National Grievance File

Share This

N00-10-00001
Date referred: 
Thursday August 18 2011
Status: 
Scheduled
Collective Agreement: 
Urban Postal Operations
Statement: 
The employer is refusing to abide by many provisions of the collective agreement for the period of May 30, 2011 to June 27, 2011, in violation of the collective agreement extended as of February 1st, 2011 by the Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services (Bill C-6). More specifically, and without limiting the generality of the above, the Corporation failed to apply Articles 4, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 27, 30, 33, 39, 40, 46 and 48, based on information received by the Union. The employer is violating both the collective agreement and this legislation.
N00-07-00037
Date referred: 
Thursday July 7 2011
Status: 
Scheduled
Collective Agreement: 
Urban Postal Operations (2007)
Statement: 
As of May 30, 2011, the Corporation has stopped applying the collective agreement, has denied employees in the bargaining unit rights they are entitled to, has denied the right to union representation and the right to present a grievance, and has unilaterally imposed several less favourable working conditions than those outlined in the collective agreement. These actions by the Corporation violate clause 43.02 and most other articles, clauses and appendix of the collective agreement.
N00-08-R0020
Date referred: 
Thursday May 12 2011
Status: 
Referred
Collective Agreement: 
Rural and Suburban Mail Carriers (2008)
Statement: 
The Union has been informed that the Canada Post Corporation (CPC) is violating the provisions of the collective agreement by charging to the financial cap costs that are not contemplated by the collective agreement or agreed to by the Union.
N00-07-00035
Date referred: 
Wednesday March 23 2011
Status: 
New Grievance
Collective Agreement: 
Urban Postal Operations (2007)
Statement: 
The Canadian Union of Postal Workers finds that the Corporation has failed to abide by Appendix “P” of the collective agreement by not maintaining the ratio of regular full-time employees at 78 %, in violation of paragraph 1 (b) of this Appendix, and by not creating the required number of regular full-time employees, as set out in paragraph 2 (d).

Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, CUPW further submits that the employer calculated the adjustment rate and the adjustment factor as described in sub-paragraphs 1 a) v) and vi) incorrectly and in a manner inconsistent with past practice and inconsistent with representations made to the Union in past rounds of bargaining when the Appendix P ratio was negotiated and renewed.

CUPW maintains that these are deliberate violations of the collective agreement.

The Corporation’s actions also violate clauses 39.02, 39.03 and 39.06 of the collective agreement.
N00-08-R0019
Date referred: 
Tuesday February 22 2011
Status: 
Awaiting Decision
Collective Agreement: 
Rural and Suburban Mail Carriers (2008)
Statement: 
In the verification of data related to one or more routes, the Canada Post Corporation has failed to implement appropriate and effective measures to ensure that employees receive the correct annual pay for their route. The employer is altering working conditions, i.e. Articles 11 and 35, Appendix “A” and other provisions of the collective agreement. Employees have been unjustly deprived of the payment they are entitled to under Article 33. This constitutes a violation of the collective agreement.
N00-07-00034
Date referred: 
Wednesday January 19 2011
Status: 
Referred
Collective Agreement: 
Urban Postal Operations (2007)
Statement: 
Further to a notice given on October 15, 2010, and despite a union-management meeting held in Ottawa on October 27, 2010, the employer decided to install, as part of Phase II, Web-based security cameras in mail processing facilities, in violation on the collective agreement and applicable legislation. The Union has learned that the employer will begin Phase II on November 15, 2010 in seventeen (17) facilities, including mechanized and non mechanized faculties, as well as in letter carrier depots. The Canada Post Corporation is thus violating the provisions of the collective agreement and applicable legislation.
N00-07-00033
Date referred: 
Wednesday January 19 2011
Status: 
Referred
Collective Agreement: 
Urban Postal Operations (2007)
Statement: 
On April 21, 2010, the employer issued a policy/directive on the validation period for Canada Post Corporation vehicle operator permits (VOPs). The effect of the employer’s policy/directive is to amend the collective agreement in its application. The employer is thus violating the provisions of the collective agreement.
N00-08-R0018
Date referred: 
Monday November 22 2010
Status: 
New Grievance
Collective Agreement: 
Rural and Suburban Mail Carriers (2008)
Statement: 
The employer has violated the provisions of Article 35 and others of the collective agreement by advising the Union of its intention to apply $6M to the financial cap. The employer alleges that transactions made by the Transition Committee as a result of route restructurings and the fair and equitable redistribution of remuneration had not been factored into the costs to be charged to the financial cap since 2004.
N00-08-R0015
Date referred: 
Monday October 25 2010
Status: 
Memorandum of Agreement
Collective Agreement: 
Rural and Suburban Mail Carriers (2008)
Statement: 
CUPW grieves the employer's decision, announced in a letter dated August 13, 2010, to stop reimbursing the Union members of the Transition Committee for the cost of their accommodation in Ottawa and their meal allowances. The employer alleges that its decision is based on the fact that the Transition Committee meets only once or twice a week. The Corporation's decision is a violation of the collective agreement and an attempt to unilaterally change a well-established practice between the parties. Furthermore, the Corporation has no right to interfere in the work practices of the Union members of the Transition Committee. Indeed, the Corporation is seeking to prevent the Transition Committee from carrying out its work.

Moreover, it is obvious that the Corporation's decision is an crude strategy to bypass a decision rendered on June 25, 2010 by arbitrator Stewart, and, as such it constitutes a form of contempt of court and shows inadmissible contempt for the authority of the arbitration tribunal.

The employer's decision also constitutes unfair labour practice within the meaning of the sections 50(b), 94(1 )(a) and 94(3) of the Canada Labour Code. The Union reserves all its rights in this matter, including the right to file a complaint with the Canada Industrial Relations Board.
N00-08-R0017
Date referred: 
Monday October 25 2010
Status: 
Referred
Collective Agreement: 
Rural and Suburban Mail Carriers (2008)
Statement: 
On April 14, 2010, the employer advised the Union of its intention to change the requirements for the types of vehicle to be used on Rural and Suburban Letter Carrier (RSMC) routes as of May 17,2010. Despite the union-management consultation meetings that have been held, the employer is maintaining its new requirements for RSMCs. The Corporation's requirements are a violation of the provisions of the collective agreement, including, but not limited to, clause 32.01.

Pages

Related Content