AMAPCEO Agreement is Garbage. Vote NO. [PAGE 1]

{141 Comments}

THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF THE FIRST AMAPCEO “NO” PAGE. PLEASE GO TO THE NEWEST PAGE at http://www.timelessfinance.com/NO. Please comment on the new site; I will approve comments on this page but recommend you comment where it’ll be most publicly seen! — October 4th, 2012

October 3rd — 9:30PM Update

1. We need our Fixed Term Members to speak up and be heard. This deal really does throw FTs under the bus. They already get an inferior deal: tenuous employment with essentially no benefits. AMAPCEO’s willingness to let the Government cut their vacation down to 5.5 days a year is disgusting. For what? Job Evaluation?

Our Colleague Jennifer Backler is standing with us to be counted among the “NO” vote. She’s prepared a poster to help Fixed Term Colleagues make an informed vote. We need Members to share this poster. If you’re not on Fixed Term, please show compassion for our friends who are.

2. Please sign the petition! We’ve got 61 “NO” signatures. You are not alone in thinking this is a rotten deal. It’s been half a day and we’ve got half a percent of the entire Membership. Speak up and be heard:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/733/627/746/vote-no-to-amapceo/

Almost 50 members are promoting the “NO” vote on Twitter. There are dozens of mostly “NO” comments on this post. Why should Members sign the petition? To tell AMAPCEO to get ready, because we’re sending them back to the table.

3. If you hadn’t heard: AMAPCEO’s leadership predicts that, if we speak truth to power by voting “NO”, the results will be cataclysmic for us. Let’s rise above fearmongering and THINK — that’s what AMAPCEO Members are good at doing, right? We’re strategists and tacticians.

As our Colleague Mike S. pointed out yesterday, this government is experiencing massive labour strife with teachers. It’s only going to get more intense when they negotiate with OPSEU.

If we, the Members of AMAPCEO, resoundingly reject this deal — which is predicated on a “pay freeze” lie that only protects union dues with merit and the Pet Project (JE) — could there be a positive outcome? Yes.

If AMAPCEO represents Members by protecting our entitlements and benefits, is willing to give up on JE, and offers to suspend ATBs/Merit/P4P for two years, then there’s a chance for the Government and the Union to save face.

Does McGuinty and his tenuous minority — facing defeat on any number of issues — really have the political capital to lock out a core group of important workers because the workers demanded a real pay freeze?

If Gary Gannage had brought us a pay freeze deal, even with a few unpaid days, I would have been angry. At who? The Employer. I would have continued to angrily tell McGuinty and his lackies what I thought in emails, phone calls, Tweets, and blog posts. But I would have voted “yes”.

Instead, we got a garbage deal that gives up COC days for two years (if not forever), sacrifices job security, dumps 3.5 vacation days, completely screws Fixed Term employees, red circles many Colleagues, and slashes head room for many more. And it paints a target on our backs for the next round of bargaining. Why would the Employer ever bargain in good faith again? They’ll know they can leave the table, come back with a hardball offer, and the AMAPCEO Negotiators will fold. As JCR said, “What did our reps think the government would do, come back with roses and chocolate?” Then, the AMAPCEO Board will foist the terrible deal on a naive membership and tell them horror stories to make them implement it.

The Union Leadership is trying to divide and conquer by pointing out our individual interests. Let’s stand up together and send our negotiators back for a fair deal.

————

October 3rd — 1:00PM Update

Colleague Ken Smith has shared a petition we can sign to tell our AMAPCEO Leadership that we’re voting NO on their garbage agreement:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/733/627/746/vote-no-to-amapceo/

Please sign it, send it to your Colleagues, Tweet it — get the word out. Let’s get enough signatures to tell our Union we’re sending them BACK to the table and that, this time, they’d better protect our entitlements and rights above all, not their pet project JE and a measly few percent for some.

————

October 3rd — 1:00AM Update:

Amapceo Member shared a brilliant piece called “Losers, bigger losers, and biggest losers (and a few winners)” that is reproduced here:

“There are always going to be winners and losers.”
- Gary Gannage, responding to members at the Toronto meeting who raised valid points about how the tentative agreement singles them out for especially harsh punishment (yes, our Union’s President called members, who pay his salary, “losers”).

It shouldn’t be this way. We are friends and colleagues. We should be making gains and taking losses together. We deserve an equitable contract.

LOSERS
- ALL MEMBERS, for losing 15.5 days off over the next two years.
- Members who don’t have a JE category yet and have to vote without knowing how the contract affects their salary.
- All members, who may find themselves in a toxic work environment thanks to a contract that pits worker against worker.
- Everyone who may get sick more than 6 days in a given year and will now get paid ⅔ of their salary instead of ¾ of their pay for those extra sick days [unless the employer, in its renowned grace and wisdom, labels the illness critical or catastrophic].
- People who lost “head room” thanks to JE.

BIGGER LOSERS
- Everyone who was classified unfairly low in JE and will have to appeal and live with uncertainty re: whether their job will be successfully re-classified [again, dependent on a decision that is ultimately made by the employer].
- Members with less than 8 years seniority, who are less likely to have vacation and COC days saved up, will be left with just 11.5 vacation days – 1.5 more than the ESA minimum, and much less than what any other large employer in Canada offers non-entry level workers.

BIGGEST LOSERS
- Everyone who’s red-circled as of year 2 – their salaries will be completely frozen, with no pay-for-performance.
- Junior members, who will LOSE job security due to stronger bumping rights under JE.
- Fixed-term employees, who are left with just 5.5 days vacation a year – less than what’s allowed by law (except the government is exempt).

WINNERS

- The Union, which has ensured it maximizes the amount of dues it collects.

- Members who were previously re-circled and aren’t anymore, thanks to JE.
- Members with high seniority and the appetite to bump junior workers out of their jobs.
- The few Members who currently earn less than the bottom of their new JE category – they’re getting a raise.

————

October 2nd — 9:30PM Update:

Colleague Lisa Levac shared some thoughts on Twitter and then expanded on them in the comments section of this page:

AMAPCEO is claiming that they did not trade away anything for JE [Gary specifically said this at today's meeting in Peterborough]. If you read their own news release, 4th paragraph from bottom, you will see their own words saying that if they resisted, they would have lost JE. And then during first teleconference, they admitted that 1 per cent bad faith ruling bargained away for further JE benefits/commitments.

[Other comment:] this deal is terrible and punitive and takes away what matters most to us. JE was the union’s hidden agenda – that much seems clear to me. They bargained away the 1 per cent bad faith ruling for it. They sacrificed our precious time off for it. They screwed contract employees every which way. All for JE. Any headroom promised under JE cannot be counted on – the employer will likely freeze merit when next round of bargaining comes, or they will keep making us pay for that headroom with our vacay days – next time they will probably give us a choice – merit or time off. And so that so called headroom will never be achieved. Promises made today, will be “temporarily suspended” tomorrow…

————

October 2nd — 5:00PM Update:

1. Patrice Cloutier, an AMAPCEO Colleague from MCSCS is running for President of the Association in the upcoming election. He asked that I share this message about our Union’s governance:

“The first thing i’m going to challenge is how the executive gets voted in. If we can ratify this bad deal via phone why can’t all dues-paying members not vote directly for the Association’s leaders? Countries vote that way and change their constitutions online; we can certainly do the same at AMAPCEO or via phone. Why should a few dozen delegates or a couple hundreds decide for thousands of members? It’s simple ! you pay your dues, you get to vote… a very simple principle of representative democracy. It’s really time for openness and transparency at AMAPCEO.”

2. Please keep in mind our fellow AMAPCEO Colleagues who are Fixed Term. This agreement would cut their vacation to 5.5 days a year. I can not condone that; it is NOT proper representation to approve a deal that slashes employees’ vacation entitlements to 45% UNDER the Employment Standards Act minimum.

3. One of our Colleagues tidied up the Job Evaluation Analysis PDF that was posted yesterday.

4. This page has a new, shorter address to make sharing easier: http://www.timelessfinance.com/NO

So far today, this page has received over 1,600 hits. That means that, today alone, as many as 15% of the Membership has seen this page. Please keep sharing the facts and engaging in the comments — people are reading your comments.

5. Thoughts from a Colleague, Mike, from MGS Toronto about how JE could ruin upward mobility:

“JE puts a stop on getting a better paid job. For example current level ASY19, ASY20 and ASY21 are all in Category 6. The maximum salary for this band is below the current maximum for ASY21 and very close to the current ASY20.  This basically means that the ASY21 is eliminated, the best you can do in this band is to get a job that was formerly ASY20.  On top of that, once you reach maximum in the band there is no P4P.  Moving to next band (7) is very unlikely since the jobs there are just a few. Even if you are lucky to get to level 7, its maximum salary is actually below ASY21 today. Level 8 is beyond of any reasonable reach.”

————

October 1st — 11:00PM Update: Tonight I received some shocking analysis of the Job Evaluation (JE) Project from a Colleague who wishes to remain anonymous.

The Member superimposed the new “Category” salary ranges on AMAPCEO’s chart of current salary maximums. Click here to see the results for yourself (this PDF is sideways and rough-looking — if anybody has the technology and time to make a tidier version please do so and email it to me).

Based on the Member’s analysis:

  • It appears that 2500 Colleagues (one in four) will have their earning potential immediately slashed upon JE implementation, resulting in a  permanent compounded loss of income.
  • It appears as many as 4000 members may be out of headroom by the end of the tentative agreement (if ratified). Keep in mind that many under JE exceed the new max and won’t get ATBs whenever they are reinstated.

I haven’t verified these numbers but it’s increasingly evident that AMAPCEO’s leadership has left important questions unanswered. They claim that many Members stand to gain headroom — but how much headroom? Give us the per capita dollar amount of headroom gained for each Member under JE. Is the new maximum for each category just a weighted-average of the old maximums that fall under each category? When we take into account the loses from red circling, how much does our Membership gain?

I want to be clear: regardless of the answers, my 7% gain as a Category 5 isn’t worth throwing 1 in 4 Colleagues under the Red Line bus. It’s also not worth giving up two weeks of vacation next year, nor is it worth the loss of Surplus Factor 80. But I’d like to know the amount of Union dues that it took for AMAPCEO to throw us all under the McGuinty bus.

