injured stepping on a stair wrong when you get home at the end of a days work. It happens. With programs like EI and WSIB available (I have had to use both in the past), I feel the employer only 'owes' so much. That doesn't mean I think a workplace should be unsafe. It means I do question people's definitions of an 'unsafe workplace' at times though. When I worked for a job where unions were involved, I did not agree with their assessment of an 'unsafe workplace' at the time for example. If I thought the workplace was really that unsafe... I'd leave.

Smorgdonkey, you seem to think some of us in the thread are against the workers and for the corporation. I only make comparisons to what the majority of the rest of the workforce has to go through, and I have a real tough time feeling sympathy on some of the issues. I mean, when I read a breakdown of that 'STD' plan, it has more compensation for leave than what any (and I stress any) other person I know gets at their jobs. They definitely don't get some of the other benefits, and in most cases don't get as good pay. They would gladly settle for SOME of what you get. So you gotta see the perspective some people are coming from on this issue.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Bankable sick time? Let's just calculate that for my case. Let's see. I'm entitled to 8 sick days a year. I've worked for my employer for around 17 years without a sick day. That would be 136 days. So, I could take more than six months off, plus my four weeks vacation which would be more than seven months altogether.

Bankable sick time sure seems like a sense of entitlement to me, and something no company would or should ever agree to.

It's simple. I go to work. I get paid. Everybody's happy. 

Seems fair to me.

STD is a huge strain on many companies and is often abused.


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

The only time that bankable sick time makes sense is when a person who has never abused their sick days gets cancer or some other long term disease. If there are provisions for that scenario then I have no problem with getting rid of it.

But the truth is that bankable sick days actually prevent abuse because you eliminate the "use it or lose it" mindset.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Bankable sick time? Let's just calculate that for my case. Let's see. I'm entitled to 8 sick days a year. I've worked for my employer for around 17 years without a sick day. That would be 136 days. So, I could take more than six months off, plus my four weeks vacation which would be more than seven months altogether.
> 
> Bankable sick time sure seems like a sense of entitlement to me, and something no company would or should ever agree to.
> 
> ...


The STD plan was canada post's, not the unions. I am only mentioning it because smorgdonkey keeps saying we should be upset over ei and sick days issues. I don't see much to be upset over. It seems to apply to extended leave beyond allowed sick days, and has to be applied for. Unless I am missing something. When I read these ei arguments in various places, what I see is people upset over sick day privileges. Not a real concern over ei issues. The ei thing seems like a scapegoat argument.

I was saying the Canada post STD plan seemed fair to me is that from reading it, it seems to reduce the amount of sick days, and limit the ability to bank excessive hours. Again, the conditions in it seem fair compared to the workforce in general.

Of course to someone working under Canada post's previous plan, it may not seem as fair. But compared to the average worker, it seems pretty fair.


----------



## Spellcaster (Jan 7, 2008)

I just wanted to say that I think this discussion is great. A lot of the forums I visit might view a labor disruption/union discussion as a hot-button topic and hit it with a delete-o-bomb. I appreciate the fact that we can talk about this topic without things becoming overheated and hostile. One of the things I really like about the Canadian Guitar Forum.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Mail has been out for how long? and all I got today was some advertisment from Google


----------



## Spellcaster (Jan 7, 2008)

"..............and all I got today was some advertisment from Google "

Could be worse! As one of the holdouts from electronics statements and billing, I'm expecting love letters from utility companies and creditors. It'll be nice to be able to ship some guitar parts anyway.


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

It seems that a lot of the arguments against unions and the benefits they receive are based on "well I don't have that so they shouldn't either", but we don't seem to have the same distaste for executive benefits, which to me are far more outrageous. There is nothing wrong with having high expectations of your employer.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> Bankable sick time? Let's just calculate that for my case. Let's see. I'm entitled to 8 sick days a year. I've worked for my employer for around 17 years without a sick day. That would be 136 days. So, I could take more than six months off, plus my four weeks vacation which would be more than seven months altogether.


