Author Archives: Pierre St-Jacques

Public Interest Commission Hearing Wraps Up For FB

Our Team and Employer made final arguments on November 23, 2017.

As per the Public Service Labour Relations Act, our FB Bargaining Team filed for conciliation earlier this year when it became clear that the employer was not prepared to seriously address our issues, including parity with other law enforcement agencies and matters related to hours of work such as protections for compressed work weeks, VSSAs and telework.

With the PIC mediation attempt having failed in October, we proceeded to hearing on November 2 and 6 at the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Employment Board (FPSLREB). On Thursday November 23 we wrapped up our hearing before the PIC. Over the course of these hearings our bargaining team made our case for compensation parity with other law enforcement agencies across Canada, including other federal agencies under the Ministry of Public Safety. We also made the case – repeatedly – that there are serious problems at CBSA and that in light of these, we seek new rights for employees particularly as they pertain to discipline, hours of work and arming.

On Thursday, Treasury Board/CBSA continued to push for concessions concerning hours of work, VSSA negotiations and leave provisions. The employer also continued to take the position that there are no recruitment or retention issues at CBSA. Again, we were crystal clear with the PIC that we do not agree, and we provided evidence demonstrating ongoing problems at CBSA.

Now that the hearings are over, we await a recommendation from the PIC. Unlike arbitration, the recommendation is non-binding. While the legislation provides for the PIC to issue its recommendation within 30 days of the hearing, the Chair may ask for an extension. Given the number of issues outstanding, there was some indication that the Chair may exercise this prerogative. We will be sure to update as things progress.

Congrats to those members who picketed the office of Finance Minister Bill Morneau in Toronto on November 23, to those who handed out flyers in Cornwall on November 24, and to those union members elsewhere in the country taking action in support of a fair contract. For more information on lobbying efforts and other activities, contact a member of our bargaining team, your CIU Branch President or go to psacunion.ca/employer/fb-group.

FB Bargaining Team after the PIC on Nov. 23, 2017

FB Bargaining Team (right to left): Dave VanHelvert (BSO, Fort Erie, ON), Brea Lewis (BSO, Willow Creek, SK), Lauren Baert (BSO, Sarnia, ON), Richard Sutcliffe (Inland Enforcement, Toronto, ON), Joey Dunphy (BSO Edmundston, NB), Jean-Pierre Fortin (CIU National President, BSO, Clarenceville, QC), Diane Lacombe (BSO, Trudeau Airport, Montreal), Morgan Gay (PSAC National Negotiator), David-Alexandre Leblanc (PSAC Senior Research Officer), Charles Khoury (Senior Program Officer, HQ) (Absent – Brett Evans, BSO, Halifax Marine, NS).

A version of this article was first published on the PSAC website.

FB Members Rally in Front of Morneau’s Office

On November 23, 2017, CIU and PSAC members rallied in front of federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s office, in Toronto, to tell the government that FB members deserve to be treated fairly. Among the members present were CIU 1^st VP Mark Weber, Toronto Branch President Frances Baroutoglou, and PSAC Ontario Regional Exec VP Sharon DeSousa.

The FB Group is composed of more than 8,000 members working for the Canadian Border Services. These members, who have been without a contract since June 2014, protect Canada’s borders. They are law enforcement, and they deserve a fair contract!

In the news:

Border security guards protest outside finance minister’s office (City News)

Photos:

CBSA Continues to Push for Concessions: Union Says No

This week, our PSAC/CIU bargaining team for the FB group will participate in the final hearing date of the Public Interest Commission (PIC) process at the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Employment Board (FPSLREB). In negotiations and in our PIC hearing last week, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) continued to push for concessions.

Some of these include:

CBSA wants to make Leave Without Pay for Care of the Family “subject to operational requirements”. Also CBSA is proposing to increase the minimum leave period from 3 to 12 weeks.
Our contract states that management must provide 7 days’ notice of shift change, otherwise the employee receives time and a half for the first shift worked. CBSA is looking to reduce the notice from 7 days to 48 hours.
CBSA wants the prerogative to take VSSA bargaining away from local decision-making and give CBSA National (in Ottawa) the ability to take control of VSSA negotiations.
CBSA has made proposals to bypass the National Joint Council Travel Directive so that some employees would not receive additional compensation when “temporarily” assigned to a port other than their home port.

