YVR ratification vote results

June 14th The negotiating committee is please to advise you that the tentative agreement that was signed in the early morning hours of June 1st has been overwhelmingly ratified by the membership on June 13th 2005. The negotiating committee would like to thank the membership again for their support during this round of bargaining.

YVR Ratification Vote Meeting

posted June 7th The Ratification vote for the tentative agreement signed on the morning of June 1st, 2005 will be held on June 13th, 2005. There will be three meetings to accomodate both shift and non shift members. Location: The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, 7980 River Road Richmond. (same location as strike vote) Times: 1400, 1600 and 1930 hours.

YVR Ratification Kit

June 2nd Download the Memorandum of Agreement between the Vancouver International Airport Authority and The Public Service Alliance of Canada - UCTE Local 20221 below. The ratification kit will also be made available at the vote meetings. Here are some of the highlights of the agreement. Ratification_Kit__Circular_Letter.pdf

Tentative agreement reached at Vancouver airport

June 1st Early in the morning of June 1st, a tentative agreement was reached between the Public Service Alliance of Canada and Vancouver International Airport Authority. This tentative agreement is subject to the ratification of both parties. The agreement will become effective on the date of ratification unless otherwise agreed to. The following highlights the terms of the tentative agreement, which your negotiating team unanimously recommends acceptance: (a) Improvements to bereavement leave (b) Improvements to Family Related Responsibility leave (c) Compensation improvements for traveling time (d) Premium increases -        a. Shift $1.50 (1st year) and $1.75 (2nd year) and $2.00 (3rd year) b. Weekend $1.25 (2nd year) and $1.50 (3rd year) c. Mileage $0.50/100 km (e) Vision care to $325 (f) Long Term Disability – Employer to pay 85% of premium (g) Employer to pay medical costs for class 3 driver’s license (h) Employer will investigate the establishment of an optional extended health care plan for retiree’s with the premium to be paid by retiree’s.  Employer to report the results of the investigation within 90 days. (i) Dental Plan  - 60% of the approved schedule of fees for major restorative services.  Combined limit increased to $1750 per person. (j) Letters of Understanding on Harassment, Sick Leave Program and Staffing. (k) 4 year agreement – 2.5%, 3%, 3%, and 3% (l) New provision for compassionate care leave (m) Improved language on suspension and discipline (n) Improvements to language on vacation leave scheduling Full details on all amendments will be provided both in advance of and at the ratification meetings.  It is anticipated that the ratification meetings will be scheduled within the first three weeks of June.

YVR Conciliation - Update

May 25th Following you will find an update from our conciliation meeting with the employer on May 24th. The employer, as advertised, tabled what they felt was a comprehensive response to the outstanding proposals. The Management committee brought Bob Cowan (VP) and Tony Gugliotta (Finance) to the table as an indication to us that the people who could determine a settlement were present. After a long team caucus we tabled a counter proposal that addressed all of the outstanding issues. Later in the day, anticipating that we were moving towards a settlement, we tabled a further response on all the outstanding proposals after hearing from the employer. We were surprised when the employer indicated that they would require additional time to respond to our proposal. Due to conflicting schedules and the availability of the employer's team, we have agreed to meet on May 31st. The conciliation officer will still "book out" of the dispute on May 29th but retain carriage of the file.  Our strategy of achieving a legal strike position in time for the July 1st weekend is still intact. Maintenance of activities mediation meeting is scheduled for today (May 25th).  Stephanie Copeland and one of the negotiating team members (Keith MacDonald) will be present.

PSAC members at Vancouver airport vote for strike

May 20th An overwhelming number of PSAC members at the Vancouver airport turned out on May 19 to give their union a strong strike mandate. The members have voted 78% in support of their bargaining demands and their negotiating team. The strong strike vote will send a message to the employer that the members are tired of their employer’s attitude at the table and are prepared to take action to achieve a settlement.  During recent meetings with employees, held with the assistance of a federal conciliation officer, the Airport Authority offered nothing more than a letter saying they would not table any position until May 24. The members will be in a legal strike position as of July 1st. However, bargaining meetings have been scheduled for May 24 and June 7, again with the aid of the conciliation officer. The union expects the employer to table a complete response to all outstanding issues, including a monetary proposal on the 24th, In the meantime, members will be mobilizing in preparation for a possible strike.

