Saturday, August 30, 2008

GCA GO-105 OFFICE SEIZED

On August 29th, the UTU International seized the Office of the General Chairperson in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.

In addition to replacing locks a notice by UTU President Futhey was posted advising that no one was to enter the premises without his authority.

Acting General Chairperson, Glen Gower, has advised the undersigned that he intends to file an emergency application to the CIRB after the long weekend.

Glen has advised that he will keep the undersigned posted as to future develops.

Rex Beatty

Friday, August 29, 2008

VOTE RESULTS - TCRC/UTU REPRESENTATION

The ballots have been counted the results are;


TCRC 1809


UTU 90


Rex Beatty

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

CN REQUESTS TO DELAY COUNTING OF BALLOTS

I was advised today that CN Rail contacted the CIRB and requested that the counting of the ballots in the TCRC/UTU Representation Vote be postponed until next week. Apparantly CN argued that it would be unfair to have their people be available on Friday in the face of a long weekend (interesting when considering how and when they conduct employee investigations).

In any event the CIRB ruled against CN Rail.

The ballots will be counted on Friday August 29th.


Rex

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

IMPORTANT MESSAGE - COUNTING OF BALLOTS

The CIRB today advised the parties in the TCRC/UTU Representational Vote that the ballots will be counted on Friday August 29th, 2008 commencing at 09;00.

Rex Beatty

Friday, August 22, 2008

COUNTING OF BALLOTS - UPDATE FROM THE TCRC

CN UTU Certification Ballot Information August 22, 2008 @ 16:42:08 EST

Brothers & Sisters,To keep you abreast of the situation, today, the UTU has filed a second list with the CIRB of approximately 42 employees that were terminated since 2002 which is a follow up to their correspondence of August 15, 2008. Upon receipt of this information, our lawyer, Mr. Jim Shields, contacted the Board and without getting into the details of the conversation, produced the results shown in the second attachment in which the UTU has now withdrawn their correspondence of August 15, 2008 and August 22, 2008 (today) and are now requesting that the counting be scheduled as quickly as possible.


In addition to the UTU correspondence, another hurdle was put into the process (I am not going to get into that one as it is ridiculous) but that was addressed in short order leaving the date of the actual count as the only issue still outstanding. We are hoping to receive that decision sometime this afternoon.This is getting to the point of being absolutely ridiculous but would you please forward this information to our members as the telephone calls we are receiving are expressing extreme frustration with the delays that are being encountered in this process and any information will be helpful.

Thank you for your assistance with this matter and we will advise everyone as soon as we have new information.

In Solidarity,

D.J. ShewchukPresidentTeamsters Canada Rail Conference

TCRC MESSAGE - TRANSITION PERIOD

Attached below is a recent message sent out by the TCRC. The message, among other things, is a response to the many questions raised by the UTU membership at CN Rail. Specifically, the message from the TCRC identifies the elected positions that will be "established/maintained" affecting the former UTU members at CN Rail should the TCRC be succesful (let's hope) in the Board ordered representation vote.


Rex Beatty

___________________________________

August 22, 2008

Mr. R. Thompson
General Chairperson
United Transportation Union
105-10423 178 Street NW 71
Edmonton, AB, T5S 1R5

Mr. Guy Ethier
General Chairperson
United Transportation Union
Black Road, Unit 8
Sault Ste. Marie, ON P6A 6J8


Mr. D. Joanette
General Chairperson
United Transportation Union
1026 St-Jean Street, Suite 200
Quebec, QC G1R 1R7

Dear Sirs and Brothers,

As you are aware, the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) ordered certification vote process will be concluded very soon and we look forward to the possibility of having the Conductors, Trainmen, Yardmen and Yardmasters (CTY) join us in the Rail Conference. A number of questions have been advanced to us related to what might occur should the representation vote favours the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference (TCRC) to which we have provided responses as well as having them posted on our website “cnteamsters.ca”.

Nevertheless, we are providing this correspondence for additional clarity relative to certain aspects of what is anticipated to occur during the transition process.

As President and Principle Officer of the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, I am very optimistic that the membership within your General Committees of Adjustment (GCA) will choose to unite with us and create a strong voice for Canadian running trades. On that note, we are pleased to provide the following information for your benefit:

…/2

August 22, 2008
Page 2


Transition Director Position

The Executive Board of the TCRC has authorized establishing/creating a new full time position, which will remain until the next TCRC Convention in 2010 and thereafter be governed by the decision of delegates in session. The primary responsibility of this position will be to assist with the integration of the CN CTY into the TCRC and will report directly to the President on all matters. The position will be filled by a member of the CN CTY through nomination and election by the Local Chairmen, which may entail the utilization of electronic voting to expedite the process.

The Executive Board has also mandated that the date for nominations and subsequent election of this position be decided upon by the President through consultation with each General Chairman and only the Local Chairmen in place on the date of the election will be entitled to vote. Our intent would be to conclude this election as soon as practicable following the Certification of the TCRC as the bargaining agent. Further details will be discussed with you on an ongoing basis during the transition period.

