Postal Union Challenges the Back To Work Legislation

Cock Throppled

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2003
4,946
853
113
Upstairs
The union representing Canada Post employees will mount a legal challenge against legislation forcing them back to work.

The back-to-work bill was adopted last weekend following a 58-hour filibuster by the NDP.

Alain Duguay, head of CUPW's Montreal local, told The Canadian Press the union will seek legal recourse in an effort to overturn the legislation.

How is this possible? The government legally passed the legislation after 58 hours of debate. Then it was sent through the senate. The government makes the laws, so how can government-legislated law be decided by a court?

We elect MP's to pass laws and determine policy. Unelected judges are making our laws.
 

whoisjohngalt

Member
Aug 4, 2009
147
1
18
Vancouver area
The union representing Canada Post employees will mount a legal challenge against legislation forcing them back to work.

The back-to-work bill was adopted last weekend following a 58-hour filibuster by the NDP.

Alain Duguay, head of CUPW's Montreal local, told The Canadian Press the union will seek legal recourse in an effort to overturn the legislation.

How is this possible? The government legally passed the legislation after 58 hours of debate. Then it was sent through the senate. The government makes the laws, so how can government-legislated law be decided by a court?

We elect MP's to pass laws and determine policy. Unelected judges are making our laws.
You can thank Mr Trudeau for that one. But to play the devil's advocate, there are reasonable and legitimate arguments in favour of having a constitution which can't be overruled by parliament. For example, in the absence of a constitution that guarantees certain rights to all, a majority acting together could lawfully enrich themselves by treading on the rights of a minority. History is rife with examples of this. While I happen to support the back to work legislation in this case, I have no problem at all with the union challenging the constitutionality of such. Somebody help me out here - is collective bargaining a charter protected right?
 

Bartdude

New member
Jul 5, 2006
1,252
5
0
Calgary
Independent courts. It's called democracy.

This is especially important in a parliamentary system with majority governments.

The idea is that the Constitution represents the laws of the land - and that nobody, not even our elected leaders, are above the law.
 

whoisjohngalt

Member
Aug 4, 2009
147
1
18
Vancouver area
I had a feeling you would know this one alinburnaby.

Governments have legislated the end of labour disputes many times before but I can't recall it ever having been charter challenged. Is this a first?

On a related note, the Charter (rightly) protects freedom of association, but I wonder if anyone has tested whether it also protects freedom to not associate, vis-a-vis mandatory union membership in "closed shop" workplaces, or for that matter the existence of closed union shops altogether. That is one charter challenge I would love to see.
 

treveller

Member
Sep 22, 2008
630
10
18
The Details

A few subtle but important points seem to have been missed.

When the courts strike down a law they are enforcing, not making law. The "courts shouldn't be making laws" complaint is used when someone can't have the lawless activity they want.

The Government of BC imposed a contract on health care workers in BC some years age and that was eventually found to be unlawful. The government had to pay many millions in compensation.

There is a hierarchy of laws, all made by politicians. The Canadian Constitution is a law passed primarily by British politicians. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a law passed by Canadian and British politicians together. The back to work legislation is a law passed be Canadian Federal politicians. All these laws are made by and can be changed by politicians.

When a court strikes down a law it is only applying a superior law made by politicians to another subordinate law also made by politicians.

I probably missed some details and maybe even got some details wrong but the general idea is probably right. :confused:
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,037
44
48
This postal strike has given us another opportunity to wean ourselves off snail mail. For me, it has given me the incentive to go to paperless billing on the few remaining bills that were still being mailed.

I recently read an article in the MaCleans about the benefits our postal workers are getting that just made my blood boil.




MaCleans said:
Time to send a message to Canada’s postal workers

It is hard to imagine a more coddled, out-of-touch and overcompensated group than postal workers



"Rain or snow or sleet or hail can’t disrupt the mail. But what rhymes with seven weeks of annual paid vacation, out-of-whack pay scales or infinitely bankable sick days?