Strike vote to be held at Vancouver Airport

May 12th The PSAC bargaining team representing the 250 members at the Vancouver International Airport met with the Employer on May 10 for what was supposed to be four days of meetings with the assistance of a federal conciliation officer. The team spent the first day familiarizing the conciliation officer with the outstanding non-monetary bargaining proposals. During the second day, it became increasingly apparent that the Employer had no intention of reaching a negotiated settlement. At the end of the second day, they advised us, through the conciliation officer, that they wanted to use the third day preparing something to provide to us on the fourth day. You can imagine the team’s disappointment when the Employer tabled nothing more than a letter that stated they would not table anything until May 24. Download the letter here. This is another example of the Employer’s contempt for the members in the bargaining unit. The Employer has left us no option but to re-affirm your support for your bargaining proposals. With that in mind, the PSAC bargaining team will be asking the members for their support by giving them a strike mandate. The vote will be held on May 19 and results will be posted on this site. WHAT: Strike Vote Meetings WHEN: May 19, 2005 - 1430 and 1900 hours WHERE: International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM & AW) Union Hall 7980 River Road in Richmond. United we bargain, divided we beg. Download the strike vote meeting poster here.

News: Big rent savings for B.C. airports

posted May 12th VANCOUVER – Vancouver International Airport says it will save $90 million over the next four years, as the result of Ottawa's announcement that it's cutting airport rent payments beginning in 2006. That amounts to a gradual rent reduction totalling 54 per cent. Read more at cbc.ca.

Issue of the Day #8 - Sick Leave

April 29th

Article 13—Short Term Sick Leave Program

Union Proposal:

The Employer will provide paid sick leave for all employees who have completed three (3) months or more of service.  Employees shall be paid 100% of regular salary until the 89th calendar day of any one sickness.

Every employee who may be absent from duty on account of sickness shall notify his/her immediate supervisor and no employee shall be entitled to benefits for time previous to such notification, unless delay is shown to have been unavoidable.

The Employer may require a medical certificate or a written statement from the employee as evidence of sickness.  The Employer may further require reports from the employee's physicians from time to time, including reports by physicians designated by the Employer.  The Employer will bear the costs of medical reports provided by Employer designated physicians.

Fraudulent use of sick leave shall be subject to the appropriate discipline.

Rationale:

Our proposal removes from the collective agreement the reference to termination of employment if an acceptable standard of attendance is not achieved.  Our proposal also removes from the collective agreement the reference that no payment shall be made if you are injured in the course of other employment.

We received many bargaining proposals regarding the manner in which the Employer was misusing this program.  As you are aware the employer views excessive absenteeism as 1.5 days over the average bargaining unit usage of 3.53 days a year.  The provincial average is about 8 days a year.  We believe this exceedingly low corporate average is due to the Employer’s policy of coaching and disciplining staff for what they view as excessive absenteeism.  This policy has resulted in employees afraid to stay home when they are sick.

During bargaining the Employer stated that they have the right to coach, send letters and discipline staff for innocent absenteeism.  Further, they are convinced that staff are abusing sick leave, in particular, in the Maintenance area.

Download the poster below.

08-sick_leave.pdf

Issue of the Day #7 - Staffing Procedure

Article 23.XX - This is a new clause under Article 23

Union Proposal:

23.XX  When an employee is trained and qualified to backfill into  another position and have been for at least six (6) months, seniority in the bargaining unit will   determine who will be promoted into the position being staffed.

Rationale:

Employees that are trained to backfill in another position, for example Airfield backfilling and covering shifts in ERS or Airport Operations covering in Baggage and Gate Scheduling, should have priority when full and part time openings in these positions become available.  Our reasoning is that if they have been selected and trained to backfill and are already doing the job, then they should get the vacant position.