 The plan that Canada Post had that will be replaced is NOT like that...we can't just take the time...but if we have a terrible illness afflict us and cannot work, it covers us by using the banked time. Another major difference is the nature of the postal worker jobs leaves people more prone to needing sick time...if I was at a desk I wouldn't have the same needs for it. That said, I know that some people are at desks and don't have any or are at similar jobs and don't have any.



Milkman said:


> It's simple. I go to work. I get paid. Everybody's happy.
> 
> Seems fair to me.


If I could negotiate with Canada Post and get my package individually, I'm sure that I'd do fine...but they don't care about the efficiency of the operation so they would never do that - they would hire everyone at $14 and police them for obvious errors but for the most part fill their facilities with bodies.



bw66 said:


> It seems that a lot of the arguments against unions and the benefits they receive are based on "well I don't have that so they shouldn't either", but we don't seem to have the same distaste for executive benefits, which to me are far more outrageous. There is nothing wrong with having high expectations of your employer.


I completely agree and the 'benefits' and wages that are being rolled back are strictly for the profit of executives and not at all for the long term financial viability of the corporation and its business. Politics has succeeded in pitting the working people against each other IE 'union' vs. 'non-union', 'public vs private', etc. It is another way that they can break down the middle class. Unions 'got' weekends, holidays and 8 hour days for many workers. The main factor being that if the company can afford to share the wealth then they should share the wealth for the people who earned it. I think unions even established minimum wage and definitely initiated safer working conditions then all non-unionized places had to up their wages/benefits to 'compete' with those employers thus all workers enjoyed some of the things that the unions have fought for over time.

Anyway, I believe the first blow has been struck and the unions are in for a huge battle ahead. I don't think that they will win either and I think that will mark a defeat for all workers.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I'm at a desk about two days a week. The rest of the time I'm traveling, Often putting in fifteen hour days, going to places that put my health at risk.

Never assume that a management job is easier than a labourers job.

I have perfect attendance because I don't give in to minor illnesses , and to sone extent because I'm lucky, not because I have it easy.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> I'm at a desk about two days a week. The rest of the time I'm traveling, Often putting in fifteen hour days, going to places that put my health at risk.
> 
> Never assume that a management job is easier than a labourers job.
> 
> I have perfect attendance because I don't give in to minor illnesses , and to sone extent because I'm lucky, not because I have it easy.


I did not assume anything about your job...just as I did not assume that you were at a desk 1 day or 5 days - I stated the reason why our union negotiated the plan in the first place. If the management people were 'on the ball' then they would/should have incorporated a way to deal with the abusers at that time. ****but just to play the part of what I have heard many people say during the postal lock out*** *I'd KILL to be at a desk 2 days a week and travel the rest of the time.

I am speaking only of management at Canada Post. If THEY ALL WERE dismissed tomorrow, we would only need someone to administer benefits and payroll, some accounting staff and some purchasing officers and the place would run itself. Management can't turn that statement around because most of them have no idea how the mail works so they couldn't even train someone if they decided to hire all new employees. 

Sick time is not an unreasonable benefit in my opinion. Prior to working for Canada Post I worked in a corrugated paper factory for about 3 years. I had 2 years perfect attendance and I missed 2 days after that after 'acquiring' pneumonia. There aren't many people who could have done anything with that pneumonia that I had (felt like I had been run over by a truck). It was nice that I had sick leave benefits...not that I live dime to dime or pay to pay but if an employer values an employee, sick time benefits are typically something that is offered. In your case, you are a 'contractor'(?) so if you negotiated it then I'm sure that you'd come to an agreement...don't you think?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> I did not assume anything about your job...just as I did not assume that you were at a desk 1 day or 5 days - I stated the reason why our union negotiated the plan in the first place. If the management people were 'on the ball' then they would/should have incorporated a way to deal with the abusers at that time. ****but just to play the part of what I have heard many people say during the postal lock out*** *I'd KILL to be at a desk 2 days a week and travel the rest of the time.


I'm sure lots of people think that. The funny thing is, when I take people on one of these trips with me they almost without fail say they wouldn't want my job for all the tea in China.

I've done lots of physical jobs in my lifetime, including working the tobacco harvests, and pulling in lobster traps.