While the rotating strike by workers at Canada Post has proven to be a hardship for many Canadian businesses, it is also shining necessary light on the massive disparity between postal employees and workers in the private sector. Outside of bureaucrats in France, it is hard to imagine a more coddled, out-of-touch and overcompensated group than postal workers.

Canada Post’s efforts to bring labour costs in line with common sense, modern technology and market rates should be supported regardless of the strike’s immediate implications. A successful conclusion to this strike might even spark a broader rationalization across all Crown corporations and government operations.

By any objective measure, a job at the post office is well-rewarded, despite the weather. Research by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business in 2008 found postal workers enjoyed a 17 per cent wage premium over comparable private sector jobs. The current offer from Canada Post would raise wages by 7.4 per cent, on a cumulative basis, over the next four years. Union officials are demanding 11.55 per cent—a massive increase for workers who are already demonstrably overcompensated.

As with most sinecures, however, the real advantage to working at Canada Post is in the benefits. Postal workers currently accumulate sick days at the rate of 15 per year, with no maximum. The extent of this bottomless bank of sick days is illustrated by a recent Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) bulletin that offered up the apocryphal example of “Narinda,” who has “402 days of sick leave credit.” Canada Post is sensibly proposing to buy out this improbable inventory; Narinda would receive $3,000 cash for her hoard of sick days.

Then there is the matter of paid vacation. Current full-time Canada Post employees are eligible for up to seven weeks of holiday, a prospect far beyond imagination for most in the workaday world. And the pension plan has an unfunded liability of $3.2 billion.

The business of mail delivery has changed dramatically since the last postal strike in 1997. The advent of electronic bill payment, email and the rest of the digital revolution has led to a 17 per cent decline in letter mail volume since 2006.

Canada Post’s sensible strategy is to establish a more reasonable pay and benefits system for workers in this declining industry—but only for new hires. Other than replacing the absurd sick-day bank (which Canada Post has offered to refer to binding arbitration), full-time postal workers would keep all their existing wages and benefits, whether appropriate or not. New employees would have a lower starting wage, receive six weeks of vacation instead of seven, and subscribe to a different pension plan.

Canada Post’s offer is reminiscent of the deal given North American dockworkers when intermodal shipping containers revolutionized the stevedore business in the 1960s. Existing workers had their jobs, wages and benefits protected for the extent of their careers, but anyone hired after the deal was signed was expected to accept reality. It seemed more than fair back then. The same logic should apply today.

While disputing the decline in mail volume and continuing to make unrealistic demands on wages and benefits, the postal union is nonetheless seeking new ways to hold the Canadian economy hostage: CUPW has called on Canada Post to expand into banking and finance. The prospect of rotating bank strikes is no doubt pleasing to union organizers. Not so for the rest of the country.

Of course the current postal dispute has significance far beyond the future of letter mail or the ambitions of Canada Post and its union. The gap between private and public sector compensation has now reached crisis proportions, and must be addressed for the sake of equity, affordability and coherent labour peace.

One example of how large and untenable this gap has become can be found in Statistics Canada’s recent observation that public sector employees now constitute a majority of all pension plan participants, despite being outnumbered more than three to one in the workforce. This suggests two types of retirement in the future: one of carefree luxury for public sector employees, and one of reduced expectations for everyone else. A similar dichotomy is at work with Ontario’s practice of paying a bonus to every corrections staffer who takes fewer than 23 sick days per year.

A postal strike seems as good a time as any to start imposing a new sense of reality on the public sector."





These lazy ass fuckers already get a more than generous package compared to the private sector and are once again asking for the moon. Perhaps it is time to get rid of these dinosaurs all together...
 

WrongMan

New member
May 28, 2009
230
0
0
That MaClean article is really one sided. I don't agree with the Canada Post Union but that MaClean article is very anti-union, anti-worker rights. When I read something like that from a news article I just stop reading.

The issue here is not back to work legislation. That is a standard thing for Canada Post strikes. Canada Post and Union negotiate, get nothing done. Union says we are going on strike. Canada Post and Union come closer to a deal and then wait for back to work legislation. They have done this 7-9 times since the 70s. Then after the legislation they go to an arbitration panel. The arbitration panel listens to each side and makes a ruling.