Recognition of General Committees of Adjustment and Local Committees of Adjustment Jurisdiction

We will incorporate each of your General Committees of Adjustment into our organization and each General Committee will retain their current area of jurisdiction. This would also apply to the Local Committees of Adjustment who would retain their current areas of jurisdiction. Retaining their current areas of jurisdiction is defined as representing the same members (craft) at the same location as is presently in place.

Recognition of Existing Officers and Subsequent Elections

To better assist with a seamless transition and if you wish to continue in your present position, we are prepared to recognize your election as the General Chairman as well as your Executive officers of your present General Committee of Adjustment during the initial transition period until elections for all executive committee positions are concluded. Should you accept, we are committed to work closely with you to organize and conduct your General Committee Executive elections as quickly as possible. We will also explore the utilization of electronic voting to facilitate an efficient, secure and timely election process.

We would also extend the same offer to all present Local Chairs (and Vice Local Chairs) presently holding those positions within your Local Committees of Adjustment. If they accept, we would immediately appoint the present Local Chairs to act as such in representing the members during the initial transition period and until the Division can conclude elections for all the new Division positions. It is also intended to conclude Division elections within the first three months after certification or sooner if possible. Electronic voting would not be utilized for Division elections due to the sheer numbers involved.

…/3

August 22, 2008
Page 3


We encourage all present officers to remain in their present positions to aid in a seamless transition and would ask that you communicate with each of your Local Chairs and provide us with a list of those Local Chairs and Vice Local Chairs who wish to continue as such, subject to the contents of this correspondence. I am sure you would agree that it is very important to retain as many local representatives as possible for the continuity in local representation and with the least disruption as possible to the members.

Additional Positions at the Division Level

New positions within the Division will be created with the addition of the CTY members and would include the following:

· One Local Chairman and at least two Vice Local Chairmen for each Local Committee of Adjustment being added to the Division.

· One Alternate Legislative Representative.

· One Craft delegate to the TCRC Convention and two alternates.

The term for these elections will be until the next regular Division elections, scheduled for the fall of 2009, at which time all Division positions will be up for election.

Financial Assistance during the Transition Period

In addition, to aid in the seamless transition, we will work with you in establishing your General Committee of Adjustment officers and provide training where required. In accordance with the TCRC Bylaws, each General Committee of Adjustment is responsible for the administration of their financial affairs therefore you will required to elect a General Secretary Treasurer for that purpose.

As this will be a new responsibility to your General Committee, we would provide the necessary instruction and training to ensure a comfort level for your General Committee. In the interim, our office, through our comptroller, is prepared to handle the financial administration for each General Committee of Adjustment and would return all financial responsibilities when you felt that it would be appropriate.

In addition, an interest free loan will be available to each General Committee so that you may establish offices, pay salaries and continue representing the members with minimal disruption. Further discussions will be necessary to finalize the administration of this transition; however, rest assured that we will assist in any way possible.

…/4

August 22, 2008
Page 4


We hope that this has provided you with the information that you require and we look forward to the possibility of working with you in the very near future.

Sincerely and In Solidarity,

D.J. Shewchuk
President

DJS/lr

cc : TCRC Executive Board

Friday, August 8, 2008

COUNTING OF BALLOTS

I was recently asked if ballots not returned are counted by the CIRB as “yes” votes.

The answer is NO. It is the majority of the legitimate ballots cast. Unlike signing of cards requesting a representation vote (which requires 50% plus 1 of the total membership) once a vote has been called the new bargaining agent will be determined by the majority of such votes returned.

Rex Beatty

CN - CATS BROADCAST – TIME LIMITS ARBITRATION AWARD

I was recently advised that CN Rail has, which is unprecedented, issued a CATS message regarding the recent “time limit” arbitration decision. As such I offer the following for your consideration;

The arbitration award does not, in and by itself, dispose of any grievances that are in line for arbitration.

The previous process remains in place, the Company will raise a preliminary objection on time limits which will be addressed by the Arbitrator on a case by case basis.

GO-105 at all times complied with time limits through Steps 1, 2 and 3. GO-105, strategically, did not file to arbitration within 60 days on many cases given what it believed was past practice, estoppel and agreement (the Arbitrator ruled otherwise).

The position of GO-105 (not filing every case to arbitration) must be viewed in light of the existing arbitration process. One must consider, given the increase in grievances against CN Rail, how many case could have been arbitrated each year.

For example if 5 cases made the docket each month (which would be unusual) it would mean 55 cases each year (the arbitrator does not sit in August). The math clearly shows that of the thousands of grievances filed (in such a short period of time) only a fraction would have went to arbitration. To view it another way, had GO-105 filed to arbitration every case the maximum heard would have possibly reached 165 leaving thousand remaining unresolved.

