Human Rights Conference // Conférence sur les droits de la personne

~~~ le français suit ~~~

 

Why A Human Rights Conference?

• What are Human Rights?
• Can you identify Human Rights issues in the news?
• Do you think that some issues have solutions?
• What do you need to be an activist?
• What prevents you from being an activist?
• How do you empower the activist?

What are we working towards?

• To empower the activist
• To engage in collective action

Come and join us as we discuss issues, develop resolutions, share our experiences and broaden our Human Rights horizons.

Conference Business:

• To elect 5 human rights equity representatives and alternates to the UNE Human Rights Committee (Aboriginal Peoples, Person with a Disability, Racially Visible, 
  Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgender, Women)                      
• To elect equity group delegates to the 2014 UNE Triennial Convention
• To receive, debate and draft resolutions to be submitted to the 2014 UNE Triennial Convention.

The Human Rights Conference participants include:

1. National President
2. National Executive Vice-President
3. National Vice-President – Human Rights
4. Assistant National Vice-President – Human Rights
5. Regional Vice-Presidents or one of their Assistants
6. Regional Human Rights Representatives or their Alternates, the five National Equity Representatives or their Alternates
7. Eight Human Rights Conference participants from each Region, for a total of 80 participants
8. Observers at Local and/or personal expense (not funded by UNE)

Each region will guarantee that 75% of its delegate entitlement to the Human Rights Conference will be from one of the five (5) equity groups: Aboriginal (First Nations, Métis and Inuit), women, members with disabilities, racially visible members and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered members.

For further information on the HR Conference, please contact the Human Rights Representative in your region.

Pourquoi tenir une Conférence sur les droits de la personne?

• Qu’entend « on par « droits de la personne »?
• Pouvez-vous nommer des problèmes relatifs aux droits de la personne qui sont des sujets d’actualité?
• Croyez-vous qu’il est possible de trouver des solutions à certains de ces problèmes?
• Qu’est-ce qu’il vous faut pour être une militante ou un militant?
• Qu’est-ce qui vous empêche de militer?
• Comment donner le pouvoir d’agir aux militants?

Quel est notre but?

• Donner le pouvoir d’agir aux militantes/militants
• Participer aux mouvements collectifs

Joignez-vous à nous. Nous pourrons discuter des problèmes, élaborer des résolutions, communiquer nos expériences et élargir nos horizons dans le domaine des droits de la personne.

Activités de la conférence

•  Élire cinq représentantes/représentants aux droits de la personne et des groupes d’équité et leur suppléante/suppléant pour le Comité des droits de la personne du SEN (Autochtones, personnes handicapées, les membres des minorités visibles, les gais, lesbiennes, bisexuels, transgenres et les femmes).
• Élire des déléguées/délégués des groupes d’équité pour le Congrès triennal 2014 du SEN.
• Recevoir des résolutions, en débattre et adopter celles qui seront présentées au Congrès triennal 2014 du SEN.

Parmi les participants à la Conférence sur les droits de la personne, il y aura notamment :

1. Le président national   
2. Le vice-président de l’Exécutif national
3. La vice-présidente nationale aux droits de la personne
4. Le vice-président national adjoint aux droits de la personne
5. Les vice-présidentes régionales/vice-présidents régionaux ou une de leurs adjointes/un de leurs adjoints
6. Les représentantes régionales aux droits de la personne/représentants régionaux aux droits de la personne ou leur suppléante/suppléant
7. Huit participants de chaque région, pour un total de 80 participants à la Conférence sur les droits de la personne 
8. Des observatrices/observateurs (aux frais de leur section locale ou à leurs propres frais — non financés par le SEN)

Chaque région garantit que 75 % des déléguées/délégués qu’elle peut envoyer à la Conférence sur les droits de la personne représenteront un des cinq groupes en matière d’équité : les Autochtones (Premières nations, Métis et Inuits), les femmes, les personnes handicapées, les membres des minorités visibles, et les gais, lesbiennes, bisexuelles et transgenres.

Pour obtenir de plus amples renseignements au sujet de la Conférence sur les droits de la personne, veuillez communiquer avec la représentante/le représentant aux droits de la personne de votre région.

On est tous touchés

Webinaire : Pourquoi les conservateurs veulent-ils abolir la formule Rand? Et qu’est-ce que c’est que cette formule?

Lors de ce webinaire, vous apprendrez notamment :

• Les origines de la formule Rand et ce qu’elle apporte aux travailleurs et travailleuses
• Pourquoi les conservateurs n’aiment-ils pas cette formule

Tous les membres de l’AFPC sont les bienvenus! Il est particulièrement important que les délégués syndicaux et les dirigeants des sections locales y participent.

Quand?

En anglais :

le 19 juin à 19 h ou 21 h

En français :

le 20 juin à 19 h ou le 25 juin à 18 h

Le webinaire durera environ 45 minutes.
Veuillez vous inscrire en cliquant sur le lien correspondant. Vous recevrez ensuite un courriel de confirmation (si vous ne le recevez pas, vérifiez vos pourriels).

