POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

Good news overnight on the looming postal lockout/strike front. To paraphrase The Godfather, the federal government has made an offer they can't refuse. 

 

https://www.canadapost.ca/web/en/blogs/announcements/details.page?article=2016/07/06/canada_post_pre...

 

Canada Post Prepared to Submit to Binding Arbitration

 

Federal Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour, MaryAnn Mihychuk, has asked both Canada Post and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW-Urban and CUPW-RSMC) to submit to binding arbitration to resolve the current impasse at negotiations.

 

The Canada Post Corporation has already agreed. "It is our hope that CUPW will consider submitting to binding arbitration to end the uncertainty. Canada Post is extending the current 72-hour notice period to Monday at 12:01 am to provide time for the union to consider this option."

 

It would be suicide for the unions to refuse, although I do expect they will make a show of doing so and wait until the final moments to concede. Binding arbitration is the best we can hope for at this point.

 

 

 

 

Message 1 of 225
latest reply
224 REPLIES 224

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

Now you know why I have said all along that CUPW is out of their mind and living in fantasy land

 

I hope they get locked out, all lose their jobs and go away. Not nice to say but that is what they deserve for thid idiotic decision.

 

They are absolutely ridiculous that the moron running them will do this. I really don't think the union even voted.

Message 21 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

Anonymous
Not applicable

How is that a "good news"?  As far as I am concerned NO strike or lockout is a "good news".  Right now they have put us "on hold" for a week and maybe more.  They need to made decisions NOW and be done and get over with it!

Message 22 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

Its situations like this that make me sad.

 

Sad for the customers of the company while the negotiating teams execute the negotiating process in this way.

 

Sad for the average employees of the company, who are also very likely to suffer in the short or long term, because of the way the negotiating process is being executed.

 

Smiley Sad

 

Gives me more time I guess to work on other "to do"s around here that I have, maybe I'll even sneak some more fishing days in!

Message 23 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@Anonymous wrote:

How is that a "good news"?  As far as I am concerned NO strike or lockout is a "good news".  Right now they have put us "on hold" for a week and maybe more.  They need to made decisions NOW and be done and get over with it!


 

 

It was good news until CUPW rejected arbitration, which I still can't believe they have.

 

Being given an opportunity for arbitration was a gift from above.  I couldn't believe CP and Chopra agreed to it.  CUPW had won.   And CUPW rejects it????  Astonishing.

 

They will never get a better deal than what they would have received from an Arbitrator.  

 

If CUPW doesn't change its mind, then they will either be locked out for months until they all starve and have to come back at whatever terms they can get, or the will quickly be legislated back to work and an Arbitrator will be appointed......an Arbitrator who won't be as generous as they would have gotten now.

 

Crazy move.......utterly astonishing.

 

 

Message 24 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@fort2b wrote:

Equality is the law, not an award’: Pay equity for rural carriers not a case for arbitration: CUPW

 

Well if that's true then an arbitrator will for sure decide in CUPW's favour.  No need to decline arbitration.  


I'd like to suggest that we all take a look at this from an analytical viewpoint before casting CUPW as the villain. Here is what I see going on, drawn from years of experience in public relations positions and in law (I've actually been involved as a team member in a number of arbitration proceedings, so I'm familiar with the process, although not specifically with unions).  I've seen things from the other side of the smokescreen, so to speak. 

 

First, as those of us who've seen a few of these postal strikes over the decades know, the history of relations between the postal union(s) and Canada Post has been poisonous.  That's an important factor to keep in mind when you consider my comments.

 

PR, and being seen as the "white hat" in these run-ups to either a dispute or a resolution, is essential to both sides.  Without it, the whole future of CP is at stake. Both parties know this, and both want to cast the other as the devil who has destroyed public support and made resolution difficult, if not impossible. 

 

Thus far, the Corp. has cleverly manipulated the situation.  The first volley, serving notice of a possible lockout, gave them one black mark in the public's eyes.  As I said earlier, somebody had to blink, and the Corp. decided it would do so to maintain control over the optics of the situation in public opinion.  