My issue is the Canadian Government is not respecting the rules with the arbitration panel. Canada Post had an offer on the table, the Canadian Government has tied the arbitration panel hand and forced the Union back to well less than what Canada Post had offer.

The Union should work with it membership to save the jobs they can. The ideas coming out of the Union are crap. Canada Post into banking, getting rid of large drop off mail boxes(why? they are great and save money) and checking up on the elderly on their route is crap. You are not going to save jobs that way.

But the back to work legislation is harsh, way harsher than normal back to work legislation.
 

HeMadeMeDoIt

New member
Feb 12, 2004
2,029
2
0
Time to pull a Ronald Reagan and fire the whole lot of those over paid, unskilled, glorified paperboys and them offer them their jobs back at 1/2 their current pay and no benefits.
If it worked for the highly skilled, well trained ATCs it sure will work for the brainless monkeys that deliver our post at exorbitant rates! I say fuck 'em!
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,037
44
48
But the back to work legislation is harsh, way harsher than normal back to work legislation.
Not as harsh as the union holding those who have no viable alternatives to snail mail, namely the poor, elderly and rural population hostage.
 

FunSugarDaddy

New member
Aug 15, 2008
1,110
5
0
The fact that the mafia was able to use unions to extort billions of dollars from innocent people tells you all you need to know about unions.

I use to think unions were a result of bad management and owners taking unfair advantage of their works, and I still think once upon a time that was true, but when unions were allowed in our govenment system they became a cancer.


Think about this postal works can retire with full benefits at the age of 55 and they're crying because Canada post wants to raise this to 60 for new employees. hand up anyone else who's got this type of deal. I also know of many teachers who are essentially pension millionaires, meaning if a husband and wife are both teachers for approximately 25 years each, the communited value of their combined pensions would almost certainly exceed $1M and these pensions are unually adjusted for inflation.

It just goes on and on.

Any yet the federal government owes approximately 561B in debts (16K per individual) and the province of B.C. is about 42B in debt as of March '2010.

So how can any wage increases or even the status quo be justified. Well because it was negotiated and is now enshired in law and hell will freeze over before any worker will give back a penny of their benefits.

Now all that aside if these works received the same amount of remuneration as those in the private sector for the same equivant I'd be fine with it, but they don't they almost alway receive significantly more, and then rather than operate like a business and make a venture profitable, they instead try to protect their turf and all costs. And because the politicans on the other side of the negiotiating table aren't barginning with their money, they have no real incentive to say enough's enough, quite the contrary, they don't want strikes etc, because it's politically an unpleasant task.

But if you operate like this long enough, you become Greece.


Greek government workers have received what are called "13th- and 14th-month salaries." That means they work for 12 months, but get paid for 14. Sweet deal, if it doesn't wreck your economy. Oh, wait. It does. So, Greece's back-breaking concession to get the European bailout is not to actually eliminate the 13th- and 14th-month salaries. Oh, no: These will not be Draconian cuts, despite the fact that Draco was Athens's original lawgiver -- they will merely be capped at a flat rate. Henceforth, government workers will get a flat 250 euro ($331) Easter bonus, a 500 euro ($662) Christmas bonus and an additional 250 euro "subsidy leave."

Under the bailout, Greeks must now work until they are 67 years old. Up until now, they have been able to retire with pensions at -- take a guess -- 65? Nope. 62? Lower. 57? Keep going! 53? Bingo!

If any private section company operated like this they'd have gone bankrupt ages ago...oh almost forgot that's what happened to GM.
 

let's review

Banned
Mar 27, 2009
53
0
0
Rotating one day strikes spread out over the country hardly hold anyone hostage, perhaps a one day delay in delivery.
LOCKING OUT employees for two full weeks while holding all the important cheques, contracts, etc. that were in the mail stream in their plants, THAT sounds more like hostage taking to me. Except for when the overpaid unskilled brain-dead dinosaur monkeys were allowed in to sort and deliver Socio-Economic cheques.

