What is going on? I thought things had gotten better...

This was not an easy decision for us to make. The employer misled us at the bargaining table in 2002 when they said that no staffing changes were imminent and then promptly announced more than 500 job cuts. This meant we had to engage in a difficult and bitter struggle to make the employer live up to the commitments they made at the bargaining table. Again and again, we returned to Mediator Vince Ready to make our reluctant employer meet their legal obligations. Eventually, the reorganization process was completed; jobs were lost; lives and careers were in tatters; and our relationship with our employer was in bad shape.

What happened in 2004?

Joint committees
CEU representatives on a number of joint committees met with the employer to tackle big issues like reorganization, the impact of technology, and the ability to do "remote work" (i.e., the ability to perform work that is normally done in one location from a different location). In these forums, the Board acknowledged that technology (e-file) had impacted many clauses in the Collective Agreement. They also acknowledged that neither party considered the impact of that technology when those clauses were negotiated. Then they refused to discuss language that would protect you from redundancy, provide fair treatment and access to training opportunities, and treat back-up rights more equitably. Instead the employer asserts that "management rights" allow them to assign work as they see fit, without regard to work location.

Labour relations
In 2004, we tried to resolve more labour relations issues informally before moving them to arbitration. We talked with Labour Relations staff about many other unresolved issues too. We set action dates and then we attended follow-up meeting after follow-up meeting. The employer routinely "never got around to" completing their action items. The only time they ever moved on a grievance issue was when we scheduled it for arbitration - and even then only a few days before the arbitration date.

Job evaluation and pay equity
In job evaluation, the Board continues to ignore the timelines in the Collective Agreement and their responsibility to keep job descriptions current. Anyone who has requested a job re-evaluation, or has been involved in revising a job description, knows how tedious the need for constant reminders to the employer has become. Despite platitudes and commitments to conclude pay equity, we are waiting for it to be scheduled for arbitration. The employer has refused to bargain or mediate any settlement on gender-neutral definitions. Human Resources appears to have unlimited money for legal counsel but the cupboard is bare when it comes to correcting historical inequities in the job evaluation plan.

The WCB is not progressive

• Refused to accommodate disabled members.
  
• Disciplined members without just cause and regard to circumstances.
  
• Shown no corporate commitment to the return-to-work program or harassment issues. Union members have made the programs work, while the Board has publicly boasted about their success.
  
• Failed to implement a drug and alcohol program, despite its legal obligations to do so. CEU representatives have carried the ball in situations that should be handled through such a program.
  
• Failed to establish an employment equity program. The employer's enthusiasm for diversity in the workplace died an immediate death in 2001 - the year the joint committee completed an employment systems review that found barriers in the recruitment system. Human Resources said they would not take the issue to SEC to get the funds needed to remove the barriers.
  

• Members have overheard Human Resources and Labour Relations staff making disrespectful and insulting statements about you and your union.
  
  
• Senior management sends legions of Human Resources and Labour Relations staff to meetings with your union with no authority to resolve problems. They are also more often than not completely unprepared on the issues.
  
  
• Worse yet, when attending arbitrations they consistently show a complete lack of respect for this legal dispute resolution process and the highly regarded neutral parties empowered to arbitrate or mediate solutions.
  

We gave the "New World" a chance

We are changing our focus

• Focus our energies on providing better advocacy for you rather than engaging in endless meetings. Instead of sitting in a room with the wrong people who have not prepared for the meeting and who have no decision-making authority, we will spend our efforts more productively by talking formally and informally with our members.
  
  
• Withdraw from joint committees and processes to which the Board has only paid lip service up to now. We have decided we spend too much time in rooms talking without substantive outcomes.
  
  
• No longer provide HR assistance in substance abuse intervention. We have been lobbying for many years for the Board to commit dollars to a formal substance abuse program - which is their legal obligation - to no avail.
  
  
• No longer run interference on harassment issues. If there is a harassment case, we will not participate in a joint investigation. Also, we will no longer try to resolve these issues informally.