Education Opportunities in Belleville, ON at CUPE 1022 office

September 24 & 25
Sat. 9-4, Sun. 9-12
Introduction to Stewarding

October 1 & 2
Sat. 9-4, Sun. 9-12
Steward Learning Series
Challenging Racism, Connecting with Aboriginal Workers & Creating Gender Equality

October 18
5:30 – 8:30
Steward Learning Series
Note Taking

October 25
5:30 – 8:30
Steward Learning Series
What Stewards Need to Know about Health & Safety

November 1
5:30 – 8:30
Steward Learning Series
What Stewards Need to Know about Arbitration

November 8
5:30 – 8:30
Steward Learning Series
Handling Grievances

November 15
5:30 – 8:30
Steward Learning Series
Disability Issues for Stewards

November 29
5:30 – 8:30

Steward Learning Series
Being An Ally for Equality

 

Mileage and cost of course will be paid.

Please contact Jody Uddenburg at jodycupe1479@gmail.com to register!

Arbitrator rules against Essex County’s proposed sick time change – the same plan management pushed on library workers triggering a strike that shut down libraries

SHARE THIS PAGE IN YOUR ONLINE SOCIAL CIRCLES
Jul 25, 2016
In an interest arbitration decision released last week, provincial arbitrator James Haynes denied a County of Essex contract proposal to change the sick time and short term disability plan for 300 paramedics, represented by CUPE 2974.2, says the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE). The sick time change rejected by the third party arbitrator is the same plan being proposed by the Essex County Library Board that pushed the library workers, also CUPE 2974 members, on the picket line in a strike now entering its second month.

“Essex County has been trying to force their now rejected sick time plan on all our members,” said Ian Nash, president of CUPE 2974. “As a result of their blind desire to seek an unnecessary sick time change, the county pushed library workers out on strike and deprived residents of important library services during the busy summer months.”

“We were prepared to bargain and find creative ways to reach a deal and avoid a strike, but the library board wanted it their way or no way – now their way has been rejected by the arbitrator,” said Lori Wightman, unit chair for CUPE 2974.1. “We are asking the library board to return to the bargaining table to negotiate independently, especially now that the county’s sick time position has been denied by a neutral third party.”

The County of Essex is the main funder of the Essex County Library, the employer of the striking library workers. “We’ve been saying all along that sick time is not an issue at the libraries and we did not understand why management was adamant in seeking this unnecessary change,” continued Wightman. “Now that the arbitrator has ruled against the proposed sick time change, it is becoming obvious that the county’s real motivation all along was to get the sick time change at all costs to bolster their case in arbitration for another group entirely.”

The library board initiated the countdown to the strike deadline by first calling for conciliation prematurely, and then triggered the ‘no-board’ report on the first day of conciliation talks, which eventually led to the start of the library strike on June 25. The arbitration case between the County of Essex and CUPE 2974.2 (representing the paramedics) was held on July 7.

“What is really troubling is that the county was willing to deprive our community of library services to get the sick time changed for other workplaces,” said Nash. “The arbitrator’s award speaks for itself – their proposal was denied. We are urging the library board and the county to stop playing games and resume bargaining to end this strike so libraries can be opened again for our community.”

For more information, please contact:

Ian Nash
President of CUPE 2974
519-816-1671

Lori Wightman
Spokesperson for CUPE 2974
519-890-1932

Suanne Hawkins
CUPE National Representative
226-347-0242

James Chai
CUPE Communications
416-458-3983

Essex County Library Workers, CUPE 2974 on Strike.

c3e66969-7f44-42d8-bd24-754b84de5f0c

CUPE_2974_Strike_support_3

CUPE Local 2974 – Library Workers for Essex County have been on strike since June 25.

They are fighting deep concessions, including the claw back of more than half of their existing sick time.

Members are holding strong. But after a month on the picket lines, they need our help now more than ever.

