Author Archives: Pierre St-Jacques

FB Bargaining: Parties discuss discipline, harassment, pension reform

Our PSAC-CIU Bargaining Team for the FB group met with Treasury Board/CBSA the week of February 24 to continue negotiations for a new collective agreement.

Despite comments recently made by CBSA’s National President about the need for ‘culture change’ and ‘less jargon’, our Bargaining Team saw no evidence of this at the bargaining table.

According to the report recently issued by the Office of the Auditor General, harassment is a problem at CBSA. The Agency has publicly acknowledged this to be true. While the union has made proposals to enhance the collective agreement and has suggested changes that would protect members against abuse of authority and harassment, management has to date opposed the union’s proposed changes. This is unacceptable.

The language used in the proposals that aim to protect CIU members against CBSA management in the context of discipline reflects what has been agreed to by other employers.

Our fight regarding the wearing of name tags continues. We questioned the CBSA requirement that names must appear on the tags as opposed to a number. The PSAC also brought this issue before the Occupational Health and Safety Tribunal last week.

It’s time CBSA put its money where its mouth is on these issues and treated our members with respect.

CIU National President Jean-Pierre Fortin met with Minister Bill Blair this week and raised (among other things) the need for 25-and-out pension reform for FBs and the timely resolution of outstanding grievances. At the bargaining table, the FB Team also spoke to the union’s proposals on these matters and to other issues such as medical certificate reimbursement, leave with income averaging and contracting out protections.  On the latter issue, PSAC has filed a bad faith bargaining charge with the Federal Public Service Labour Relations Board over the contracting out of certain BSO escort duties at Pearson Airport in Toronto. We will uphold our rights.

We return to the table the week of March 9. We’ll be sure to provide updates as things progress. To review the package of proposals that we tabled and those of the employer, go to: psacunion.ca/fb

The original version of this article was first posted on the PSAC website.

Phoenix damages : everything you need to know about what we are negotiating

PSAC rally in front of Parliament

Much of what PSAC members have heard about Phoenix damages focuses on the government’s general damages offer of five days of leave for the last four years of hardships. You may not know that we’re negotiating more than just compensation for general damages. Here’s the breakdown:

A three-part settlement

The Phoenix compensation agreement we are seeking has three main elements:

  1. 1. General damages compensation for all: This is universal compensation for everyone, regardless of their circumstances. Unlike an out-of-pocket expense, or a direct financial impact, this will cover all the general hardships suffered throughout the public service such as: personal time lost trying to resolve pay issues, delays in career advancement (forced to avoid acting assignments, transfers, etc.), high levels of anxiety and stress, cancelling of parental and other personal leave to avoid being Phoenixed, reduction in support of family members, delayed retirement – to name a few.
  2. 2. Strengthening the current expense claims process: This is largely for out-of-pocket expenses caused by Phoenix pay problems, such as interest on lines of credit, bank charges, etc. We successfully negotiated this claims process years ago for our members but we intend to legally enshrine this claims process moving forward and strengthen key language in order to ensure our members can continue to get the reimbursements they are owed.
  3. 3. Expanding the expense claims process to include greater financial hardships: Many thousands of PSAC members experienced far more than general damages, or out-of-pocket expenses – this would allow them to claim those specific damages. This includes things like major financial losses (cars, homes, investments etc.), and longer-term impacts like ruined credit ratings.

Why PSAC still doesn’t have a settlement

We are largely satisfied with our negotiations surrounding the strengthening of the current expense claims process and expanding it to include more significant financial hardships. Therefore, two of the three parts of the proposed settlement are not a problem. The major stumbling block is the government’s offer on compensation for general damages.

no Part 1: General damages compensation for all   

yes Part 2: Strengthening the current expense claims process     

yes Part 3: Expanding the expense claims process to include greater financial hardships   

Let’s look at why we rejected this part of settlement:

The Liberal government has offered what amounts to 1.25 days of leave per year for each member who has worked for the federal government since 2016. Entitlement to that leave would be the following:

2016/2017 2 days leave
2017/2018 1 day leave
2018/2019 1 day leave
2019/2020 1 day leave

Former employees and retirees would need to apply for this compensation directly and would receive it as a cash payment according to the value of the days of leave they would have been entitled to. All members would be entitled to the above leave if they worked for any part of the relevant year. Both full time and part time employees would qualify for the full amount.

This offer is unacceptable for two key reasons:

  1. 1. Five days of leave is far too little to compensate for over four years of general damages across the entire public service.
  2. 2. Most importantly, it’s not an equitable solution. It rewards the highest earners because their days of leave are worth more when cashed-in, punishing lower paid employees, many of whom have suffered the most.

Why should a Program Manager receive double the compensation compared to an Administrative Assistant? And why should that same Administrative Assistant get a third of what a diplomat in the public service would receive?

It’s completely unjust and there’s no reason for it.  

The general damages portion of this agreement is going to be our one chance to account for all the impacts of the last four years that can’t easily be demonstrated through receipts, invoices, bank statements, etc. The final amount has to be better than what the government put on the table, and it must be equal for everyone.

We are using our bargaining strength to win Phoenix damages

At the start, PSAC and other federal public service unions sat down together with the federal government to discuss compensation for the harm done by Phoenix. However, these discussions took place outside of the collective bargaining process giving the unions little leverage to get a fair deal. When the other unions accepted the Phoenix compensation offered by the federal government, PSAC made it clear that agreement on Phoenix damages is one of our priority demands in collective bargaining.