En anglais :

le 19 juin à 19 h

le 19 juin à 21 h

En français :

le 20 juin à 19 h

le 25 juin à 18 h 

Veuillez vous brancher quelques minutes à l’avance pour vous assurer que la connexion fonctionne. Le webinaire offrira la transmission sonore sur votre ordinateur. Il est toutefois possible que vous deviez utiliser le téléphone si la transmission sonore ne fonctionnait pas. Un numéro sans frais vous sera alors communiqué. Vous pouvez aussi participer par conférence téléphonique uniquement.
Ces webinaires sont enregistrés et seront disponibles pour visionnement.

We are all affected

Webinar: Why do conservatives want to take away your Rand Formula, and what is it anyway?

Join us for this webinar to discuss:

• The origins of the Rand Formula and how it helps workers
• Why conservatives don't like it

Open to all PSAC members but especially important for stewards and local executive members.

Date and Time:

English

June 19th 7:00 pm or 9:00 pm

French

June 20th 19:00 or June 25th 18:00

The webinar will run for approximately 45 minutes
Please register by clicking on the appropriate link. You will receive a confirmation email (check your junk folder if you don’t receive this).

English

June 19, 7:00 pm

June 19, 9:00 pm:

French

June 20, 19:00:

June 25, 18:00:

Please join the webinar a few minutes early to assure proper connections. The webinar will be offered with audio feed through your computer, however you may need/want to dial-in if this function does not work. A toll-free number will be offered. You may also attend as a conference call participant only.
These webinars will be taped and made available for distribution.

PSAC takes government to court over bargaining

PSAC takes government to court over bargaining; Union challenges call for border guard vote

---

The largest federal union is going to Federal Court to try to quash the Conservative government's decision to bypass the collective bargaining process by forcing Canada's border guards to vote on the government's last contract offer. 

The Public Service Alliance of Canada wants the court to set aside Heritage Minister James Moore's June 7 decision to order the Public Service Labour Relations Board, which he oversees, to call a secret vote on the May 6 offer to 8,600 border guards represented by the Customs and Immigration Union (CIU).

The CIU, whose bargaining team rejected the offer, is one of 17 unions under the PSAC umbrella. 

PSAC argues that Moore has no "factual or legal basis" for his decision because a strike he said would jeopardize public safety and security isn't even on the horizon. They argue the minister erred in law, acted "in a capricious manner" and based his decision on "erroneous findings of facts." 

The union also says that Moore failed to follow the principles of "natural justice" and "procedural fairness" by calling the vote before considering a newly released conciliation report by the Public Interest Commission that was supposed to provide the basis for further negotiations. 

Moore sought the vote at the request of Treasury Board President Tony Clement. The provision for such a vote was added to the Public Service Labour Relations Act in 2005, but until now it has never been used. Among unions, the move is seen as a hard-line tactic to thwart collective bargaining and chip away at their power. 

Matthew Conway, a spokesman for Clement, said the government won't comment on the challenge because it is before the courts. He said, however, that Treasury Board feels employees should have a chance to vote on the offer which is "reasonable and affordable" and addresses most of the parties' important issues. 

The move is a gamble, and many say the government must be confident that CIU members will vote for the deal. 

The union's court challenge could be seen as a sign it is worried it doesn't have the backing of its members, who could accept the vote and deal a damaging blow to the union leadership. CIU is one of the stronger and more militant unions and usually has its members' support.
CIU president Jean-Pierre Fortin said the challenge is about the broader principles of collective bargaining rights at stake in this case. The union has asked for an expedited hearing, but Fortin said it is proceeding as if the vote will go ahead. 

"If we let this vote go by unchallenged, then the entire concept of collective bargaining will be in play for the future," he said. 

Fortin said Moore intervened too early and didn't give the bargaining process a chance to work. He said the two parties should have gone back to the table to discuss the commission's conciliation report and to try to negotiate a settlement. 

Instead, two days after the report was issued on June 5, Moore asked the board to call a vote for later this month. 

In his order, Moore said he was calling a vote in the "public interest" because of the "current fiscal environment, the potential safety and national security risks and the significant financial repercussions" Canada would face in the event of a strike. 

A strike, however, is at least several months away. The union hasn't yet held a strike vote, and it is still haggling with the government over the essential services agreement that designates employees and tasks that are required to ensure the public's safety and security. That agreement must be approved by the Public Service Labour Relations Board and be in place before a strike can be called. 

The two sides have been negotiating for two years and went to conciliation in December 2012 to help bridge their differences. A conciliation report is not binding but provides a basis for a possible settlement.

---

Ottawa Citizen
PAGE:	A2
DATE:	2013.06.15

Clement can’t kill the public service, so he might as well kill morale

The Conservative government doesn’t hate Ottawa.
It just despises lots of people who live and work here. Sure feels that way.
What’s next from Tony Clement? Cancel lunch-hour and Christmas holidays to boost workplace morale?
