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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.