[Whoaccio]

This is exactly why I think public sector jobs should be prohibited from forming Unions, or at least for striking without being able to point to a clear threat to their well being. They shouldn't be able to leapfrog each other with "highest pay" clauses.

JAMES RUSK

From Friday's Globe and Mail

August 15, 2008 at 5:45 AM EDT

Toronto faces a one-two punch from its two largest labour unions, threatening wage increases that would swamp the city's budget and trigger a sharp rise in property taxes next year.

The left jab is a compulsory arbitration between the Toronto Police Services Board and the Toronto Police Association that begins on Sept. 19. The association will argue that the only acceptable settlement is to make Toronto police the highest paid in the country.

The right hook follows in November, when the two locals of the Canadian Union of Public Employees that represent almost all other city departments, except firefighters and transit workers, start to bargain for a new contract.

Brian Cochrane, president of CUPE Local 416, which usually sets the running in bargaining with the city, said in an interview that he expects "a very nasty set of negotiations."

While he does not know what tack the city will follow, "with the present climate, there is not a chance in hell that we are going to reach an agreement with these folks," Mr. Cochrane said.

By the time CUPE and the city get down to financial considerations - wages are usually the final issue settled - they are likely to know what the arbitrator awards the police association, representing 5,500 uniformed officers and 2,100 civilian employees.

"The reality for us this time is that we believe that we will get a fairer deal in arbitration than we will from the police services board," said police association president Dave Wilson.

"Over the last decade it has always been recognized within bargaining that Toronto officers need to be compensated to become the highest paid."

Mr. Wilson said the last contract, which expired on Jan. 1, now leaves Toronto police between $2,500 and $3,000 a year behind Peel Region officers and the Ontario Provincial Police.

With the starting wage for a Toronto constable at just over $50,000 a year, Mr. Wilson's numbers point to a wage demand in the range of 5 to 6 per cent this year, whether the arbitrator decides on a one-year contract or something longer.

Police board chair Alok Mukherjee, who welcomed the decision to go to arbitration after eight months of bargaining and two months of mediation failed to find agreement, said the board cannot be locked into formulaic bargaining that automatically gives Toronto police the highest wages in Canada.

Such an approach to setting wages has become "a device for engaging in leap-frogging" that has led to wage-boosting provisions in contracts, such as one in Peel Region's last agreement that calls for the contract to be reopened in 2010 for its police officers to get a raise if they are not the highest paid in Canada.

"No responsible employer would want to enter into such an agreement," and the TPSB, while it will pay police as well as it can within the needs of taxpayers, would not offer its staff such a concession, he said.

Mr. Wilson declined to say whether he has demanded a similar provision, but he did repeat that Toronto police would not be getting the respect they deserve if they are not the highest paid in Canada.

For his part, Mr. Cochrane said that he will be watching the outcome of the police arbitration, as past police wage settlements have been a relevant factor as he and the leaders of the other city CUPE locals shape their wage demands.

"I wouldn't say it's lockstep, but certainly we very much keep an eye on what is happening in the same way we do with Toronto Fire."

What bothers him going into his talks is that is "the general labour relations atmosphere that we are currently under in this city. It is pathetic. It is commensurate with the labour relations relationship that we had pre-2002."

Local 416 says it represents about 9,000 city employees. Local 79 says it represents about 16,000 full and part-time city workers, not counting those employed by Toronto Community Housing.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080815.wlabour15/BNStory/National/home

 

[Dilla]

This is exactly why I think public sector jobs should be prohibited from forming Unions, or at least for striking without being able to point to a clear threat to their well being. They shouldn't be able to leapfrog each other with "highest pay" clauses.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080815.wlabour15/BNStory/National/home

I couldn't agree more. I've never understood the apparent contradiction that many hard line socialists seem to live with in Canada. That is, they want the state to control most things directly, as it's the "voice of the people". However, even when you work for the "voice of the people", you need a hugely strong union to protect you from even that entity which is entrusted to run almost everything.

That and the government is not going out of business anytime soon, no matter what they demand.



"Mr. Wilson said the last contract, which expired on Jan. 1, now leaves Toronto police between $2,500 and $3,000 a year behind Peel Region officers and the Ontario Provincial Police."

- Go work in Peel, then.

 

[Whoaccio]

On balance I think unions have done more good than harm. I just think they have become a bit of an anachronism. They were started to stop robber barons from sending 12 year olds to work in structurally unsound coal mines and locking women in unsanitary sweat shops. I can see the need for unions in that case, to protect the health of it's members.