Please forward this to your Colleagues ASAP so they can demand accountability at the ratification meetings (a.k.a. the Rat Roadshow).

————

The AMAPCEO negotiating team has reached a tentative agreement with the employer. I’m voting NO to this garbage deal on October 16th or 17th, and I hope you do, too. Send them back to the table with a message for McGuinty: we won’t be bullied.

  • This garbage deal will destroy work-life balance — AMAPCEO’s sacrifice of 9.5 days in the first year is disgusting. If we vote “NO” there’s little to lose for Members with seniority of 8 years or less — the “deal” would cut our vacation to almost the Employment Standards Act minimum.
  • The union defended and – in many cases – increased our salaries. I stand to get an extra 7% in headroom. But I was OK with an ACTUAL wage freeze, if work-life balance was protected. Why would the union sacrifice so much for a measly few percent? Is it because they’ll get more union dues?
  • Dalton McGuinty’s pay freeze is, quite simply, a lie. A lot of us stand to make more money. None of us stand to lose salary. Yet so many AMAPCEO Members are standing up against this deal. Could it be that AMAPCEO Members are protecting the public against our employer’s pathological lies and our union leadership’s money-grab?
  • Job Evaluation consolidates 200+ categories into 8. The administrative efficiencies benefit the employer, not you and I. Why should I sacrifice so much to save more money for the employer?

AMAPCEO is burning us on the altar of union dues

It’s an unfair deal regardless of seniority:

  • All employees — including employees with more seniority who stand to gain NOTHING from Job Evaluation — are being forced to subsidize merit progression by giving up 3.5 vacation days.
  • Job evaluation makes it easier for employees with more seniority to bump employees with less seniority. Employees with more seniority, all things equal, make more money (a.k.a. MORE DUES). The Union should represent all of us, but it’s sacrificing its most vulnerable members.
  • The agreement sacrifices Surplus Factor 80, which can be the difference between dignity and poverty for public servants after a long, distinguished career.

Not to be cynical, but do you see how union dues are protected at every turn, in every possible scenario?

People are concerned about infighting and it’s understandable. But we can’t let our union remain unaccountable. It’s a ridiculous deal that protects Union Dues and little else. Please stand with your colleagues and, on October 16th and 17th, vote NO to the ratification of this garbage deal.

What can you do?

  • Politely tell your Workplace Rep that you don’t support the deal. Many don’t like this garbage deal. If they don’t understand why, explain the problems.
  • Print off an analysis like this one, or the analyses listed below, and share the information among your Colleagues. Email this article, or even just a link, to your Colleagues.
  • Attend the AMAPCEO Dis-Information Sessions and tell your Union what you think of this garbage deal.
  • Tweet your disgust using the #AMAPCEO hashtag. Tweet this article using the button on the left or at the bottom of this article. Tweet your thoughts at the Union’s account @AMAPCEONews.
  • Post this article on your Facebook if you have friends who are in AMAPCEO. It’s easy using the social button at the bottom of this article.

Lots of AMAPCEO Colleagues have spoken out against this garbage deal:

Patrice Cloutier

Jennifer Backler

Robert Lawson

Amapceo Member

Margaret Kipp, a Founding Member of AMAPCEO, had this to say:


(Please comment below with any related link and include the name/pseudonym of the author.)

- Joe Wood (Twitteremail), AMAPCEO Member, MGS Chapter, Toronto

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

141 Comments… Share your views

  1. As an ASY this deal isn’t doing much for me. My colleague next to me loses $10k of his maximum.

    • Exactly my thoughts. This deal would put my max up approximately $6k / 7% a year. I’m not selling out Colleagues for merit, let alone for a hypothetical $6k somewhere down the road.

      I’m no longer working in Peterborough; if you could share this with our Ptbo Colleagues it’d be greatly appreciated.

    • Haha, got him beat. Losing 10k in headroom too, but AFTER already taking recent paycut becuz I was surplus and matched to a vacant lower level position. Yay me.

      • I sincerely hope that you attend one of the information sessions and take them to task. I heard they’re really inconsiderate of Members who speak out against them (e.g. that lady on the telecon who Gary disconnected and he was like “Well, I guess we know how you’ll vote”). Well, I guess Gary knows how a lot of us are going to vote and it’s going to make him look pretty foolish for bringing this garbage deal to his Membership to whom he doesn’t seem to think he’s accountable.

    • A realist AMAPCEO member October 3, 2012 at 10:36 am

      And my wife and I are both in AMAPCEO – at the termination of this tentative agreement, with no guarantees that those who are red-circled will have that continued, we stand to lose 16.5% of our gross income. Factor in that P4P is likely not going to continue and we stand to lose about 20% of our gross income. Guess what – at that point in time, with our current obligations – we will have no option but to declare joint bankruptcy – especially if the employer decides to play hardball.

      There goes a lifetime of dedicated public service and damned hard work down the toilet.

    • This kind of “increase” just makes the deal even more ridiculous. There’s no Across-the-Board in this agreement. Even ONE YEAR of historical ATB would do MORE to increase the maximum for a lot of folks (dare I guess, in the vacuum of facts created by AMAPCEO’s refusal to release useful statistics, for the average AMAPCEO member?).

  2. This “agreement” may just be the worst deal ever in the history of collective bargaining!

    I have never seen any union try and take such a ridiculous amount of take-aways to their membership to be ratified. Does anyone think that OPSEU would take such an outrageous agreement to their membership to be ratified? No chance! Many of us supervise OPSEU employees, who certainly will come out ahead of us if this nonsense is ratified.

    A back of the envelop calculation reveals that the new JE levels are basically a weighted average of the existing salary ranges. Nothing is gained by JE, and there is substantial compression caused by the new system. Those lucky enough to have higher salary maximums have to fund their own increase with vacation credits. Not to mention those who are at the max STILL have to “donate” 3.5 vacation credits even though they will not get any Merit pay. Are you kidding me?

    Many people are being red-circled, not to mention the loss of COC, vacation days, Merit pay, and P4P, sick benefits, elimination of surplus factor 90 and god knows what else since they won’t release the full text of the agreement.

    We have been ambushed as none of this was disclosed or discussed during the teleconferences. Everything we voted on was ignored, then we are presented this as a “fait accomplis” and threatened with dire predictions if we do not agree to vote to ratify. I do not believe we could possibly be in a worse position even if the government legislation passes and withstands legal challenges. Our union leadership has failed us. Just who are they representing?

    It’s time now… to reject this outrageous proposal!

    • Thanks for your thoughts. I assume you’re already communicating with your Colleagues but please spread this information. AMAPCEO is sending out lots of emails and ripping into Members at meetings who dare to speak out. If there’s any hope of getting this tentative agreement voted down, it’s by spreading the truth.

    • I tend to agree that it must be the worst deal ever to be recommended by a union to its members – if we ratify it, god help us, it will be the worst deal ever in OPS history.

  3. Furious with AMAPCEO October 1, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    Many of us volunteered to take unpaid vacation days to help eliminate the deficit. That would SAVE the employer $. instead there are improved provisions for collecting overtime. We would have been happier with a salary freeze and keeping our COC and vacation days. Instead, Gary Gannage pats himself on the back and retires with the legacy of his pet project – JE.
    The OPS claims to be “a progressive employer that supports work-life balance”. AKA punish your hard-working employees by giving them the minimum vacation required by law.
    I’ll call Gary out at the next Toronto meeting.

    • Good for you. And exactly my thoughts. If we’d been forced to take “Dalton Days”, there wouldn’t have been a backlash (at least nothing like this massive backlash). Not only did we lose PAY for time off, but we lost the time off itself. Ridiculous.

      Then the Union patronizes us with encouragements to ‘start counting your overtime hours’ or to ‘take advantage’ of CWW. Those are not solutions. They are ways for the union to collect MORE DUES by forcing us to work more hours.

      • “Start counting your overtime hours” is a JOKE! Our area does not pay overtime. Period. Even authorised overtime hours had to be escalated through the union and was a HUGE fight for one employee – and those had been APPROVED. There is no way overtime will be paid to our members and I had a sr manager say as much. Unless it directly affects the workings of the business, overtime is not authorised and will not be paid. So much for working your keister off to get the management reporting and fiscal requirements in on time – if the ministry doesn’t stop running without them, you’re out of luck… well, out of $$$ anyway. Essentially, we just gave up those days for no compensation whatsoever. If I’m going to be unpaid, I’d rather have the day off!!

  4. Here are some increase in headroom #s per the big bars on graph:
    $9 increase to max for the 400 members in 20Ps who become a 6, our 600 members in 18As who become 4s under JE gain $42, and our 500 members in 19As who become 5s gain 2% headroom.
    Looks like the overall LOST headroom outweighs what may be gained.

  5. On Friday I asked for a way to communicate with the membership as a whole, as AMAPCEO controls that. this is the response:
    “Thanks Pam, but are you serious? You really expect AMAPCEO, which is recommending that members vote in favour of ratification, to provide support from members’ dues to those who want to mount a campaign against ratification? You are entitled to try to persuade your colleagues to vote against the deal, but you’ll have to find your own resources to do so.”
    So all voices are equal, but some are more equal than others? This is supposed to be a recommendation from the union, not a directive. Maybe they’re scared that is we contact the entire membership, they are screwed.

    • Since yesterday, this page has gotten 282 hits. Some are probably repeats, etc. but I assume they’re mostly pretty targeted at AMAPCEO members. This page, or some other pages it links to, have very likely been printed off or copied for emails (so let’s imagine that a full 282 Members have seen this information). That’s almost 3% of the Membership, and it excludes all of the other efforts that our Colleagues are undertaking. In short, share your voice here and share this page because it’s being heard.

    • And, on the topic of ratification, they’re acting like we have no choice OTHER THAN to vote for it. There is a REASON a ratification vote is required and IT’S EXACTLY IN SITUATIONS LIKE THESE when the Union LEADERSHIP recommends a deal that is absolute GARBAGE for Members. If we don’t vote this deal down, honestly, there’s no point in AMAPCEO doing ratification votes anymore.