Employees that are trained to backfill and are successful in getting a posting in that position have lost months’ worth of pay increase due to the Employer’s long and protracted staffing procedure.

Download the poster below.

07-staffing_procedure.pdf

Issue of the Day #6 - Posting of Vancancies

April 21st

Article 23.01, 23.12 & 23.13—Staffing Procedure

Union Proposal:

23.01 The Employer shall post all vacancies, including
  newly created positions, in the bargaining unit.

23.12 The Employer is not required to post under this
  Article if the circumstance is the reassignment of a
  disabled person employed by the Authority.

23.13 Delete this clause.

Rationale:

We would like to see the Employer provide an equal opportunity for all staff to further their careers.  We want a transparent staffing procedure where ALL staff are made aware of ALL employment opportunities.  The current language allows the Employer to arbitrarily move staff into positions they perceive as a “better fit”, regardless of the employee’s interests or desires because the Employer does not have to post certain types of vacancies.

During bargaining the Employer told us that staff should tell their managers about their career aspirations.  The Employer felt that the Checkpoint process helps managers determine who is interested in acting assignments.  They went on to say that they “don’t want to reward people who don’t do that, by posting all vacancies”.  The Employer also stated that posting all vacancies would not allow them any flexibility.  Finally, they told us that they don’t think they are abusing the staffing procedure at this time.

Download the poster below.

06-posting_of_vacancies.pdf

Issue of the Day #5 - Apprenticeship

Article 40.04

40.04 Dual Ticketing

Effective July 1, 1998 the dual ticket rate of pay shall be provided to employees who in addition to their current position have obtained a second ticket in the following area:

Current Position	Second Ticket
Millwright	Electrical Electronics Certification
Plumber	Millwright Electrical Electronics Certification Class 3 Stationary Engineering
HVAC	Electrical Plumber
Carpenter	Millwright Electrician
Heavy Duty Mechanic	Automotive Mechanic
Automotive Mechanic	Heavy Duty Mechanic

An employee shall be entitled to the dual ticket rate of pay for a ticket in addition to the ones identified above provided that the Employer deems it of value to the organization.

Effective July 1, 1998 the dual ticket rate of pay will be provided to employees enrolled in a second apprenticeship.

Effective July 1, 1998 an employee shall be entitled to the dual ticketing rate of pay if he or she applies to the departmental manager for entry into the second trade (as outlined above).  Such rate shall continue provided the employee makes an earnest effort to obtain the second apprenticeship, including any prerequisites.  Failure to successfully complete the apprenticeship program shall not disqualify the employee from the dual ticket rate of pay provided that the employee has made an earnest effort.

Union Proposal:

40.04 Dual Ticketing

All trades personnel are eligible for dual ticketing.  Effective July 1, 1998 the dual ticket rate of pay shall be provided to all trades personnel who have more than one ticket.  Effective July 1, 1998 the dual ticket rate of pay will be provided to employees enrolled in a second apprenticeship.

Effective July 1, 1998 an employee shall be entitled to the dual ticketing rate of pay if he or she applies to the departmental manager for entry into the second trade.   Such rate shall continue provided the employee makes an earnest effort to obtain the second apprenticeship, including any prerequisites.  Failure to successfully complete the apprenticeship program shall not disqualify the employee from the dual ticket rate of pay provided that the employee has made an earnest effort.

Rationale:

Our proposal is designed to allow all trades personnel to be eligible for dual ticketing.

During bargaining the Employer tabled a document that would fundamentally change the current practise and move farther away from the intent of our proposal.  The Employer wants to maintain the right to ensure the right proportion of trades.  They also want to restrict the timing of when people can apply for a dual trade.

Download the poster below.

