15 REPLIES 15

Canada Post

That's a bit of good news !

There parcels are down over 80 percent so a very wise move.

Anyone opening shop ?

Message 2 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

"Anyone opening shop ?"

I am not.  Not yet.

 

CUPW has NOT (yet) accepted the offer.  They are hedging.

Message 3 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

I read in that article that they already said no to the 30 day and binding arbitration as they don't want binding arbitration under any conditions.

 

I also read the lockout is still on for Monday.

 

Did I misread something?

Message 4 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

You read it right.
Message 5 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

Well it seems the CUPW  rejected the offer. No real surprise. I for one think the Union is just digging a hole for themselves. I for one feel the Union and the workers are being a little to greedy. But then again my point of view is clouded by all the times I paid extra for Express Post so I would get my items faster then to have the packages show up 2 or more days late. Very sad to pay extra only to get worse service.

 

I do wish they would solve the mess though. I got things I want to sell and things I was hoping to purchase.

Message 6 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

The union might as well accept it because I'm sure the government will step in if the strike lasts more than a few weeks.  I know Trudeau said they wouldn't but I think that will change as the time passes.  Arbitation will be what settles this whole thing.

Message 7 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

It's odd that they are so against a binding arbitration, it makes me suspect that their demands have nothing to do with equality likely they claim.

 

The union needs an overhaul once this is resolved because the current leaders are incompetent and incredibly greedy. Thanks to them, the postal workers are likely going to end up getting less than what CP offered when the government steps in (the union is in for a harsh dose of reality if they think that the liberal government won't get involved if they keep dragging the dispute on). They need to just accept that Canada Post is not going to give into their demands and take the final offer since they are not going to get a better deal. 

Message 8 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post


@indiansummernights wrote:

It's odd that they are so against a binding arbitration, it makes me suspect that their demands have nothing to do with equality likely they claim.


If you visit the CUPW website or check a few other threads on this board, you'll find information suggesting that binding arbitration hasn't worked particularly well in past disputes between the union and Canada Post.  It's not necessarily the level playing field that it appears to be to people like you and me from the outside and it's expensive and time-consuming, to boot.


@indiansummernights wrote:

 


The union needs an overhaul once this is resolved because the current leaders are incompetent and incredibly greedy. Thanks to them, the postal workers are likely going to end up getting less than what CP offered when the government steps in (the union is in for a harsh dose of reality if they think that the liberal government won't get involved if they keep dragging the dispute on). They need to just accept that Canada Post is not going to give into their demands and take the final offer since they are not going to get a better deal. 


What is an example of this "greed" that you're observing?

Message 9 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

Lets get real carried away with this and I really do wish it would happen.

 

CP locks out the union and stops all negotiation as it is a waste of time.

 

Survey says?

 

If CP went to all the union members and asked them if they would like to come back to work as non union employees with the same benefits they have now, how many would say yes as they feel they actually do have a better job than many workers in the real world?

 

Why should potential employees that don't work for CP have any bearing on the present employees? ie: pension benefits. Present employees will not lose their benefits which is fine but for the union to use future hiring is absolutely ridiculous.

 

They may as well go out on the street and ask everybody what they want if they were hired by CP.

Message 10 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

They have a very good chance of getting what they want in arbitration if they want equality like equal pay for female carriers like they claim. Because as they said it's the law not an award. Arbitration is inevitable because the government is only going to let this go on for so long so the union would be better off agreeing to a binding arbitration instead of being forced into it.

 

The greed I'm referring too is them putting their self interests before what's best for their co-workers. They are not going to get what they want because CP feels that it's not affordable yet they are putting jobs at risk (the longer this drags on the more money CP loses which could result in job cuts due to the corporation not having enough money to pay all the their employees and other expenses) and are going to cause the postal workers to get less than what they would have if CUPW had either accepted the arbitration or taken CP's final deal all because they can only think about what they want.

Message 11 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post


@indiansummernights wrote:

They have a very good chance of getting what they want in arbitration if they want equality like equal pay for female carriers like they claim. Because as they said it's the law not an award. Arbitration is inevitable because the government is only going to let this go on for so long so the union would be better off agreeing to a binding arbitration instead of being forced into it.


Historically speaking, binding arbitration has not worked well for CUPW.  It's expensive and time-consuming.  A two-year process to reach an arbitrated agreement in the late 1990s ended up going nowhere.  In the 2000s, the arbitrators appointed by the government were found by the courts to be less than impartial.

The way things seem to be set up, the employer still holds most of the cards when it comes to binding arbitration.  CUPW has been led down the river at least twice on this now.  I can't blame them for being less than enthusiastic about the idea.


@indiansummernights wrote:

 


The greed I'm referring too is them putting their self interests before what's best for their co-workers. They are not going to get what they want because CP feels that it's not affordable yet they are putting jobs at risk (the longer this drags on the more money CP loses which could result in job cuts due to the corporation not having enough money to pay all the their employees and other expenses) and are going to cause the postal workers to get less than what they would have if CUPW had either accepted the arbitration or taken CP's final deal all because they can only think about what they want.


I'm not clear on whose "self interests" you're referring.  I mean, isn't t the whole point of unions that there's a degree of self-interest in their activities?  As far as the union's proposals being unaffordable, that's an oft-taken line by employers who haven't bothered doing the number-crunching for themselves.  If there was serious negotiating going on, the union's numbers would be crunched by the employer and counter-proposals would be put forth, and I see no evidence of that going on.


Message 12 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

I'm not surprised about CUPW's position on it's member's pension plan.

Hasn't their pension fund been running a multi-billion dollar deficit for several of the past years?

Message 13 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post


@mcrlmn wrote:

I'm not surprised about CUPW's position on it's member's pension plan.

Hasn't their pension fund been running a multi-billion dollar deficit for several of the past years?


The union seems to see it differently (Surprise!):

http://www.cupw.ca/en/why-canada-post-hiding-huge-surplus-pension-plan

Message 14 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

These are my recollections, and now that I'm "medium old" I could be wrong or misremembering....

"Surplus" situations are a part of a defined benefit plan.

Overall the carrier has to make sure there is enough money in the plan to cover the defined guaranteed pension amounts it is supposed to cover now, and going forward. The means that depending on the market predictions the invested pension amount changes to try to prepare for that.

If the predictions are wrong, theoretically the company has to add money to the to ensure it is covered.

I forget what all the terms mean, but it think the "solvency deficit" is the thing that is a problem, ie if the company was sold or went bankrupt today, the amount it has in pension savings would be short 6 billion dollars, ie there wouldn't be enough money set aside to pay the guaranteed pensions already in place.

I could be wrong but it looks like while the situation has been improving in the last year (ie the deficit is shrinking) because of the in year surplus the overall situation is still not good if something happened to cause the plan to be stopped.

If that is right the folks are asking the PO to continue underfunding the pension plan (on the assumption the company would never be sold or go bankrupt).

This is part of the reason defined benefit plans are such a pain to companies, almost nobody outside the actuaries really understands how they work and they are especially a problem when companies are sold or go bankrupt....

Message 15 of 16
latest reply

Canada Post

Good post, Ricarmic, and that's pretty much how I understand things, too.

It's also my understanding that the CPP is also a defined benefit plan, FWIW.

Message 16 of 16
latest reply