# PSAC  Strike Actions and Some Reactions- Merged Thread



## bossdog (21 Sep 2004)

Another strike started today with one of the civilian unions that represent personnel that work on base.

It seems that it is pretty harmless aside from holding up traffic for 15 to 30 minutes but what are your views on the matter?

Here are some good points that came up at work today:

- Our pay increase will be formulated on their results;
- We give up some of our rights and freedoms to defend their right to protest and therefore should not obstruct our role on base;
- It is their legal right;
- <EDIT>If it weren't for the military, you wouldn't even have this job, be happy that you're working.
- If you aren't happy with your pay or job, quit.

I'm on the fence with this hole issue. It seems to be pretty quiet so far but I have seen protests on base that have gotten out of hand.


----------



## Greywolf (21 Sep 2004)

Yeah, one of our messes here in Borden closed down today because of the strike and we had to march over to the other one 20 min away.  But other than that, we are not too inconvenienced.  And as you said, if the civilians get a pay raise, we'll get one too.  But hell, I'm still waiting to see the money from the pay raise that was supposed to start back in April.  When will that actually kick in?


----------



## bossdog (21 Sep 2004)

That's the one we're waiting for. Hopefully we get it shortly after the strike is over.

I was in Borden yesterday for the first time in 8 years! There was a lot of changes and I can't beleive how much the town of Alliston has grown!


----------



## Inch (21 Sep 2004)

The pay raise you're talking about is the one that will reflect the outcome of the current strikes.   We knew back when that CANFORGEN was issued that these strikes could happen since a number of CBA's expired this fall and the actual amount of the pay raise would be dependant on what the PSAC gets. 

It is their legal right, however, they cannot stop you from going to work, maybe slow you down but not stop you.   We've been instructed here in Shearwater to show up for work in uniform with a valid Mil ID and there shouldn't be any problems. If it's official business that needs to be done be it a dental appointment or a scheduled flight or whatever the case may be, they have to let you through. Keep in mind that although it may be a pain in the arse, most of these people don't get incentives like we do every year and the only way to get a raise is to take strike action. In a lot of cases we work very closely with them on a day to day basis so it's in your best interest to be cordial to them and just show up for work 30min early, after all the Queen doesn't pay you to work 8-4, she pays you to get the job done. IIRC, DND has already settled with our employees, but since they all belong to PSAC, they all strike.

Cheers


----------



## Cloud Cover (21 Sep 2004)

Kings Town Jimmy said:
			
		

> I'm on the fence with this hole issue.



KTJ, would that be a fence post hole?  ;D


----------



## winchable (21 Sep 2004)

I've been trying to understand this strike.

Does anyone have some more definitive information on it?
I've got classes at the maritime warfare center at Stadacona and they keep telling us to show up early but there's never any strikers.


----------



## kiltedtradesman (22 Sep 2004)

check out www.psac.com


----------



## bossdog (22 Sep 2004)

whiskey 601 said:
			
		

> KTJ, would that be a fence post hole?   ;D



It could very well be a fence post hole that I'm stuck in. 

On one side I'm thinking "good for you, get all the money you can and exercise your rights and freedoms". Afterall, this will benefit us (the military) in the long run. 

On the other side, I have a little screaming voice in the back of my head that says "Put up & shut up or get the hell out. If you don't like your job, for whatever reason, piss off and find a new one." I think this voice is the army in me that's just lashing out. :threat:


----------



## bossdog (22 Sep 2004)

Turns out that it was only a one day strike...


----------



## Padraig OCinnead (22 Sep 2004)

Isn't it ironic?

We were just talking about this yesterday in our lines. I mentioned that I noticed the irony of their (the civvie strikers) actions. Although they are exercising guaranteed rights and freedoms they have decided once again (as they always have) to picket the entrances to our base. What this accomplishes is inconvenience us (the soldiers), possibly making us late for roll call or other timings. Someone mentioned leaving 20-30 minutes earlier. Yes, this will solve it. For those who need to drop off children at daycare centers (with set hours of operation) this is not an option.

However, they are inconveniencing the very people who are the most powerless to change policy regarding their grievances. It is not the soldiers sailors and airmen (officers included) who will get them their raises and other whinges sorted out. In fact, the ones that they are delaying are the very ones who have given up many rights and freedoms so they, the strikers, can exercise their rights and freedoms. We often do twice the work of civilian, draw half the pay (no union). I however, do not have the right or freedom to strike. I have enough of a sense of humour to see the irony here.


----------



## bossdog (22 Sep 2004)

> I have enough of a sense of humour to see the irony here.



Hey PadraigyVagon! Why don't try and take some of that sense of humour with you to work so we can improve the quality of atmosphere here in our cell...since we don't have a union...you lil' piss ant!   :blotto:


----------



## George Wallace (22 Sep 2004)

Padraig OCinnead said:
			
		

> Isn't it ironic?
> 
> However, they are inconveniencing the very people who are the most powerless to change policy regarding their grievances. It is not the soldiers sailors and airmen (officers included) who will get them their raises and other whinges sorted out. In fact, the ones that they are delaying are the very ones who have given up many rights and freedoms so they, the strikers, can exercise their rights and freedoms. We often do twice the work of civilian, draw half the pay (no union). I however, do not have the right or freedom to strike. I have enough of a sense of humour to see the irony here.



They are inconveniencing many others as well.   Petawawa had 20 Km line ups in traffic from the Gate to Hwy 41 on the Trans Canada Hwy in Pembroke.   There was a 20 Km line up to Chalk River to the West as well.   That was a serious traffic hazard on 40 Km of the Trans Canada Highway, holding up East and West bound Truckers, workers at AECL, normal commuter traffic, School buses, Vacationers, etc.   The Strikers could have been more organized and not caused the line ups to build up on a major highway.  The only organization they showed was to show up at 0645 and block the gates.  That was a MOB.  

GW


----------



## childs56 (23 Sep 2004)

I think it is good that they are excercising their right to strike, but when a civie says ya well tomorrow you will appreciate us when you are standing in line waiting for your food, that makes me mad i pay for that crap, I hate it when people take their job for granted, especially people getting paid very well for the job they are doing. yes they will help us the military worker get a better pay raise but i already make good money ( can't beleive i just said that), they need to realize they could have much worse jobs with little or no job security. Be gald of your job and thankfull for the money and security.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (23 Sep 2004)

Picketing is one thing.  Blocking access to various bases, as they have been doing, is both illegal and very aggravating.  They say they are not blocking access, because they let one car in every five minutes.  What BS!  If they keep it up, there will be some bitter divisions.  They also say they are doing it becasue there are too many civilians working on Bases that are not part of the Union.  People like me, the cleaners, the Commissionaires, and so on.

They obviously have a higher agenda than just pay, they want to see all civilians in the union, to broaden their power.  It iwll be a cold day in heck before I belong to any union!


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (23 Sep 2004)

What would you do,Lance, quit? 
 Remember striking isn't always about money as most of the time you don't make it back. [future employee's enjoy it though] I've been through two strikes now and I wish I never had. It was one of the "@#%$&*# gifts" that our nice NDP govt. gave to us. Before that we had binding arbritation and to me, it worked a lot better since the jails can't withdraw all our services we strike but still do the job,........ stupid!
Now our last strike had nothing to do with money it was all about our pension fund, the Harris boys wanted to take OUR money and put it in general funds of the govt. and then decide how much it might have grown over my working years.
All it was an attempt to balance the books for that year and put it on a future govts. back. Trust me, we made no money but at least we still control our pension. 
Remember no one wants to be out there but this is the way it works in the civi world, just hope you never have to go through your "right" to strike. Not getting paid is not all its cracked up to be.


----------



## Jungle (23 Sep 2004)

Personnally, I don't think it's helping us (members of the CF) in any way. The public service and the CF have different pay systems, and they are not connected. Even our pension systems are different. The only way we can get a pay raise in the Military is through promotions. We also have incentives, usually a negligible amount, and the annual "cost of living" adjustment usually in April. I believe the CF adjustment was decided in time for April, but the govt refused to announce it so the public service doesn't use the data in their negotiations...
We should turn as many as possible of those civilian jobs into Military positions.