That’s why we’re holding a Solidarity Rally and Food Drive for CUPE 2974 next Thursday, July 28 from 10:00 – 6e7801a3-debb-4365-bbbb-8c1aa52e96181:00 pm at the Essex Civic Centre (360 Fairview Street West, Essex).

Join CUPE Ontario Secretary-Treasurer Candace Rennick, 1st Vice-President Michael Hurley, OMECC Chair Ann Jenkins, CACO Chair Jeff van Pelt, Board Members Eddie Pereira and Patrick Hannon, Former CAW National President Ken Lewenza, and many other labour leaders for a morning of on-the-ground support and solidarity for these amazing Library Warriors!

Make sure to bring donations for CUPE 2974’s food bank. There are no families with babies, so formula and diapers are not needed. See you there!
RSVP and connect with car pools on the Facebook event page

Prison Farm

Aric McBay

The empty siloes, barns, and fields around Collins Bay and Frontenac Institutions may soon be active again.

Kingston Heritage

By Aric McBay

It’s been nearly six years since the massive blockades of Collins Bay penitentiary. Since hundreds of people put their bodies in the way of the removal of dairy cattle and the closures of the prison farm. Since two dozen people—and one donkey—were arrested trying to stop what they saw as not only a bad policy decision, but a threat to democratic process.

To people outside of Kingston, hearing about the prison farm struggle for the first time in a burst of national news coverage, the breaking of the blockade probably looked like a defeat.

Instead, those events forged a movement with real staying power. In the days after the blockade, prison farm supporters pooled their money to buy cows from that prize-winning dairy herd, forming the Pen Farm Herd Co-op, and they’ve maintained those genetic lines to reconstitute the herd.

A prison farm vigil has taken place every Monday night across from Collins Bay. Die-hard supporters have been there—whether freezing or sweltering, snow or rain or sunshine—for over 300 weekly vigils.

Now, finally, there is real progress on the restoration of the prison farms. In keeping with a pre-election promise, the federal Liberals have ordered a feasibility study on restoring the two prison farms in Kingston. (Restoration of the other four across Canada doesn’t seem to be on the table.)

As part of that process, the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) is conducting an electronic survey about the prison farms, online at: www.csc-scc.gc.ca/consult/index-en.shtml

The anonymous survey on “institutional agribusiness,” as they call the prison farms, can be filled out until Aug. 2.

I would encourage you to fill out the survey. It’s a bit on the long side—choosing an answer often generates a new box asking you to expand or clarify—but you can skip questions and still submit the survey. If you are concise, it may only take you five minutes to fill out.

If you want to be more detailed, that’s great, but there are a few key priorities that the community expressed clearly six years ago, and that we need to reiterate now.

First of all, it’s essential that the prison farm land be kept intact. The CSC survey asks: “To what extent do you agree that the land previously used for CSC’s institutional agribusiness must continue to be used for these purposes?”

We need to keep that farmland to feed our community. Covering it with houses or factories would be unacceptable. Much of the best farmland in Canada has already been paved over—it’s underneath Toronto and other cities—and continues to be lost at a dizzying rate. We can’t afford to lose any more if we want to sustain ourselves in a future of global warming and unpredictable energy and water supplies.

And second, we have to emphasize the value of farming, in particular, for rehabilitation. The CSC survey focuses quite a bit on whether prisoners will get jobs as farmers, which has never been the primary concern of prison farm advocates.

Farming can help people to cultivate a wide variety of skills—from mechanical ability to personal qualities like diligence and persistence. But farming is different from most trades, in that caring for other creatures encourages empathy.

We know this in part because prisoners themselves told us that working with the dairy cows, in particular, developed their empathy. That it helped to keep them from becoming hardened by prison.

And while some people want to make prison into a universally terrible and debasing experience, the simple reality is that the vast majority of prisoners are eventually released into the community. Eventually we will pass them walking down the street.

We should make it clear to CSC—on this survey and in other ways—that this matters to us, and that “public safety” should mean something other than just building bigger prisons.