05-apprenticeship.pdf

Issue of the Day #4 - No Harassment and No Other Forms of Discrimination in the Workplace

Article 9 – No Discrimination & Article 10 – Sexual Harassment

Union Proposal: Delete current Articles 9 & 10 and replace with the following:

9. NO HARASSMENT AND NO OTHER FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORKPLACE

The Alliance and the Employer recognize the right of employees to work in an environment free from sexual and personal harassment and discrimination and the Employer undertakes to ensure that sexual and personal harassment and discrimination will not be tolerated in the workplace.

9.01

(a) Harassment means any improper behavior by a person employed by the YVRAA that is directed at  and is offensive to any employee of the YVRAA and which that person knew, or ought to have  reasonably  known, would  be unwelcome. It comprises objectionable conduct, comment or display made on either a  one-time or continuous basis that demeans, belittles or causes personal humiliation or embarrassment  to  an employee.  It includes harassment within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

(b) Sexual harassment means any conduct, comment, gesture or contact of a sexual nature whether on a one-time basis or in a continuous series of incidents:

1. that might reasonably be expected to cause offence or humiliation to any employee or,
2. that the employee might reasonably perceive as placing a condition of a sexual nature on employment or on any opportunity for training or promotion.

9.02

(a) The Employer acknowledges and affirms its obligations under the Canadian Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination in respect of employment by reason of race, national or ethnic origin, creed, language, color, religion, age, sex, marital status, family status, mental and physical disability, criminal conviction for which a pardon has been granted, sexual orientation, political affiliation, or membership or activity in the union, in the absence of a bona fide occupational requirement as provided for by the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Accordingly, the provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with applicable human rights legislation.

(b) In the event of a violation of this Article by the Employer, an arbitrator shall have the jurisdiction to hear the complaint and have the remedial powers set out in Section 53 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

(c) Where an employee makes a complaint to the Human Rights Commission, the complaint shall not be arbitrable and no grievance shall be filed by the Alliance in respect of such complaint.

(d) There shall be no discrimination in respect of employment by reason of membership or activity in the Alliance.  An allegation of such discrimination is subject to the Grievance Procedures.

9.03 - Complaint Procedure

(a) The employee who alleges sexual harassment, or a Union representative on behalf of the employee, will contact a Human Resource Representative who will:

1. investigate the matter, and
2. maintain a strict degree of confidentiality with the employee concerned; and
3. take appropriate action to resolve the problem.

(b) In the event the problem is not resolved under (a) above, the employee may refer the matter to Stage 2 of the Grievance Procedure and subsequently thereafter to arbitration.

(c) Grievances under this Article will be handled with all possible confidentiality and dispatch by the  Alliance and the Employer.

(d) At any stage in this procedure an employee may seek assistance and/or involvement of a union representative.

9.04 - An alleged offender whether a member of the bargaining unit or an excluded employee, shall be given notice of the substance of a complaint under this Article and shall be given notice of and be entitled to attend, participate in, and be represented at any grievance hearing or any arbitration under this Agreement.

Rationale:

Our proposal includes the issue of personal harassment and clearly defines what harassment is.  The current language does not address bullying or harassment from either the Employer or co-workers.

The Employer told us during bargaining that they take measures to not have harassment in the workplace.

The Employer stated that to have a general harassment clause in the collective agreement sets up a different dynamic.  Employees will use this language against management and it will infringe on the manager’s right to do performance reviews.  Further, that employees will view coaching as harassment and file grievances.  Finally, the Employer is worried that employees would use this clause to avoid legitimate performance management issues.

Download the poster below

04-no_harassment_no_discrimination.pdf

Issue of the Day #3 - Discipline

Article 20.03 (2nd paragraph) & 20.04—Suspension and Discipline

Union Proposal:

20.03 Amend to read:

The Employer will initiate any disciplinary investigation no later than fifteen (15) days after the incident comes to the Employer's attention.  Upon initiation of an investigation the employer shall advise the local President, or his or her designee, and the employee involved, that such investigation has commenced. The employee shall also be advised of the specific details of the incident.  The union representative shall be provided with copies of all statements prior to the 1st investigation meeting.   Any such investigation will be completed and the union advised of the results of the investigation in writing, within ten (10) days from the date of original notification.