----------



## Spr.Earl (25 Sep 2004)

Our pay should be linked to M.P.'s and Fed. Judges pay raises's!! 
They are getting a 10% pay hike!!!


----------



## Bartok5 (26 Sep 2004)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Remember no one wants to be out there but this is the way it works in the civi world,



Fair enough Bruce,

But where I (and many others) have a problem with the ongoing PSAC labour dispute is when strike action has a deleterious impact upon our ability to do what we are paid to do.  It is not simply a matter of showing up late for PT because you couldn't get on base out of uniform.  When strike action begins to adversely affect the delivery of military training, we have a "no win" situation.  

My school (CTC Tactics) has 10 training days in which to deliver the Residency portion of the "Army Tactical Operations Course" starting on Monday.  Two days of the curriculm are TEWT-based, and as such are dependant upon contracted civilian coaches getting on base to pick up the students and deliver them to the TEWT site.  A further 5 days of the ATOC Residency package are JCATS (Janus) based.  If the part-time JCATS civilian employees cannot access the base due to PSAC strike action, then we cannot train.  There is no scope to "adjust" our timings, nor make-up lost training opportunities.  When strike action precludes the JCATs interactors from showing up for work on time, the only people who suffer are our military students who have travelled at great expense to attend a very regimented (and zero-flex) 10-day training program.  Who suffers?  And to what quantifiable end? Do our students have any bearing on the outcome of the Federal Government labour dispute?  Do I or my fellow military instructors?  The answer is a resounding "NO".

I am generally sympathetic to the striking PSAC workers.  I don't mind having to wait an extra 20 minutes (on a personal level) to get on base during strike action.  Where I have a fundamental problem with the strike action is when it screws with my military duties to the point of no recovery.  When my students'  training resources are unecessarily waylayed, I can no longer do my job.  That situation is manifestly unnaceptable.  It is precisely this sort of thing that turns me from a reasonably sympathetic (albeit greatly inconvenienced) bystander into a manifest hater of the sheer obstinate ignorance demonstrated by the average striker.....

The PSAC employees are entitled to strike and protest.  We all know that.  The "Defense Team" notwithstanding, I understand and appreciate their plight. But the minute a labour protest precludes me from doing my job for the benefit of Army as a whole?  Well, to say that the civiilian strikers have lost my support would be a manifest understatement.....

If PSAC wants to strike and disrupt "life" then by all means do it on Parliament Hill where the effects will be felt. There is zero to be gained by jacking around those of us who wear the uniform.  We're supposedly on the same "defence team".  Furthermore, none of us in uniform has the wherewithal to make an iota of difference in settling the labour dispute.  The only people that suffer as a result of piquet lines at a military establishment are the CF personnel and (in my case) their students.  

Quite frankly, the current situation of day by day "will they, or won't they screw us around" is ludicrous.  As much wiser minds have said in the past, "this ain't no way to run a railroad".  If PSAC keeps targetting Military members and our training-essential (but non-union employees), they are simply cutting their own throats.  My patience is already wearing VERY thin, and we've only just begun the latest charade.....  

Quite frankly, impeding access to a military establishment should be manifestly illegal.  It apparently is, but there are ludicrous loopholes which say that a "reduced flow" of 5 cars per hour is perfectly acceptable.   Bull-crap!   Screw with the learning opportunity that I am trying to afford my military students, and you have just made an enemy.  

It has only just begun, and I've already had enough of the crap.  For the PSAC employees - pick on somebody who can do something about your grievances.  Just let me do my job.  Interfere with the learning of my students, and you royally piss me off.  At that point, I am all for the "billy-club" approach....

Just my $.02.....


----------



## Infanteer (26 Sep 2004)

Coming from a small business owning family that has been targeted by a high power union, I don't have much sympathy for these guys either.

Perhaps we could hold Crowd-Control drills for the troops to open up the gates.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Sep 2004)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a great fan of the unions who like to throw their members weight around[especially when they go against what most members actually care about...CAW anyone?] If you wish to blame someone blame the military, thats right, I'm sure if anyone higher up the food chain gave a rats *** that you guys are getting pissed off, they could have started the ball rolling a long time ago towards making them essential service and employ binding arbitration, just like you have, in a way, and I used to have in the good old days.
I find most unions, with their" everyone equal, whether incompetent or not" is slowly sucking the life out of the civil service. Its almost parallel to some of those "be nice" programs that some say are killing the military.

Back to the original topic, these people don't want to inconvenience you, but thats the weapon they have and sometimes it must be used. Here's an idea, stop and talk to them and try to work out a solution, something simple usually works like offer to honk, etc. These people are your neighbours.


----------



## patt (26 Sep 2004)

yea the strike was really a pain in the arse..my bus was ove an hour late for school and the construction on the main raod into borden wasnt helping at all.. and a little warning to anyone coming to borden that the strike MAYBE again on tuesday its not for sure yet but just a heads up.


----------



## axeman (26 Sep 2004)

MY two cents /bits is that if you dont want to work get out of my way . im  not anti union but if i  want to work why should someone who doenst because he / she feels they need more money / benifits to work why am i being held up .


----------



## Spr.Earl (28 Sep 2004)

I'm going to play Devils Advocate. >

Is this not why we joined the Forces too protect these rights to improve ones life as our for fathers did before us.
Should the average worker just roll over and let big Government and the Multi Nationals put every one back to the age of the Industrial Revolution of slavery and slave wages while they get richer and more powerful?

Over the last 5 yrs our M.P.'s have recieved nearly a 38% pay increase yet are offering the Union only 2.5% a year,so what should be done then?


----------



## JasonH (2 Oct 2004)

Kings Town Jimmy said:
			
		

> That's the one we're waiting for. Hopefully we get it shortly after the strike is over.
> 
> I was in Borden yesterday for the first time in 8 years! There was a lot of changes and I can't beleive how much the town of Alliston has grown!



My uncle is a contractor doing plumping in bordon and he's on strike.  

You were in alliston?!  DUDE I WAS BORN THERE!  I havn't been there since '97, god damn do I miss it.


----------



## Spr.Earl (2 Oct 2004)

Spr.Earl said:
			
		

> I'm going to play Devils Advocate. >
> 
> Is this not why we joined the Forces too protect these rights to improve ones life as our for fathers did before us.
> Should the average worker just roll over and let big Government and the Multi Nationals put every one back to the age of the Industrial Revolution of slavery and slave wages while they get richer and more powerful?
> ...



I'm still waiting for a retort pro or con.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (2 Oct 2004)

Should we be protecting Unions that, in turn, protect the incompetent, the lazy, the ones that use government jobs as welfare?

My goodness, big mean government?  Treading all over the downtrodden?  Gimme a break!  Nobody is forced to work for the government.  But all government employees are forced to belong to a union, and pay union dues, whether they want to or not.  Then they have to go on strike, whether they want to or not.  

Thankfully, as a contractor, I do not have to put up with the union nonsense.  But I have to put up with their B/S.


----------



## bossi (12 Oct 2004)

"... civilian staff at military bases in Western Canada walked out ... "?

PSAC workers hit picket line

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2004/10/11/665270-cp.html

OTTAWA (CP) - Tens of thousands of civil servants were on strike across the country Tuesday as bleary eyed negotiators for the federal government and union continued their marathon talks. 

Nearly 125,000 Public Service Alliance of Canada members started strike action as the midnight deadline passed, the union said early Tuesday. PSAC president Nycole Turmel said the union had set a deadline "either to reach settlements or to strike." While talks continued overnight, 100,000 general workers and 25,000 members with the Canada Revenue Agency "are taking strike action," she said in a release. 

However, just before the deadline there was a tentative deal reached with 5,000 employees of Parks Canada. 

There were pockets of strike action across the country early Tuesday. Government centres in Atlantic Canada and Ontario were hit and civilian staff at military bases in Western Canada walked out, said another union spokeswoman who would not be named. 

Other government services that could be hit by strike action include: 

-applications for EI, Old Age Security, Canada Pension and veterans pensions. 

-weather gathering data and reports. 

-payments from Revenue Canada. 

-Security clearances and record searches from the RCMP, parole board hearings. 

Turmel had been hopeful on Sunday that a deal could be reached. 

"I am still optimistic that we will get a settlement, but I believe that government has to show more willingness to settle this," Turmel had said. 