The restoration of the prison farms is still in the earliest stages. It’s happening slowly. And I don’t know how committed CSC is to maintaining the entirety of the farmland.

But here’s what I do know: The strength of the prison farm movement came from the fact that it didn’t just go with the flow. That people were willing to take a stand, and to obstruct business as usual, in order to protect their community and that farmland.

We did it then. And if we have to, we’ll do it again.

 

We have until August 2nd to complete the survey, not August 2nd. Corrections, not the Minister of Public Safety is doing the online survey. It is a critical component of the feasibility study and an important opportunity for public input we cannot miss. We remind you that the survey is lengthy, but please persevere so that we can convey to CSC the value of the program and the strength of our commitment. We are also waiting to hear back from CSC to let you and others know how to access a paper version of this survey.

Please note that the term “Agribusiness” stands for “Farms”.

The Save our Prison Farm key message in two sentences:

Prime Agricultural land needs to be protected and the cows need to come home.

Prison farms rehabilitate inmates, they teach work ethics and skills that lead to work, regardless where, and, most importantly, prison farms reduce re-offending rates.

When inmates are rehabilitated, taught work ethics such as responsibility, teamwork, punctuality, and gain skills, they will get jobs upon release. It doesn’t matter where they will find employment. It is not CSC’s responsibility to ensure that inmates end up in agribusiness. It is CSC’s responsibly to ensure that they do not re-offend. That is what the prison farms offered. That is what matters to our communities.

Managed correctly these farms can easily incorporate trades such as welding, mechanics, and office work. They can also offer horticulture and animal therapy, anger management and much more.

Providing all of this, the farms can make our communities safer because we must always remember: most inmates, including lifers, are released.

Upon release ex-offenders move to communities across Canada. They will be someone’s neighbour. Does it matter if they work in Agribusiness? No. What matters is that they are rehabilitated-that they do not re-offend. The cows help the rehabilitation process and that is why we want to bring the cows back.

Thank you for taking the time to fill the Prison Farm survey out.

PLEASE NOTE: The online questionnaire cannot be saved for completion at a later time. It must be completed and submitted in one sitting. There is, however, no time limit so the browser screen can be left open for as long as you require. Please ensure that you submit your responses at the end of the questionnaire by selecting the checkmark. If you close the browser without submitting, all of your responses will be lost.

http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/consult/index-en.shtml
(If the link is not live in your email, copy and paste it into your internet search bar)

Mooving on,

the 2015-2016 Board of Directors, Pen Farm Herd Co-op Jeff Peters, Dave Perry, Dianne Dowling, George Sutherland, Meela Melnik-Proud

Health and Safety Learning Series

The Health and Safety Learning Series will give participants a wide range of knowledge and skills related to workplace health and safety. After the nine-hour introductory workshop, participants can take any of the three-hour workshop modules in the three sections outlined below. To receive a certificate, participants need to complete the introduction workshop, all four skills workshops, at least three perspectives workshops, and at least three specific hazard workshops.

Health and safety: An introduction (9 hours)

Every CUPE member should take this workshop. After completing it, members can complete other workshop modules from the Health and Safety Learning Series.

Skills workshops

These workshops will teach members basic skills to be successful while working on a health and safety committee, or as a health and safety representative.

The workshops are:

Identifying and documenting hazards
Making committees work
Basics of incident investigations
Law and orders
Perspectives workshops

These workshops will challenge participants to think about the different ways that health and safety intersects with human rights issues in our union and our community. Members will learn how they can contribute to social justice causes while improving health and safety in the workplace.

The workshops are:

Women and work hazards
Equality in health and safety
Preventing mental injuries
Mobilizing around health and safety
Solidarity beyond borders
Specific hazard workshops

These workshops will teach members about specific workplace hazards and methods for removing them from the workplace.