    • Pam, was that AMAPCEO’s response to you? Amazingly rude! Today I discovered that paid AMAPCEO staff are preparing opinion pieces that are being put out for circulation by AMAPCEO members. I guess these members can’t think of reasons to vote YES and are content to be spoon fed information from AMAPCEO and are also content to present this information as their personal views. Why are my dues going to pay for the salaries of staff who are trying to ensure that our ratification vote is not based on information, but on spin?

  6. Disgusted Beyond Words October 2, 2012 at 9:58 am

    Both my husband and I will be retiring in approx 7 years. Because both of us are above the maximum of the new Job Evaluation/Classification (JE) salary range, neither of us will never, ever see another merit or ATB increase because of the poorly instituted salary ranges through JE. Add to that the “bonus” of losing 13.5 days off over the next 2 years, we have decided to vote no, strike if necessary and even declare personal bankruptcy before voting to ratify this agreement.

  7. What's good for the goose... October 2, 2012 at 1:02 pm

    So I think that there is also merit in requesting a decrease in our AMAPCEO dues and I would also like to know if AMAPCEO staffers are up to loose vacation days, decrease sick time coverage, etc. It is important for those who are at the barganing table to have a personal connection to the negiotiations, as this will impact their actions moving forward!

  8. The only cost savings I see is the 14% redcution in sick leave benefits from 75 to 66%.

    I find it hard to understand how a union would support cost cutting measures that come off the backs of the sick who are already losing 25% of their pay.

  9. I always thought that a large partof the union’s job was to stand up to bullying by the employer.

    I find it interesting that the government wants to take time away from us instead of money …I thought they were looking to reduce the deficit, but instead they are pressing us to give back time allocations that we won previously in lieu of pay increases (i.e. they saved money already in that case). When I take a COC day, the government does NOT backfill my absence …how does this in any way contribute to the reduction of the deficit??? Time does however matter to me, to me time IS ALSO money. I would have been willing to pitch in to help the government get itself out of debt (from the scandals, vote buying and ill advised policies on energy and full day kindergarten) by taking some unppaid days off (at least I would have received something for this …i.e a day off), but they refused to accept this offer …presumably because someone doesn’t want their legacy to be remembered via the term “Dalton Days” …nice!

    …and thanks a lot Union for the wonderful implementation of the JE project, which will red circle me, costing me thiousands more dollars. Bravo! …I am so happy :(

    • Bang-on about the biggest sacrifices saving a grand total of $0. Such a brutal lie. The Government eats it up (see their announcements) because of how their “pay freeze” lie plays with the public. The Union has embraced this because it allows them to get Dues increases in an environment of austerity. What do they care if contract employees no longer get even the EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS ACT MINIMUM for vacation? There’s no pain for them when we work way too much. They’re hoping we get angry at the employer and make en masse overtime claims — more dues, right?

  10. Before I became an OPSer, I worked contract after contract, and this PERMANENT JOB was a reason to celebrate… or so I thought. Apparently, all it means is that you lose more of your paycheque and still suffer the same consequences as this situation illustrates.

    3 years after starting at the minimum in my range, my union thinks I should sign an agreement which will result in my already being red-circled. Furthermore, any opportunity for advancement in my office has been squashed as other levels in my office have either joined me in my new classification or are now 3 levels away… and since we all work as a team, we all share the same work! I’ve been doing work (now classified 3 levels higher) for well over a year now and didn’t mind… Until now.

    My union also thinks I should voluntarily give up 9.5 days of my vacation, after 3 years of service, effectively leaving me with the same or less vacation than minimum-wage NON-UNION jobs?

    I think I had better work arrangements when I was on contracts and didn’t have a union to “defend my rights”.

    Weak deal. Weak Union.

    • I’m with you on being down to 11.5 days. It’s awful.

      If we were still on contract, we’d be down to 5.5 vacation days a year. I can’t believe AMAPCEO takes pride in forcing these Fixed Term Colleagues to undergo the indignity of paying dues to the Union. It’s all very sickening.

      • As a fixed term employee, I am still in shock about this agreement. I thought I had misread the information. Unfortunately, I did not misread, and they are not joking.

        I will get 5.5 vacation days next year (DISGRACEFUL) and 9 days the following year. For real. Two full years of working, with only a total of 3 weeks off. Who in their right mind could think this is fair??!!

        Then, 18 months from now, when these wing-nuts go back to the table ‘for us’, who knows how many vacation days I’ll end up with. And, don’t fool yourselves, next round of ‘bargaining’ will result in salary freezes or reductions. That will complete the full picture of degradation.

        Shame, shame, shame. The same chant I heard over and over again at the AMAPCEO rally in front of Queen’s Park is more appropriately directed at our ‘bargaining team’ than at our employer.

        VOTE NO – IT COULD NOT POSSIBLY GET WORSE.

        • stillinshock — PLEASE make sure this message gets out to Fixed Term Members who you know. They are traditionally less engaged in the process, so they get underrepresented. We need a resounding “NO” vote and that requires the participation of our marginalized Fixed Term Members, too. You get fewer benefits, so you pay a HIGHER proportion of compensation to the Union. DEMAND accountability. Get on Twitter. Share this on FB. Tell your Colleagues.

      • Agreed. I had no idea Fixed Terms were getting such a raw deal. I’d vote NO just to voice my disapproval with that and defend their rights!

  11. Since this site was launched, there have been three commenters who have expressed dissent. Here’s what two of the commenters had to say:

    “You are all idiots. You honestly think that there is a hope in Hades of getting a better deal than this?”
    “Max went up 9,000 … this is pensionable money … I vote YES”

    Further comments were aimed at specific members. One comment was polite, but I’m waiting til the “YES” trio can chill out to approve it.

    • I would love to reply to the dissenters. Tell them to do the math, and to read the proposed legislation, and to look at the legislation that was passed for teachers. Both legislations are better than this deal. I’d prefer legislation to hanging all AMAPCEO members out to dry!

    • I think you should allow people with other viewpoints to post their opinions. It is all part of a healthy discussion and fair debate. A small number of AMAPCEO members may have been fortunate enough to experience a large increase through JE, but even so, they should consider what has been lost in the process, and whether or not it is such a good deal, even for them.

      • If you look in the comments below, I approved one dissenting comment (and another that goes against my beliefs — somebody who thinks AMAPCEO should be dissolved).

        The un-posted comments were from commenters who shared vitriolic messages. They specifically mocked the Members to whom they responded. That’s not the kind of discourse we need.

        The “YES” side already owns the discourse of the ratification meetings, the teleconferences, etc. AMAPCEO has definitely quashed dissent.

  12. 9.5 days of lost vacation is outrageous. If I wanted 2 weeks of vacation, I would have worked at a McDonalds. Like others, I don’t understand why, when AMACEO was proposing a wage freeze, they decided to preserve merit increases and chop away our vacation, which doesn’t even affect money.

    Furthermore, I was classified as a 5 until today. Now I have received notification that my position is under review by the employer. 700 others are in the same boat as me. There may be more, including me, that are red circled as a result of this ‘review’.

    • I was classified as a 6 until noon yesterday and then suddenly it went “under review”. I was red circled at a 6 so what happens if they decide that I am a 5? As it is it would take 5-10 years before I saw a wage increase. (5 years assumes ATB increase comes back in the next contract for 3 years at 3% – how likely is that? NOT)

      Also, this in essence is a 2% reduction in pay every year becasue of inflation. So much for my spending power. Not to mention the impact to my pension!!!!

      • I have now heard of three similar cases of classifications being “under review”. I would strongly recommend you contact both Management and AMAPCEO to determine what the reasons are for this reevaluation. If you could let us know what reasons were given it could be helpful to others. If the new classifications are going to be subject to random reevaluations, then that is yet another reason to distrust this contract.

        • The review/appeals process is a Kangaroo Court because it ends on the desk of the MGS DM. AMAPCEO said this is because an arbitrator isn’t allowed to decide by law (I forget which law was cited). Well, I’d feel a lot more comfortable if these classifications were NEGOTIATED and set in stone, rather than left to the whim of the employer. Supporters of this egregious deal who are pumped about getting more money (ignoring that normal merit, for which we historically didn’t need to sacrifice because it was an INCENTIVE not a PUNISHMENT, would get us more than 6.5% over two years) might be left pretty disappointed when the heralded benefit of this agreement – new classifications – screw them over, too.

          I gained 7% headroom. Let’s IMAGINE that I get my 6.5% merit (I won’t see any benefit from the extra headroom in the next two years anyway) during the next two years and I don’t get re-classified…

          Well, what’s going to happen next negotiations when gov’t plays hardball again (realizing we’re the PUSHOVER union)? No more merit? How are we going to get back the 6 COC days? Give something else up? Give up another piece of income security like Surplus Factor 80?

          Ontario will be in a fullblown housing bubble collapse by 2014; revenues won’t improve. This is just the Government’s opening act and if you think a collective agreement that the government can simply override is better than saying “NO” and fighting for our rights, then you’re like a sheep to the slaughter (obviously not referring to the person I’m responding to, your comment just got me on a rant lol).

          • Exactly. This agreement is a total win for the government.

            If we agree – what will we give up next time? We have nothing left to give!

            If we don’t agree – they’ve broken the union.

            I cannot believe that AMAPCEO screwed up so so so badly.

    • I am a bit confused by your post: Are you saying 700 AMAPCEO staff classifications have not yet been classified in the new system, or 700 people who had classifications determined under the new system are under review, or 700 are red-circled? None of these scenarios are good, but if 700 classifications under the new system are now under review, then that is a shocking development.

    • AMAPCEO claimed that only 25% worse off, 75% better off,
      Who believes this?