There are reasons management positions pay better, and having been in both types of jobs, I know the difference.

I'd wager management at Canada Post is much more capable than you seem to think.

At any rate, the mail is flowing again.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Milkman said:


> I'm sure lots of people think that. The funny thing is, when I take people on one of these trips with me they almost without fail say they wouldn't want my job for all th etea in China.
> 
> I've done lots of physical jobs in my lifetime, including working the tobacco harvests, and pulling in lobster traps.
> 
> ...


I used to get a charge out of people around the office and on the floor that used to "envy" me and all the travel I did. Beleive me it wears off real fast. You typically never have time to do crap when you are on these trips. The company does not build in "free" time for you to look around. The trips are structured around meetings and work, thats about it. I have been to some of the nicest cities in the world only to see the airport, hotel and inside of a meeting room or shop floor. If you are lucky the drive to the hotel is a scenic one.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> I used to get a charge out of people around the office and on the floor that used to "envy" me and all the travel I did. Beleive me it wears off real fast. You typically never have time to do crap when you are on these trips. The company does not build in "free" time for you to look around. The trips are structured around meetings and work, thats about it. I have been to some of the nicest cities in the world only to see the airport, hotel and inside of a meeting room or shop floor. If you are lucky the drive to the hotel is a scenic one.


Not to mention the fact that some of the places I visit are just plain dangerous.

I have some control over my schedule and I'm really trying to stop and smell the roses whenever I can, but there are lots of trips that are just grueling. I've had as many as fourteen flights in one week and driven thousands of KMs on some trips.

I'm not crying about it. frankly I love it. It's what I'm best suited to do. I just get a bit weary of hearing how incompetant and dispensable management is. The whole "us vs them" mentality is one of the biggest reasons I dislike unions so much.

This quote is exactly what I'm referring to.

"I am speaking only of management at Canada Post. If THEY ALL WERE dismissed tomorrow, we would only need someone to administer benefits and payroll, some accounting staff and some purchasing officers and the place would run itself. Management can't turn that statement around because most of them have no idea how the mail works so they couldn't even train someone if they decided to hire all new employees."

I doubt this VERY much.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

It's these "nature of the job results in more suck days" arguments that I really take exception to.

First of all, desk jobs are not easy. They come with their own set of issues.

Second, there are plenty of people out there working comparably physical jobs. Ask some of these people if they feel the 'downgraded' plan being offered seems unreasonable to them.

I'm sorry, as someone who has always done physical work, these 'nature of the job' arguments are driving me nuts. If you don't like a physical, hard job then don't work it. If you do want to work it, realize there is wear and tear involved.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

torndownunit said:


> It's these "nature of the job results in more suck days" arguments that I really take exception to.
> 
> First of all, desk jobs are not easy. They come with their own set of issues.
> 
> ...


I think this is true in almost any job. It is probably one of the hardest things to do in life, leaving a job voluntarily. You get into a comfortable position knowing that steady money is coming in. Even though some of them may be robotic you still know what tomorrow brings. I could have stayed in my last job. I made really good money but the last two years were starting to affect my health. I was popping pills for anxiety, the stress was getting to me, the travel. 

So now I make way less money and probably put in more hours, in fact, I know I put in more hours. But I am off the pills and my stress level is about 1000 times less. 

So like you say, if you dont like it then sometimes you have to make that hard decision and get out


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2011)

GuitarsCanada said:


> I have been to some of the nicest cities in the world only to see the airport, hotel and inside of a meeting room or shop floor. If you are lucky the drive to the hotel is a scenic one.


That sums up my thoughts on business travel as well. Occasionally I'll try to bookend a trip with a weekend say (on my own dime) but more often than not I'm rushing home to get back to the wife and kids. The travel part is brutal. Nothing like having flights canceled out from under you when you're stuck in a connecting airport like Topeka or Detroit to really hammer your spirits -- knowing you're going to be spending Friday night in another cheap hotel and up at the crack of dawn to fight for a seat on the one plane out of there at 5 am, hoping to be home in time for dinner on Saturday.