The talks are complex because they encompass bargaining with six different PSAC groups covering 26 occupational groups. 

Talks between the Treasury Board, which represents the government, and PSAC have been going on around the clock since last Thursday. 

The major obstacle to a settlement is salaries. 

The government had offered a six-per-cent raise over three years, but the union wanted a nine-per-cent increase, which had been recommended by the conciliation board. 

Rotating strikes by government workers have been hitting Canadians throughout the summer. 

Parks Canada workers first hit the picket lines in the summer. Rotating strikes hampered campers at national parks and boaters were temporarily stranded as canal lock operators walked off the job. 

More than 25,000 Canada Revenue Agency workers have also been on rotating strikes, closing tax centres across the country. 

The other groups at the negotiating table include program and administrative service workers, operational service workers, technical service workers, and educational and library science employees. 

There are 80,000 program and administrative staff. They include customs officials, immigration officers, parole officers, Employment Insurance and Canada Pension representatives. Some of the people in these services are designated and their jobs would continue whether there would be a strike or not. 

The 10,000 operational service employees are labourers, trades people, search and rescue workers, firefighters, and coast guard workers, among others. 

There are another 10,000 technical service workers, whose jobs include working in government labs and inspectors. 

The educational and library science employees are not on a strike path. They were headed to arbitration, but negotiators decided to bring them to the table at these discussions to see if they could work out a new deal. 

The union says there is a 20-per-cent wage gap between 11,000 electricians, cleaners and heating plant operators and people in similar positions in the private sector. 

The last major PSAC strike hit in 1991, when 100,000 striking clerical workers and secretaries paralysed the public sector. 

Union members were legislated back by the Mulroney government with a three-per-cent raise over three years. The Chretien government then controlled all PSAC wage increases for the next six years.


----------



## Release Section (12 Oct 2004)

My two civilian employees are on strike today.  They are not picketing here at the gates - they were off to Revenue Canada I think.  They are Table 1.  

Are there many civilian employees in Army units?  It has been awhile since I last served in a true Army unit but it seems to me that there were few civilians around.

Anybody have any thoughts about civilian employees?  Strikes?   ???


----------



## Tyrnagog (12 Oct 2004)

I say good for them and good luck to them!

The wage disparity really is out of line between public and private sectors..

And the government really has done nothing to address this since legislating them back to work in '91.

Hopefully it is a quick end to the strike, as my wife isn't a big fan of waking up at 4:30 am (she's management) for picket line monitoring...


----------



## Release Section (12 Oct 2004)

I agree that there needs to be a reconciliation here.  The last collective agreement was two years ago I believe.  That is unsat.  I guess what I was going for is:  are strikes productive for unions these days?

I keep thinking (dangerous) that any deal the union receives will be negated by what the individual members have lost in salaries during the strike.  The cynic in me wonders if the govt isn't just encouraging the strike and will settle for an already decided upon amount, when the amount saved in salaries = the cost of the new agreement.

What is in it for my single-income employee with a mortgage, bills, etc?  Life is expensive.  I hope she doesn't win the battle but lose the war. (I had to get an army analogy in there!)


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Oct 2004)

There can be quite a few civies working on a base.  Everything from cleaners to working in the ammo depot.


----------



## George Wallace (12 Oct 2004)

You will probably find that the amount of Civilians on a Military Base will number about one fifth of the Base's population.   There are a large number of Administrative jobs in Base Headquarters, Base CE, Base Supply, Base Transport, PSP, Base Maintainance, Base Heating Plants, Base Fire Halls and in other locations such as Learning Centers, Newspapers, Language Schools and Social Services.

GW


----------



## Lance Wiebe (12 Oct 2004)

Canada has to be the only country that would allow a civilian org to block access to military Bases.  I think that it is degrading to the military, being held hostage by a bunch of people that rely on the military for their salary.

I don't know what the solution is, but there has to be some way to stop them from blocking the Base, and causing such traffic mahem that schools and businesses are affected.  The soldiers on the Base can't help them, for the life of me I have no idea why they aren't picketing federal MP offices and such.


----------



## NoDuff (12 Oct 2004)

Lance Wiebe said:
			
		

> Canada has to be the only country that would allow a civilian org to block access to military Bases....



I can't speak for all the bases but I know in Kingston they cannot stop military pers, so they are only stopping people out of uniform.   As for those dressed in civvies they have been asking them for ID.   Interesting idea, but I have a problem being ID'd by anyone but an MP or commissionaire.   Correct me if I'm wrong but an item that shows your name and S/N together is a protected item and I believe a civi has no right to try and identify you as a military member.   In most other countries that wouldn't fly.


----------



## Infanteer (12 Oct 2004)

...and people think we should send these folks on Operational deployments?


----------



## brin11 (12 Oct 2004)

They aren't allowed to block access but they can make your advance through the gate as slow as molasses.  That's what they did during the '91 strike.  They would walk back and forth in front of every 2-3 vehicle very slowly.  They were allowed to do this but not to stand in front of the gate.  Same difference to me, still made us over 1/2 hour late for work most days.  One thing though, our platoon WO's were very good about it and we didn't have any problems if we happened to be late.  We all tried to leave home early but it didn't work most of the time.


----------



## patt (12 Oct 2004)

brin11 said:
			
		

> They aren't allowed to block access but they can make your advance through the gate as slow as molasses.   That's what they did during the '91 strike.   They would walk back and forth in front of every 2-3 vehicle very slowly.   They were allowed to do this but not to stand in front of the gate.   Same difference to me, still made us over 1/2 hour late for work most days.   One thing though, our platoon WO's were very good about it and we didn't have any problems if we happened to be late.   We all tried to leave home early but it didn't work most of the time.



a little side note...the strike is going to be all week everyday from what ive herd...anyways ya here in borden they walk for 15mins on the road and than 5mins to let the cars pass by...my bus always arrives there when they close it up and im getting quite pissed  because i barly have enough time to get off my bus and into my class


----------



## Arctic Acorn (12 Oct 2004)

This is an irritating time for everyone, but (and someone please correct me if I am wrong) our pay rates are based off the public service. This ongoing strike is the reason why we have not recieved our readjusted pay rates this April, as we have no rate to adjust them to yet. 

Indirectly, they're out there for us as well. It's annoying, but it will benefit us in the end.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Oct 2004)

I believe your right.  Either way when they get an increase so do we.  Of course the PMQ rates just happen to go up as well.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Oct 2004)

Give the reserves some clas B contracts to fill in while their striking.


----------



## brin11 (12 Oct 2004)

> Indirectly, they're out there for us as well. It's annoying, but it will benefit us in the end.



I understand that this is reality but why are our pay rates directly related to the pay rates of a civilian UNION?  They shouldn't have anything to do with one another.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (12 Oct 2004)

I agree, Brin.

They rely on the military for a job, THEIR pay should be tied to the MILITARY pay.

The military should not be saying, "yeah, it's OK they are screwing my troop/course training, because I'm going to get a raise..."

What crap.  I'm sure that there isn't another military in the same situation.


----------



## Bartok5 (12 Oct 2004)

I have posted on this subject before in the "political" forum, specifically as to how it negatively impacts upon the training that my organization is mandated to deliver to military personnel.  I won't repeat myself, as I have already made my position clear.

What I WILL say is that I spent 3.5 hours stuck in a traffic jam on the Waasis Road leading to CFB Gagetown this morning.  Yes, this is the supposedly "interference-free, uniformed-only" gate that 3 ASG allegedly negotiated with PSAC as a condition of letting them picquet and obstruct traffic interminably at the other 2 base gates.  So much for negotiotiations conducted in good faith....

Quite frankly, I don't give a "flying *&%$" about military pay-raises tied to the public service.  So much for the "defence team".  I have a right to work for my wage, and these malcontent wankers are obstructing me from doing the job that I am paid to do.  Quite frankly, I am disgusted with the one-sided concilliatory attitude of the 3 ASG base "leadership".  They have been lied to and taken advantage of by the union.  And still today, I receive e-mail "spam" from the uniformed union syccophants telling me to tell my subordinates to remain calm and cooperate.  Screw that!  If I had my way, 2 RCR would be out putting those shiny new Crowd Confrontation Operations TTPs into practice.  Enough is enough.  This entire exercise is utterly pointless when the only people being inconvenienced are those who have absolutely zero influence nor bearing on settlement of the dispute.  If PSAC wants to make their point, then shut down Ottawa.  Quit screwing with my ability to perform my military duties!