  13. Here’s the stats of the JE in dollars and cents:
    Group 1: New Range is 48000-60010. Includes previous maximums from 54710 to 58705
    Looks like ALL 11 (yes 11) people in this range get new head room. No one is below the new minimum
    Group 2: New Range is 50000-65690. Includes previous maximums from $52962 to $88440
    Looks like about 270 people. No one below new minimum. About 219 get more head room, 51 get red-circled
    Group 3: New Range is 54,000-72490. Includes previous maximums from $58705 to $99591. Looks like about 858 people. No one below new minimum. About 526 get more head room, 332 get red-circled
    Group 4: New Range is 60,650-82250. Includes previous maximums from 54710 to 108423. Looks like about 1368 people. Looks like maybe 2 people that are BELOW new minimum! WOOHOO..they get an immediate raise from 54710 and 58705 all the way UP to 60650!. About 1194 get more head room (although 600 of those are up from 82206 to 82250). WOOHOO again. And 172 get red-circled
    Group 5: New Range is 64605-90300. Includes previous maximums from 63019 to 108423. Looks like about 1795 people. Looks like maybe 2 people that are BELOW new minimum! WOOHOO again, they get an immediate raise from 63019 to 64605. About 1137 get more head room. (although about 480 of those are up from 88440 to 90300). And 656 get red-circled
    Group 6: New Range is 69680-99600. Includes previous maximums from 70947-124228
    About 3056 people. No one below new minimum. 2403 have more head room. (although 400 of those move from 99591 to 99600). And 653 red-circled.
    Group 7: New range is 75000-105740. Includes previous maximums from $85979 to $129156. About 825 people. No one below new minimum. 635 have more head room. (although 65 of those move from 104290 to 105740.) And 190 are red-circled.
    Group 8: New Range is $85,000-$116,210 – (includes previous maximums from $99591 – $133640). There are about 57 people in this band (YES ONLY 57, across the province). No one is below the new minimum. 24 have more head room. 33 are red-circled
    Total Members: 8240 (not sure where the other 3000 people went?)
    TOTAL RED-Circled: 2087 (that’s about 25%, or 1 in 4…a bit more than a “FEW”)
    Total that get immediate raises: 4 people at a cost of 11057

    • Thank you for your analysis, but you are missing a couple of important points:

      The salary maximums charts were produced using the maximum salaries from the previous classifications NOT INCLUDING P4P!

      Since P4P is being eliminated by this new contract, you cannot directly compare the salaries in the new 8 Levels directly. When you add the typical 3.5% P4P amounts to the salary maximum charts, and then compare that to the 8 new levels, there are far more people who actually will see a salary decrease with the new system than you mentioned.

      Of course none even begins to factor in the loss of COC days and vacation days, and also the fact vacation credits are used to fund upward progression in the salary range. When this is factored in, things are DRAMATICALLY WORSE!

      • “When this is factored in, things are DRAMATICALLY WORSE!”

        lol this is actually the most accurate headline that AMAPCEO could apply to any of its emails to Members over the last week.

        Sorry for the gallows humour.

    • Disappointed Member October 3, 2012 at 11:42 am

      Your analysis is somewhat flawed…use group 6 for example…includes a wide range of classifications. Let’s use ASY21 as an example – current max is 108k, this bring us down to 99k. In this example, I am not receiving more head room or getting red circled (since I’m not above 99k today).

      You forgot to include those that are simply getting LOWER headroom.

  14. I also think the provisions in this tentative deal are not great, but I worry that we will face and even worse outcome if we don’t get a negotiated settlement. Check out Thomas Walkom’s article and be prepared for any future actions by the employer to be in line with their overall strategy.

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1263939–walkom-ontario-restraint-bill-much-more-than-two-year-wage-freeze

    If we vote this down, we may not be in a position to get them back to the table to renegotiate some of these unwelcome provisions, since they can just say they have no other offers for us, and then they go straight to consiliation through the MOL, get a No Board report, and then impose whatever provisions they want.

    I agree that the union leadership appears to have let us down, but let’s be clear – we are bargaining with a bully who has all the cards at this point. No other sector works for an employer who can just legislate their employee’s terms and conditions if they don’t like the negotiated settlement. If we turn this down, we have no idea where we will end up.

    • That’s a very fatalistic viewpoint. If every other Union said “Oh noes, our Employer has all the power!” and promptly gave in to FOOLISH concessions, e.g. our abandonment of COC days, then workers in Canada WOULDN’T HAVE WEEKENDS. True story, look it up. We — the Union Membership — sent our leadership to the table with, basically, pre-acceptance of a wage freeze. Then, somehow, our Union manages to force upon us merit and JE to increase our salaries and union dues, but completely destroys various important entitlements.

      Why are we the ONLY union giving up paid days off? Why couldn’t we take unpaid days? Why were we FORCED to take merit? We don’t get a summer/Christmas/March Break like Teachers, yet they managed to get unpaid days. It’s pretty clear from Gary’s talk today in Peterborough that they’re very interested in our dues money, and therefore salaries, to the exception of other priorities.

      Why are you confident we’ll get back COC days or we’ll get another Across the Board in two years? What happens after the housing bubble bursts and McGuinty maintains his tax cuts for corporations? We’ll be in a deeper black hole and the government will be looking to bully Public Servants again. Who do you think they’ll try to screw first? OPSEU? The Teachers? Or AMAPCEO (the Union where the majority of workers went into the slaughter house whistling “ho-hum looks like the Guv’ment is having bad times!! They even said that the cupboard is bare! Gee-whiz, better take the crumbs they’ll give us.”) Members who vote for this agreement are REWARDING the Government’s bad faith bargaining.

    • Our representatives told us point blank that they left an agreement on COC, benefits, sick days, etc. on the table because we couldn’t agree on wages – after being told time and time and time again to compromise with the employer on wages and abandon JE.

      In the face of legislated contracts, what did our reps think the government would do, come back with roses and chocolate? Of course they came back with something worse! That’s what anyone with any ounce of bargaining experience would understand.

      It’s time now – for a real union?

      • “In the face of legislated contracts, what did our reps think the government would do, come back with roses and chocolate?” quote of the day! Definitely made me chuckle, so true.

    • That law is not in effect and even it is may not stand the court challenge.

      In addition to that, according to one of the AMAPCEO representatives at one of the town-halls, the government does not need a new law to impose a new contract on us. Under the current law they can declare “no-board” if they believe that the negotiations are going nowhere and impose a new-contract. This has been in place for a long time. If they do so, I don’t think they will go further than what it is in this agreement.

      However, the big difference is that it will be a contract imposed by them not ratified by us. Which means that at the next round of negotiations we are in much better position to negotiate, since we have not given away core benefits (COC days, sick days pays, Factor 80) etc. If we give those up now, and ratify this contract, at the next round we will be pushed back even more. Also I do not see how the government will give back next time things that we willingly agreed to give away this time.

      • Nail-on-the-head. The Employer will be back at the table in two years looking for even MORE vicious clawbacks of entitlements if we approve this deal. Why? We’ll have shown ourselves to be a WEAK Membership that is incapable of backing-up the Union Leadership. And Ontario is on a significant decline thanks to years of transfer payment hell, a high loonie, cheap credit, and a housing bubble. It’s NOT going to get better in two years. People who think the hope of winning everything back is reasonable, well, they’re delusional.

  15. I am another one of the red circled members. Last I saw the calculations were approximately 25% of us were red circled and Gary Gannage says that is a few? I would suggest that is a very large percentage of your membership Mr Gannage!

    A colleague did some calculations today and the value of the COC days we are being asked to give up is roughly the same value as JE. Things that make you go hhhmmmm? They also pointed out our 3.5 day contribution is about the 2.5% the government wanted.

    I was on every call AMAPCEO held and on ALL of them there were questions about JE. I sent a number of emails to AMAPCEO asking what the real benefits to the members in having it negotiated within this agreement were. Not once did I hear or recieve a straight answer. It was all rhetoric. I expect that of the politicians NOT my bargaining agent!

  16. This outrageous cave in from our union representatives only serves to augment the argument that we have no need for union representation. Unions are a throwback to a time long ago when largely uneducated and unskilled workers had little, if any alternatives to dangerous workplaces and menial wages. These are very different times, and AMAPCEO membership is predominately comprised of educated workers with valuable skill sets. Vote NO to ratification. Vote NO to the union!!

    • No, we need a stronger union. The government can’t mess with management because they need to keep them on-side. The government can only mess with front-line OPSEU staff because they’re the public face of the government. We’re caught in the middle as the faceless, nameless employees who make everything work between those two groups. I don’t agree much with AMAPCEO lately, but believe me if we didn’t have a union the employer wouldn’t be giving us the deal they gave to management.

  17. Another point of interest. There may be 6000 members who have expanded grid movement (head room), but with ranges that 20 or 30k, you can bet you’ll only be moving up 1 or 2% at a time, and certainly NOT for the next 2 years (unless you are one of those 4 people who are below the new minimum of your new band). So your maximum may be increased, but it will be many many many many years before you get there. The new maximum for ANY AMAPCEO member is $116210. Not much considering we have some folks in the same classification as managers, who are still up at the $130,000 to $150,000 range! I also cannot figure out how they agreed to the new minimums (almost all are lower than previous minimums, sometimes by as much as $10k). This obviously does not affect any current members, but it certainly is a mess for any new employee (as we know they always start them at the bottom).

  18. I’d like to point out that fixed-term employees are EXTRA screwed by AMAPCEO’s proposed agreement. According to the FAQ sheet on their It’s Time website (and confirmed by AMAPCEO in an e-mail response to my query), “Fixed term employees, who are not entitled to COC days, will be required to select an equivalent reduction in vacation and/or overtime credits prior to the end of each year of the tentative agreement”.

    That means that fixed-term employees (of which there are now many) will lose 9.5 out of their 15 vacation days in year 1 and 6 out of 15 days in year 2. So big whoop if I’ll gain ‘headroom’ — if I want to take 15 days off (to keep me sane and productive) in 2013, I’ll have to take 9.5 of them WITHOUT PAY — which amounts to a 3.8% pay-cut. Thanks a lot, AMAPCEO, for treating your fixed-term dues-paying members like second class citizens.

    • I told Gary today that this deal throws fixed term employees ‘under the bus’. He says it’s an unfair metaphor. OK, it’s loaded language, but it’s TRUE. If slashing peoples’ vacation from 15 days to FIVE AND A HALF PER YEAR isn’t “throwing them under the bus”, what is? They get essentially no benefits. I empathize with FTs because I was an FT (as I’m sure many Members reading this were). I can NOT support an Agreement that would do this to them. Just on that basis alone I need to vote “no” to the AMAPCEO “deal”.

    • AGREED.

      How can I get a refund on my union dues?

