President’s Report
April 2011
Niagara Falls Local # 16

 

I was in Ottawa the week of April 8th attending the Board of Directors meeting. As always after the meeting I present a report to the membership, and I’m sure management gets a copy too. I have at times taken excerpts from the report of the National President and the Vice-Presidents. For further information the full report will be on our website ASAP. Next week I will be in Ottawa representing the membership on the bargaining team. We did meet with management once to exchange demands. Next week will be our first real face to face meeting, and we do have a slate of dates we presented to management going into August. I am sure action will be required by the members in order to get a good contract and I am sure Niagara Falls is up to the task. For those of us whom have been around for a while we can tell you management NEVER gives anything for free, there is a cost involved. That cost may be some action by our members up to and including a strike. We intend to hold a general membership meeting early May to inform the members as to where we are and where we are going. The intent is to arrange for a National officer to attend the meeting. Last time we achieved a great contract and I can assure you the actions you did in the field assisted us in getting this contract. Our job was easy; we were at the table with the employer making sure we got the best we could get. As I have stated many times, this is my last year as President of CIU Local #16. It is time for the next generation to pick up where we left off. It won’t be easy as it will be a fight all the way, but I am sure there are members out there not only willing to make a difference, but will actually make a difference. It is easy to sit back, do nothing, judge, and no matter what the outcome what we do will always be wrong. It is a lot harder to actually do the deed for your fellow workers, and although not all will appreciate what you do, you will know that you did the right thing. Looking back at the last eleven years I know we had many successes in our local meeting with management in order to make this a better working place.

 

Fred Milligan
President
CIU Local # 16

Report of the Niagara Falls District Branch
National Board of Directors Meeting
April 2011

 

It is hard to believe I have been President for over ten years and that this Board meeting will be the last time I am here at a full board. In October we have our Convention and then it will be time for another President to take over in Niagara Falls.

I was looking at the minutes of the local Executive meetings in Niagara Falls both at a time while Laurel was President and also when Doug Kasakowski was President before Laurel. In the twenty years or so of meetings, the main topic then discussed is the same topic being discussed now. It just goes to show that management doesn’t get, and as soon as we win an issue and then put it aside, we once again have to fight for it.

I am happy to say that many of our CR’s have sent me e-mails showing where other CR’s do the same job at a higher classification. Carmen you have awakened those members since your visit to Niagara. We still have CR’s in the warehouse for example getting CR3 wages where others doing the same job get CR4 wages. Now with the re-organization we will have these clerks doing just that within the same region.

We have a real problem getting transfers for our members. One member just married, she lives in Niagara Falls, he lives in Toronto but getting these members together is a real concern and is not being looked at because they are not bilingual. Had she been bilingual the transfer would be approved by Toronto.

We have been informed that Rick Commerford is the new RDG for Niagara Falls Region starting April 1, 2011.

We were successful in putting five new Stewards through the TUB course offered by PSAC. These are young new activist sorely needed by our locals.

I am also happy to announce that a JLP offered anti-harassment day for members and management alike. I was a participant on day one and I can tell you it was well organized and controlled, and all had positive words to say about it.

Since a call was put out for JLP facilitators, many of my members put forward their names, and the first candidate has taken the three day course here in Ottawa. We have many more excellent candidates to choose from.

Respectfully submitted,

In solidarity,

 

Fred Milligan
President, CIU Local #16, Niagara Falls

From the National President:
Collective Bargaining:

The fast-tracked attempts at negotiating tentative deals which took place outside the legislated collective bargaining process at the end of 2010 were without any form of precedent. Given the extremely divisive results thus generated, I suspect and certainly hope we will never witness such an approach to collective bargaining again.

With the FB and TC Collective agreements expiring in June 2011; most of us on the Board, along with over 60 additional FB activists, attended the FB Bargaining Conference here in Ottawa at the end of this January 2011. The conference was the perfect forum for finalizing the FB Package of Demands and establishing the strong mobilization strategy which will be key for what is shaping up to be an extremely rough round of bargaining.

I am always extremely proud to be at the helm of our organization, but, as I told the group attending the conference, never more so than when I find myself in the same room with those who, by every definition, are the Union. In my address to them, I reminded CIU’s front-line activists that they truly are ‘la crème de la crème’; their ability to mobilize and bring the ranks together when it counts most has been the key to our countless achievements thus far. It is this solid and unwavering approach that will make the difference in the battles to come.