Our union and our bargaining team have made it clear that we are not interested in concessions. Our position with CBSA and Treasury Board is that we are looking for improvements, not steps backwards. PSAC has successfully defended our sick leave. Our team has every intention of defending our other hard-fought contract rights.

We’ll be sure to provide updates as things progress. If you have questions be sure to follow up with your CIU Branch President.

A version of this article was first published on the PSAC website.

FB Bargaining Team Makes Its Case Before the PIC

As per the Public Service Labour Relations Act, our FB bargaining team filed for conciliation earlier this year when it became clear that the employer was not prepared to seriously address our issues, including parity with other federal enforcement agencies. With the Public Interest Commision (PIC) mediation attempt having failed in October, we proceeded to hearing on November 2 and 6 at the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Employment Board (FPSLREB).

Over the course of these two days, our bargaining team made our case for compensation parity with other law enforcement agencies across Canada, including other federal agencies under the Ministry of Public Safety. We also made the case – repeatedly – that there are serious problems at the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and that in light of these, we seek new rights for employees particularly as they pertain to discipline, hours of work and arming. CBSA management is not to be trusted. We need new protections.

On the afternoon of November 6, the employer began presenting Treasury Board/CBSA’s case. The employer responded to our wage position by stating that it is inappropriate to compare members of the FB bargaining unit – including Inland Enforcement, Investigations, Intelligence and Border Services Officers – with other large law enforcement organizations such as municipal, provincial and federal police forces. The employer also indicated that there are no recruitment or retention issues at CBSA.

We do not agree. From CBSA YouTube recruitment videos to skeleton staffing at ports of entry to officers being asked to handout recruitment flyers to the public at certain ports, clearly there are recruitment and retention problems at CBSA. As for comparator groups, our position is that a majority of PSAC/CIU members at CBSA are armed law enforcement personnel with police powers, and that compensation needs to reflect this reality.

A final hearing date is scheduled for November 23. We wish to thank the officers from the Ottawa area who came and joined our team at the recent hearings. We’ll be sure to provide updates as things progress. If you have any questions, please contact a member of our bargaining team, or go to psacunion.ca/employer/fb-group.

A version of this article was first published on the PSAC website.

Victory! PSAC Member Awarded Damages in Age Discrimination Case

In a recent adjudication decision, Diane Legros, a PSAC member who worked for Canada Border Services Agency, was awarded $25,000 in damages because her employer discriminated against her based on her age. The Federal Public Service Labour and Employment Relations Board (FPSLREB) decision awarded these significant damages because the employer refused to allow Legros to take advantage of a retirement incentive due to her age, and that the discrimination was “willful and reckless.”

“We are pleased to see that the adjudicator awarded significant damages for a violation of the Canadian Human Rights Act,” said Robyn Benson, PSAC National President. “It’s important that in cases like this, where managers so blatantly and recklessly discriminate against an employee, that there be a consequence for that. Hopefully, lessons will be learned from this case.”

Denial of alternation based on age

The adjudicator found that the grievor’s age was a factor in the employer’s decision to deny her alternation, which was discrimination. Alternation is available under the Workforce Adjustment Directive during reorganization or downsizing in the public service. It occurs when one employee switches or “alternates” with another employee who has been declared surplus and will lose their job. The employee can alternate into the surplus job and retire with a financial payout known as the “transition support measure”.

Legros wanted to alternate with a surplus employee and take the transition support measure and retire. But her manager refused to allow her to do so because of her age. She was 62 and the manager expected she would likely retire soon and her position could be eliminated at that time.

The adjudicator said that “due to the grievor’s age, [the manager] was relying on the grievor retiring to meet the DRAP’s objectives. For that reason, she denied her a benefit (leaving as an alternate) that others could claim.” This denial of the benefit was age discrimination.

Damages for pain and suffering, “willful and reckless” discrimination

According to the decision, the manager “did everything in her power to prevent [the alternation] from taking place.”

The manager’s refusal continued despite an adjudication decision in another case where the Board had ruled that alternation could not be denied based on the employer’s future plan to eliminate the alternate’s position once he or she retired.

The adjudicator awarded $10,000 in damages for “willful and reckless discrimination” under section 53(3) of the Act, because the manager continued the refusal for a long time, even after the other adjudication decision.

Stating that Legros suffered “significant pain and suffering”, the adjudicator also awarded $15,000 in damages under section 53(2)(e) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

A version of this article was first published on the PSAC website.