Business travel is not leisure travel that's for sure.


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

My Mom always used to say (and I'm told that her Mom always said it too) that if we could all walk into a room and put our lives in a pile on a big table in the middle and then have our pick of everyone else's life. We would all walk out again with the life we came in with.

Edit: For the record, I have the poorest paying job and poorest benefit package of any of you. (I'm a stay-at-home parent.) And I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't trade places with any of you. (But I am looking into forming a union.)


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Not to mention the fact that some of the places I visit are just plain dangerous.
> 
> I have some control over my schedule and I'm really trying to stop and smell the roses whenever I can, but there are lots of trips that are just grueling. I've had as many as fourteen flights in one week and driven thousands of KMs on some trips.
> 
> ...


No one doubts that management work very hard, but sometimes they don't work very smart. A great deal of what my own manager slaves away at is something I could easily do myself, if only he a) trusted me, and b) wasn't so busy running from meeting to meeting with other managers that he can't manage to provide me with the information I need to operate more autonomously.

I have studiously avoided the management track, and as a result have had one promotion within a 14 year government career. A longtime friend who recently retired from the presidency of a major university has asked me on several occasions to consider pursuing more leadership roles, and posed the query that maybe I'm exactly what's needed withn the management cadré. If such jobs were maybe 8% leadership and 92% managing, I might consider it, but they tend to be about 2-3% leadership and 97-98% managing; not particularly good balance and not what I'm cut out for.

I tell my own managers that I feel about management the way Jane Goodall feels about chimps. She enjoys living and working among them. She respects them and finds them a subject of endless fascination. She works tirelessly for their welfare and protection. But she doesn't particularly want to *be* one. That confession has worked well at removing me from consideration.

For me, a job has to be *about* something, and where I work, management jobs are not about anything in particular. I get to read journals and think. My management team needs me to generate "briefing notes" for them because they have no time to read or think. I'm grateful that they have been willing to take on those s**t jobs (and a survey of government executives several years back found that traval and being away from home was considered one of the down-sides of the job for many). I just wish they'd stop running around for once, and take a moment or two to listen to people.

The fact that management jobs are not really about anything also means that such people never really stay in one place very long since their skills are considered generic, rather than specialized. If you're a manager you can manage anything, right? That mobility tends to bring out the worst in them. So the management team where Smorgdonkey works may well be fairly competent caring people, but the "churn" in the organization may well lead them to keep non-managerial staff on a very short and dark tether.

I've been involved with the survey of federal employees for 12 years now, and designed part of it. One of the things we used to ask people was how many supervisors they had within the last 3 years. One of the things I noticed, combing through the data, was that people who reported more supervisors in the same time period also reported poorer communication with their supervisor, less autonomy, and less support for their own career development. The picture that emerged was that the new manager/supervisor hits the deck running, and requires a period fo time before they get a handle on who to invest in, why, and how, and whom they should trust with what. Some folks are obviously more likely to micromanage than others, merely due to their personality, but the constant movement of managers can bring out those undesirable traits in folks who wouldn't normally display them, if they stayed in one place long enough.

Finally, the public sector (and this includes crown corporations like Canada Post) is besotted with "accountability" these days. I like to refer to it as "accountabalism" - the cult of thinking that if you're running around frantically measuring and reporting on anything and everything, regardless of its validity, or any sense of what it means, or whether it matters, then you have achieved accountability. sadly, a great many managers ARE preoccupied with all of these measuring and reporting things, and lack any time to actually understand the operations or provide productive guidance. I wish I could say we are getting better value for our tax dollar, but we're too obsessed with getting value for our tax dollar to actually get any.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> "I am speaking only of management at Canada Post. If THEY ALL WERE dismissed tomorrow, we would only need someone to administer benefits and payroll, some accounting staff and some purchasing officers and the place would run itself. Management can't turn that statement around because most of them have no idea how the mail works so they couldn't even train someone if they decided to hire all new employees."
> 
> I doubt this VERY much.