On Sept. 27, 2010, while many of you were demonstrating in Montreal on our CR/AS Campaign, the FB Team returned to the table for an attempt at more negotiations. When we finally met in the late afternoon, it became clear that the employer was not willing to move on any of our five priority demands. The next morning, we attended an All Teams Meeting and advised the employer that there was no point in meeting as we were awaiting a reply with regard to our demand for pension reform. That afternoon, we were briefed by Sister Lisa Addario on a number of salient files. The following afternoon, we met with John Gordon who presented a letter from Bill Jones of the Pay and Benefits Section who committed to research and analyze the data necessary in order for the Public Service Pension Advisory Committee to review our position by the spring. Thursday afternoon and Friday were primarily focussed with discussions regarding Alternate Work Arrangements.  On Saturday, Oct. 2, 2010, at 2:30 PM, we declared that we were at an impasse and advised the Alliance accordingly. The following morning, we met one last time to be briefed on the progress of the other tables and to sign the letter that would go out to the members from the team.

On Oct. 5, 2010, conference calls were held to brief the Board members by region and the team went into the field to hold information sessions. Over the next month, I conducted sessions at Inland Enforcement in Calgary, the Port of Coutts and Calgary International Airport. Many work locations did not feel they needed these sessions. 

With the signing of the agreements at the PA, SV and EB tables, the regional bargaining conferences were cancelled. The FB National Bargaining Conference was held in Ottawa Jan. 20-22, 2011. We gave Brother John Gordon a “warm” CIU welcome as we grilled him on his recent ruling that determined that Branch Presidents are no longer considered national officers for the purpose of regional conventions. It was an excellent opportunity to meet new and veteran activists from across the country and to discuss what will become important issues in the coming months.  

Your new FB Bargaining Team that was elected at the last Board met for the first time in Ottawa Feb. 16-17, 2011 to do some final work on our package of demands. The PSAC served Notice to Bargain on Feb. 21, 2011 and the teams met March 8-9, 2011 to exchange demands.  The FB demands are now posted on the PSAC and CIU websites. The teams will meet again April 12-14 and May 2-4. We have also tentatively set dates for June 21-23. I think it is important to note that this is the first time that we have met with the employer three times before the contract expired with the fourth meeting on the days immediately following the June 20th expiration of the agreement. That certainly cannot ensure an expeditious settlement, especially with the onset of the federal election, but it is progress.

There is not a great deal to report on the negotiation of Essential Service Agreements, but I hope to have some news on April 1, 2011. The Alliance is awaiting a reply with regard to “levels of service”, but the employer has been holding off because there is a ruling pending from Service Canada that deals with the employer’s requirement to provide rationale for “levels of service”.   We have agreed for the BSO position, the breakdown will be by business lines and by region. For all other FB positions, the breakdown of essential services will be jobsite.

In conclusion, I think it is obvious that we are heading into one of the most difficult negotiations that we have ever faced. The employer is seeking the most significant concession in the history of the Alliance, which is only compounded by the fact that they have already been successful at three other Treasury Board tables. Our success in the last round was based on two factors: mobilization and solidarity. That formula can work again. 

 

Public Service Health Care Plan
The new contract with Sun Life for the administration of the Public Service Health Care Plan (PSHCP) took effect on November 1, 2010. The introduction of the PSHCP Benefit Card was one of the final steps in the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2006 between the Treasury Board Secretariat, the bargaining agents of the public service, and pensioners represented by the Federal Superannuates National Association (FSNA). Some of you will have had a chance to witness firsthand how the introduction of the PSHCP Benefit Card has also changed the way prescription drugs and certain medical supplies are now being processed affecting such things as supply limits. The Plan administrator has just published the latest version of its online Bulletin which I encourage you to read; it covers these and many other aspects of the Plan including the new contribution rates for pensioners, generic drug substitution, and the link between the PSHCP and provincial drug plans, to name a few. The Bulletin can be found online at:

http://www.pshcp.ca/english/bulletins/bulletin25.pdf

 

From the 1st. National Vice-President
Arming:

The Chair informed the Committee members that the CBSA had cancelled three meetings, as the employer has been directed not to speak to the union with respect to arming. One meeting related to the revisions of the Arming Policies. Had the policy been adopted, as drafted, this would have impacted our members who work at airports. Another meeting had been to share information relating to a joint approach for remote locations. The last meeting was meant to be an update with Calvin Christiansen on the program as a whole. As the election is scheduled for early May, it is expected that no meetings will take place until mid May at the earliest.