The Federal government is hardly at arm's length, taxes paid by Canada Post go where? Profits made by Canada Post go where? Anyone remember the Liberal sponsorship scandal? Alphonse Gagliano?

The real issue is the attack on all unions, public and private, and the elimination of the middle class; but that's another thread.

Just a note - having been a CUPW member (surprise!) I can tell you, women are a driving force and huge part of that union, so I don't think you're allowed to call them some of those names.

On with the hyperbole!
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,037
44
48
Rotating one day strikes spread out over the country hardly hold anyone hostage, perhaps a one day delay in delivery.
LOCKING OUT employees for two full weeks while holding all the important cheques, contracts, etc. that were in the mail stream in their plants, THAT sounds more like hostage taking to me. Except for when the overpaid unskilled brain-dead dinosaur monkeys were allowed in to sort and deliver Socio-Economic cheques.

The Federal government is hardly at arm's length, taxes paid by Canada Post go where? Profits made by Canada Post go where? Anyone remember the Liberal sponsorship scandal? Alphonse Gagliano?

The real issue is the attack on all unions, public and private, and the elimination of the middle class; but that's another thread.

Just a note - having been a CUPW member (surprise!) I can tell you, women are a driving force and huge part of that union, so I don't think you're allowed to call them some of those names.

On with the hyperbole!
How about addressing the disparity between the sweet heart deals the unions have gotten (however unsustainable they may be) and what the rest of us have to live with?
 

FunSugarDaddy

New member
Aug 15, 2008
1,110
5
0
You probably should realize that unionized employees, because of the power of numbers, will pretty much always make more than similarly skilled non-unionized employees doing similar work. The level of wages & benefits earned by their union counterparts pull up the wage level of the non-union workers.

To see what happens to all workers' wages when you bust the unions' ability to bargain collectively & effectively, look to the wages of all workers in the "right to work" states in the USA compared with the states without that type of legislation. You'll not find much of a middle class left in the right-to work states. The middle class, with decreasing real earnings from their work and little real investment in the markets is disappearing & the wealthy are taking the majority of the money generated by increased productivity and lower labour costs.

The most effective way that corporations have driven down workers wages is by encouraging (and where possible, forcing) the workers to personally invest in the stock market. If the viability of your pension saving depend on cutting the reducing the labour costs at corporations X, Y & Z, shipping the job overseas if necessary, one probably doesn't have much sympathy for the pension aspirations of the workers at those companies. And neither do they for yours.
This whole line of thinking is screwed beyond belief.

Let's see where to start.. you do realize that the very corporations that workers are investing in are the same one's pension companies, mutual funds and others are investing in don't you?

There's not two markets one for workers and one for the rest.

Take that further, the so called "risk" the worker has, is the same risk employers of defined benefit plans have..what do you think they do in an effort to save for an particular employees pension..they invest the money, largely in the stock market and hope the gains are enough for it to prove a pension to a particular individual for the rest of their lives. The problem is that if it doesn't, they have to come up with the shortfall. But now multiple this by same in the case of GM 1000's and 1000's of employees and realize who's really taking the risk.

I've either completely misunderstood you, or you have no concept about how defined benefit and defined contribution plans work.

Now as far as workers go, if someone has the necessary skills they really shouldn't need something to artifically protect them from the free market.

Don't ya think?

So if person A is getting $40 to do his job, and person B says I can do the same job for $30 and the owner doesn't see a difference in the services being provided, why should person A have a devine right to have that job? (or need to hide behind a union to secure that job). This is especially true if because of this artifical (from the market) arrangement it's causing the corporation to lose money and threatening the very viability of the corporation.

Then these people moan and bitch when the corporation ends up moving jobs overseas, which may have been the only way of keeping that company from bankrupcy. For some reason, there's some fallacy that all corporations are rich and owners are bad, which simply isn't true.

What doesn't make sense to me, is why someone would provide more value to a corporation because they are unionized verses not unionized. Theoretically one would think a persons value to the corporation would be exactly the same, because the skill set they are bringing to the table is the same.
 

