Mitch Cronin Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Some folks have accused Air Canada of trying to "negotiate" directly with union members, rather than through their union reps... by offering a poll... Now I see ACPA is likewise offering a poll, of sorts (in the form of a petition), to members of all of AC's unions... What's the difference? I don't see asking for opinions as "negotiating", and I'm completely unable to see what it is that's got some people so rankled over it. I asked here yesterday why I should consider it a bad thing that management wants our opinions... I got only one reply from an ex-employee. Why the silence? Have I asked the wrong questions? My question is simply as stated above... Why is it anything but a good thing that management wants to know our opinions? Since when is an improvement in communication ability a cause for objection? Now when this post sits without reply all day... I'll know you're all hiding from your own shadows... It's the rest of the world that's crazy, not me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Hi Mitch Good question Mitch. A number of posters on this forum and others have complained about Milton not communicating enough or that he doesn't listen to the rank and file. As I understand it the company is not supposed to bypass the union negotiators by negotiating directly with the employees, which is where the criticism comes from. Frankly however, he isn’t negotiating with the employees. He is looking for their opinion. In the end he will still have to negotiate with the union reps but he will at least have some idea of what the employees are thinking and hopefully so will the reps. He is asking for input. All the folks putting money into this venture think Milton is the right guy for the job. Trinity Time is even willing to give him, out of their own holdings 1% of the company to ensure that he stays. These are not normal times. The company is in bankruptcy. Our white knight is Li and it is highly unlikely that there would be anybody else if he were to pull out. The employees at Air Canada may or may not like Milton, but either way they had better get behind him or this whole thing could go down the tubes. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimer V Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 A bag smasher and a tire kicker agreeing,what next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky High Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 As an outsider to AC but, not the industry, I can't really see anything wrong with what AC is doing by conducting the poll. It's pretty apparent to me, by reading other posts here, that the union leadership has not bothered to find out how the members feel about some matters. It's also pretty apparent that AC knows this and is looking for some indication of what the membership of the various unions want. It's pretty obvious that the company will use the information to create their strategy for future negotiations in some areas, but once again as you point out Mitch. That is not such a bad thing. Might actually make negotiations easier. I am also getting the impression from the various postings that the union leadership is trying to stifle any sort of communication between their members and management under the excuse that it will damage their stance in any future negotiations. Does it sound like that to anyone else?? Possibly they are scared that their power structure may be in jeopardy? excretia factum Sky High Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 There's nothing legally wrong with what Trinity Time has done, nor is there anything morally wrong with it. On the legal side, asking for employees' opinions is not negotiating. Nor is Trinity Time our employer. Even if AC weren't in CCAA and under the protection of the court, I have a hard time seeing a legal objection to what they've done going anywhere. On the moral side, which must surely be the more important concern given the subject, I'm fully in support of Trinity's poll. My own union hasn't seen fit to ask its membership what it wants, and I'm not aware of any other union that has either. If you're not even going to consult your own membership over such an important issue, then you have lost any claim to the moral high ground. Richard Roskell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Mitch: While I'm an outsider, I think you'll find that the unions are concerned that they haven't been included in the process of analyzing the poll data to ensure that it isn't skewed in one direction more than another. Like any poll, the interpretation of the data is left in the hands of the interpreter. Just watch the next pre-election coverage and you'll see what I mean. My company tried something similar recently, and our representatives intervened immediately. In doing so, they got a seat at the table when the poll data was analyzed. At first, I couldn't see why they were so upset, but the net result of the subsequent negotiations was an agreement which has been well received by the majority of my colleagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest abc Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Negotiating or collective bargaining or polling, what is the difference? It may be perceived as undermining the union’s exclusive authority 36.(1)(a). But this might help clarify the issue. In the “unfair practices” portion of the labour code, it appears that Air Canada and Trinity Time Investments may have found a “loophole.” Please see section 94.(2)© So I have to agree with you, but for different reasons. You don’t feel coerced, intimidated or threatened do you? Is Air Canada promising something or persuading employees with undue influence? No. The company is gathering information and as such is within the bounds of the labour code. Perhaps the unions challenging this poll might find a better use of their money. The legal fees in this whole CCAA process must be staggering! 