  19. I think I have said it all on twitter, but I just can’t say it enough – this deal is terrible and punitive and takes away what matters most to us. JE was the union’s hidden agenda – that much seems clear to me. They bargained away the 1 per cent bad faith ruling for it. They sacrificed our precious time off for it. They screwed contract employees every which way. All for JE. Any headroom promised under JE cannot be counted on – the employer will likely freeze merit when next round of bargaining comes, or they will keep making us pay for that headroom with our vacay days – next time they will probably give us a choice – merit or time off. And so that so called headroom will never be achieved. Promises made today, will be “temporarily suspended” tomorrow. Thanks, TF, for this site/forum.

  20. AMAPCEO is claiming that they did not trade away anything for JE. If you read their own news release, 4th paragraph from bottom, you will see their own words saying that if they resisted, they would have lost JE. And then during first teleconference, they admitted that 1 per cent bad faith ruling bargained away for further JE benefits/commitments.

    http://itstimenow.ca/amapceo-reaches-tentative-agreement-with-ops-employer

  21. You're kidding right? October 2, 2012 at 10:11 pm

    My JE level was up on Monday, now “Under Review”. What a complete joke. This whole thing stinks. I’m voting no if for no other reason than to voice disgust with my “bargaining team”. It’s all JE spin. Time >>> Money

  22. Disappointed Member October 2, 2012 at 11:17 pm

    This is a terrible agreement. It basically takes away any ability to get promotions since there is nowhere to get promoted to. I’m an 21ASY (level 6) and I supervise 20s and 19s…now we’re at the same level? Now I will only have the ability to get promoted to 1-2 more levels and make the same maximum I currently have…I don’t understand how JE became a requirement. I don’t recall any member requesting JE…it has become very clear that JE was AMAPCEO’s request. I am saying no simply because of JE…don’t even get me started on the loss of vacation/COC…and increasing overtime provisions? really? nobody gets overtime…how is this a good thing?

    They need to go back with pay freeze proposals, no JE and no loss of vacation. They could also easily review the sick day provisions if necessary – even this would be better!

    • Agreed. Send them back to the table with NO JE. Give them their vaunted pay freeze. Maintain all of our non-merit/non-ATB/non-P4P provisions.

      If the government wants to consolidate 250 categories into 8 with JE and realize the associated cost savings then that is THEIR prerogative, NOT mine. AMAPCEO has thus far failed to give us the per capita gain/loss of headroom. JE required REAL sacrifices at the bargaining table for NEGLIGIBLE gains.

      Same goes for limiting bumping to 2 — it completely goes against seniority rights. What does it gain? The EMPLOYER no longer has the headache of bumping chains. That’s NOT a benefit for you and I. Mix in the JE debacle — meaning people can easily bump within categories — and you’ve got an EMPLOYER’S DREAM FOR EXECUTING MASS LAYOFFS.

      Oh, and don’t forget about the abandonment of Surplus Factor 80. So it’s only 0.11% of our total compensation package, huh AMAPCEO? Well, as somebody who worked in an office where many people got surplussed and took Factor 80, I’ve seen it’s the difference between a dignified retirement for a public servant and a destitute retirement (the improvements in pension law heralded by AMAPCEO mean that Colleagues could go YEARS and years without a paycheque). Just remember: it’s “not a big deal” until you need it. And then it can mean everything. So Surplus Factor 80 is ANOTHER protection for Union Members against mass layoffs that AMAPCEO gave away to the Employer. FOR WHAT? Again, it just creates the ideal circumstances for the Employer to lay off entire offices of staff.

      This goofy “It’s Time” stuff. Seriously. Take a message to the public that they’ll UNDERSTAND. We’ll say YES to a pay freeze.

      Honestly, if they’d brought back an agreement that maintained COC and vacation (and other provisions), and just froze our pay — no JE stuff, no merit for two years — I wouldn’t be complaining about it. I’d be angry at McGuinty but NOT my Union. But this whole agreement is just a DUES GRAB. At every turn, dues are protected and increased.

  23. This agreement is terrible.

    We asked them to acknowledge the fiscal situation by freezin our wages for two years.. Instead they got us merit increases and give us more money for overtime.

    We told them that time off and vacation was very important to us.. Instead they cut 16 days of vacation over two years.

    We told them job security was important.. Instead they made it easier for us to be surplused, easier for younger employees to be surplused, easier for the employer to surplus us with a 2 bump max, and with only 8 levels there are way less chances for the promotions to new jobs with increases salaries.

    And for those people in I.T. check out the language on page 91 of the new agreement. They’ve included a section (right before the IT source section) which would make it very easy to let a large company take over (privatize / outsource) IT work. This has been rumored for years but to see amapceo paving the way for tye employer to do this to us… hurts!

    And the worst part… We pay our union for this!

    I will be voting no for sure!

  24. I’d like to see someone from this board offer to take a few sample ratification polls. See how many people we can reach and see what those people are saying in terms of their vote.

    At this point in addition to having little faith in amapceo to conduct a fair vote, I also have little trust.

  25. This agreement is shockingly bad..
    We need a new Union….

    NO!

  26. Two other things to note:
    1. The change from 3.5 to 3.0 for merit in the second year is a PERMANENT change to our collective agreement.
    2. “Where a position is reassessed and is reclassified to a class with a lower maximum salary, an employee who occupies the position when the reclassification is made is entitled to maintain his/her current salary as long as the person remains in the position…” – does this mean that if the person changes positions, they will lose their red circled protection?

    Thanks for creating this site and for helping us to communication with each other!

  27. Why is everybody blaming AMAPCEO? I think there were 2 parties at that bargaining table. And one of them historically doesn’t appear like us very much. Did the government suddeny change their tune about us and want to give us all kinds of good stuff, and we turned it down in favour of less entitlements? That doesn’t sound right….

    • You're kidding right? October 3, 2012 at 11:43 am

      You’re not paying attention.

    • That’s a great question. If you read the material, you’ll see that JE is a system that makes very few people “BIG WINNERS” and a lot of people “BIG LOSERS”. The Union Membership — in majority we believe but we can’t get stats — would have accepted a pay freeze so long as other entitlements were protected. Instead, JE was pushed by the Union Leadership.

      Of course I’d like a pay increase and I’d love to buy a ponies for every little girl in Ontario. But I would make due with a pay freeze. I am NOT OK with throwing our FT Colleagues under the bus and SLASHING their vacation to 5.5 days a year. I’m NOT OK with losing AMAPCEO’s Crown Jewel: COC days. I am NOT OK giving up 15.5 days for ethereal promises of gains in the future.

  28. This tentative agreement negotiated by AMAPCEO through 1000+ hours(?) totally gave up the battle ground in exchange of little or no benefits for some, and hurt many members in terms of red-circled, confiscating COC days, weaker long term sick leave benefit, and many more, depending on individual circumstance, and the only thing AMAPCEO negotiated and mitigated from “injuries” only by dangling a “hope” that we may “take the lost back” in the next round of “bargaining”

    Only 2 winners in this agreement
    1. Employer
    2. The AMAPCEO office, and AMAPCEO “leadership”,
    a). President and VP gave themselves a big increase not very long ago.
    b). When AMAPCEO presented member the action plan in case of “lock-out”, it protected the office very well by reserving 1-year salary budget in place, and left emergency reserve fund for members that only can last 2 weeks, so the AMAPCEO office and its member are not on the “same boat”

  29. Can someone please post a link to the text of the full tentative agreement? I can’t find any link to it on itstimenow.ca …

  30. UPDATE on my JE status:
    - previously classified in a level that leaves me red-circled after 3 years in my job;
    - then updated with “Under Review” but supported documents still listed the same level;
    - NOW: MISSING JOB CLASSIFICATION, no salary information or supporting documents;

    So 12 years of JE work, all this analysis when suddenly…. before a vote, I am left in the dark about how this JE situation affects me. Very suspect.

    I have lost trust in the very people who are supposed to be fighting WITH and FOR US.

    • That is brutal, Vern, sorry to hear it. The terrible thing about this whole process is it ends on the Employer’s docket. Instead of ensuring we’ll be protected by getting the opinions of Members on their final categories and fighting to negotiate a solution into the Agreement, we’re being asked to close our eyes and HOPE that we get a better deal awarded by the Employer.

      I, for one, am not going to be caught standing around wishing. I’m glad there are like-minded Members like you, it makes me feel a lot better.

  31. A realist AMAPCEO member October 3, 2012 at 11:23 am

    Based on what I see – whether we accept or reject the tentative agreement negotiated(????) by AMAPCEO – there is absolutely no possibility of ever seeing another salary increase in the foreseeable future.

    - approximately 25% of AMAPCEO members are red-circled – if the salary ranges remain the same for the 8 new classifications, we are all going to remain above the maximum. At best, after the agreement expires we could anticipate a 1% salary increase – which means no possible chance of ever catching up with inflation

    - all AMAPCEO employees will lose ground to inflation – with the likelihood of interest rates starting to rise by the end of our proposed agreement – instead of losing the approximately 2% of income – we will all lose more money

    - I don’t know about the rest of you AMAPCEO members but it sure costs me more to buy food at the grocery store and to put gas into my car. Everything else costs more too – if you haev kids, you are paying more for your kids extra-curricular activities … day care costs, and so on. By the end of this contract, you will all be in a significantly worse state than today

    - I can best summarize our current situation with this acronym – BOHICA – bend over, here it comes again!

    • I highly recommend buckling down where you can. This is only Stage 1 in Ontario. People don’t realize that in 2 years, Ontario’s economy will be even worse off — the housing bubble is popping and cheap credit is disappearing.

      If people think the Employer played hardball in the last round, just wait til the next one. ESPECIALLY if we just throw-in-the-towel on this Agreement.

  32. As a long-term fixed term employee, this agreement is a complete kick in teeth. We being fixed-term already don’t receive COC days, so for AMAPCEO to term it as an equal reduction in vacation is laughable. They are taking away something that we never had. But I still have the privilege of paying my union dues. (There really should be some consideration in reducing FT employees dues.)

    The JE project is absolutely a wolf in sheeps clothing, and I can tell you from experience this is a precursor to mass lay offs. I went through a similar JE evalution in the UK government 5 years ago and believe me no one benefited and alot of people lost their jobs. With this agreement AMAPCEO have created conditions to ‘devour their young’.

    If this gets ratified I will certainly be preparing for when surplusing comes not if.

