Strategic Review
Report of the
Advisory Panel
to the Minister

CUPW has filed a National Policy grievance alleging Canada Post violated the Urban Operations Collective Agreement between May 30 and June 27, 2011.

Bill C-6, the back-to-work legislation, extended the term of the Urban Operations Collective Agreement back to February 1, 2011.

As a result, CUPW is arguing that the Urban Operations Collective agreement was in full force and effect for the entire period.

This means that Canada Post violated the Collective Agreement when they:

* failed to grant us sick leave with pay, vacation leave, and other types of leaves during this period;

* failed to honour health care claims during this period;

* failed to include this period in the calculation of our sick leave, vacation leave, night worker’s leave and other types of credits;

* failed to accept grievances;

* failed to properly pay us for overtime hours worked;

* failed to allocate work on an uncovered route properly;

* performed bargaining unit work;

* sent apprentices home from training;

* changed letter carrier work patterns.

This is not a complete list. For example, in the Pacific Region, B. C. members were denied the 70% coverage for their Provincial Medical Insurance Plan during the month of June 2011. Many members are just getting these late bills at this time since the B. C. Government contracted out this service to the private sector.

At this time, many members also have to choose whether to take their vacation leave without pay or work the extra dates since the employer also decided to not honour the Vacation Leave entitlement described in Article 19.01. For example, if you were entitled to 3 weeks, the employer will not honour 1.25 days of your vacation leave. If you are entitled to 7 weeks the employer will not honour 2.9 days.

CUPW wants Canada Post to resolve this National Policy grievance by fully and retroactively applying all the provisions of the Collective Agreement, and providing proper compensation.

You need to inform your local of how this decision by the employer has impacted your vacation leave, your provincial medical coverage or your sick leave, since the employer also did not allow you to accrue 1.25 days of sick leave during June 2011. Please copy any documents you have that show the deductions of your vacation leave and/or vacation pay; or inform the local that you chose to work these dates rather than lose your pay. Include any relevant correspondence from the employer regarding this situation.

Solidarity,

John Bail
National Director

JB:iwk
cope 225

Canada Post management has shown once again that it remains firmly entrenched in the tail end of modern day Human Rights standards.

On January 11, 2012, a Vancouver Letter Carrier found herself confronted by a post office supervisor who requested to take photos of her leg with a personal cell phone. The employee, who had suffered an injury-on-duty, was in the process of returning a medical form and was fully clothed at the time. The employee was led to believe that there would be consequences should she refuse to allow the supervisor take the photographs. The incident sparked the intervention of a Shop Steward who observed the female employee with her pants around her ankles in the open view of passing employees as the supervisor hovered over her, cell phone camera in hand. Despite the intervention, the supervisor continued to pressure the employee into allowing her to take photographs.

In most organizations, this type of conduct would be prohibited but Canada Post exists in a parallel universe, where common sense is often rejected and statutory rights are viewed as mere inconveniences. When approached by Union representatives for an explanation, Canada Post Manager Ken Buker lived up to expectations. A core player on Director Marie Robinson’s management team, Buker refused to acknowledge the obvious. While smirking, he claimed that Canada Post has the right to photograph employees. Buker further refused to reassign the offending supervisor. Interestingly enough, several management representatives who later spoke with Union officials on the condition of anonymity stated that they would not want their own family members subjected to such treatment.

A subsequent meeting with Marie Robinson failed to resolve the issue. Robinson, who has been found guilty in the past of engaging in illegal conduct, refused to comment on the legality of such invasive photo op undertakings.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Employees have a fundamental right of privacy. Although not isolated, Canada Post’s actions in this incident strayed outside the bounds of ethical behaviour. Employees cannot be required to expose themselves in order that they may be photographed by their supervisors. Such photographic undertakings are humiliating, degrading and unacceptably invasive.

Moreover, it is a breach of the privacy rights that flow from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As noted by arbitrators, employees do not leave their privacy rights at the company gate.

When an employee suffers an injury on duty, Canada Post is required by both the Collective Agreement and the Canada Labour Code to include a Union representative in the investigation of the accident. Despite its legal obligations, Canada Post often deliberately excludes Union representatives from accident investigations, which then allows supervisors to isolate employees. Once isolated, employees can be more easily coerced into forgoing their rights.

Canada Post is entitled to certain medical information after an employee suffers an injury-on-duty, from the employee’s physician. Illicit photography is completely out of bounds. As noted by one supervisor, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, why do we have doctors if photographs are to be used as an assessment of an employee’s injury?

An employee’s physician is always in the best position to assess and diagnose his/her patient’s injury. When confronted by supervisors who are prepared to act in unethical fashion by requesting illegitimate photographs, just say NO! And contact your Union representative immediately.