20.04 Amend to read:

Any document or written statement related to disciplinary action, which may have been placed on the personnel file of an employee, shall be destroyed after twenty-four (24) months have elapsed since the disciplinary action was taken, provided that no further disciplinary action of a similar nature has been recorded during this period.

Rationale:

Our proposal for Article 20.03 is designed to achieve two things.  To ensure that the Employer knows what the issues are before an investigation begins and that they complete the investigation process in a timely fashion.  Far too often we have seen investigations linger on and on with no end in sight.  The Employer didn’t think that taking four (4) months to complete an investigation was too long.

Our proposal for Article 20.04 is to have documents or written statements related to disciplinary action, placed on the personnel file of an employee, removed if no similar disciplinary action took place within a twenty-four month period.  During bargaining the Employer told us that bad people have different ways of acting up and therefore doesn’t want “of a similar nature” in the collective agreement because it takes longer to discharge them.

If people are not performing, the Employer needs to get them on a different track.  Managers are expected to manage and if people are not performing, the Employer wants to move them out of the company.  In the Employer’s words, they “want to fill the bucket as quickly as possible” (with disciplinary issues).

Download the poster below

03-discipline.pdf

Issue of the Day #2 - Position Classification

Position Classification

Article 41.02

Union Proposal:

41.02  - When the Employer establishes a new position, changes the duties of an employee, or upon request of the Union, the Employer will establish a rate of pay and notify the Union in writing, including the rationale for the rate and classification.  In the event the Union disagrees with the rate or classification, the Union will advise the Employer in writing within thirty (30) days from the date of notification and request a meeting with the management personnel involved.  Failing agreement, the issue may be submitted to the Grievance and Arbitration Procedure.

Rationale:

Our proposal is an attempt to ensure that when the Employer adds additional duties to a position, that there is recourse available for review.  Some positions have changed quite a bit as a result of the Employer’s habit of adding more duties.  This is quite a regular occurrence at the Airport.

The Employer does not want “band creep” or the false expectation that just because employees are doing something different, they will change bands. The Employer is quite happy, to have “work creep”, an ability to keep adding to employees’ work loads without concern for increasing wages or even a cap  on a reasonable work load. They do not want to go through the process of job evaluation again and perceives that our proposal would result in the Employer continually evaluating jobs.

Download the poster below

02-position_classification.pdf

Issue of the Day #1 - Leave With Pay for Family Related Responsibilities

Leave With Pay for Family Related Responsibilities

Article 12.10 (b)

Union Proposal:

12.10  Leave With Pay for Family-Related Responsibilities

(b) The Employer shall grant leave with pay under the following circumstances:

Amend to read:

• a medical or dental appointment when the dependent family member is incapable of attending the appointments by himself or herself, or for appointments with appropriate authorities in schools or adoption agencies.  An employee is expected to make reasonable efforts to schedule medical or dental appointments for dependent family members to minimize his or her absence from work. An employee requesting leave under this provision must notify his or her supervisor of the appointment as far in advance as possible;
• to provide for the temporary care of a sick member of the employee's family;
• for needs directly related to the birth or to the adoption of the employee's child.  This leave may be divided into two (2) periods and granted on separate days;
• for the purpose of getting married.
• for the purpose of a family related ceremony.

Rationale:

Our proposal is designed to achieve a number of things.  One of those things is the removal of the various caps that are present in the current collective agreement.  This will provide greater flexibility for members who use this type of leave.  Another is an attempt to achieve a balance between work and family life. 

Caring for both children and an elderly family member is in itself a full-time job; members are looking for ways to balance their work life with their family care obligations.  Helping members find this balance should be as much a priority for the Employer as it is for our union.

The Employer was quite curt in their response to our proposal.  They do not want to give employees any more flexibility than they already have and they are convinced that employees will abuse this leave if our proposal was accepted.

Download the poster below

01-leave_with_pay.pdf

News: Vancouver Airport Authority Negotiations Break Off

VANCOUVER – Negotiations between the The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), bargaining agent for employees working for the Vancouver Airport Authority, and the Authority have broken off.