    On another point this is my first experience of CBA negotiation, and I have to say I have found the attitude and general lack of respect to the membership from Gary Gannage very disturbing. I have found him to be very condescending and frankly rude. Seems to be an attitude of ‘we know best, so you don’t need to know’. Openess and transparency has been poor to say the least. Regardless of the ratification vote result, I really believe there is a need for a change of leadership in AMAPCEO.

    I am also interested how many vacation days will the AMAPCEO executive be losing?????

    I for one feel totally let down by this deal and will be voting NO.

    • I always suspected that AMAPCEO’s leadership doesn’t care about Fixed Term.

      Fixed Term is tenuous employment. To improve job security for ALL Members, the Union should strengthen its weak provisions for Fixed Term employees. Did you know that a lot of organizations give BENEFITS to FTs?? Our “Employer of Choice” and Union can’t seem to get around to helping the most vulnerable.

      Then, this most recent deal, that throws FTs under the bus with NO consideration for their wellbeing just proves that Gary Gannage doesn’t care about contract employees. COME ON — 5.5 days of vacation? It literally makes me DISGUSTED. It’s the DEFINITION of scabbing. I can’t believe there are people voting for this, let alone doing so on the basis of “OH I PERSONALLY GET 5% despite losing entitlements and rights for me AND my co-workers”. Maybe I’m naive but I think better of AMAPCEO Members. I think that we’re NOT THE EMPLOYER’S UNION. We ARE a strong Union.

      I hope we reject this deal and if we need to be on a strike line for a few weeks (15.5 UNPAID DAYS sounds better to me than 15.5 LOST PAID VACATION DAYS) then I will be there whether I’m on pat leave or not. Gary says he was afraid that AMAPCEO Members wouldn’t step up for job action. Well, I made it clear and we owe it to our Union Members to make it clear that we WON’T be bullied by the Government when we send them back to the table.

  33. A colleague has set up a petition on this topic at the following URL – it would be good to know how many of us are against this deal before the ratification vote, and to let those who feel it is not the best idea to accept it know that they have company. I encourage anyone reading this to join the petition if they are against this deal.

    Petition URL: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/733/627/746/vote-no-to-amapceo/

    I’ll be voting no, unless someone offers more compelling arguments than I have heard so far; and for the record, this agreement will impact me much less than many – I get headroom coming out of JE…

    • Hey Ken, this is up as the 1PM update. Please share the petition and this URL as broadly as possible!

      • Excellent! This is just what we need… Hard facts! I just signed, can we get some assurance if my name and other info is private or public? Once I know I will share the link broadly with my colleagues.

        • I personally can’t provide any such assurances for external links. If you’re aware of a safer petition site I encourage you to post it; I think we need a mass petition to tell the Union Leadership that they need to go back to the table, dump JE/merit and keep us our entitlements, vacation, and rights. And yes, if Ken could comment about this that’d be great — but I for one signed it publicly. If we expect our Union Leadership to start being courageous, then I think we owe it to them to show the mild fortitude to stand up and be counted publicly.

  34. I think perhaps the saddest aspect of this whole episode is the fact that we are questioning the motive of the very institution that is supposed to protect our interests. If AMAPCEO truly agreed to this deal with a view to protecting their funding base (ie union dues), this could well be a watershed moment for the principles of collective bargaining in Ontario.

    This may be a little dramatic but the fact that I no longer trust my union to advocate on my behalf really is a sad reflection on this whole process.

    • There’s still time to fix the damage. We vote a resounding NO to Gary Gannage’s JE and the Union’s beloved merit. If they ACTUALLY LISTEN TO THEIR MEMBERS and go back to the table saying “Our Members do NOT want JE, they will take an ATB+Merit+P4P pay freeze, but ALL rights/entitlements rollbacks are off the table” then I have high hopes and we — at least — will know the Union is rep’ing us, not their own pet projects. If the Gov’t tries to impose, then we again need to show support with a strike vote.

      • The problem is that JE really is this Executives and Gary Gannage’s mandate. If and I still think it is a big ‘if’ this ratification is rejected question marks will remain over whether this bargaining team are in fact the correct people to be representing us at the table.

        • D – is it their “mandate” or their “priority”? A mandate implies that it is what the majority of the membership has asked them to make a priority. I agree that JE is the union’s priority, but did the membership give them a mandate to make it a priority in this round of bargaining?

  35. I will ask if “the creator” would consent to being named. I will attest that it is a real person, not me, and the motivation is the same as anyone else posting here to this thread. S/he may have privacy issues also; and I am sure is sympathetic to any others may have.

    I’ll get back to you on it.

  36. Hi all,

    The person who created the petition decided not to post his/her name as the creator as that might be create a bit more exposure than might be desired. Contact me if you want to get in touch; if you will reveal yourself, s/he will reveal likewise one on one. You can find me searching Info-Go under Environment…

    Cheers, Ken

  37. So if the No vote wins Then it looks like there are two possibilities At the end of the day. A strike or an imposition. I think the last strike lasted eight weeks. I guess that’s not so bad. It would be nice if it were shorter. I would Probably be more inclined to take the imposition. At least there would be no interruption to my pensionable earnings like in a strike. I can only hope that the governments imposition would offer better terms than what’s in this agreement. What are the odds? Oh well there’s a principal at stake here

    • You’re leaving out a key, reasonable possibility: the Union goes back to the table to give up its Pet Project JE and its Union Dues Grab Merit and fights for what WE AS THE UNION’S MEMBERS WANT: our rights and entitlements untouched.

      Seems a lot better than risking the mass layoffs that YOUR plan makes possible, doesn’t it?

    • In the event of an imposition, we would have the ability to join with other labour groups affected and challenge it in court. Non-strike job actions are also a possibility.

      Or we can just agree with the bullies and let them have what they want.

      Do we want to be victims or exercise our collective power? The outcome of the vote will let us know where the majority stands on that.

  38. Three things.

    As the bargaining committee member who pressed for and got the initial government Job Evaluation commitment, in 2001/ 02 round of bargaining, I’m having a difficult time with the initial downgrading of fellow members who I know do more than what their initial job evaluation rating shows. I would emphasize ‘initial’, because I’m supporting them with information about appealing the initial rating. (As a point of information – JE was first done in the City of Toronto over 25 years ago, and was not a precursor to mass layoffs – both management and the unions could live with it. The issues began with Mike Harris’ forced amalgamation of Metro Toronto.)

    The concerns about loss of days are legitimate. While I have days to burn because of years of service, colleagues with young families or elder parent care responsibilities and those with health issues are up against it. If I’d had input into bargaining over and above surveys, I’d have recommended a formula for lomger-serving members to give up a % of carried-over vacation days to lessen the impact on younger/ parent care members, members who are ill, and members who are on fixed term contracts.

    While there are many additional points, I’ll pick one more – strike mandate.
    Every AMACPEO bargaining committee begins negotiations at a disadvantage – alone among public sector unions, including Doctors, AMAPCEO members do not give their committee the leverage of saying – “if you don’t offer us a fair agreement, the members are prepared to strike”. That’s why instead we have secret surveys with all their attendant issues. Why do we have this situation? Up until this moment AMAPCEO members as a large majority have said such collective job action ‘is not on’. I’m impressed with the passion shown on this site; going forward, I hope we’re getting prepared to show it to the employer in subsequent rounds of bargaining.

  39. First off, I think that it was a HUGE mistake to negotiate JE at this time and that Collective Agreement issues and Job Evaluation issues should have been debated separately.

    Can someone explain to me how we will get a better deal if we vote no?
    Sending our team back to the table assumes there is a table to go back to. Unless the employer says “Hey, you’re right. This is a ****** deal, let’s see how we can work together to make it better” there is no one to negotiate with. The government will save money if we are locked out or if we go on strike and we will never make up those 9.5 + 6 days we are fighting for. I’m not trying to be difficult, I just can’t see the benefit to voting no.

    • I have to reluctantly agree. I never would have thought that this government would behave in the way that it has with teachers, the BPS and now us. This makes me very much question whether in fact this very bad deal will be replaced by an even worse one – i.e. complete loss of COC, reductions in benefits, etc. At the very least the uncertainty of such a prospect is not a fatalistic point of view but sadly a very realistic one.
      I want to vote NO to this deal but I see it going straight to a strike and don’t necessarily see us getting a better deal…

      • In spite of all the evidence on this site and elsewhere, do you really believe the Union’s struggle to impose JE + merit on us had NO adverse impact on our COC, vacation, and job security?

        I really wish people would post their headroom change so we can see where motives lay. If a person stands to gain and will admit that’s their impetus, then it’s undercutting other union members but it’d be intellectually honest at the least.

        • I’m sorry I wasn’t clear. I never said I “believe the Union’s struggle to impose JE + merit on us had NO adverse impact on our COC, vacation, and job security” so I’m not sure where you got that idea.

          I took a pay cut after restructuring 4 years ago and I started this new job at the top of my pay range. I’m gaining about $100 in headroom. I don’t have anything to gain via JE and I have nothing to gain by asking this question.

          In fact, I don’t doubt that we paid for JE with some of the concessions we made but that doesn’t discount the fact that, if we vote to send the bargaining team back to the table and the employer doesn’t want to negotiate, we are sh!t out of luck. What gives you the impression the employer will want to renegotiate? All they have to do to save a tonne of money is to lock us out. Simple.

          • Strategically, there are many factors that are on our side when we say “NO”. If we say “YES” to this, where does it end? Will you suddenly have the gumption to defend your Union and stand up to this government’s bullying two years from now? Say NO today. This is why we get accused of being weak and being the Manager’s union, because our membership is fair-weather. Well, eventually that strategy gets us a crap deal like this one. The Teachers have continually opposed and they’re better ahead.

            They start negotiating with OPSEU on November 1st. It’s a minority government, they’re already in a massive battle with teachers. Do you think they want to ramp up their battle with us on October 20th? Or do you think they’d gladly scrap JE+merit+P4P and give us back our normal entitlements so they could get a rare “good news” story?

            Do you want to reward the AMAPCEO bargaining team for making concessions to get us the JE and Merit that YOU AND I DIDN’T WANT? Or do you want to tell them “NO, you didn’t listen to us, SO GO BACK TO THE TABLE”? I know what statement I’m going to make. I’m going to stand up for my fellow Union Members and vote NO to this scab deal.