 

That black mark has now been lobbed back in the direction of the union (and made larger in the process), through the Corp. having accepted the option of binding arbitration and extended its deadline "to give the union time to reconsider".  We can already see on these boards how much vitriol is going to be thrown in the Union's direction by the public now (and no doubt the press will be joining in the fray shortly).  The Corp. must be satisfied for the moment that its PR people have done their job.  

 

So, what does the Union have to work with, in order to neutralize the appearance of being the "bad guy"? Righteousness of course.  They have had to seize on the one thing that they know will gain them some support -- standing up for equal rights, and specifically women's rights.  

 

This seems to be a reasonable position to take: we see no point in binding arbitration because an arbitrator can't reverse Canadian law.  However, it's a false argument, a ruse, whose real purpose is to make the Union appear, in both the public's eyes and the eyes of its members, to be the true champion of the worker (as opposed to the Corp., or even the federal government).  

 

Why is it a false argument?  Because it has nothing to do with equal pay for equal work.  The work of a rural letter carrier and an urban letter carrier are quite different.  I've lived with both services over the past few years.  Our rural carriers, from what I can see, have an easier task than their urban counterparts: they deliver the mail driving cars, not on foot; although their routes are no doubt larger, the actual number of deliveries they make is smaller, and the workload (number of items handled) smaller than in urban centres.  

 

There are doubtless other differences I'm not aware of that have determined the pay scale.  The fact that rural carriers happen to be overwhelmingly women is completely irrelevant from a legal standpoint, but useful from the Union's point of view in this dispute as a viable (and publicly acceptable) rationale for rejecting arbitration. They know very well that this particular issue could be dealt with in arbitration.  And Pierre is correct, this is why the matter hasn't been brought to the fore previously -- it wasn't necessary. 

 

The fact is that anything becomes negotiable during arbitration as long as it is within the law.  If urban jobs and rural jobs differ in any significant way, pay equity is not restricted by legal considerations.  The Union knows that by opening the door to binding arbitration, it could very well lose some of the gains it has already made.  The Corporation, on the other hand, knows that it can argue fiscal restraint effectively to obtain concessions it may not have obtained through contract negotiations.

 

In the end, this becomes sadly not about bona fides on both sides and continued good service for the public and business, but about who can play the public opinion game most effectively.  I think both parties are equally guilty in this, but the Union (and its workers) have more at stake and more to lose, and they know it.  The Corporation likely has more effective and more extensive resources at its disposal to wage the war of public optics.  They can also afford a cynical attitude in using a lockout threat as a weapon.  Lockouts save them money in the short run.  

 

As I've said previously, I think there is value in having a well-trained, professional, "career" workforce operating a public service corporation.  We who make regular use of that service should remember that if the Corporation breaks the back of the Union (by slowly substituting part-time, dubiously-trained workers), the overall level of professionalism and the current excellence of service of Canada Post will decline.  I say this because in over 8 years of selling online, I have yet to have Canada Post do anything but a first-rate job in delivering my parcels, both outgoing and incoming.  

 

So what's next?  I will be very surprised if the Union backs down now.  If Monday comes and goes and the Union refuses to proceed with binding arbitration, we will have another stalemate that may lead the Corporation to go forward with a lockout after all.  Canadians will be furious with CUPW, pressure will be brought to bear on government to "do something", and it's possible the government itself may ultimately have to renege on its earlier promise not to interfere.  

 

Message 25 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

The situation in 2016 is different than that encountered with the last strike.

 

It was the government that legislated  the union back to work with the last strike.

 

and.... Then the union took the government to court  and  many parts of the legislation were found to be unconstitutional in an Ontario court.

 

What the government does in 2016 will be unique..... and done carefully.

 

 

 

 

Message 26 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@rose-dee wrote:

@fort2b wrote:

Equality is the law, not an award’: Pay equity for rural carriers not a case for arbitration: CUPW

 

Well if that's true then an arbitrator will for sure decide in CUPW's favour.  No need to decline arbitration.  


