|
Pressuring the Employer I
January 30, 2006
As the ACFO collective bargaining team is headed into its second year of negotiating with our employer (Treasury Board), the messages it is receiving from the other side of the table have become less than encouraging. The Employer's three year offer of 1.75%, 1.9% and 2.0% is low given the demand for financial professionals in both the public and private sectors.
We feel that the time has come to show the employer that we are serious about our demands and that we are willing to take action to achieve our goals.
When the Association started this round of collective bargaining, it was given a clear mandate from its membership to take a more no-nonsense approach to collective bargaining. As the previous rounds of negotiations with a binding arbitration mandate had not left all members satisfied, it was clear that the status quo was no longer acceptable. By overwhelmingly voting for the conciliation/strike route, the membership sent a clear message that it was willing to take action. Everyone was aware that there was a good chance that at some point, we would come to a crossroads where tough decisions had to be made - and tough actions would be necessary. At this time, the Compensation and Benefits Committee firmly believes that the time has now come to collectively demonstrate our resolve and to start putting some pressure on the employer.
For the financial professionals of the FI group, there are a number of ways to do this that, in a legal way, send a strong message to the employer. We are choosing this route as it is necessary to get Treasury Board to make a reasonable offer at the bargaining table. Given the staffing challenges, high workloads and stress in the financial community, we think it is in the employer's interest to make the salaries more attractive; this should facilitate staffing and retention in the community.
It is also important that throughout this process the Association and all FI members conduct themselves with professionalism. We are involved in a process that will require us to undertake some actions to achieve our objectives, but we will take these actions in a way that shows respect for our colleagues, our departments and ourselves.
If negotiations are not successful, we will move to conciliation and the establishment of a public interest commission. If an agreement cannot be obtained at conciliation, we will ask the members to approve a work to rule campaign once the Association is in a legal position under the Public Service Labour Relations Act. We believe work to rule is a process that will minimize loss of pay, while at the same time clearly put pressure on the employer. Please see here for more information on the collective bargaining process and the various steps that will need to be undertaken by the association and its membership.
Last year, the Association talked to a substantial number of members about their views on different actions that could be legally undertaken without a strike mandate to advance their goals. What we are asking from you now, starting today, is to start pressuring the employer with what we call "Stage 1: Respecting the Collective Agreement." Here are a few strategies we are strongly recommending you follow as FI members to support our goals in collective bargaining.
Please click here for the business case for additional increments for the FI group that was presented to the employer, and  here for a presentation on the lack of salary increases over time for the FI group relative to other groups in the federal public service.
Your negotiating team and Compensation and Benefits Committee:
Jonathan Hood, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, jhood@acfo-acaf.com
Harry Barber, Veterans Affairs Canada, Charlottetown
Nicole Bishop, Health Canada, Regina
Tony Bourque, Correctional Service Canada, Moncton
Don Caldwell, Indian and Northern Affairs, Gatineau
Philomena Doyle, Public Works and Government Services Canada, St. John's
Karen Hall, RCMP, Vancouver
Milt Isaacs, National Defence, Halifax
John Leduc, Foreign Affairs Canada, Washington
Robert Loiselle, Correctional Service Canada, Winnipeg
Tom McNaught, Social Development Canada, Moncton
Gabriel Najjar, National Defence, Ottawa
Arjun Patil, Justice Canada, Ottawa
|
|