The workshops are:

Ergonomics
Workload and overwork
Violence prevention
Harassment prevention
Chemicals
Indoor air quality

For more information go to CUPE Health and Safety

Pay equity laws help end gender wage discrimination

Irene Janson | CUPE Equality

In the 1960s, we forced an end to separate collective agreements for men and women. Since then, we’ve won pay equity battles in every province – some through legislated pay equity plans, others through bargaining, including strikes. CUPE’s equality history timeline documents groundbreaking pay equity wins.

Gender gap bigger in provinces with no pay equity law

Pay equity legislation has narrowed the gender pay gap, but discrimination persists, and we press for better laws. The complaints-based system that exists in federally-regulated workplaces and four provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador) has failed. Pay equity legislation in Manitoba, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island boosted equity but was a one-time initiative and only covered certain wpay-equity-map-eorkplaces. The New Brunswick law has similar flaws, and adjustments are slow to come.

Our greatest success has been in Ontario (600 joint pay equity plans) and Quebec (300 plans). These two provinces have proactive laws that cover both the public and private sectors. Even in those provinces, we are challenging regulatory gaps. At the federal level, CUPE is currently pressing for federal pay equity legislation.

Better pay equity laws are needed because gender pay gaps persist despite women’s increased education and labour force participation. Canada has the seventh largest wage gap of 34 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries. Women working full-time and full-year in Canada earn 72 per cent of what men earn, on average. Racialized, immigrant and Indigenous women and women with disabilities get paid even less, on average.

Pay equity laws are only part 
of the solution. We also need employment equity, universal child care, strong public services, decent work, living wages, free collective bargaining, tax reform and other measures to end the gender earnings gap.

See CUPE’s submission to the federal House of Commons Special Committee on Pay Equity for more on our campaigns for stronger pay equity laws and the part they play in ending wage discrimination.

Check out our equality history timeline.

Leave no one behind in CPP expansion: Mark Hancock

Please let your provincial Finance Minister know you support CPP expansion. Visit our campaign page to send a message now!

A growing number of business and financial sector voices with histories of strong opposition to expanding the Canada Pension Plan have suddenly accepted that our public, not-for-profit, pension system should grow. Their newfound support, however, comes with many caveats. Their strategy now focuses on ensuring any expansion of the CPP is overly narrow and extremely modest.

Various Chambers of Commerce, financial industry lobby groups, and the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association argue that CPP expansion should: 1) not apply to low-income workers, 2) only apply to some middle-income workers and 3) not be the focus for new saving among higher-income earnings, who, in their view, are presumably better served by the for-profit private pension system. The small number of workers remaining who would be affected would only see a “modest” increase to CPP benefits.

These carve-outs would have significant consequences.

All workers currently participate on an equal basis in the CPP. Adding new exceptions for workers at certain income levels would make it more complicated and costly to operate the plan. More contributions would be used to pay administrative and compliance costs instead of being invested. A simple universal expansion of CPP is the more efficient solution.

Cutting low-income workers out of CPP expansion will also encourage employers to game the system. If new CPP contributions and benefits only applied on earnings above $27,500 as some are suggesting, employers would have yet another incentive to offer lower-wage, lower-hours jobs – keeping total earnings below this threshold would keep payroll costs down. This would lead to a new incentive to split full-time positions into precarious part-time positions. Canada’s governments should not be encouraging precarious employment by building these incentives into the CPP. Canadian workers deserve more good jobs and our governments should be fighting to keep them.

If Finance Ministers are concerned with the retirement prospects of low-income Canadians, CPP expansion should not be carved up. Low-income Canadians would see their retirement incomes rise like others under a bigger CPP. If Finance Ministers are concerned about the impact of the GIS clawback on these workers, they should address that particular mechanism rather than undermine the universal CPP.

Polling shows Canadians of all income levels, including low-income Canadians, strongly support CPP expansion. This federal government clearly campaigned on commitment to expand the CPP without reference to any new caveats.