This has NOTHING to do with protecting anyone though. It is just extorting the public for bigger and bigger paychecks. Are any CUPE members being placed in unsafe conditions? Are any of them being paid below minimum wage? Clearly not. This is threatening the government, and hence the people it represents, in order to extract payment they don't necessarily deserve. It is called extortion. And who looses? The disadvantaged residents of Toronto who will surely be faced with higher taxes or reduced services to cover the middle class of the lazy. This is the weirdest form of wealth redistribution going! Poor people get screwed to cover the solidly middle class, and they call it socialism.

 

[CGM]

Such an approach to setting wages has become "a device for engaging in leap-frogging" that has led to wage-boosting provisions in contracts, such as one in Peel Region's last agreement that calls for the contract to be reopened in 2010 for its police officers to get a raise if they are not the highest paid in Canada.

Dumb agreements have led to a situation were the taxpayers are held hostage. This needs to stop here. Officers currently work 2 weeks in month, and have 2 weeks paid off, during which they can rest and relax or work as privately paid officers in events, construction projects, etc. for $55/hour. I understand that their work is stressful, but we live in a civilized society for the most part and I think they are very fairly compensated as it is. 50K is the starting pay for a rookie, and it quickly increases with experience. I have a couple of good friends on the force and I greatly respect what they do, but this is too much.

 

[CDL.TO]

Starting salary for the NYPD is $35,881.

And you have to live in New York on that salary.

 

[kEiThZ]

I find it interesting that TO cops make more than a trained infantry private deployed in Afghanistan. I never thought the streets of Toronto were that dangerous!

 

[TOinTO]

Officers currently work 2 weeks in month, and have 2 weeks paid off, during which they can rest and relax or work as privately paid officers in events, construction projects, etc. for $55/hour.

Seriously? 24 weeks vacation a year? Anything that preferential should get you hated.

And yet, politicians love to promise more police officers. Highly paid civil servants getting half the year off. Can't be.

 

[Dilla]

Seriously? 24 weeks vacation a year? Anything that preferential should get you hated.

And yet, politicians love to promise more police officers. Highly paid civil servants getting half the year off. Can't be.

That's similar to the arrangement firefighters get. Most of them have second jobs (as contractors and the like) and make a helluva lot of money as a result.

 

[Dichotomy]

It wouldn't take an accountant to go into City Hall and chop off 10-15% of the annual budget, just by taking the 'fat' out of the union contracts.
Anyone who has worked with or for the unions or their members knows exactly what I am talking about. There are many hard working members in these unions, but they get crushed by the intertia of the culture therein.

 

[toraerach]

On balance I think unions have done more good than harm. I just think they have become a bit of an anachronism. They were started to stop robber barons from sending 12 year olds to work in structurally unsound coal mines and locking women in unsanitary sweat shops. I can see the need for unions in that case, to protect the health of it's members.

This has NOTHING to do with protecting anyone though. It is just extorting the public for bigger and bigger paychecks. Are any CUPE members being placed in unsafe conditions? Are any of them being paid below minimum wage? Clearly not. This is threatening the government, and hence the people it represents, in order to extract payment they don't necessarily deserve. It is called extortion. And who looses? The disadvantaged residents of Toronto who will surely be faced with higher taxes or reduced services to cover the middle class of the lazy. This is the weirdest form of wealth redistribution going! Poor people get screwed to cover the solidly middle class, and they call it socialism.

Unions are anything but an anachronism - they are as needed today as they were in the 19th century. However, they are democratic institutions and there is no safeguard against greed. You see the same thing when City Council or wealthy corporate CEOs give themselves huge raises. Greed is a human condition, not a by-product of unions. Nor is greed the only goal a union has/should have.

The problem in Canada is that a disproportionately high amount of unionized workers are in the public service. Their unions fight for better wages that come out of tax payers money, true, but if workers in the private sector were getting the same wage increases there would be more tax revenue to cover the costs. If you look at the state of the labour market in Canada today where there's people working off two full time jobs just to make the ends meet, where for many people a liveable wage is becoming increasingly hard to come by, the idea of the union becomes quite applicable to our world, our city right now. We have women working in the custodial industry not getting paid for months too afraid to do anything about it because they can barely speak English. We have garment makers doing work outside of their homes from a small percentage of the pay they would've made in a unionized factory. We have educators around the province find stable and well-paying jobs increasingly hard to come by.

Yes, sometimes unions do get greedy, but so does everyone else - they play an essential part in balancing out our society in a way. The labour movement could improve in a lot of very important ways, but I think loosing unions would be far more detrimental to our society in the end. Just look at Sweden where the rate of unionization is exceptionally high - it's not like their public coffers are empty or anything.

With the power of the union comes the responsibility of being a good worker. People forget that. It's kind of like how the power of democracy is supposed to come with the responsibility of participation. People are just too apathetic I suppose.