      • As one of the AMAPCEO rep mentioned at a town hall, the government is not interested in locking us out. They can impose a new contract, there is no need for new legislation for that.

        Saying NO does not automatically mean a strike. That has to be approved by the members.

        You are afraid that we will get a worse deal with complete loss of COC. But we’ve got that already, even worse: as per the current contract you do not get any COC days and on top of that you have to give away 3.5 days from whatever you have accumulated before. If you think that the government will give us that back at the next round of negotiations, you are dreaming. Why would they do that? Do you think that the deficit will be gone in two years? You are also afraid of reduction of benefits. But again, we’ve got that already: P4P is gone, merit is a farce because the maximum salaries imposed by JE are much lower, sick days are paid at 66%, factor 80 is gone, etc.

        So the alternative can not be much worse. But if you agree on this “deal” and have those benefits taken away now, you will have less to start with at the next round of negotiations. Also we’ll be in a much weaker negotiating position since we have agreed to cuts. That is precedent that will be exploited ferociously by the employer.

        Also please keep in mind that the high-school teachers union just announced that their members voted 92% in favour of a strike which can start on November 1st. Around the same date the government starts the negotiations with OPSEU, which is not a soft negotiations partner. Do you think that the government would want to have another show down with us in that context?

      • Rejecting contract puts ball in employer’s court-they can walk away and seek no board, lock us out, impose working conditions, or do nothing as they have so many other problems right now to deal with. Unless they impose, our current CA would be in effect until they make a move otherwise. They could impose the working conditions that we rejected, and thus force us to either strike or accept. And yes, this will require intestinal fortitude to take a stand. And maybe the membership will see it through to bitter end – or not. This is certainly difficult for everyone, including those who may choose to hold their nose and swallow this out of fear.

    • For me the main benefit is to show the government that this bargaining agent is not a pushover. In the long run we are establishing a precedent – AMAPCEO will never strike no matter what you do to them, is what we are saying if we don’t draw a line in the sand.

      And we don’t have to make it a strike (although they can lock us out). Other more creative job actions are possible.

      If we’re legislated back, then we can join with other unions similarly affected and launch a charter challenge of the legislation.

      We can oppose “the employer” creatively and minimize the risk to members. Does this government want to lock out people willing to work? Unlikely. What kind of press would that make when the NDP appears to be their new nightmare threat?

      If you think you have no options, then you don’t – because you made it so…

  40. Just checked out the AMAPCEO “Top 100 Employer in the GTA” site which lists the first criteria for selection including:

    - in addition to personal paid days off, starts new employees at four weeks of paid vacation allowance.

    Wish I worked at AMAPCEO. I’m 54 and next year I will have less holiday time than when I was 28 if this deal is ratified.

    I recognize that we could get a worse deal imposed if there is a “No” vote. But seriously, how much worse could it possibly be?

    If we reject this tentative agreement at least we aren’t agreeing that this is a fair contract. And if the government decides to impose worse terms the workplace will be poisoned. Do you really think the government will go down that road? Vote “No.

  41. I cannot vote to accept this agreement. It is neither fair nor equitable.

    I believe forfeit of our COC days exceeds the membership’s mandate. The explanation that we have not “lost” COC days, they are still in the agreement, does not obviate the fact that we have LOST them. Really, do we expect that these will be reinstated in two years in calendar year 2015?

    I cannot accept this agreement. Each of our forfeited 3.5 paid days off does not increase government revenue nor does it decrease the government’s financial liability. Yet, it is sold to us as our “payment” for continueation of merit increases for those who are not at the maximum of their pay scales. This does not improve productivity. As evidence shows us, the most productive countries are those where employees are encouraged and supported with the most vacation time. What kind of payment is this?

    If we accept this agreement, we have no one to blame but ourselves for the losses. If I am subject to an imposed settlement, at least, it would be none of my doing.

    I cannot vote yes to accept this agreement, it means that I find it acceptable and I do not. I belive that most of understand a wage freeze, but the sacrifices in this agreement go well beyond fiscal restraint into the world of mean spiritness. It is punitive. Why does our employer wish to treat us this way?

    • I want to know exactly what went on during bargaining in order to make an informed decision when I vote–Is there a way that AMAPCEO members can verify key negotations?

  42. I hate this agreement as much as the next person, but what’s the alternative? I was completely committed to voting “No” until I read further about the implications. The government does not need to legislate us, as our direct employer they can simply impose a new contract on us, at which point we would either accept it, or we move undertake labour action (strike).

    So what if they impose something worse? Are we prepared to strike? Not trying to sway people either way – but an honest question – are we prepared to strike if we get something imposed on us?

    • Voting “No” does not mean a strike. But if you vote “Yes”, the same pople who gave away your vacation days, to promote their own JE pet-project, will “represent” you at the next round of negotiations.
      In case you didn’t know, AMAPCEO staff gets from the start 4 weeks of paid vacation + 3 personal paid days. Also the APAPCEO leaders are paid well above the maximum of band 8, which you will never be able to reach under this agreement.

      • I don’t have a problem paying our leaders well and our Union obviously needs to set an example by treating their employees well (unlike OUR employer). BUT there is a MAJOR governance problem when they think they can bring us a garbage deal like this and assume that it earns their keep. People are cluing into the fact that this deal protects union dues at EVERY turn yet is brutal on the membership.

  43. Given the gorillas in the room, and the weak resolve of the membership to date, I think this is the best draft deal AMAPCEO negotiators could get. But, the draft deal really really sucks. Voting NO on the deal in large numbers will signal membership engagement and resolve to both the gorillas and the AMAPCEO negotiators. AMAPCEO negotiators need this resolve behind them. Go after JE another day from a position of strength and resolve.

    Just say NO to thugs.

  44. It will not be worse if something gets imposed, for three reasons:
    McGuinty still has to answer for the bad faith bargaining
    McGuinty would be in a precarious legal position, constitutionally, were he to do so (failure to bargain)
    McGuinty would be faced with a snowball rolling downhill, with the rest of the broader public sector and OPSEU about to get militant on him.

    • I’m sorry but you’re wrong.
      Like it or not, we did bargain with the employer – in fact the Amapceo board approved the deal for ratification. Do you honestly think a court will rule the government has not bargained – if our own board has approved the tentative deal? That ship sailed.

  45. …If the vote is NO, then I’m sure we will get a corresponding number of people voting for a strike… A strike will likely cost us money in lost salary, but we will probably make it back up with a better deal. And if they impose, there is the possibility that the imposition will be better so we DON’T have to lose pay in a strike.

  46. I was curious to find out how my JE rating compared to colleagues within my work area and in other ministries. When I inquired with AMAPCEO about a listing of all positions and the JE levels assigned to them, I was told that, “we don’t have lists available of other positions.”

    I find this a bit unbelievable given that S.27.3.5 (old collective agreement) and S.27A.3.5 of the proposed agreement, states, “an OPS-wide seniority list and the relevant ministry/regional seniority list, including the employees’ names, date of continuous service, ministry, classification, location and region shall be maintained…”

    Why are they being secretive about the JE levels assigned? Do they think that some of us might get a tad upset to find out that colleagues that are currently at lower classifications are suddenly assigned higher JE levels? How hard is it to add another column with the JE level to the existing seniority list? I truly find it very difficult to believe that there is no documentation available comparing existing positions to new JE levels.

    On the subject of “transparency,” why the delay in announcing the salary ranges for the JE? Many of us have known for several weeks what level we were at, but it was not until Sunday that the salary ranges were divulged. Again, I find it hard to believe that these levels were not developed with some inkling of what the remuneration would be.

    Also, why the delay in providing us with a copy of the tentative agreement? Why the need to provide us with a document that could not easily be copied and reviewed (I mean really…..a simple Google search on how to print pdf-protected documents solved that issue)?

    AMAPCEO members are bright, articulate and creative individuals. Some of the responses by the Association to our inquiries have been condescending and patronizing (and in some cases downright insulting). Give us some credit and give us the respect we deserve.

    (okay, rant over….)

  47. This what I have received from AMAPCEO today

    “The relevant clauses can be found on page 86 of the tentative collective agreement, beginning with paragraph #2.

    Credit reductions for fixed term employees shall be pro-rated based on the ratio that their hours of work bear to full time employment.

    For a full time fixed term employee, the following credit reductions apply:

    • No later than 12/31/12, select a reduction of nine and a half (9.5) days or 68.875 hours to be chosen from either vacation and/or compensating time (overtime) credits. Reduction takes effect 1/1/13.

    • No later than 12/31/13, select a reduction of six (6) days or 43.50 hours to be chosen from either vacation and/or compensating time (overtime) credits. Reduction takes effect 1/1/14.

    • If the employee has insufficient accumulated credits available, the employee shall be required to take unpaid leave days in the amount required. ”

    I’m a fixed term employee. I’m due to fly to New Zealand for 3 weeks at christmas to spend it with my family for the first time in 7 years. I’ve saved my vacation credits for a year and now this deal would pull the rug from me and basically mean that I have to take two unpaid weeks, with less than two months notice.

    I posed the following questions back to AMAPCEO.

    “what is the justification for taking 6 COC days from fixed term employees, when we don’t earn them in the first place. I think a serious debate needs to be had in to why fixed term employees pay full union dues for frankly far less representation.”

    I’ll be interested if I get a response.

    • D, first off I am extremely sorry that the Union is promoting a deal that would do this to you and our other FT Colleagues. Please, speak up. FTs are traditionally inactive relative to other Members, but Members do care (a lot of us were FT). Tell people how this deal is going to affect you. Tell FTs that they have a vote and that they should speak up. There are hundreds of FTs with TONS to lose and almost NOTHING to gain from this agreement, but I only hear the voices of a few. Spread that poster!

      • Thanks, I did infact email the poster along with a bunch of questions to AMAPCEO cc’ing the whole board of directors including Gary. I have not yet received a response.

        Rest assured I have let every fixed term employee know about what this agreement means and they are all equally as shocked when they see what this will mean to them.

        I simply can’t believe that that they agreed to this deal. It just makes no sense at all.