As the salespeople for many for-profit private retirement products, Canada’s insurance industry has a long track record in lobbying against CPP reform. Canadians pay the highest mutual fund fees in the world in their RRSPs and these companies like it that way.

The insurance industry ran a massive campaign that tried to kill the CPP before it was born in the 1960s. The Canadian labour movement, on the other hand, was rightly skeptical that most workers would be able to achieve a pension plan at work, leading to our call for CPP benefits to be set at a much higher level. A middle ground was ultimately chosen, establishing a public pension plan with overly modest benefits. Political leaders at the time believed workplace pension plans would grow – enough to fill the gap left by the modest CPP. This hasn’t happened, and the basic benefit target of the CPP remains basically the same as when it was established.

Unions pushed for a doubling of CPP benefits in the 1980s,as the private pension system was not working for most Canadian workers. The insurance industry and other business groups successfully quashed CPP expansion, arguing that workplace pension coverage and private savings vehicles would grow and expand over coming decades.

These business groups were proven spectacularly wrong. Workplace pension coverage has been on a decline ever since. It’s no surprise we are facing a retirement crisis.

If we had listened to the insurance industry in the 1960s, we wouldn’t have a CPP today. If we hadn’t listened to them in the 1980s, Canadian baby boomers would be retiring with bigger CPP benefits today, instead of the justified anxiety of the retirement insecurity our failed system has left them with. The picture for their children looks even bleaker – unless something is done today.

Our Finance Ministers should reflect on this history next week as they weigh the latest, flawed advice from the insurance industry about CPP.

The labour movement’s message has been simple for the past 50 years: the CPP works very well in terms of coverage, benefit security and inflation protection. Its only flaw is that its benefits are too modest. It should be expanded for all Canadian workers. Relying too heavily on our private, for-profit retirement system has not and will not work for most Canadians.

Canadians are overwhelmingly behind the simple idea of setting aside a bit more today for a decent and secure retirement. Our Finance Ministers have an obligation to listen to Canadians, and universally expand the CPP.

Mark Hancock is national president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees. Representing over 635,000 members across the country, it is Canada’s largest union.

 

From: CUPE National

Minimum, living and fair wages: What’s the difference?

Minimum Wages are the lowest wage employers can legally pay workers according to legislation or contract. Minimum wages were first introduced in Canada in 1918 to protect female workers in certain jobs. At the time, unions felt they could more effectively ensure adequate wages for men, but women were largely unorganized and so more easily exploited.

In Canada, hourly minimum wages range from a low of $10.40 in British Columbia to $13 in Nunavut. Minimum wages have not kept pace with inflation. The average remains below what it was in 1976, after adjusting for inflation. One in 14 workers receive only the minimum wage, with women, young, racialized and part-time workers much more likely to be paid the minimum wage.

Fair Wages are minimum wage rates for specific occupations. They must be paid by contractors doing work for governments with fair wage policies. These policies generally apply to construction, trades and sometimes cleaning and security workers, and are often tied to union wage rates. They’re intended to ensure contractors pay decent wages on government contracts instead of slashing wages and ben26423415830_c998fa87e6_oefits.

The City of Toronto introduced the first fair wage policy in 1893, before minimum wages existed. Since then he federal government, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick, the Yukon and a number of municipalities have adopted (and sometimes subsequently repealed) fair wage policies.

A Living Wage is the wage needed to provide the minimum income necessary to pay for basic needs based on the cost of living in a specific community. Calculations of living wages vary significantly: from about $14 an hour in some communities to just over $20 in Metro Vancouver and Yellowknife. Living wages rely on public and private employers voluntarily agreeing to pay them.

At CUPE’s 2015 National Convention, delegates passed a resolution urging our union to push for living wages as the minimum wage across Canada. The resolution calls on members to support living wage campaigns, and to work towards bargaining a living wage for all members. CUPE’s Strategic Directions also sets a goal of achieving a minimum $19/hour wage for all members by the end of 2017.

 

From CUPE.CA