Oh, and for the RCMP and Military Police who refuse to enforce the respective laws against obstruction of public highways and access to military establishments?  Do us all a favour and get out from behind your video cameras to do your frigging jobs!

Yes, patience is wearing thin.  My school Commandant and (American exchange) RSM were the first two from our school to have there names taken down by the RCMP for a "confrontational attitude".  We are now on the slippery slope to much more interesting "road rage" times unless the civilian and military law enforcement officials actually pony up and do their frigging jobs.  

"Right to strike"?  No problem.  "Right to exercise your rights by picquetting"?  No problem.  "Prevent me from reporting to work and hold me up for 3.5 hours in a 2 km-long traffic jam because the RCMP and Military Police can't/won't do their jobs"?  Well, now we have the makings of a serious problem....

I am seriously pissed, and I am NOT alone.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (12 Oct 2004)

I'm with you, Mark.

I parked and walked in, instead of waiting.  The're always in my face anyway, with me being a civilian now.  Thank goodness J7 wasn't built any further awa!

This morning, the RCMP and MP's were nowhere to be seen at 0705 hrs when I came in.  I think they were taken by surprise.  I think they'll be out again tomorrow as well.  Darn them.


----------



## Infanteer (12 Oct 2004)

> If I had my way, 2 RCR would be out putting those shiny new Crowd Confrontation Operations TTPs into practice.  Enough is enough.



Bang on.

The way I see it, hindering the ability of the Armed Forces of this country to train for war is interfering with our National Security, especially with the situation in the world today.

We are at war; Canadian soldiers have died in the line of duty, some due to hostile action by enemy factions.  These people are providing comfort to the enemy by hindering our training and preparation.  Considering other countries shoot people for snooping around military facilities, these people are lucky that a 30 Ton armoured vehicle hasn't drove over their picket (which it should).


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Oct 2004)

I thought we weren't allowed to do crowd control.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (12 Oct 2004)

I've said it before but I guess I will remind you again. DON"T blame the strikers, all the higher-ups on the base need to do is get a court order so they cannot picket within so many kms....etc.......            about 2 hours work!

Obviously you getting held up in traffic means NOTHING to your bosses.
They want to work[trust me I've been through two] but this one of the only weapons they have.
Just be glad you get yours awarded to you and don;t have to put your finances on the line to get it.

So tomorrow don't bitch, stand up, and call somebody who has the power to do something about it.
Bruce


----------



## axeman (12 Oct 2004)

i agree with mark c . im not allowed to strike, i cannot decide i dont want to show up today , i get fined . i get fined if i'm late . just get out of my freaking way and let me work . what are they trying to do , we dont have any say on weather or not they get a raise hey if it was up to me , fire them al and let the forces run the forces not have some freaking civie tell me we cant do it because my union wont allow that . last time i looked this was / is a military est. not the post office..


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Oct 2004)

Unfortunately the forces is in such a state that we couldn't possibly fill in all the slots that they currently fill.  I wish we could though don't get me wrong.


----------



## bossi (14 Oct 2004)

Yup - one of the calmer ways to deal with this is walk or ride your bicycle to work
(and if you have to drive a long distance, just throw your bike in the back or simply park and walk the last bound).

This morning the picket lines were in effect at our local defence establishment - traffic was unusually high coming in on the alternate approaches.
I was out doing my ruck march, and next thing you know people are driving down the CLOSED road I'm marching on (chuckle - the lemming effect?)

One of my friends had an amusing encounter - when he drove up to the picket line, he shut off his engine turned up the radio and sipped on his coffee.  When the picketer approached for the obligatory "information session" my friend replied "No problem - I realise our pay raises are linked to your salaries, so in effect you guys are on strike for us, too."  Instead of making my friend wait, they waved him through ... (!)  
Moral of the story:  Try reverse psychology - it works better than confrontation.
(a.k.a. "the indirect approach")


----------



## Acorn (14 Oct 2004)

Maybe I have too much time on my hands tonight, but the subject line of this thread just struck me.

Are there any non-civilian members of PSAC?

Acorn


----------



## gun plumber (15 Oct 2004)

I heard today through unofficial army communications(rumor mill)that some.but not all tables of PSAC have reached an agreement.Can anyone expand on this and how does it directly relate to us at this time in relation to time till raise or whatever
Thanks


----------



## winchable (15 Oct 2004)

Do the strikers have any actual right to request to see my ID?
Today I obliged, but I didn't think it seemed right. They could have easily asked me to wait until they opened up the line, which I did anyway, then the comissionaire would do his usual ID check.
I felt very wierd showing them my ID though I didn't voice it, I wonder what right they actually have to do so.

Not hijacking the thread gun plumber, but if someone does now a definitive on that, could you please post it.


----------



## bossi (15 Oct 2004)

re: partial strike settlement - I saw a headline that some sections had reached an agreement (e.g. the Parks workers, who went out on strike earlier than the majority - perhaps due in part to the reality that "Parks season" is over and picketing empty national parks isn't all that effective ... since Parks Canada would benefit from not having to pay their wages during the off season ... ?)

There are stories in the media about how close they are to reaching a settlement ... but probably a more accurate prediction can be obtained by estimating the picketers tolerance for cold weather and snow (i.e. they're mostly sedentary officer workers and indoor labourers, not "Teamsters" ...).

re: ID - they're probably asking to see ID because you're in civvies and they want to ensure you're not a "scab" - when I've been in uniform I've never even been stopped at the picket lines (well, actually ... when I rode my bike in they didn't stop me, either - most picketers realise that the short-haired, ornery, muscular guys aren't part of their union ...).


----------



## Lance Wiebe (15 Oct 2004)

They have no right asking for ID.

Having said that, refusing to show it might slow you up a bit getting on Base.


----------



## chrisf (15 Oct 2004)

bossi said:
			
		

> re: ID - they're probably asking to see ID because you're in civvies and they want to ensure you're not a "scab" - when I've been in uniform I've never even been stopped at the picket lines (well, actually ... when I rode my bike in they didn't stop me, either - most picketers realise that the short-haired, ornery, muscular guys aren't part of their union ...).



In civvies? I've had them ask for my ID while in uniform and driving a big green military vehicle...


----------



## Bartok5 (15 Oct 2004)

I am keeping a running tally of time spent sitting in my vehicle with the engine idling due to PSAC strike action.  To date, our "defence partners" owe me 6 hours of my life that I will never get back.  Assuming that my experience is typical of other service personnel working at CFB Gagetown, the Federal Government should fine the union a day's wages based on the military strength of the base, plus an additional penalty for lost productivity.

Has anyone else in uniform noticed that the so-called "Defence Team" seems awfully one-sided?


----------



## winchable (15 Oct 2004)

> In civvies? I've had them ask for my ID while in uniform and driving a big green military vehicle...



I've seen them ask a group of officers in uniform for their ID's.

I mean I'm not going to cause any trouble at the line and I'll oblige to show them my ID but I just want to make sure.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (15 Oct 2004)

I would refuse to show ID if I was in uniform.

That's beyond crazy.


----------



## winchable (15 Oct 2004)

She was rude about it too, I think that's what irked me.


----------



## Armymedic (15 Oct 2004)

The PSAC mbrs (one of who is my wife) have been more accommodating with the traffic situation here in Pet. After the last strike 4+ yrs ago where they almost completely blocked one of the two main accesses to the base and got nothing but bitterness and threats. IMHO, they now know to get our cooperation and support, they can't delay us more then by a few mins. A traffic jam up 5 kms of Petawawa Boul is a dangerous thing. OPP don't look kindly upon it either.

And the thought of "we get what they get", I don't buy either. I know how much my wife gets paid, and what her increases are....Currently we are doing much better, and I can't see us getting 2.5-3% increases that they will be getting.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (15 Oct 2004)

PSAC recommends workers reject latest offer 
CTV.ca News Staff

A strike by 90,000 federal public servants will be suspended for at least six weeks to allow a vote on the government's latest offer -- but the union is telling workers to reject the deal.