The union did this for two main reasons:

  1. 1. It would strengthen our ability to get a better Phoenix damages deal. While we’re bargaining for new collective agreements the union has the most leverage and power. If we were to settle our collective bargaining first, we would have few mechanisms left to get a fair Phoenix damages settlement.
  2. 2. Trying to negotiate Phoenix damages separate from bargaining has already been proven unsuccessful. PSAC was originally part of the group of 15 federal public service unions that negotiated for years to get to the current offer of five days of leave. Without being tied to a formal process where unions have some leverage, the government refused to improve their meagre offer.

Why hasn’t PSAC filed a class action lawsuit?

Unlike non-unionized workers who might have to rely on a lengthy and expensive class action lawsuit, PSAC members are already part of a certified class – their union – and can seek a resolution directly with the government. Unlike a lawsuit that would wind its way through many years of the legal system with an uncertain outcome, we can negotiate more quickly with the government and ensure we only settle for the best deal.  In addition, PSAC members will not have to pay a significant percentage of their settlement to a law firm as they would if they were forced into a class action lawsuit.

The original version of this article was first posted on the PSAC website.

CIU welcomes Auditor General’s report on harassment and violence in the workplace

CIU Flag / Drapeau du SDI

We applaud the Auditor General’s recent report that found that both the Canada Border Services Agency and Correctional Service Canada were well aware of issues of workplace harassment, discrimination and violence – yet did little to curb the problem.

The Auditor General’s report confirms what the union and our members have known for a long time. Despite being on the receiving end of hundreds of grievances regarding harassment and discrimination in the workplace, too often has CBSA chosen to delay and stall. Just last fall, CIU’s National President, Jean-Pierre Fortin, was vocal about CBSA’s management creating a “toxic workplace culture through fear, intimidation and harassment,” calling upon the government to “launch an independent, third party investigation to look into these serious abuses of power by managers.”

We are pleased to see that Minister Blair as well as CBSA reacted favourably to the Auditor General’s recommendations. In light of this report, we remain fully committed to work with CBSA to foster a better environment for our members and ensure that real work is done to create a safer, healthier workplace.

Further reading

Phoenix damages, wage increases key to PA deal says Public Interest Commission

Bargaining

The government will need to offer PSAC members more Phoenix compensation and higher wage increases if they hope to reach a deal, recommends the Public Interest Commission (PIC) report on Treasury Board common issues and the PA group bargaining unit.

Despite this obvious conclusion, we know this government won’t budge unless we make them. That’s why we’ll need to continue ramping up our workplace action, up to and including a strike, until PSAC members get the Phoenix compensation and fair working conditions they deserve.

Strike votes are already underway for our members at CRA and in the coming weeks PSAC will announce when it intends to begin holding strike votes for the PA group and other bargaining units.

While the PIC’s recommendations aren’t binding, key findings from the report include:

Proper Phoenix compensation 

The PIC agreed with PSAC that reaching a fair Phoenix damages deal could be the “ultimate antidote” that paves the way to a deal. The PIC acknowledged that while other unions have set a pattern for compensation that includes five days of paid leave, as the largest bargaining agent, PSAC has the leverage to demand more.

Every PSAC member has suffered stress and anxiety because of Phoenix, even the small few that haven’t had pay issues. Many members have had to put their lives on hold; canceling parental leave, refusing new jobs, promotions or acting assignments and even delaying their retirement for fear of being Phoenixed.

That’s why we continue to demand equal, cash compensation for all PSAC members. When cashed-in, five days of  leave disproportionately rewards higher wage-earners at the expense of those who make less. That’s not fair, and you deserve better.

Fair wage increases  

The PIC recognizes our position that as the largest federal public sector union, PSAC has the bargaining power to negotiate a better wage settlement for our members.

The PA group alone has more members than all other federal public sector  unions combined, and the PIC noted that PSAC has historically not been tied down to the deals reached by those other unions.

Wage adjustments 

Because of the diverse membership of the PA group, the PIC recommended that Treasury Board should provide allowances for specializations within the PA bargaining unit that have been identified by PSAC.

Two sides still far apart 

The report also pointed out that the two parties are still so far apart in their positions but that some of the differences are not insurmountable. This reinforces PSAC’s position that Prime Minister Trudeau must give Treasury Board a new mandate and come back to the table ready to bargain fairly if they hope to prevent strike action.

Next steps 

Now that we’ve received the PIC report, we’ll continue to escalate our job action to pressure this government into negotiating a fair deal for PSAC members. Keep in touch with your regional office and sign up for PSAC’s newsletter to get the latest bargaining updates.

The original version of this article was first posted on the PSAC website.

Name tags group grievance: Nearly 2,000 signatures collected

Photo of BSO with words "Name tags NJC group grievance" along with a name tag with the word "target" on it

Last fall, we sent a call to action by inviting all members who wear name tags to add their names to our National Joint Council Group Grievance, which argues that the employer’s decision to mandate the wearing of name tags is in contravention of the NJC’s Uniforms Directive.

It bears repeating again: CBSA’s name tag policy contributes to a dangerous work environment, and needlessly endangers officers. Since this policy has been implemented, members all across the country have suffered threats, been harassed, and have had to worry about the safety of their family all because they could easily be identified by disgruntled members of the public.

Well, CIU members responded to our call to action in droves: We recently filed the grievance with the employer after collecting nearly 2,000 signatures. That impressive display of solidarity illustrates what we know all too well: CBSA’s name tag policy needs to end.

We’ll make sure to keep you updated as the grievance process progresses. In the meantime, rest assured that we’ll keep pushing for a safer work environment for all.