“The employer has no interest in having a transparent staffing policy or protecting their employees from harassment in the workplace”, says Patty Ducharme, PSAC Regional Executive Vice-President/BC. “Until the Employer respects and addresses the issues brought to the bargaining table by our members, our negotiating team is unable to move the process forward.”

“We have met with the Employer since early January and we can’t find agreement on some of the most basic bargaining proposals”, says Dave Clark, President of Local 20221 of the Union of Canadian Transportation Employees (UCTE), a Component of the PSAC.

There are more than 250 PSAC members employed by the Vancouver Airport Authority. These members provide key services such as emergency response; runway maintenance; airfield & approach lighting; computer systems; baggage system and passenger loading bridges; maintenance of airport equipment and administrative services.

YVR Negotiations update #2

The parties met for the second time February 15-17, 2005 in Richmond B.C. Brothers Little and Dunsmore were unable to participate due to other work related commitments. The remaining participants were the same as our first meeting.

The atmosphere was less than positive for the first two days of negotiations. As a result of a discussion held with the employer the morning of the second day, the tone of Day three was much more positive.  The employer appears to be quite satisfied with the current collective agreement.  They have also told us that they are frustrated with the size of our bargaining proposal package.  As a result we have not found agreement on any of our bargaining proposals and this does cause your negotiating committee some concern.

The employer has tabled a number of proposals that would reduce the benefits that bargaining unit members currently enjoy.  Specifically, proposals dealing with the apprentice program, casual employment and vacation leave all of which require additional analysis.  More information regarding ongoing negotiations will follow in the near future.

We are scheduled to meet with the employer February 22-25, 2005.  We are also scheduled to meet from March 8-11, 2005.  An update from that negotiating session will be posted immediately following that session.

Your feedback on the content of this update or the negotiation process is welcome

Your negotiating team

YVR Negotiations Update #1

The UCTE/PSAC bargaining team responsible for the YVR Airport Negotiations has been preparing to meet with the employer for some time.  The 2005 UCTE Bargaining Committee met in early December to review and prioritize the demands submitted by the membership.

The bargaining committee then selected the following members to represent the membership in face-to-face negotiations with the employer:

• Dave Clark : Local President/20221
• Tom Kavanagh : Vice President/20221
• Bryce Danyluk : ERS
• Deborah Procter : Operations
• Keith MacDonald : Airfield Operations
• Steven Dunsmore : UCTE Regional Vice President
• James Little : PSAC Regional Representative
• Dave Jackson : PSAC Negotiator

The employer’s negotiation team consists of the following members:

• Michele Mawhinney
• Paul Levy
• Frank Crook
• John Beckett
• Brett Patterson

Your negotiation team met with the employer January 17-19, 2005 inclusive.  The first two days were spent presenting and providing some rationale to the employer on our bargaining proposal package.  These proposals are designed to improve your rights and benefits in several areas including; staffing, classification, leave provisions, scheduling, overtime, grievance procedure, hours of work, benefit plans and issues related to trades.

The third day began with the employer providing a presentation on the vision regarding ERS.  During the presentation much discussion took place between the parties.  The remainder of the day was taken up with the tabling of the employer’s bargaining proposal package which consisted of various themes.  For example:  vacation scheduling, issues related to trades, part-time and term employees, shift schedules and overtime.
The discussions throughout these three days were quite informative and educational.  It is obvious that both sides have proposals that are similar in nature.  At our next negotiation meeting we will deal firstly with the proposals that are of a non-monetary nature.

The next negotiation meeting has been scheduled for February 15-17, 2005.  We have also scheduled negotiation meetings for February 22-25, 2005 and March 8-11, 2005. We will provide a further update on the progress of your negotiations following each of those negotiation sessions.  

Your team appreciates your support and encourages you to stay informed via the UCTE Local 20221 and BC PSAC websites, as we will continue to post more information as bargaining continues.