If it is rejected, that means workers will be hitting the picket lines again by Christmas.

About 125,000 government employees went on strike on Tuesday. The workers, part of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, were in a legal strike position as of midnight Monday.

Officials from PSAC and the government have been trying to negotiate deals for all the groups under the union's umbrella. Those talks have resulted in deals for at least three groups so far, but tens of thousands of workers are still without a tentative contract.

The latest government offer was deemed unacceptable by PSAC, because the union says it would strip workers of benefits agreed to in previous negotiations.

However, PSAC will still be asking members to vote. Union president Nycole Turmel said the vote on the latest offer will be conducted by mail.

"We must make sure our members receive the packages (containing ballots), can vote and have the time to vote ... it (will) take a minimum of six weeks, it could take eight or 10 weeks," Turmel told a news conference in Ottawa.

"We have members who are working on vessels with the Coast Guard so they have to have the time to come back and have time to vote."

Turmel had earlier predicted more deals, and sounded optimistic Thursday, specifically about the Table 1 group. That group is the largest body under the PSAC umbrella, and represents about 80,000 clerical and bureaucratic staff.

Almost 10,000 grain inspectors and technical workers also remain without an agreement. Turmel said the government was insisting on clawbacks on benefits, while refusing to recognize other issues, like seasonal workers. 

Federal negotiators have already reached tentative agreements with:

25,000 Revenue Agency workers, who got a 10 per cent pay hike compounded over four years 
10,000 employees under the Operational Services Group, who include electricians, plumbers, carpenters, labourers and cleaners. About half of them are employed by the Defence Department. 
5,000 Parks Canada workers
At Pearson airport on Friday, striking federal workers have set up picket lines outside Toronto's Pearson Airport.

Officials at Pearson Airport have set up a Public Information Line at 416-776-5772 that says "there is virtually no impact on airport operations" because of the pickets.

With files from The Canadian Press


----------



## Spartan (15 Oct 2004)

I'm just curious with this question: on the military side of the government house, how is it ANY cheaper to contract out versus having those jobs offered as military careers?


----------



## sheikyerbouti (15 Oct 2004)

If the forces has an issue with strength does it not make sense that the effect is mitigated by utilizing employees that would not detract from the service strength.

 Face it, we don't need janitors that can fire a rifle if all they are needed for is mopping the floor.


----------



## SHELLDRAKE!! (15 Oct 2004)

I have no issues with the picketers demonstrating as long as they follow the rules.At my base they have agreed to stop vehicles 30 seconds apiece to demonstrate their point and at a small base, that is not a great issue, however a few weeks ago the spouse of a soldier was trying to access the base to pick up her husband and was verbally assaulted by picketers who thought she was a scab.Although for the most part the demonstrators are being somewhat reasonable, there are those out there that feel a strike gives them the right to become anarchists that no longer fall under the canadian legal system.As for these folks, I wholeheartidly agree with the use of lethal force to save the world from one more a**hole.


----------



## Acorn (15 Oct 2004)

I've heard that they will pause in the strike in order to vote on the offer, but the union will apparently recommend that they vote against it.

So far I haven't had any problems with the picket lines, however I'm not sure how I would react if I had to deal with a rude or offensive picketter. If I wasn't in a hurry my response to a request for ID (if I was in uniform) would be to request the ID of the individual asking, and explaining that they have no standing to demand my ID.

There should be a point where the Army says enough is enough. If strikers get to be a problem, become consistently rude, and make a habit of demanding ID from uniformed CF members, I'm sure most bases could rustle up a platoon of infantry or two to clear the gates (good ACP practice).

Acorn


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (15 Oct 2004)

Waaaaaaaaaaaaait a minute, here. As some of you know[right Lance?] I have been supportive of the measures used by the strikers and put the blame on the base chain-of-command.[ref court order]
However, demanding to see your ID?    Let me be blunt, #$%+& *&$%$ #$%*      Having been through two of these things and kind of being   one of the head poop disturbers in the last one, NEVER would I have demanded someone show me thier ID.   Going to far is going too far!    .....thats not how you conduct these things, IMHO.


----------



## marshall sl (15 Oct 2004)

So you would use the army to stop people from excersing their right to strike eh? I thought you were there to protect these citizens and their way of life.   They have every right to do what they are doing.

Deploying soldiers against our own citizens sounds kind of like Nazi germany to me. People like you scare me.


.


----------



## Bartok5 (15 Oct 2004)

Marshall,

You have manifestly missed the point.   The Army has no desire to stop PSAC members of the "Defence Team" from exercising their democratic right to strike.   What those of us in uniform have an interest in doing is our inimpeded duty - whether that be arriving at work on time to perform our instructional training roles, or participating in our mandated physical training.   When the PSAC employees whom we normally work alongside in perfect harmony adopt a stance of labour dispute such that their demonstration of displeasure with the Federal Government precludes those of us in uniform from performing our jobs?   Well, then we have a serious disconnect within the so-called "Defence Team".   To whit, everything is fine and dandy when the PSAC workers are mollified.   However the minute that DND PSAC employees have a labour grievance, the only people who physically suffer are the uniformed members of the purported "Defence Team".   I get really irate when I cannot perform the instructional role that I am paid to fulfill because our civilian "enablers" are on strike.   The fact that I have spent no less than 6 hours idling in my vehicle in traffic jams which have shut down a municipality over the past week is simply icing on the cake.   Who is reimbursing me for my wasted gas (at $.95 per litre), the wear on my truck's clutch, or my inflated blood-pressure?   Who is reimbursing DND for the full work-day and lost productivity that I (and everyone else in uniform serving at CFB Gagetown) has lost due to the strike?

Sorry, but you get zero sympathy from me.   No one is suggesting deploying soldiers to force DND PSAC employees back to work in downtown Ottawa at the barrel of a rifle. What we are (and rightfully so) saying is that PSAC stirkers have zero legal right to illegally obstruct civilian roads and access to Federal facilities.   And yet, that is precisely what is happening right now with the non-confrontational acquiesence of the RCMP and Military Police.   Well, screw that.   PSAC strikers can picquet all they want.   But the minute that they adversely affect the ability of military personnel to access their place of work, the strikers have stepped over the line.   Not only have they manifestly betrayed the "defence team" that they rather one-sidedly purport to belong to, they are also fundamentally compromising the delivery of military training and services.   The self-interested nature of the former is rather eye-opening.   The latter is manifestly unacceptable.   

As regards the compromise of military training?   There is no excuse.   The PSAC arse-clowns who fail to realize the impact of their actions need to be shut-down in no uncertain terms.   And THAT is where the lexan shields and billy-clubs most definitely come into play.   I am all in favour of exercising CCO TTPs with uniformed soldiers to form corridors for the unimpeded access of uniformed personnel.   Get in the way with the purported intent of demonstrating your union dissatisfaction with those of us who serve?   Fine - go home with a big frigging (and well-deserved) billy-club lump on your evidently thick noggin.   What part of "don't dick around with the rest of us" don't you understand?....

Call me a "Nazi" all you like.   Canadian citizens pay their taxes.   Those taxes pay my wage.   I take that wage in the expectation that I will perform my duty regardless of obstacles.   PSAC strikers are currently an obstacle.   I have a job to do, and if they are in the way for reasons that have nothing to do with my delivery of value for taxpayer dollar?   Then they are and impediment that I will go over or go around.   Truth be known however, I'd much prefer to "go through"

As a final point Marshall, it is people like YOU who scare me.   People who are willing to abrogate what is right in favour of the "socialist collective".   Let me just ask what YOU have PERSONALLY done for Canada lately.   Please tell us where and when YOU have personally put it on the line?   I await your response......


----------



## Jungle (15 Oct 2004)

Relax, nobody said we should shoot them. They simply should not be permitted to interfere with military ops, that's all. You see, like another member on this site, I work in the training system. Everyday they strike, I have to come in a couple of evenings or a weekend day to make up for the losses, because end-of-course dates can't change (flight bookings etc...).
So without deploying the Military, the Police should be on site to ensure Military pers have free access to Military installations.
Oh, and one more thing: people like you (comparing Canada and nazi Germany) piss me off !!! And I have every right to say this... 
EDIT: I guess Mark C posted while I was still typing... You beat me to it !!!


