In a meeting held on December 2, 2009 the Union made a global offer of settlement to the employer. In making this offer the Union reiterated a number of points it had made in its opening presentation. These included the facts that this was the last re-opener before RSMC members obtained the right to strike and that the demands being put forward by the Union were meant to address the many workplace problems being experienced by RSMC members. The Union also pointed out that the proposals being made by the employer primarily only dealt with the allocation of previously agreed to financial cap monies and did not provide any serious proposals for dealing with workplace issues. Finally, the Union indicated that it preferred to reach a negotiated settlement with the employer but for that to happen the employer had to reconsider its own proposals and give a more thoughtful and measured response to the demands being made by the Union.

A summary of what was contained in the Union’s global offer may be found below.

WAGES

The Union maintained its demand for a minimum bargaining unit hourly wage and rejected the employer’s proposal for regional based wage increases. It also maintained its demand for payment for all hours worked. In terms of the percentage of any wage increase to be applied to lower paid routes the Union indicated that it was willing to discuss the difference in the proposals being made by the parties.

JOB SECURITY

The Union maintained its demands on job security (demands 3 – 6 inclusive), as the employer is unwilling or unable to provide information to the Union about the impact on RSMC members of the employer’s “Modern Post” and route realignment projects.

EXCESSIVE WORKLOAD

The Union indicated that the adoption of a route measurement system, including the conversion of Appendix “A” values into time values,   a three day delivery span for householders and the appointment of union observers during restructures were priorities in this round of negotiations. The Union also rejected the proposal made by the employer to raise some of the values in Appendix “A” and to create others. This rejection was based on a Union analysis that proved that acceptance of the employer’s proposal would actually serve to lower the hourly rate applicable to many routes.

HEALTH AND SAFETY

The Union’s global offer did not include demand # 11 ( long-term disability plan) however it did include the other demands listed under this heading; four (4) days of paid cumulative sick leave, consultation with the Union in accommodation situations and collective agreement language regarding a members right to refuse unsafe work. The Union also indicated that it did not accept the employer’s short term disability plan, which differs significantly from the sick leave provisions in place for Urban Operations members. However, the Union did accept the proposal for an increase in personal days, which was unnecessarily included in the employer’s short-term disability proposal.

BENEFITS

The Union accepted, with some amendments, the proposals made by the employer concerning the drug plan, the vision & hearing plan and the dental plan. The amendments made to the drug plan proposal would make the drug plan for RSMC members essentially the same as for Urban Operations members. The Union also proposed that the drug plan be available to Relief Employees. The amendment made to the dental plan was to have the previous year dental fee guide applied as of April 1 instead of January 1.

The Union offer also included demands for four (4) weeks of vacation leave after seven (7) years of continuous employment, maternity and adoption leave allowances and the payment of $500,000.00 into the Child Care Fund in each of 2010 & 2011. The demand concerning isolated posts was not included in the Union’s global offer.

UNION PROTECTION AND MEMBERS RIGHTS

The Union maintained demands 21 – 25 inclusive, dropping demand # 26 (definitions). It indicated as well that it was prepared to modify its demand concerning court leave (demand # 24) if the employer was able to provide satisfactory proof that the adoption of language similar to clause 27.03 of the Urban Operation agreement would significantly impact the financial cap.

SENIORITY

The Union’s global offer included a right to transfer on the basis of seniority, the filling of routes by seniority when there has been a sizeable restructure or surplus positions created in an installation, distribution of extra work to route holders when there are insufficient Relief Employees or Replacement Workers and the hiring of Replacement Workers, Helpers and Assistants before hiring externally.

FINANCIAL CAP

The Union maintained its demand for a process to insure that all financial cap monies are distributed. In so doing it rejected the employer proposal to hold back some financial cap monies as a protection against possible overspending.

OTHER  

The Union’s global offer also proposed that letters pertaining to the employer’s policy concerning the recovery of overpayments and the distribution of its policy on harassment be included in the collective agreement.

EMPLOYER RESPONSE

Following several requests the employer has agreed to meet the Union on December 11, 2009 to discuss the Union’s global offer. A bulletin will be sent out next week reporting on that meeting and on any counter proposals made by the employer. In the meantime members should continue to show support for their demands and their Negotiating Committee.