The Committee discussed concerns with the availability of French trainers, the high standard that our members are held to, the cross country travel (members from Sarnia going to PEI and members from New Brunswick going to Ottawa), and the lack of trainers required to train and to recertify our members as more of them get to the three year mark.

We’ve been informed by some of our members who are trainers that remote firing ranges have been purchased. One is 12 lanes and is being used in Chilliwack. The other is 10 lanes near the Ottawa airport and will be operational by the end of the summer. Another will be located in Farnham, QC.

Concerns were raised that members who work at airports believe that the Union should take a more active role in pressuring the CBSA to arm Officers at airports. The Committee agreed that members who are armed should not be made to hand in their firearm if they are transferred to an airport. These members are not able to maintain their skills and would be unable to respond should there be an emergency. The Chair will raise this concern with the CBSA as soon as possible. The Committee recognized the important role of mobilization of the members in achieving arming of those who have not been armed to date.

 

Border Security
From the National President:
Arming

I have been working with our Equal Opportunity Representative, Sister Karen Church, to develop our accommodation strategy that will help us position ourselves in keeping with Appendix F of the FB Collective Agreement. That is the Appendix that forces management to negotiate with us to set up regional accommodation teams, and given CBSA’s reluctance to consult with us lately, we should be thankful to have this Appendix in the FB Collective Agreement.

As some of you already know, the CBSA President has announced that the CBSA will not amend the 25 meter firing test and reduce the distance to 15 meters. According to the CBSA, it would be a huge mistake to move away from the “federal standard”.

We are still waiting for CBSA to inform us about possible changes to the uniform policy that will clarify the circumstances when BSOs may / may not wear their firearm.

We are also still waiting for CBSA to inform us about whether or not BSOs will be able to practice firing their firearms on their own time.

CBSA has also purchased mobile firing ranges that will help our member practice/test. One was delivered in Chilliwack, BC. The second will be installed on a new property purchased in Ottawa next summer. The third will be located in Quebec in the near future.

I would like to thank Brother Sean Smith for inviting me to join him and Brother Carmen Filice to meet with local management and firearms trainers in his Branch. I’m pleased to report that the morale of the trainers is improving; they tell me things appear to be on the right track.

Border Patrol

The Pilot Project in Quebec is still operational and, in December 2010, the CBSA President reaffirmed that the CBSA will only continue to provide intelligence support to the Patrol and not to play any enforcement role.

 

From the 2nd National Vice-President:

It is spring in Ottawa, a lovely City where the CBSA makes not so lovely decisions that affect our membership. Here too we are gathered and together we will attempt to right wrongs done to us by the Employer.  Our NBOD meetings are invaluable and when we are together as a group our combined energy and activism can be felt by all. It is with this conviction of strength and solidarity that we must charge forward and let the employer know we mean business.

The damage and destruction caused by Strategic Review is still a deep wound.  Our membership continues to work diligently for an employer who many feel, appears to offer no appreciation. As a matter of fact, many members express to me that they feel this employer goes out of their way to take from and keep their employees down rather than appreciate and acknowledge them. Members point to Bargaining attempts as solid examples. They find it insulting that instead of fair upward changes and remuneration that reflect dedicated hard work the CBSA/Treasury want to take from CIU members by diminishing rights, reducing benefits, offering ridiculously low salary increases and altering past contractual agreements.

This is not a good time for the CBSA to toy with the CIU membership. From coast to coast our membership has felt the sting of lost functions and jobs, closed ports, closed offices and more. Members have been left to change careers, move distances, reconsider employment or retire while still not financially prepared, all due to a highly criticized “strategic review” by the CBSA.  Add to this name tags, staffing inadequacies, classification concerns, the AWA hypocrisy, severe Trade/Recourse Program cut backs, starving Wellness Programs, questionable port closures unfair disciplinary actions and much more. What we have ended up with is a membership resolved to demand what they feel they deserve from the CBSA.

Should Bargaining fail to produce an agreement the gamble of a strike would certainly have me betting on our membership. This bet would not be based on my dedication to Labor and the CIU; it would be based on what I am hearing out in the field. Our membership is angry, feeling unappreciated and threatened. CIU Members want to show this employer how they feel and a legal strike is as good a time as any.  I hope the CBSA/Treasury seriously considers the worth of well deserving Employees while at the table.

This brings me back to this NBOD meeting and our collective energy. We are diligent, we are united and we are effective.