 

 

So what's next?  I will be very surprised if the Union backs down now.  If Monday comes and goes and the Union refuses to proceed with binding arbitration, we will have another stalemate that may lead the Corporation to go forward with a lockout after all.  Canadians will be furious with CUPW, pressure will be brought to bear on government to "do something", and it's possible the government itself may ultimately have to renege on its earlier promise not to interfere.  

 


 

I agree with all you've said.  It was obvious from the beginning the case CUPW was making for the rural workers was borderline spurious, in that they were making it a gender issue, which it is clearly not.  They are clinging to whatever they can to try and gain public support to achieve their goal of equal pay.  I don't think too many bought into it from day one, except those who wanted to.

 

However, i'd be very surprised if the Union doesn't back down, for all the reasons you stated.  Up til now I would gauge that most of the public support (and political support too) has been on their side.  With this move they've lost most of it.  They have nothing to gain by digging in their heals any longer and much, much to lose.

 

Back to work legislation will probably come swiftly, whereas it wasn't even under consideration before.  The request for both sides to accept arbitration came from the Federal Gov't afterall.......that means it came from Trudeau.  Not wise to tick off the PM, no matter how friendly he's been with you before.

 

No, it would be a foolish, foolish move not to submit to arbitration.  They will never get a better deal, and the public will view CUPW with sympathy or at least some softness, instead of the hatred that will be the alternative.   Not smart.

 

Palecek thinks he has right on his side, perhaps, but all he has is self-righteousness. 

Message 27 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

I think its safe to assume that there's more than one member here with personal insight and professional experience in public and corporate relations, arbitration and politics. Many have self-declared but others are choose not to draw attention to themselves.
Message 28 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@cumos55 wrote:

The situation in 2016 is different than that encountered with the last strike.

It was the government that legislated  the union back to work with the last strike.

 

and.... Then the union took the government to court  and  many parts of the legislation were found to be unconstitutional in an Ontario court.

What the government does in 2016 will be unique..... and done carefully.

  


Yes, I agree, the situation has certainly changed.  But the rancour between the two opposing parties hasn't lessened.  

 

In fact, they may be even more adversarial toward each other this time around, knowing that the government might not intervene.  These postal disputes have always been nasty, bitter confrontations, whatever the eventual outcome.  

 

Surely both parties must realize that a lengthy lockout could give alternative carriers or services exactly the impetus they need to draw parcel customers away from Canada Post -- perhaps permanently.  As I understand it, the parcel division is currently the only viable part of CP.  If they lose that, everybody loses.  

 

The government is in a difficult position.  It has openly said it won't intervene, yet the unconstitutionality of  the previous decision hasn't been tested at the federal level (Supreme Court of Canada).  

 

Message 29 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@rose-dee wrote:

@cumos55 wrote:

 

and.... Then the union took the government to court  and  many parts of the legislation were found to be unconstitutional in an Ontario court.

What the government does in 2016 will be unique..... and done carefully.

  


 

 

The government is in a difficult position.  It has openly said it won't intervene, yet the unconstitutionality of  the previous decision hasn't been tested at the federal level (Supreme Court of Canada).  

 


Which is why the Gov't will have a free hand to act as they wish.  They will do it carefully but they can do it, no problem.  If the Union wishes to fight it for the next 5-10 years in Federal Court then go ahead.  The bottom line is in the meantime the Union will have to abide by the Legislation the Gov't issues.   And it won't be as good as what they would get now from  binding arb....guaranteed.

 

I'm really disappointed by Palecek.  Up until now, I thought he was a good guy, with a lot of common sense.  But he has demonstrated otherwise with this move.

Message 30 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

Canadians should be furious.

Message 31 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

I just had a thought.

 

CUPW has vowed not to strike.  It was repeated in today's statement, when they rejected binding arb.   So why doesn't CP just vow to not lockout?   That way the mail will flow as before and there will be no uncertainty as to whether the mail will be delivered and mail and package volumes will return to normal, which at the moment is CP's big concern and their reason for considering a lockout..

 

The existing agreement will carry on indefinitely with neither party getting what they want.  Simple.