In Solidarity,

Ken Mooney
Regional Grievance Officer Jan 16/12 cope 225

TO: ALL LOCALS – PACIFIC REGION

RE: PEL 5-day “Letter Carrier Route Measurement” Course for Observers

The Pacific Region will be holding a 5-day Letter Carrier Route Measurement Course for Observers from January 22 to 27, 2012 which will be held at the Empire Landmark Hotel, 1400 Robson Street, Vancouver, B.C. (Phone: 604-687-0511).

• Participants will gain knowledge of route measurement so they can make the letter carrier route measurement system work to their best advantage; learn the role of a Union observer; prepare the membership for a volume count and a restructuring.

This is a Paid Education Leave (PEL) course so class size is limited.

As this course is offered under the PEL provisions of our collective agreement, all costs including loss of wages, transportation and meals will be paid by National Union.

Priority will be given to members who will be observing restructures in their Locals.

Interested members should be made aware that there will be some evening sessions involved and that all sessions of the course are mandatory.

The deadline for registration is 3:00 p.m. on Monday, December 19, 2011. Please ensure your applications are in by that date, any application received after the deadline will not be considered. All applications must go through your Local and the Registration form must be signed by an executive member.

In solidarity,

Tim Armstrong
Education & Organization Officer

Encl.
TA:iwk
cope 225

A Campbell River retail clerk and local CUPW President has been reinstated to her employment as a result of an arbitration award dated November 14, 2011.

On June 1, 2010, Monica Judd was discharged by Canada Post on the grounds that she “intentionally deprived Canada Post of revenue” by giving a customer a break on the price of postage when his parcel marginally exceeded the 2 kilogram price threshold. In keeping with the practice that she had been shown while being trained as a retail clerk, the Grievor charged the customer a rate of postage commensurate with the 2 kilogram price threshold even though it was marginally overweight. The transaction took place after the customer balked at the price of postage and indicated that he might walk away and take his business elsewhere.

After being informed of the incident, Canada Post rejected the Grievor’s subsequent explanation and apology and chose to discharge her from her employment.

In his letter of discharge, Ken Podritske, local area manager, claimed that the Grievor had engaged in “dishonesty, fraud and theft”.

Podritske made these claims even though he was aware at the time of his decision to proceed with discharge that other Campbell River retail employees had engaged in the same practice while serving Canada Post customers and had in fact been shown how to do so during their training as a means of appeasing their customers.

As borne out by the evidence at the hearing, Mr. Podritske was also aware that Campbell River retail clerks had also engaged in a variety of other practices such as free box holds, free redirection services and free packaging in the interest of pleasing their customers. However, no other employee even received so much as a suspension.

The grievance was initially scheduled for hearing in Campbell River on February 9, 2011, at which point the Corporation employed a lawyer to argue that the evidence surrounding the other incidents and the no-charge retail practices that were known to Podritske should be excluded from the arbitrator’s consideration. In his preliminary award dated April 29, 2011, Arbitrator Vince Ready rejected that argument and held that such evidence was admissible and relevant.

During subsequent hearings on July 26, 27 and August 4, 2011, Canada Post’s legal counsel argued that the Grievor was dishonest and fraudulent and had not provided a reasonable explanation for her actions.

The Union argued that there was no evidence that the Grievor had ever intended to defraud or steal from her employer. The Union argued that at most, the Grievor had exercised misguided judgment while attempting to keep a Canada Post customer from taking his business elsewhere. In his ruling, Arbitrator Ready rejected the Corporation’s claims of dishonesty:

On the evidence before me, I similarly cannot conclude that Ms. Judd engaged in fraud or theft... At worst, the grievor has exercised poor judgment in not charging the appropriate postage for a package that she inducted into the mail system.

In a situation where a progressive, corrective approach was called for, Canada Post chose to proceed with a questionable discharge. Noting that the Grievor’s evidence was consistent with the fact that other employees had engaged in the same practice, Arbitrator Ready reinstated the Grievor to her employment with a suspension and an order that she be made whole for her residual lost wages and benefits. As a result, the Grievor is now entitled to approximately seventeen (17) months of lost wages and benefits.

In solidarity,

Ken Mooney
Regional Grievance Officer

TO: ALL MEMBERS - PACIFIC REGION

RE: CALL FOR NOMINATIONS FOR THE
NATIONAL WORK MEASUREMENT COMMITTEE

This is an invitation for all CUPW members in good standing to put their names forward as a delegate from the Pacific Region to the National Work Measurement Committee. This Committee is made up of two delegates (one Brother and one Sister) from each of CUPW’s eight Regions. One delegate from our Region should be knowledgeable in the Mail Service Courier Workload Structuring System, and the other delegate from our Region should be knowledgeable in the Letter Carrier Route Measurement Systems.