The CIU Membership is determined and the CIU Board is in fine form, this Union is prepared to defend and ensure a fair contract!                                                              

From the 4th National Vice-President
Human Resources

Support Staff/ CR and AS:

I am pleased to announce that we have received a commitment from the CBSA to review the many outstanding Support Staff Job Descriptions. I trust that most of the NBOD have seen the mutual release by the VP of HR and me announcing this endeavour. This is certainly a victory on the part of the CIU and I personally want to thank this NBOD, the Committee and our members who promoted and helped champion this cause.  I and Committee member Sister Francine Stuart meet on a monthly basis with a team from Corporate Classification in an effort to monitor progress and address issues. I have included a document provided by the Corporate Classification Division that details the project (appendix “A”). In an effort to conserve time I ask that any questions concerning the CR/AS campaign be reserved until the Committee makes its presentation as a whole.

I would like to address certain expectations that some of our Membership has concerning this campaign. Some members have the expectation that a review of their Job Description will result in a classification upgrade. This is not necessarily the case. Should a member be in disagreement with their job description, they then have the right to grieve. It is the first step needed in order to pursue a Classification grievance and that is why we started here. When the Job Descriptions are distributed and if a member then feels that this description is not reflective of their duties they can grieve. Should they also feel that they are not properly remunerated, it is at this point the Classification grievance is submitted. One follows the other.

There are also members with concerns that they do similar or identical functions as their counterparts in other regions who are presently classified higher. These discrepancies are what prompted the NBOD to take action, hence where we are. We have no real influence over how the end Job Description or what the Classification will be. From the onset we have been arguing these inconsistencies and we hope the CBSA addresses them. Our focus is that we procure the current Job Descriptions required to move on to Classification inadequacies by manner of grievance as already mentioned. The CR/AS Committee will stay in place until this is done. We have achieved a great milestone; however our work is not completed. Our CR/AS committee will remain dedicated and active in this cause.

Dog Handlers

The Committee was provided a brief overview of the work done by the National Office to help dog handlers.

A member who worked as a dog handler was told when his dog was retired that he would not be given a new dog.  Management issued a poster soliciting the interest of other BSOs who might be interested in a one-year assignment to the position of dog handler, with the possibility of extension for a total duration of 3 years. The member grieved and also filed a complaint with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (PSST).

The National Office represented the member before the PSST in 2010 and used the same arguments that were used in the Supreme Court Brault case from the 1980s.

In the Brault case, the Supreme Court found that the extent of testing / evaluation / assessment that the employer goes through to determine if someone has the ability to work with a dog is indicative that the work of dog handler is different from the work of customs officer. In essence, the Supreme Court said there was a test to do to determine if the job was different.

The PSST decision said that the Brault case did not apply in this situation (known as distinguishing a decision from the current case), which implied that it was not necessary to do the test, because the current BSO statement of duties includes 2 lines that say a BSO may be required to perform dog handler duties. Translation: the statement of duties includes some references, no matter how vague, to dog handler work, and the Tribunal found that to be enough.

It is important to note that, during closing arguments, counsel for the Public Service Commission (PSC) supported the CIU request for the application of the test and that the Tribunal decision not only ignored this but also said that counsel for the PSC was not present during the 3-days of hearings. Counsel was present the entire time.

The PSAC, after a request from the National Office, agreed to support dog handlers and retained the services of Andrew Raven to file an application for judicial review of the Tribunal decision in Federal Court. The application was filed in early February 2011. What CIU hopes to obtain from the application to Federal Court is a decision that what will: a) send the matter back to the Tribunal (to be heard by another member than the one who issued the first decision), and b) give direction to the Tribunal that it must apply the test from the Brault decision.

Regarding the extent of testing / evaluation / assessment that the employer goes through to determine if someone has the ability to work with a dog, the employer goes through at least 3 stages. First, management arbitrarily assesses letters of interest and resumes that were received in response to the poster it issued, and decides who to send to Rigaud College in Quebec for 3 days of back-to-back testing. Candidates are scored out of 100 on their general ability to interact with a dog. Second, management arbitrarily assesses the scores of candidates, and decides who to send to Rigaud for 10 weeks of intensive training that includes additional evaluations and testing (having the highest score does not automatically mean being chosen to go to Rigaud). Failing any test results in automatic disqualification from becoming a dog handler. The testing / evaluation / assessment is extensive. Following the reasoning of the Brault decision, this means that the duties of dog handler are substantially different from those of BSO, which further means that dog handlers must have a statement of duties that is separate from the BSO statement of duties.

 

CR-AS Support Staff

The Committee discussed statements of duties for CRs and AS’s.