36. (1) Where a trade union is certified as the bargaining agent for a bargaining unit, (a) the trade union so certified has exclusive authority to bargain collectively on behalf of the employees in the bargaining unit; 94. (1) No employer or person acting on behalf of an employer shall (a) participate in or interfere with the formation or administration of a trade union or the representation of employees by a trade union; or ( contribute financial or other support to a trade union. Exception (2) An employer is deemed not to contravene subsection (1) by reason only that they (a) in respect of a trade union that is the bargaining agent for a bargaining unit comprised of or including employees of the employer,(i) permit an employee or representative of the trade union to confer with them during hours of work or to attend to the business of the trade union during hours of work without any deduction from wages or any deduction of time worked for the employer,(ii) provide free transportation to representatives of the trade union for purposes of collective bargaining, the administration of a collective agreement and related matters, or(iii) permit the trade union to use their premises for the purposes of the trade union; ( contribute financial support to any pension, health or other welfare trust fund the sole purpose of which is to provide pension, health or other welfare rights or benefits to employees; or © express a personal point of view, so long as the employer does not use coercion, intimidation, threats, promises or undue influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innuendo Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Your point about who gets to see and verify the returns is spot on. As has been pointed out here, anyone with a couple of seniority lists has access to a big chunk of employee #s. Unless there is some sort of security to make sure the returns are not all coming from the same internet cafe the poll could be stuffed and the results spun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 No, I don't feel coerced, intimidated or threatened. I feel like TTI is treating me like an adult, actually. Rather than deciding what is best without bothering to ask for my views, TTI asked for them. That feels respectful, not abusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 29chev Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 All the more reason to mark your own ballot so no one else can use it and send a message different to your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest greener Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Richard, TTI was not in the negotiating mood a couple of weeks ago when they came out with the "offer"... it was take it or leave it. Mr Milton has tried to become the white knight by "offering" a compromise by polling the people and finding middle ground. If the company wants a poll, no prob, but it should be with the blessing of the union to get the "feel" of the employees. It should not be a shareholder, or company, if trying to do an end-run around the unions. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted February 24, 2004 Share Posted February 24, 2004 Steve, I beg to differ. TTI's pension proposal was never a take it or leave it offer. I've read the entire pension package and at no place whatsoever do they state that it's take it or leave it. The only comment made in regards to the pension which was unconditional was that the pension issue had to be resolved prior to TTI's putting in new equity. In that regard, TTI simply restated the condition that they made when they won the bid for AC. No employee or union could have reasonably doubted that something was coming down the pipe. As far as actual negotiations are concerned, the proposal specifically stated that TTI's position was, "...not an opening gambit in a long negotiation." It didn't say no negotiations were possible, only that TTI had no intention of making them protracted. Does that seem unreasonable to you, given the strict time limitations lawfully mandated by CCAA? Our unions don't want to negotiate on pensions, period. They have spun this issue since last summer, Steve, both in what you weren't told, and now with incorrect information by the very people who are supposed to be honest with you above all else. Has Mr. Milton and/or TTI made political hay with the issue? That may well be the case, Steve, your opinion counts for at least as much as mine in that regard. But if our unions had sensibly staked out a political position that didn't leave them vulnerable to management manipulation, Mr. Milton would have had nothing to say. Best, RR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted February 24, 2004 Author Share Posted February 24, 2004 Hmmmm... what a difference a day makes... Thanks Greg, and thanks all, for your thoughts. I do hope they've tracked ip's while collecting the poll answers... otherwise, it's all for not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest greener Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 Hi Richard, “This is not an opening gambit in a long negotiation,” said Mr. Gordon. “It is not an open-ended proposal. For us, a viable, sustainable resolution of pension issues is an essential condition of investment.” The “It is not an open-ended proposal." above was what I interpreted as "non-negotiable." Maybe I just read it in a different light than you. As far as all your other comments, I totally agree, and from my other postings on other forums, you have read my dismay at the pilots not being polled to find the mood of the membership on this issue before a "position" was taken. Perhaps the most frustrating is that I cannot say which option is best, because Trinity has not provided enough information for me to come to a conclusion. I'm a big boy(size wise too) and want to make my own decisions sometimes(when my wife lets me) on life changing decisions like pensions. Best regards, Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 Sounds like you have a perfectly reasonable expectation to me, Steve. Whether by our union or by TTI, I hope we're provided with ample information to make a good decision. Best, Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 5 O Clock Charlie Posted February 25, 2004 Share Posted February 25, 2004 If I'm not mistaken, didn't we already go through a protracted set of negotiations earlier this year ? And wasn't the result of those negotiations substantial concessions on our part and a long term contract with the company ? Are not pension benefits part of this agreement, and if we a legally obliged to adhere to this agreement should they not likewise be so obliged ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.