----------



## patt (15 Oct 2004)

here in borden when the strike first started the main gate was being re paved so everyone had to go to the south gate, the strykers did a 15min walk and 5mins of letting them through i found it too be little to no time for my bus and the military people to get on base. ive talked to several people who live off base and had to wait 2 hours just to get to work, i think that was way overboard, if people want to strike like that they should head down to ottawa and stop our liberal friends from entering there job and see how much that like it


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (15 Oct 2004)

Quote from Jungle,
So without deploying the Military, the Police should be on site to ensure Military pers have free access to Military installations.

You are right, so where are they?, I KNOW the Govt. of Ont. had them out last public service strike here.
Again I would state that the higher-ups in your C of C don't give a rats something about you waiting in traffic.
They are exercising a democratic right but your higher-ups are not exercising thiers?....so's who's to blame?


----------



## Jungle (15 Oct 2004)

The C of C certainly is to blame for even negociating with union reps. But I believe Commanders are afraid of the media going crazy because the Military "did not respect citizen's rights".
And with people like this marshall accusing us of being like Nazis, my theory is not too far from reality...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (15 Oct 2004)

In full accordance with the "nazi" thing. When I hear people toss this word around I cringe, what I wouldn't give for the power to send them "there" for about a day. Alas....
Just one point on-topic, it would have nothing to do with the "commanders", once the court-order is issued it becomes a civilian police problem.
No need to get the military's hands dirty. Right marshal?


----------



## marshall sl (15 Oct 2004)

I put my *** on the line every day in a Federal Maximum Security Prison and have for 22 years. I have been assaulted, been the target of an attempted hostage taking but managed to escape.I also have fired shots in the line of duty to protect staff during a major riot. I was affected by the same striking PSAC members as you were. I also served in our Canadian Forces , probably while you were still in grade school.

You don't find the idea of our soldiers being deployed against law abiding citizens repugnant? That realy worries me. It is the police's job not yours until they have lost control and have to call you in. If the strikers were destroying property or injuring people then heavy handed methods of crowd control are justified. 

We live in a free society, the right to strike is one of those freedoms, Wake up and have a look at the real world.


----------



## Infanteer (15 Oct 2004)

> You don't find the idea of our soldiers being deployed against law abiding citizens repugnant?



Do you find the idea our national security being put at risk for the sake of a labour dispute repugnant?

Since you missed the point the first time, we aren't debating the right to strike; we are arguing against the actions of strikers which disrupts military training and hinders military personnel (through "ID checks").

I could give a fat rats-ass about about 2.5% wage increases - we are at war right now (unless you missed it) and we can't afford to be dilly-dallying around the entrances to our bases and training areas.


----------



## marshall sl (15 Oct 2004)

"There should be a point where the Army says enough is enough. If strikers get to be a problem, become consistently rude, and make a habit of demanding ID from uniformed CF members, I'm sure most bases could rustle up a platoon of infantry or two to clear the gates (good ACP practice)"

This is the comment that prompted me to reply,and If you don't find it disturbing then you belong to a differant army than I did.

Oh and when did we declare war and with who?
I'm quite aware of the world situation but the last time I looked we were not in a declared war. By the way I still have very close friends in the army, I am the grandson of a WW1&WW2 Vet and the son of a WW2 vet , I am not anti military.


----------



## Infanteer (15 Oct 2004)

Like I said before, if Crowd Control is required to allow soldiers access to their training facilities, then so be it.  We've been constantly deployed for the last 10 years, and we can't afford to sacrifice our training for the sake of a labour dispute.

Your heritage is all very nice and all, but don't go insulting the integrity of those who have put just as much service to their country as you with flippant remarks like "Nazi".

As for the war, let me refresh your memory for you:


----------



## Acorn (16 Oct 2004)

marshall sl said:
			
		

> "There should be a point where the Army says enough is enough. If strikers get to be a problem, become consistently rude, and make a habit of demanding ID from uniformed CF members, I'm sure most bases could rustle up a platoon of infantry or two to clear the gates (good ACP practice)"
> 
> This is the comment that prompted me to reply,and If you don't find it disturbing then you belong to a differant army than I did.
> 
> ...



That was my unattributed comment, and I stand by it. What you fail to comprehend is that I'm not advocating some 1919 Army strike-breaking action (not Nazi, by the way, it was Canadian. Only dickheads use "Nazi" as a knee-jerk - are you a dickhead?). 

What I said, quite clearly, is that when the strikers step over the line their "right to strike" becomes something else, and if it requires a platoon of Patricias to ensure that servicemembers are able to do their duties unimpeded, so be it.

The "right to strike" does NOT entitle them to block passage to the bases. They are NOT entitled to ask for ID. And finally, unless they are looking for a good thumping, they are most emphatically NOT entitled to be disrespectful or rude to me or any of my fellow soldiers.

So far I have not encountered any disrespectful strikers, and I have always made a point of being polite to them myself. If THEY step out of line things will be different.

Acorn


----------



## rw4th (16 Oct 2004)

Since this thread has already gone on a few tangents, I will throw in with an opinion.

I think some people have a misguided view of just what rights striking workers have. Yes, workers have the right to strike (if the strike is deemed legal) but they do not, however, have the right to commit crimes while striking. These crimes include property damage, the obstruction of traffic, and preventing lawful workers from getting to work. 

The problem, in my opinion, is that unions have grown out of control. Striking workers who damage property and commit crimes should be arrested and charged for their crimes. In practice, this never happens. 

Decades ago, before the governments had strict employment condition laws, union served an important function; they prevented employers from abusing employees. Now however they are a tool used by often already over compensated workers to hold their employers hostage. 

This is a bit of a rant, but the bottom line is that I think the government needs to get a backbone and start standing up to unions. Let workers strike, but arrest the ones who break the law by doing things like obstructing traffic, and preventing soldiers from getting onto bases.

My view will probably be unpopular, but it my $0.02 CND


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Oct 2004)

The minute someone uses the words Hitler or Nazi's in a debate on the internet the argument should immediately be over.



> I could give a fat rats-ass about about 2.5% wage increases - we are at war right now (unless you missed it) and we can't afford to be dilly-dallying around the entrances to our bases and training areas.


Fucking right.


----------



## Infanteer (16 Oct 2004)

> The problem, in my opinion, is that unions have grown out of control.



Tell me about it.   I had to wade through alot of Health Employee Union dinks every morning to get my little cousin to her cancer therapy.



> Decades ago, before the governments had strict employment condition laws, union served an important function; they prevented employers from abusing employees. Now however they are a tool used by often already over compensated workers to hold their employers hostage.



I think you're right.   Sure, Unions were handy for securing a minumum wage and preventing industry from overworking their workers in the "Night Watchman" state, but now the government is much more proactive and ensures this itself.   What do the unions do now?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Oct 2004)

Just as a point of interest, you are right about obstructing traffic, say they were to sit down on the road, then they would be committing a crime.   That is why they simply cross the road over and over and ov.....
Semitics yes but the law....


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Oct 2004)

Infanteer,
Heartfelt to your cousin.
You said you had to "wade" through them, so was this just an inconvience for you, say something along the lines of   not knowing when your next pay was?

QUOTE
What do the unions do now?

Actually, the previous Govt. of Ontario did things to some of our management that wouldn't fly in the private sector, so do not say the Govt. looks after things legally these days.
As it was the only reason I still have a job is because of my union LOCAL, as the Govt. of the day decided that irregardless of senoirity or work peformance if you worked in that building you were gone.
It would be like the military deciding that they didn't want the WO rank anymore, so if your a WO , your gone, out of a job, close to retirement,thats too bad, you have the wrong rank, bye,bye,.
Untill a few years ago I thought just like you, not anymore.


----------



## Bartok5 (16 Oct 2004)

> Oh and when did we declare war and with who?



Well, "marshall", you've quite evidently missed the societal boat for the past 2 years.   The Canadian Liberal government formally declared WAR on Al Quaida (sometimes spelled Al Queda) in October 2001 shortly following the 9/11 Attack.   Which is precisely what led myself and 850 of my closest uniformed friends to embark on 6 months of very deliberate, government-sanctioned combat operations against those very specific Afghan-based terrorist scum-bags.   The AQ were an officially "declared enemy" of Canada, and our Rules of Engagement quite amply reflected that fact.   Questions?