Further, when considering that objections are to be heard first (which the Company does on most cases) the number of grievances heard at arbitration each year are further limited.

GO-105 viewed the situation as a serious matter to address. The Union filed a complaint to the CIRB in an attempt to persuade the Board that CN was intentionally “clogging” up the grievance process to severally limit the application of the Collective Agreement. Simply put, it was more advantageous for the Company to violate the Collective Agreement then abide by its provisions.

The “clogging” of the arbitration process was, in the Union’s view, strategic on the part of the Company. In this way, not only could the Company violate the Collective Agreement but limit any effective timely resolution at arbitration.

GO-105 assessed this situation and determined that it would proceed to address the more pressing issues of the membership rather than a “first-come-first served”. An example would be the issue regarding the pension.

Consider, for example, the many time claims that have been declined in comparison to the increase in discipline assessed in the context of the above noted problem. As with the pension, it goes to “Company” employee leverage. Loading an employee up with discipline is one way in which to control the worker. In other words, once an employees job is at risk the easier it is to control that person. The withholding of consent with the pension (a position being argued by the Company) is another application of this corporate ideology.

The situation, unfortunately, will remain, at least for the near future no matter who represents the membership. As many of you may recall this matter was on the negotiating table to be addressed (and was dropped) once the elected negotiators were removed from service.

Recently I was advised by one TCRC General Chairperson that he proceeded to a joint conference with the Company on 60 grievances. The Company refused to address one grievance. If all these grievances are filed to arbitration it will take years to resolve.

I fully expect this to be an issue when TCRC commences negotiations this year.

The above situation is real. It is no doubt one of the most pressing problems facing the membership and their leadership. CN, in my view, is out to limit the effectiveness of the Unions and their leadership, this to force compliance to its corporate ideological views.

Are there means in which to address these problems? The answer is yes. Although contract negotiations are one avenue I believe a more direct approach by way of the Remedy Provision (forcing Collective Agreement compliance), the CIRB and the Courts are a more timely and effective.

WHY DID THE COMPANY PUT OUT A CATS MESSAGE?

It is my personal opinion that the Company (which backed the UTU) now realizes the possibility that the former General Chs. and Vice-General Chs. may again be in a position to represent the membership, a situation that does not sit well with the Company.

Remember H. Harrison’s latest book. Recall the passage whereby he states that he has had to close terminals and go after the leadership so as to force change. Consider these passages when viewing the CATS message.

Remember the gains achieved in the last few rounds of negotiations (not the FOS) such as;

Remedy Provision
PL days
“EO” – 48 hours time off
Full vacation entitlement etc.

Consider the grievances filed against the Company with respect to the Pension and Drug and Alcohol testing.

Consider how steadfast the former Gen. Chs. and Vice-Gen. Chs. were against CN Rail when advocating for the membership.

The Company, I believe, has now realized that the UTU is out and the TCRC are in. The membership will once again choose their representatives.

It is when considering all of the above that you will find the true motives of the Company with respect to the above noted question.

Rex Beatty

Friday, August 1, 2008

CN PENSION – INTERIM ARBITRATION AWARD

I was unable to copy the interim award on my blog sight as it was in PDF format. I previously sent a copy to running trades and I have been advised it is now posted on;.

http://www.runningtrades.com/

MY COMMENTS:

As most of you are aware the participating Unions all filed grievances regarding the CN Pension Plan. As a matter of process it was agreed that the CAW grievance would be the “lead” grievance with the other Unions intervening in the dispute.

The parties agreed to a format of resolution refereed to as med./arb. (mediation/arbitration) and retained the services of M. Picher (the CROA & DR Arbitrator) for these purposes.

The first attempt at settlement was by way of mediation. It appeared that a settlement had been reached in principle however CN “pulled out” at the last minute and opted for binding arbitration.

It is my view that CN “pulled out” as it believed that the Arbitrator had to first decide on the Company’s preliminary argument of “arbitrability” and this, the Company believed, would give them a “no risk” opportunity to resolve the dispute in their favour. Simply put, had the Arbitrator heard the preliminary objection first and ruled in the Company’s favour there would be no arbitration. To point, the Union’s grievances could not proceed.

It is my opinion that the decision of the Arbitrator was the correct one and certainly can be considered a “win” for the Unions. I believe it was a well thought out award that, essentially, put both parties on the same footing should they proceed with a hearing on the merits. In other words, both sides have everything to win and everything to lose should they proceed to arbitration.

NOTE: For the Unions there was no alternative but to proceed to arbitration once mediation failed.

The issue the Company now faces, given the interim award is, do they attempt to resurrect the proposed mediated settlement (a “win-win” scenario) or proceed to arbitration with all the attached risks?

In my opinion a “win-win” is preferable for both parties. To proceed to arbitration resulting in a winner take all would no doubt have a continued negative impact on Union/Management relations on a move-forward basis, including Collective Bargaining.

Something the Company must now consider given this award.

Rex Beatty