Management indicated that current statements of duties for CRs and AS’s would be issued in fall 2011.

The Committee agreed that it will likely have to fight to win proper job classifications for its members who work as CRs and AS’s.

It will also be important for the National Office to have measures in place before fall 2011 that will enable it to easily solicit input from its members about the accuracy of those statements of duties should grievances be filed. That input would strengthen arguments that could be presented to the CBSA if modifications to the statements of duties are called for.

Excess Annual Leave

The Chair informed the Committee that CBSA HR recently told him that it had become aware that some employees had accumulated annual leave in excess of the allowable limit. Consequently, CBSA plans on communicating with those employees to inform them that they will need to take the excess annual leave within the next 2-year window.

CBSA Staffing Policy Manual

The Chair informed the Committee that CBSA HR recently told him how it was planning to issue a new Staffing Manual and would like CIU to sign off on it. The Chair reported that he told CBSA CIU could agree to sign off on the manual if CBSA would commit to adding an appendix or module on redress – a request that was well received by CBSA.

Health and Safety

This portfolio takes up much of my time.  Between local and regional OSH issues and the Policy Safety and Health committee, not a day goes by without some relevant OSH issue popping up. 
At the forefront of late has been the hot button topic of name tags.  At a winter strategic review / change agenda briefing (note briefing...not consultation), the employer dropped this little bomb on us.  They stated that effective early spring, our members would be asked to wear name tags while performing any duties in which they dealt with the public.  To clear up the misconceptions which have been communicated by the employer representatives on a couple occasions, I would like to assure everyone that notice was given immediately that the employer could expect significant resistance to this initiative.  Both, Brother Fortin and I, immediately responded and Brother Moran certainly agreed with us.  After Brother Moran exchanged correspondence with the employer, it was agreed that this topic should be handled by me given the obvious health and safety implications.  To this end, it was immediately placed on the Policy Safety and Health committee as a standing agenda item.  It was discussed during Policy committee and I offered various arguments against the program, and it was ultimately decided that the magnitude of the issue was such that it could quickly take over the whole meeting.  Given this, the employer agreed to meet separately just on this issue.

In preparation for this meeting, I reviewed the various issues and concerns brought up in the 211 emails that I received from the field.  I also went to Toronto, where I met with Brother Mike McCormick (President of the Toronto Police Association) who briefed me on the many ins and outs of their recent decision on the wearing of name tags.  They had recently lost this adjudication and Brother McCormick was very helpful in providing information to use in our own fight.  Much of that which was used to ultimately decide against the TPA doesn’t apply to our members.

I did follow up with the meeting on March 3, when I met with Patty Bordeleau (Director General of Labour relations) and Martin Bolduc (Assoc. VP of Operations).  I again provided various arguments and asked that while these arguments were considered, the employer agree to suspend the program.  Martin did agree that he would hold off on the RFP until we had met again.  I expect this meeting to have taken place by the time we meet and I hope to have good news to report verbally at NBOD.

 

 

Use of cell phones in Customs controlled areas

This issue was referred to me by the PIA OSH committee.  It was raised when the employer chose to remove the signs which prohibited the use of cell phones in primary, secondary etc.  Among various and obvious concerns raised by the brothers and sisters at PIA, was the example of a sister working the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act counter who refused entry to a performing artist who was attempting to come in for a show.  The artist took a picture of the member with his cell phone and immediately posted to his blog with the heading “this is the bi***h that cancelled our show.”

This picture was subsequently posted on various websites of fans and sympathizers with the artist.  Even if this is the only issue (which it was only one of many) this should be enough to halt this dangerous initiative.  More to come on this issue when the employer follows up.

 

Uniform and Equipment working group

I was invited to be the lone CIU representative on this important group.  A number of issues were brought up and I found it particularly promising that most of the issues were unanimously agreed by all group members, despite the extremely high percentage of management represented.  Not the least of which was the importance of a more universally acceptable identifier for our non-uniform enforcement staff (i.e.: CUSTOMS or IMMIGRATION, instead of CBSA).

I hope these reports give you an insight on the problems we are dealing with. While writing this report I am in Ottawa with the bargaining team trying to get the best contract we can for the membership. Our next session will be the first week in May, and as reported we also have another meeting planned for the first week in June. Dates have been proposed for July and August, however we have to date received no word from the employer as to whether or not dates for those months will be accepted.

I look forward to meeting the new RDG and getting local issues resolved.

Respectfully submitted
Fred Milligan