Message 32 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

CP doesn't want to continue with the current terms being at some point they will reach rate increases beyond what the customers will pay, then they wont' be able to pay their bills.  That would already be happenning if the govenment hadn't let them defer making payments to deal with the unfunded pension

Message 33 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@mjwl2006 wrote:
I think its safe to assume that there's more than one member here with personal insight and professional experience in public and corporate relations, arbitration and politics. Many have self-declared but others are choose not to draw attention to themselves.

I'm sorry -- was that barb intended to fly my way?  If so, I fail to see the harm in stating the background and experience behind an opinion, or why not saying anything is the mark of a better character.  

 

Many of us have spent a lifetime in the workforce, in various professions.  Mentioning that background is often relevant to the subject being discussed.  Personally I'm always interested to learn what people here have done in their lives and how that shapes their views or lends credence to their opinions.  I would hardly consider it as some sort of ill-mannered affront to others as the above comments seem to suggest.  

 

That was a very strange thing to say.  

Message 34 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@billybee99 wrote:

Canadians should be furious.


I imagine many are that weren't before.  Palecek has shown what he's all about.  He's just out to cause trouble and disruption, regardless.

 

All along he has claimed he wants to avoid a postal disruption and that he wants to get a good deal for the union members, yet when that opportunity is handed to him on a silver platter, binding arbitration, he dismisses it immediately on 'principle'.  


And what is that principle?  He's not worried that he won't get what he wants (equal pay) he's concerned that he won't get it the way he wants it (though CP backing down instead of arbitration).  

 

He's shown that he cares not at all for the Canadian public, or even his workers.  He's going to let them be locked out for weeks, perhaps months, losing many thousands of dollars in pay in the process, so he can win.

Message 35 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

"I'd like to suggest that we all take a look at this from an analytical viewpoint before casting CUPW as the villain. Here is what I see going on, drawn from years of experience in public relations positions and in law (I've actually been involved as a team member in a number of arbitration proceedings, so I'm familiar with the process, although not specifically with unions).  I've seen things from the other side of the smokescreen, so to speak. "

 

The manner in which you have stated the above seems to indicate a presumption that anyone with an opinion that differs from yours must come to it due to their underwhelming ignorance in comparison to your 'vast' experience in the fields you mention. I am merely reminding you that others bring experience of equal or greater value to the discussion. 

Message 36 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

Everyone needs to take a step back and "stop" speculating on matters that are out of our control, let the process play out until Monday at 12:01 AM.

 

Just look forward to a warm and sunny weekend......  

Message 37 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@mjwl2006 wrote:

 

The manner in which you have stated the above seems to indicate a presumption that anyone with an opinion that differs from yours must come to it due to their underwhelming ignorance in comparison to your 'vast' experience in the fields you mention. I am merely reminding you that others bring experience of equal or greater value to the discussion. 


Goodness gracious, nerves are getting frayed.  

 

You've completely misunderstood, or perhaps you're looking for something that isn't there.  I meant nothing of the kind, not at all.  I was attempting to present another side of the equation that no one had offered, based on my own experience, which seemed relevant (to me at least).  This is a discussion.  All opinions are fair game for consideration, but context occasionally helps.  Let's drop the rancour, it's unseemly. 

Message 38 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT

Anonymous
Not applicable

Why can't the union members fire the CUPW president?  Why do Canada Post have too many unions?   Unions are crime organizations! And that is where it started!

Message 39 of 225
latest reply

POSTAL LOCKOUT/STRIKE UPDATE: BINDING ARBITRATION PROPOSED BY GOVT


@silverpinups wrote:

Everyone needs to take a step back and "stop" speculating on matters that are out of our control, let the process play out until Monday at 12:01 AM.

 

Just look forward to a warm and sunny weekend......  


Yes, we're all hostages, we might as well make the best of the excess time on our hands.  What I do plan to do is work on my listings, add new ones, do some R&D and R&R.  Who knows, a lockout could go on for weeks (or more).  There's no point in spending it in a state of extended anger and frustration.  

 

On the other hand though, things could change dramatically between now and Monday a.m. if the Union alters its stance.  Just saying...

Message 40 of 225
latest reply