ThisEndUp

mort à l'entente
Al, have you discovered why the Union Executive refused to put the2nd offer to the membership

Am I correct in my reading, that the second offer was a better deal than the legislated deal

Also, can't seem to find how much of a CUPW members union dues are being spend on non-Canadian activities, or what their executive is making
 

FunSugarDaddy

New member
Aug 15, 2008
1,110
5
0
As for your idea that Unions do not operate according to free market principals, or are artificially protected from them, drivel. Does the the web service Groupon not operate in the free market? The power of group buying. That is the same principal that unions work on: the employer is dealing with all his workers at one table. He cuts a deal that can be accepted by all the workers or all the workers withhold their labour. If he won't meet their price, they are not selling: If they won't accept his offer, he won't buy. Free market.
You may want to take a few economic courses, because you're wrong.

If it were a free market, the employer would then have the right to buy this labour service from others at a cheaper price if such an opportunity existed, (and likewise employees would be free to look for better opportunities elsewhere) but they don't have that right because the unions have created a monopoly on labour, when that occurs it artifically shifts the supply side of labour.

As for the pension idea, you've just illustrated my point, which is that all the risk associated with defined benefit plans lies with the employer. It's a huge, huge obligation, and liability, that for some strange reason the beneficiaries of such plans fair to appreciate, then instead view it merely as an entitlement.
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,037
44
48
You probably should realize that unionized employees, because of the power of numbers,
I have read your response to me and FSD. While I appreciate the role the union plays in protecting the rights of workers, I also believe some of what you expressed are out of touch with the rapidly changing work environment.

I am glad to hear that your defined benefits plan is not broke like so many others are but the gradual shift to defined contribution plans tells me all I need to know, that defined benefits plans are simply not sustainable.

I find it appalling when workers are rewarded based on seniority rather than productivity but I guess you are ok with that.
 

Chef99

Member
Apr 22, 2008
258
15
18
Excellent discussion, I love it!
My biggest problems with unions is there sense of entitlement. They think they are entitled to more pay, entitled to work less, entitled to more vacation, entitled to more benefits,.... year after year after year.... Then they bitch at everything costing more, which they then use to argue that they are entitled to more pay, more...... Then when companies go tits up because the costs just don't make sense, the unions want the government to add subsidies and protect their jobs. So, IMHO, there is a total disconnect between pay and performance and necessary skill sets. To peform a Canada post office job you need to be able to walk and read which should be worth how much an hour?....
 

sr8razr

Director of self
Apr 2, 2011
32
0
0
I enjoy these non-prostitution related threads here. Most people have no idea what they are talking about, but of course they would never let that get in their way, and then one or 2 take every opportunity they can to to elevate themselves by schooling the ignorant children. I'm not sure who they are trying to convince, but it's they same know it alls in every one.
 

let's review

Banned
Mar 27, 2009
53
0
0
Elevated? Dirtied.

As I said, on with the hyperbole.
Read and walk. Really?
I wanted to stay out of this because I despise trolls, but the ignorance displayed is beyond belief.
Every douchebag that woke up with 3 inches of snow on his stairs and couldn't be bothered to sweep it off thinks his letter carrier is a lazy fuck. It'll be gone by tomorrow, right? Where's my cheque?
Every "small businessman" that was ever told the cheque was sent yesterday believes it. Where's my cheque?
Every whiner that didn't bother to apply or can't pass a background check thinks it's an elite club from which you can't be fired. Where's my cheque?

Try carrying a bag of mail up and down the streets in N. Van for 25 or 30 years. See how much you think you deserve to have income while they reconstruct your hip. Greedy fuckers.
Try not missing a day for 12 years, but when your life goes a little strange and you miss 3 days over two weeks? You're hauled in to explain to some low level douche why. Lazy cunts.
Try reaching into a street letter box to clear it on the DTES, or anywhere for that matter. Entitled pricks.
Dog attacks are funny. Chickenshits.

Try to enter the discussion with a modicum of real information, however outdated it may be.

Rant: Off
 
Vancouver Escorts