 

[CGM]

We can address this problem of greed you mention by taking wage demand abilities away from the public unions, and putting a law on the books that requires the city to a) compensate for inflation on an annual basis and b) evaluate/compare compensation with other major cities and adjust if needed to keep it to a realistic level. If NYC officers are starting at 35K, it'd be a long while before Toronto would need to adjust it's compensation.

 

[afransen]

We can address this problem of greed you mention by taking wage demand abilities away from the public unions, and putting a law on the books that requires the city to a) compensate for inflation on an annual basis and b) evaluate/compare compensation with other major cities and adjust if needed to keep it to a realistic level. If NYC officers are starting at 35K, it'd be a long while before Toronto would need to adjust it's compensation.

This is quite a good idea. The amount of sway unions have over governments is absurd. I don't see why Toronto needs to increase the compensation of its officers unless it is having difficulty retaining and recruiting employees.

 

[kEiThZ]

You should ask Mot how he feels. He's berating me in the future mayor thread about my stance against the unions.....

I think its ridiculous that a TTC bus driver or Toronto Police Officer makes more than the privates and corporals I have under me. Heck they make more than a Private serving in Afghanistan. Does that make any sense?

And its gotten worse, ever since the City instituted the fair wages bill, effectively, inflating the cost of contracting out. Apparently the unions see no problem being fat, dumb and happy on the backs of struggling single mothers and hard working immigrants.

 

[kEiThZ]

Unions are anything but an anachronism - they are as needed today as they were in the 19th century. However, they are democratic institutions and there is no safeguard against greed. You see the same thing when City Council or wealthy corporate CEOs give themselves huge raises. Greed is a human condition, not a by-product of unions. Nor is greed the only goal a union has/should have.

The problem in Canada is that a disproportionately high amount of unionized workers are in the public service. Their unions fight for better wages that come out of tax payers money, true, but if workers in the private sector were getting the same wage increases there would be more tax revenue to cover the costs. If you look at the state of the labour market in Canada today where there's people working off two full time jobs just to make the ends meet, where for many people a liveable wage is becoming increasingly hard to come by, the idea of the union becomes quite applicable to our world, our city right now. We have women working in the custodial industry not getting paid for months too afraid to do anything about it because they can barely speak English. We have garment makers doing work outside of their homes from a small percentage of the pay they would've made in a unionized factory. We have educators around the province find stable and well-paying jobs increasingly hard to come by.

Yes, sometimes unions do get greedy, but so does everyone else - they play an essential part in balancing out our society in a way. The labour movement could improve in a lot of very important ways, but I think loosing unions would be far more detrimental to our society in the end. Just look at Sweden where the rate of unionization is exceptionally high - it's not like their public coffers are empty or anything.

With the power of the union comes the responsibility of being a good worker. People forget that. It's kind of like how the power of democracy is supposed to come with the responsibility of participation. People are just too apathetic I suppose.

You hit the nail on a diagonal.

You are right that unions are needed....but not in the public sector. Unions are needed in the private sector. However, unions constantly seem to direct their efforts at the public sector because its incredibly easy to organize in a government workplace. However, its not morally right that they are essentially extracting wages and benefits from taxpayers who are not in the same position and are often significantly worse off.

The unions keep complaining about how membership is in decline without understanding the changing nature of employment. Manufacturing and public sector jobs that could be unionized are declining, and the service industry which is hard to organize is rising. Unions should be focusing at organizing maids at hotels, waiters and chefs at restaurants, etc not trying to help the highest paid bus drivers in the country make even more.

As for your comparison to Sweden....I would note that European Unions tend to be far more responsible and corporate friendly. They are allotted seats on the board of directors in Germany. This helps them understand why companies have to make certain decisions...so we don't get over reach like what we have seen from autoworkers throughout North America....

 

[Dichotomy]

This is not the 19th century. The sweat shops and slave labor have moved offshore. Anyone who is 'indentured' in this country is doing so by choice. (Not learning English or not knowing one's rights is a choice.)
Unions discourage competition, plain and simple. Why would I want to work harder/faster/smarter if I am only going to get paid as much as the guy/gal beside me? There is no incentive to get ahead. There is no incentive for productivity.

Public sector unions are double jeopardy: you are talking about a monopoly within a monopoly.
Besides that, the silly rules are killing progress. I once participated in a work shop where 8 professionals had to stand around for 45 minutes while we waited for the appropriate person to get us some chairs to sit on. The chairs were in the next room but we weren't allowed to touch them. It was outrageous: 8 people waiting. Productivity, zero.
For the most part, labor laws have made unions obsolete. Frankly, I resent the idea of someone making $22 an hour to turn a wrench in a factory floor.

The only people worth that kind of money have spent 3+ years in college or university.