When you have a clue, please come back and talk to us.   Until then, just go away and stop wasting our collective time and bandwidth....


----------



## Acorn (16 Oct 2004)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Actually, the previous Govt. of Ontario did things to some of our management that wouldn't fly in the private sector, so do not say the Govt. looks after things legally these days.
> As it was the only reason I still have a job is because of my union LOCAL, as the Govt. of the day decided that irregardless of senoirity or work peformance if you worked in that building you were gone.
> It would be like the military deciding that they didn't want the WO rank anymore, so if your a WO , your gone, out of a job, close to retirement,thats too bad, you have the wrong rank, bye,bye,.
> Untill a few years ago I thought just like you, not anymore.



While I agree that unions still have a function, and that the gov't is not necessarily the best of employers, your analogy, frankly, sucks. I also have my doubts as to whether work location was the real issue.

What is a strike supposed to accomplish? Traditionally it was supposed to cause inconvenience or profit loss to the employer - by striking the employees leveraged the employer.

What PSAC seems to be missing is a few brain cells - they are not inconveniencing the employer - they are inconveniencing other employees who do not have the right to job action. In fact, they are more likely playing into the employer's hand - by striking the TB doesn't have to pay them. Can anyone say a sudden increase in that budget surplus the Libs are bragging about?

Soldiers are NOT scabs, and should NOT be delayed in the conduct of their duties. 

Acorn


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Oct 2004)

QUOTE,
_I also have my doubts as to whether work location was the real issue_

Let me put your doubts to rest, we lived it for 7 years, wondering when our last shift would be, all because of where we worked.
[go back to my rank anology]


----------



## rw4th (16 Oct 2004)

I'm not saying unions should be abolished; they DO still have a function. They are just completely out of control. Striking employees committing crimes should be arrested and not tolerated.


----------



## marshall sl (16 Oct 2004)

In regards to the declaration of war against Al Quaida I did not know that had formally happened.thank you for correcting me.

I apologize for using the term Nazi.

How ever   The flippant remark about using soldiers against citizens of this country is still inappropriate.Deploying any riot control pers. is an extreme use of force and should only be deployed when lives are in danger or if there is destruction of property.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Oct 2004)

Quote
_Striking employees committing crimes should be arrested and not tolerated._

..and on this I agree 100 %.....strikes should not be about evening scores, etc.


----------



## Acorn (16 Oct 2004)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> QUOTE,
> _I also have my doubts as to whether work location was the real issue_
> 
> Let me put your doubts to rest, we lived it for 7 years, wondering when our last shift would be, all because of where we worked.
> [go back to my rank anology]



So you would lose your job simply because they were closing the building in which you worked? The fact that your union won your case may be indicative of the truth of that, though I would have to be way more cynical than I already am in order to believe that it was the sole reason.

In any case, your rank analogy does not work in the same context. 

Acorn


----------



## childs56 (16 Oct 2004)

During the last strike a couple years ago I was entering a Navy base on the west coast driving a MLVW with a 105mm Howitzer in tow. needless to say they stoped me and asked for my ID I politely refused and explained to them that as I was towing a Artillery piece and did not feel comfortable being parked outside the gate with it and to please let me by. They replied no   I then asked nicely once again and reinforced the fact that I did have a weapon system and therefore they could not refuse me transit, they still refused I then politly put the truck in gear, locked the door and started to inch forward. They were yelling to stop and standing in front of me the MP finally stepped in front of me and ordered stop, to which I did, he came up and told me to stay were I was till I was let through, I explained the same thing to him and the need for opsec in the fact that if the protesters decided to get nasty that they would then have a howitzer in which to destroy, I said your choice and you can take the truck over, needless to say he told them to let me thrue. The next day it was with an LSVW command post, they demanded to see into the back of the vehicle which at the time had the new radios in it and the BFCS, I replied that if they had the security clearance to look at the equipment i would gladly let them look. Needless to say same thing, MP came over I told him once again and, he let me thrue. I said i was going to be back a few more times that day and didnt appreciate being stopped when carrying sesitive equipment. And next time I wasnt going to stop. needless to say I had no further problems that day going in or out of the base. I dont agree with civies stopping or interfering with any military training or movement. If they want to protest go to Ottawa or   their federal rep bldgs. As far as I see it any military personalle or vehicle is a securtiy matter, as protesters get aggresive, they take their anger out on the ones in uniform. to me this is an immeidete concern and all military pers and equipment should be allowed thrue unimpeded.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Oct 2004)

Acorn,
We are hijacking the thread here, but I must reply. If you go back to my other post I put the LOCAL in big letters, the union basicly lost our jobs but our local managed to work out side deals as the ministry was so short staffed at the time.
And as for almost   losing my job because of the building I worked in well, Sunshine, thats my real name and what I do for a living, it wouldn't be hard for someone to check out if I was full of kife or not.
...and lastly why doesn't my analogy work?...and just because won't cut it.


----------



## Acorn (16 Oct 2004)

OK, I misunderstood. If I now have it right your union failed to fight for you, and your local managed to turn it around. Good on them, that's what they are supposed to do.

My doubts come from the concept that a building is the centre of the issue, though I won't claim to be 100% correct.


As for the analogy, I don't think that closing a building and firing it's staff equates to eliminating an entire rank of the CF. If you think it does you should probably provide better support.

Acorn


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Oct 2004)

The analogy I was trying to make was the fairness of what was attempted.  I could have used anyone with red hair, anyone with glasses, etc. The point was regardless of whether you were a great CO with 20 years in or a useless piece of driftwood,as long as you worked in that building you were gone while 1 km away at the local detention centre[same ministry, same union] you kept yours.


----------



## Infanteer (16 Oct 2004)

I understand what you are saying Bruce; termination should be based upon merit (keep your best workers) rather then geography (get rid of group A).


----------



## Danjanou (16 Oct 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I understand what you are saying Bruce; termination should be based upon merit (keep your best workers) rather then geography (get rid of group A).



And that infanteer remains the problem with most unions especially public service ones. People are more often let go on basis of straight geography as the case here, or strict seniority, rather than merit. In fact merit often has little bearing. The union brass often really don't care if you can do their jobs or not, although they often make public lip service to this, as long as you pay your dues to keep their war chests full.

It's been my experience (15 years in a unionized public service environment and no I'm not PSAC) that the most strident and vocal supports of y union are the least competent dead weights we have â Å“workingâ ? for us.

Bruce you're fortunate to have a good local.

Damn it I said I was staying out of this one too.


----------



## patt (16 Oct 2004)

ive herd talk about another strike MAYBE, because the union wants more than what they 'accpeted'


----------



## Acorn (16 Oct 2004)

From what I've seen of most unions seniority is usually the only consideration for retention. The emplyer may have wanted to sack everyone in a given location, but most unions would stand up and insist that the job losses be based on seniority and distributed over a wider area.

In any case, back to the topic - my understanding is that the union is encouraging the membership to reject the offer. They may be on the line over Christmas.

Acorn


----------



## bossi (17 Oct 2004)

Good grief - I was busy today, and missed perhaps the best part of this little shindig ...

Okay - first of all, there is no such thing in Canada as "martial law".
Thus, the civilian police are responsible for civil disturbances
(and the Army only becomes involved when the provinces requisition assistance, as per NDA).

So, the concept of using Canadian troops to quash/quell picketers is ... far-fetched
(i.e. it would mean the civilian police were unable to handle the situation).

However, what really ticks me off are the examples of soldiers in uniform being asked for their ID.
No.   No way.   Absolutely not.
Who has the legal authority to ask to see your ID?
Police officers, maybe.   Picketing workers?   No.   No way.   Absolutely not.
I liked the answer about asking to see the picketers ID, but ... that's probably only going to made a bad situation turn worse ...
This one has got me so annoyed, I'm actually going to get official legal advice on this and post it here.