Well, I am not saying that they don't work...they are given projects and I'm sure that they try very hard with them, but they are almost always ineffective (because they don't know the practical aspects of the work) and almost always a drag on the efficiency. After the efficiency is destroyed, then they can say "well...perhaps we should close that rural office because everything attached to it is very inefficient and it would look good on the bottom line"...yes, because they F'd it up so bad that there is no value left.

I'm telling you right now...if you were able to get to know that place intimately, you'd know exactly what I am saying just as those misconceptions are cleared up for those people when you take them on those trips.

Need I say it again? 60% of letter carriers quit in their first year.

I would guess after much thought that 99% of the population couldn't or wouldn't do my mail route (that I just left) for 6 months.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Warren Bennis, one of the hotshots in the area of management and leadership, and right up there with Peter Drucker, likes to talk about "management by walking/wandering around". He sees great vaue is keeping in touch with the shop floor. What is management by walking around (MBWA)? definition and meaning


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

mhammer said:


> Warren Bennis, one of the hotshots in the area of management and leadership, and right up there with Peter Drucker, likes to talk about "management by walking/wandering around". He sees great vaue is keeping in touch with the shop floor. What is management by walking around (MBWA)? definition and meaning



This is what famous notables such as King Louis XVI, the Russian Tsar and similar failed to do. Keeping an ear to what the box boy has to say about working conditions in a warehouse is an education any management should undertake. The out come could become epic as there are even major religions that go on in detail about the revolts that happened when the help decided to say enough!


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Yes, something that never happens at Canada Post. I have seen the plant manager a total of perhaps 10 times in 3 years and never close enough to actually speak to...not that the manager would speak anyway. I heard a story last night of the manager's first day (years ago) while said manager was standing behind employees who were working and yelling at them to go faster.

The problem is that Canada Post still has the main top heavy structure that they had when they were a Federal Government job. People who were 'high up' created new positions so that their kid(s) would have high paying salaried jobs when they got out of university. Those jobs still exist. There are 28000 salaried employees for 48000 hourly paid workers. The supervisors are only schedulers and can't even make decisions...not that they aren't capable but they aren't allowed.

The 'streamlining' of Canada Post has chopped the workforce significantly and made very little downsizing moves within management...imagine having more than one salaried employee for every 2 people who actually do the work.

I have worked at a few places and I am not one of those people who believe management doesn't know anything...but THIS PLACE takes the cake. Some of the people in management are absolutely incapable of anything. Like the 'old school' way of business was: they can't do the job so promote them.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

My block didn't get mail today. /sadface


----------



## prodigal_son (Apr 23, 2009)

Letter Carriers in major centres were told today to return all undelivered mail at the end of their shifts if they could not deliver it all in 8 hours. This means that piles of mail are not being delivered on time. Canada's economy is in jeopardy so you'll have to wait. WTF?


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

prodigal_son said:


> Letter Carriers in major centres were told today to return all undelivered mail at the end of their shifts if they could not deliver it all in 8 hours. This means that piles of mail are not being delivered on time. Canada's economy is in jeopardy so you'll have to wait. WTF?


That is the corporation's 'double standard'. Lie, lie,lie...sooner or later you just get used to it. The sorting plant is up to its eyeballs in mail and the part time employees (like me) didn't even get extended hours.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

keto said:


> My block didn't get mail today. /sadface


Mine did, but just bills /sadface


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Not that this is difinitive by any means, but this poll result is pretty much what I'd expect.

Striking unions offside with public - Politics - Canoe.ca


----------



## amp boy (Apr 23, 2009)

whats more important....workers rights.......our the housewives of Canada get their American Vogue.
I am glad i got payment in the mail for a job i did in April....i needed that !!


----------



## tubetwang (Dec 18, 2007)

went to ze post office yesterday to pick up me mail...i live in the mountains, one hour from Vermont border...rural area caper...

turns out, my order from Marsh amps (10 chrome 5F2-A Tweed Princeton chassis) was returned cuz' i had'nt follow through on the notice that Canada Post had sent me...

Problem is, i had'nt got any notice...Canada Post was on strike...

Oh well...