  48. “I want to know exactly what went on during bargaining in order to make an informed decision when I vote–Is there a way that AMAPCEO members can verify key negotations?”
    From the experience of being on 2 bargaining committees in the 2000s, your AMAPCEO board of directors makes a determination if the bargaining committee is making progress on members’ collective agreement priorities. This is informed by the surveys before the onset of negotiations. The ‘ key negotiations’ are also informed by the political climate, what our labour lawyers advise, what the employer team tells us, and off-line conversations between AMAPCEO and government officials.

    • “From the experience of being on 2 bargaining committees in the 2000s, your AMAPCEO board of directors makes a determination if the bargaining committee is making progress on members’ collective agreement priorities.”

      It’s cool that this is how they operated before. But let’s be honest: this “deal” in NO WAY represents the interests of most Members.

      -FTs get SCREWED — less vacation than would be legal for a McDonald’s employee
      -We all lose 15.5 credits and we MAY NEVER GET COC BACK
      -We lose Surplus Factor 80, layoffs are made easier by fewer categories, and bumping has been limited to 2 — AKA MASSIVE LOSSES OF JOB SECURITY
      -Many Members are red circled and many more lose headroom — has the Union released the net salary/headroom impact of JE? Why not? Is it because it’s SALARY NEGATIVE OR NEUTRAL?? That might make it clear that our sacrifices, for a pet project nobody wanted, just aren’t worth it.
      -Union dues are the only better-protected beneficiary of this agreement

    • Thank you for your insight. Do you know if any records are generated in the process that could be reviewed by members to confirm who offered what/when along with what members voted for when during the countless surveys that we completed?

  49. Since AMAPCEO does not want to represent us properly, can anyone tell me how I can move to OPSEU?

    • I think, in fairness, AMAPCEO Members have not traditionally sent its leadership to the table with sufficient support. ALSO in fairness, that strategy has worked pretty well up until now. But then, when the Government came back with a terrible deal, the leadership panicked and thought we needed to take it. Support for “NO” to a bad deal is not instant. It needs to be built like any Union support. The Union should have said NO and then committed its resources to show why this is a garbage deal, rather than getting JE and trying to explain why it’s OK to completely screw a large portion of our Membership for the gain of a few. There is, however, time for a fair deal. The first step is saying NO to this agreement.

      • Gary just admitted that the government would love the union to scrap JE. If that is the case that gives us negotiating room. Yet when this was said in the meeting at noon, Gary ran on about the process and how it would lead to a strike or lockout. I love it when a union head uses fear mongering.

        does anyone know if OPSEU is looknig at JE?

    • My thoughts exactly.

      I thought we dodged a bullet last time around when the government was threatening to legislate us into OPSEU.

      Now I realize that they dodged the bullet, not us.

      Our bargaining team blinked and the employer understandably pounced. We need a real union.

  50. Joe – it is time now to bring something new to the conversation.

    I think that it would be fair to say that many if not most AMAPCEO members are not happy with the proposals in this tentative agreement being recommended by our union officials. Those who may be thinking of accepting are probably doing so simply out of fear of the unknown consequences of a ‘no’ vote.

    The time has come for us to focus efforts on letting our AMAPCEO colleagues know that “It’s Okay to Say No”.

    A rejection of this contract does not mean a strike.

    Rejecting this contract puts the ball back in the employer’s court. The employer could come back to the table and renegotiate.

    Or, the employer could walk away and apply for a ‘no board’ report. If granted a ‘no board’, and after the required ‘cooling off’ period, the employer could:

    - Lock us out, OR
    - impose working conditions on us

    Now yes, they could impose the very conditions we rejected, and thus either force us to strike or accept. I suppose they could impose so-called “worse” conditions (I would like to know what is worse than what’s currently on table), and thus proving our point that the employer is simply looking to be punitive and dictatorial.

    The employer could also do nothing for a period of time. That is, walk away from the table and weigh their options against all the other issues they are dealing with politically and on the labour front.

    We could be forced into a strike, yes.

    Many of us identified that we were willing to accept unpaid days to preserve our other benefits. I am willing to take those unpaid days via a strike if necessary in order to preserve the things that matter most to me and to send the message that I won’t be threatened or pushed around.

    I don’t believe it could be any worse. The union says if we reject we will be faced with permanent loss of COC. But this deal already takes COC away from us. I don’t care what is written in a letter – we can and will be asked to give them up again next round. They were already in our CA, but lo and behold, they are now “temporarily suspended”. That’s the thing with a CA: anything can go when bargaining happens. And if we voluntarily accept the loss of them now, we will have to fight to get them back. So why not fight now?

    I am rejecting this tentative agreement because I believe it is okay to say NO to this deal. And I believe it is okay for anyone else to say no, if they want to reject this deal. I believe that we should say yes or no to this deal based on the deal, not because we are scared or pressured into voting one way or the other.

    If you think giving up COC days, vacation, job security — maybe losing salary headroom or being red circled — for a promise of merit that could be dumped by legislation is a GOOD deal, then vote for it.

    But if you believe this deal should not be ratified, It’s Okay to Say No.

    You do have a choice. Make an informed one.

  51. Here is why I find this agreement unacceptable:
    (1) It does not consider feedback I provided in polls (JE has been the least of my priorities)
    (2) It takes away COC days, which is already inadequate and only compensation for long hours I put in weekly to deliver on-time
    (3) It lumps together ASY(s) 19 to 21, which leaves me likely red-circled with no carrier advantage
    (4) It put all of us in VERY unfavourable position for the next round of bargaining
    (5) It terribly miss-treats fixed-term employees
    (6) It is not fair to employees who do not get merit increase but still have to contribute 3.5 day

    Union leaders talk a lot about fairness but the result falls short of it.

    Here is why I am still undecided:
    (1) We are small group and can strike forever without any real pressure on the employer
    (2) Greece actually ended-up letting go most of the public service – it was driven by fiscal constraint (i.e. no money to pay bills). Ontario has huge deficit that needs to get under control. Are we on the Greece’s path?
    (3) We live in unprecedented times – pension funds have difficulties meeting its obligations, governments are going bankrupt, interest rates are at historical low.
    Objectively, bargaining climate is not going to improve for a long time. May be “Bird in hand” is better than nothing?

    I am looking forward to more views and responses from the members.
    Thank you for this opportunity.

    • There is a huge difference between what is going on in Greece and Europe as opposed to Ontario.

      They had/have a huge revenue problem i.e the tax receipts were never large enough to sustain their systems after joining the EURO. I think it is well established that Ontario has a well established revenue stream, and the current defict is the of lag that was created by the 2008 meltdown. The public sector always feels the pinch a couple of years after the private sector.

      I think AMAPCEO are wrongly trying to campaign on peoples fears rather than objectively looking at whether this is in fact a good deal or not, which I would frankly expect from a political party, not what I expect from my union.

    • Actually a real pay freeze, with no merit and P4P, but no benefits reductions (COC, sick pay, etc.) would save the government concrete money compared with the current deal.
      Taking COC days away doesn’t save them any real money.

      Why the government went with this deal you may ask ? Because our union was fixated on their JE pet-project and were willing to sacrifice anything for it, including COC. So they took that (I would !) since JE will save them big money in the long run.

      Going to your comparison with Greece, a real pay freeze will give the government immediate savings in the current context environment. If the union goes back with such a proposal, taking out JE from the discussions, there is a good chance that they may accept it.

  52. One thing Gary was spouting at today’s meeting was the P4P and the merit increases for the next year, If McGuinty passes his proposed wage freeze legislation, won’t that freeze any P4P and merit increase? Wouldn’t that make us a lot worse off? would we still lose COC days and vacation days?

  53. Agreed 100% – how can we ensure that everyone is clear on this?

    If we vote No, then we are simply sending our Union and the Employer a message that we are unhappy with the current tentative agreement. It is not a strike vote. Hopefully both sides will come to a better understanding of what we are willing to accept. We are not asking for status quo, we are simply asking to be treated fairly or to at least be treated no worse than any of the other employee groups. I don’t even understand how this agreement meets the government’s stated goal of reducing the budget. Wouldn’t days off without pay be much better at accomplishing this goal than giving back COC and vacation days?? I would be much happier with that as it is abit more WIN – WIN in that at least we would get something out of it (i.e. some time off).

    Also JE is nothing more than a dog with fleas …it harms almost as many people as it helps. What the…?

  54. I am truly shocked and saddened by the sucker-punch inflicted on its members by this union. The same union that we trusted and pay to represent all of its members. In today’s economic state, we did not expect anything but wage freeze, merit freeze, p4p freeze. We asked to keep our COC days. We asked at townhall sessions why the Job Evaluation Conversations … during negotiations – now is NOT the time… they agreed!!! Disclosure without numbers my friends is NOT disclosure. The AMAPCEO uniion finally published the JE (why … if it is not one the table we asked). This disclosure told you what group you were in … but not finances. Another survery sent out … same answers back from membership – keep our COC days, we don’t want to strike, we don’t care about JE. Then, at the same time we learn that the AMAPCEO union came to a deal with the government, we seen the JE — at least some of us have – for many – they still don’t know where they stand … and we heard of the details. So – how does representing ALL members – take away COC, take away holidays and then add insult to injury – reduce the maximum (for me by 8k) … but don’t worry – you are red circled. 4 years ago – i left an s06 opseu job – for a promotion. The salary stayed the same – but the max limit was more and i also got an extra week … this extra week is what truly appealed to me. I have kids … in rep hockey … and holidays are scarce enough .. but when you need to take time off to see them in tournaments… every holiday you get is precious. So now, you are asking me to tell my kids .. that i will only have barely enough holidays to take them to hockey … none left for christmas or summer … and i have no room to grow in my job … the one that i worked so hard (and still work hard) … there is no incentive. I live in gta .. but going to toronto to work means that i am commuting 4 hrs each day … amapceo – you my friends have bargained in bad faith .. you did not disclose to any of us your intentions until you had us held hostage …. making this agreement has removed our ability to fight … in this economic climate you are banking on people’s fears to give a yes vote and taking away all our ability to fight … i hope you sleep well at night … since this is destroying the lives of many.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

*

{ 1 Trackback }

  1. Dalton McGuinty: End the Bullying and Negotiate Fairly (Pingback)