Having said all of the above ... PSAC is now striking "smarter".
When workers are on the picket lines, they're not being paid (by their employer).
So, some strikes are a farce - "management" simply lets the workers stay out on strike until they've saved enough money in salaries to offset the wage demands - in effect, the strikers pay for their own pay increases.   A variation on this theme is when workers "work to rule".   Management will then sometimes "lock out" the workers in order to achieve this phenomenon (hmmm ... can you say "NHL" ... ?)   Of course, it's a slightly different situation when it's a public service strike - sooner or later management (i.e. the elected government) has to answer to the "shareholders" (the electorate), whereas in business the bottom line is ... profit (i.e. whether or not the company can afford the strike, with both labour and management attempting to alienate the other from the "customers" in order to break the strike).
But, enough of my amateurish labour relations analysis.

Here's the latest news report (from the Sun):

Union back, but in limbo
By CP, Sat, October 16, 2004 

NINETY THOUSAND federal public servants who went on strike this week are back on the job, but without a contract. The Public Service Alliance of Canada rejected the latest offer from the Treasury Board yesterday, placing nearly 90,000 workers into contractual limbo until close to the Christmas holidays. 

PSAC president Nycole Turmel saTurmoil union could not accept benefit rollbacks the government had demanded from grain inspectors, fishery workers and others. 

Treasury Board delivered its final offer yesterday morning, hoping to end a strike that started early Tuesday. 

RISKY TACTIC 

Turmel acTurmoildged the union is risking backing its members into a corner by calling a vote just before the holidays, but said there was little other option. 

"It's always a worry," she said about the strategy of asking workers to vote on an offer the union has already rejected. 

"But (the workers) have a right to vote," said Turmel. "Turmoileally important for us. I believe and I trust our members to do their best." 

While it spends the next six weeks preparing for the vote, the union has suspended all strike action. 

PSAC strategists will determine next week whether civil servants should launch a work to rule campaign. 

If public servants reject the offer, they could be walking picket lines again just as winter approaches. But Turmel saTurmoil union could also ask Treasury Board to return to the bargaining table.


----------



## bossi (17 Oct 2004)

sheikyerbouti said:
			
		

> If the forces has an issue with strength does it not make sense that the effect is mitigated by utilizing employees that would not detract from the service strength.
> 
> Face it, we don't need janitors that can fire a rifle if all they are needed for is mopping the floor.



Conversely, wouldn't it be nice to have some more personnel who could fire weapons ... ?

I recall a conversation on this topic regarding engineers.  As more and more garrison positions were converted to civilian carpenters, etc. it meant that there weren't as many opportunities for troops to have a pause from operational deployments ... (hmmm ... ya know, the notion of civilianising and out-sourcing sure sounds like "it seemed like a good idea at the time" ... but perhaps short-sighted in the grand scheme fo things ...).

This problem hit home in Kabul in Camp Warehouse.  It became painfully, even embarassing apparent when drawing up the fire picquet roster - all the civvies enjoyed a full night's sleep ... 
(and then there was the time our generators all crapped out in the middle of the night, and we had to wait until the next day when the contractor ... you get my point)


----------



## childs56 (17 Oct 2004)

Yes you must love greed by the people who while their workers are on strike and receiving no money, they are still receiving a decent sum of money. yes lets put it off till christmas time, that way tempers will flare when people have little or no money for Christmas. How does this effect all of us, lets see more taxes= more pay increases,= less money to the average non union person=loss of jobs=more welfare required=more taxes=less for pay raises. As we can see it is a revolving door. From what I can see we are all going to suffer, whether it is lack of fisheries patrolling the poachers or the tax man doing even less for more. As a member of the CF these strikes really dont effect us that much as in pay raises go, but they do effect the way we do business and its the impedence that is the worst.


----------



## George Wallace (17 Oct 2004)

CTD

Man....are you ever ill informed.....

GW


----------



## portcullisguy (17 Oct 2004)

brin11 said:
			
		

> I understand that this is reality but why are our pay rates directly related to the pay rates of a civilian UNION?   They shouldn't have anything to do with one another.



Yes, it's true.

As members of Canada's military, we are not entitled to form a collective bargaining unit, and we are not entitled to petition for changes to our pay & benefits.

However, the Treasury Board Secretariat defines and sets all pay & benefits policy for the entire public service, including the military and RCMP.   Even when they are not directly negotiating with a bargaining unit, the policies apply, and quite often the pay rates are used as a basis for comparison.

When Revenue Canada (which was under Treasury Board) became the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (a separate employer), the CCRA kept all the same classification categories, pay levels, and HR policies in the interim, until it wrote new polciies, added classification categories, and made new agreements.   When customs officers were under CCRA, we were still classified as PM-02's.   However, because our agreement with CCRA was different than the rest of the public service under Treasury, their PM-02's were paid less.   Then, in December, we went back under Treasury with the formation of the new Canada Border Services Agency, and now Treasury thinks we have been "overpaid" for the last 3 years, and this is affecting our ability to get a fair and equitable contract offer.

The reason I state all this is to highlight that the Treasury Board runs the show for the entire public service, directly or indirectly.

In the case of the military, our rates of pay are based on equivalents for the rest of the public service.   A PM-02 is roughly paid the same as a Corporal-B (A Master Corporal), and our duties and responsibilities are in the roughest of terms, similar (although as an aside, when customs officers go overseas on UN missions with the military, we are generally given a "equivalent" rank of Lieutenant, and are paid roughly the same).

If the rest of the public service doesn't have a contract, Treasury Board doesn't have a basis or comparison for increasing the pay for the military until the other bargaining units settle.

So, indirectly, the outcome of the public service strike affects our pay in the military.

In fact, right on the DND's website, you are given this information in a very large hint:   





> "The Directorate of Pay Policy Development is responsible for the strategic advancement of Canadian Forces compensation policy, within the guidelines provided by *Treasury Board*, in such a way as to enhance the Forces' ability to attract, retain and motivate its most valuable resource - its members."http://www.forces.gc.ca/dgcb/dppd/engraph/home_e.asp?sidesection=3


----------



## brin11 (17 Oct 2004)

I've been waiting from the beginining of this thread for someone to bring up hockey.  After all, we are in Canada.  Bossi, you didn't disappoint.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (17 Oct 2004)

That had civvies in Kabul???


----------



## bossi (18 Oct 2004)

CFL said:
			
		

> That had civvies in Kabul???



Not sure if I understood your question, CFL.
There were PSP civvies to run the rec facilities/clubs and make HLTA bookings.
Also there were civvy CANCAP hires - quite a few young men from Nepal, working in the kitchens and swabbing out the shower tents.

The point being, none of these civvies were eligible to pick up a weapon if push came to shove.


----------



## bossi (18 Oct 2004)

brin11 said:
			
		

> I've been waiting from the beginining of this thread for someone to bring up hockey.   After all, we are in Canada.   Bossi, you didn't disappoint.



Hockey ALWAYS belongs on Army.ca - it's "War on Ice", and one of our two national sports 
(Lacrosse being "The Little War").


----------



## geo (19 Jun 2008)

This morning started off nicely.
The union was picketing the main gate in Longue Pointe (Langelier entrance).
Everything was kept VERY civil - no effort to block military personnel from entering
Not the same story for PSAC employees who tried to enter though....

They were handing out leaflets that discuss their negociation results so far.... 1.5  1.5  1.2  and 1.2% over the next four years.
Considering the increase in the price of gas.... this isn't going to go very far... is it ???
(they were handing out "joe Louis" snack cakes with the leaflets..... IE - offer is considered "chump change")

BTW - Joe Louis with morning coffee.... not bad


----------



## cavalryman (19 Jun 2008)

Considering Public Service executives just got a 2% cost of living increase, I can't blame PSAC for being annoyed.


----------



## OldSolduer (19 Jun 2008)

I'm retired from the military and now PRes.

I work in a prison. We've been without a contract for over two years now. 
The other day at lunch, the kitchen staff put out peanuts in the shell for us. Very nice.

I guess the provincial government heard we would work for peanuts......(groan here optional).

Meanwhile the government voted themselves a huge raise.


----------



## jollyjacktar (19 Jun 2008)

As I mentioned earlier in another thread, one of the tables in FMF Cape Scott received a 22% raise last week.  Needless to say this has set the remainder off and I expect that the negotiations will be nasty.  They were handing out pamphlets at the gates locally too.  Looks like there will be a gun fight between the two sides.  Go get em PSAC!


----------