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> Not that this is difinitive by any means, but this poll result is pretty much what I'd expect.
> 
> Striking unions offside with public - Politics - Canoe.ca


I agree...but very few people say "I still feel the same way" after hearing the details. Furthermore, many people still thought that we were on strike which we weren't. On the picket line we'd get so much support you wouldn't believe it...then about 3 times per day someone would go by in the car and yell "get back to work"...we all wanted to go to work but the doors were locked. So...if the person who yelled "get back to work" knew that the doors were locked and the employer was not allowing work to be done...would they yell "get back to work"?

Got illitterussy?

(joke intended)


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> I agree...but very few people say "I still feel the same way" after hearing the details. Furthermore, many people still thought that we were on strike which we weren't. On the picket line we'd get so much support you wouldn't believe it...then about 3 times per day someone would go by in the car and yell "get back to work"...we all wanted to go to work but the doors were locked. So...if the person who yelled "get back to work" knew that the doors were locked and the employer was not allowing work to be done...would they yell "get back to work"?
> 
> Got illitterussy?
> 
> (joke intended)


As I mentioned in an earlier post, it's no surprise to me that you would have mostly positive support at the picket line. People who disapprove won't generally stop by to express their views. I know I wouldn't. Who wants to get in an argument with union guys? It's like arguing over religion.

I WILL say as others have, that I'm happy we have been able to have a discussion on this subject here without it getting nasty.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

smorgdonkey said:


> I agree...but very few people say "I still feel the same way" after hearing the details. Furthermore, many people still thought that we were on strike which we weren't. On the picket line we'd get so much support you wouldn't believe it...then about 3 times per day someone would go by in the car and yell "get back to work"...we all wanted to go to work but the doors were locked. So...if the person who yelled "get back to work" knew that the doors were locked and the employer was not allowing work to be done...would they yell "get back to work"?
> 
> Got illitterussy?
> 
> (joke intended)


Why does it constantly have to be mentioned that what people told you while you were on picket lines is not an accurate measure of anything? People who aren't happy with you generally aren't going to go up to a picket line of people and debate them. They will generally just avoid you. As Milkman said, if you aren't 100% on the side of everything unions stand for there is no point whatsoever in debating with someone who is. Never mind a picket line full of people. It would be a colossal waste of everyone's time.

Also, I have read every one of your points and my opinion hasn't changed in the slightest. Neither some other people's opinions in this thread. Could you please stop implying that anyone who doesn't agree with you are just 'uniformed'? People in this thread are being very level minded in this discussion, and are reading and replying to all of your points. If you can assume you have support from what people told you in the picket lines, why can't you assume a lot of other people out there are just like the people in this thread having this discussion with you? How long can you keep calling everyone uniformed?

These 2 arguments are really borderline insulting. Your mindset seems to be in every post that anyone's who's opinion is different than yours just doesn't know 'the truth' or is on the side of 'the corporations'. Those are ridiculous assumptions. People in this thread have been incredibly polite with you, and made it very clear they don't have it in for Canada Post workers. It's just that everyone is not going to sympathize with the points the workers/unions are making about their jobs or agree with them. You can't make the assumption from that though everyone sides with all of the corporations points either though.


----------



## Spellcaster (Jan 7, 2008)

Both Canada Post and the CUPW have shot themselves in the foot by participating in this labour disruption. Several people I know who operate businesses that used postal service were forced to find alternatives during the work stopage/strike/lockout. Only one that I know of is going back to using mail service....the rest are fed up with this BS and don't want their businesses to be victims to this kind of stuff again.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

torndownunit said:


> Why does it constantly have to be mentioned that what people told you while you were on picket lines is not an accurate measure of anything? People who aren't happy with you generally aren't going to go up to a picket line of people and debate them. They will generally just avoid you. As Milkman said, if you aren't 100% on the side of everything unions stand for there is no point whatsoever in debating with someone who is. Never mind a picket line full of people. It would be a colossal waste of everyone's time.
> 
> Also, I have read every one of your points and my opinion hasn't changed in the slightest. Neither some other people's opinions in this thread. Could you please stop implying that anyone who doesn't agree with you are just 'uniformed'? People in this thread are being very level minded in this discussion, and are reading and replying to all of your points. If you can assume you have support from what people told you in the picket lines, why can't you assume a lot of other people out there are just like the people in this thread having this discussion with you? How long can you keep calling everyone uniformed?
> 
> These 2 arguments are really borderline insulting. Your mindset seems to be in every post that anyone's who's opinion is different than yours just doesn't know 'the truth' or is on the side of 'the corporations'. Those are ridiculous assumptions. People in this thread have been incredibly polite with you, and made it very clear they don't have it in for Canada Post workers. It's just that everyone is not going to sympathize with the points the workers/unions are making about their jobs or agree with them. You can't make the assumption from that though everyone sides with all of the corporations points either though.


First of all, it isn't so much picket line experience that I have had experience talking to people about this issue and 'informing them'. The picket line experience was more like cars driving past and giving thumbs up while honking horns or stopping and donating things. The experiences of 'informing people' have not been on the line aside from a very few people who didn't even have the slightest idea of what was going on. On the 'poll question'...people just want the mail to move so they vote 'Yes' to 'agree with the back to work legislation'. It is the first time in history that a company locked out the workforce and then the workforce was legislated back. Someone kicks you out of a building and then makes you go back in the building. Seem right? Not to me.

Now I certainly wouldn't think that I have changed everyone's mind in this thread...in fact I would say that I have changed nobody's mind in this thread. The people who don't 'agree' with me are free to do so, but the people who think I don't earn everything that I get as a postal worker ARE uninformed. Just as uninformed as the people who want to do Milkman's work travel. If you haven't done it for a year then you have no idea. 

So, further on the uninformed topic: either you knew everything that I have posted on this topic before OR you were uninformed. Now you are informed but can still have the same opinion that you always had...which was likely formed by misinformation but is so deeply set into your mind that you won't change it anyway. That's fine...in your first couple of posts you stated (while referring to someone else's job) that you "know you do" ("work a lot harder for a lot less") and you assumed that other people's benefits would cover your medications. 

So, when someone says "the postal workers are greedy and are demanding way too much & holding our mail hostage"...that is flat-out being misinformed. That isn't my opinion - it is a fact. 

*If I have insinuated that the only reason that people in this thread disagree with me is because they are misinformed then I have failed in that regard because it was certainly not my intention...and as for 'borderline insulting' well, any time someone remotely suggests that I receive something that I have not earned I am 'borderline insulted'. I have acquired this great skill of being dismissive, however. *

Did I expect to turn some people around by getting the facts out there? Yes. 
Do I feel like I achieved it? Not in the least. 
Am I surprised? Yes indeed. 

Anyway, a couple more interesting articles: 

Canada Post Debate Rife with Misinformation - Raise the Hammer

Backroom talks came close to ending postal standoff - thestar.com


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

"Did I expect to turn some people around by getting the facts out there? Yes. "


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

Small distinction, but what you got "out there" was your opinion. I'm cool with people having different views on this but that comment sounds like a religious person explaining that his beliefs are truth and mine are misguided. 

I'm not insulted, but I don't think there's any point in beatinbg a dead horse. 

I figure we've managed to have a discussion on this without it turning into a flame fest so I think I've said enough on the subject, but facts is facts and opinions is opinions.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Milkman said:


> "Did I expect to turn some people around by getting the facts out there? Yes. "
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...


There is no doubt that there is some opinion in there but for the most part I presented factual information and insider's views - the opinion started coming out more later in the thread when the issues were becoming more scarce. It was just the factual stuff that I thought might turn some people around, not the opinion. 

Even when new people ask me questions about the place I always say "well, this is my experience, so put it in the back of your mind and let your own experience form your take on it". I tend to do the same when people ask me about other people too.

So, when I said "when people first get on at Canada Post, they get no vacation, no pension and no benefits & they have to do that for a couple of years" that is a fact...when I say "management has their head in their azz" (which I more insinuated rather than stated), you are correct...that is opinion.

So...have you seen what's going on in Britain?
http://www.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/06/30/uk.strike/index.html


----------