Seriously, if an election were held tomorrow, you wouldn’t want your name to be Galipeau or Poilievre or even Baird. The big bosses trashing the little workers in a company town that loves gossip and shop talk: nice campaign platform.
You know, with that circus they’re running on Parliament Hill, these guys have a lot of nerve telling the serfs what to do, or telling us how Ottawa, the city, should be run.
The National Capital Commission, given the main job of making the capital a great place? More like the National Capital Omission. The feds took away the only thing it did really well — festivals, like Canada Day — and gave that to the Canadian Heritage Department, leaving the NCC to be in charge of, you know, lots of trees.
Is it not telling that the Crown corporation has been without a permanent CEO for almost a full year? (Marie Lemay announced her departure on July 6, 2012. Ads looking for her replacement went out three weeks ago.)
The Rideau Canal, Ottawa’s showpiece waterway? The proposed lockage fee increase this spring was a complete fiasco and, when it looked as though that beast was back in its cage, here comes a hike in moorage fees.
Great way to support Ottawa and our UNESCO World Heritage site.
Museums? They don’t want to build or improve any, just monkey with their names. Better parkways? Nah, but here’s a new name and sign. A new bridge over the Ottawa River? A better waterfront? People, we will all be dead by then.
But, back to the public service which, conveniently forgotten, the feds cut by 19,200 in the 2012 budget.
It is very telling how the government is framing both the question of performance review and sick days.
Clement, the Treasury Board boss, did not begin the discussion of performance by calling for improved productivity. Paraphrased, he began the discussion by declaring: “We totally need to fire some asses around here.”
Look at the numbers they released to help the public to understand this horrible dilemma of actually having to employ people.
According to Clement, the dismissal rate for unsatisfactory performance in the private sector is between five and 10 per cent of the workforce. I’m not sure what his source is for these numbers but, working in the private sector for 35 years, I’m skeptical.
He went on to say the rate in the public service is 0.06 per cent. So, ergo, the firing rate in the PS should be much, much higher, because this is an apples-to-apples comparison. Baloney.
The “line in the sand” announcement to PS executives was made as though Tony Clement had just invented the concept of performance reviews. Spare us. Have they not been going on in the PS forever and a day?
And, furthermore, what have all these managers been doing, lo these many years, if thousands upon thousands of public servants are sitting around working at half-speed all day?

You want to fire someone? Fire some supervisors asleep at their desks and quit yammering about unions.
And, rest assured, it does not escape the attention of the average worker that the story of Clement’s winging about sick days appears on the same page as the story of MP Eve Adams claiming $424 for seven trips to a spa during the 2011 election.
Heh Tony! Why don’t you review that performance from your G8 gazebo? Honestly, the hypocrisy is breathtaking.
The sick day discussion also seems to be full of figures and wedge words sure to be seen as red flags by a casual consumer.
On a typical day, for instance, the government reports 19,000 workers are on some form of sick leave, making this sound like a colossal problem or rip-off.
And sick days can be “banked”, from year to year. But this is not the “banking” that some professions had, like certain teachers, who could cash in the days when they retired. There’s no cashing in.
Furthermore, the union disputes the government’s figure of 12.5 sick days per year. It claims the correct figure is below 10.
Clement, however, says absenteeism is “exceedingly high.”
You know, put it all together: On the whole, your boss thinks too many workers are lazy, not enough are being fired, too many abuse sick days and lots of them need a kick in the pants during a performance review.
Doesn’t that make you want to race to work in the morning!

To contact Kelly Egan, please call 613-726-5896, or email kegan@ottawacitizen.com

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Clement+kill+public+service+might+well+kill+morale/8510973/story.html#ixzz2W128CrtG

Les congés de maladie à la fonction publique fédérale : Les faits

FAIT : Les congés de maladie sont des avantages négociés, pas des cadeaux. On ne peut ni les encaisser ni s’en servir pour prendre une retraite anticipée.

C’est faux d’affirmer que les congés de maladie non utilisés représentent une « dette » de 5 milliards de dollars. Les fonctionnaires fédéraux ne peuvent pas encaisser leurs congés de maladie, ni les utiliser pour prendre une retraite anticipée. En fait, ils les perdent lorsqu’ils quittent la fonction publique. Or, en ce moment, nous n’avons pas suffisamment de données pour pouvoir déterminer combien de crédits de congé sont utilisés et combien sont perdus.

• À lire : Congés de maladie des fonctionnaires : le gouvernement doit cesser de tromper le public canadien

Pourquoi avons-nous négocié ce droit? Parce qu’avoir des congés de maladie accumulés, c’est comme avoir une police d’assurance : les travailleurs les « achètent » et s’en servent lorsqu’ils en ont besoin. Ainsi, une personne qui souffre d’une maladie chronique doit attendre au moins 13 semaines (65 jours ouvrables) avant de toucher des prestations d’assurance-invalidité. Si elle a accumulé 65 jours de congé de maladie ou plus, elle peut les écouler durant cette période. Mais si elle n’a aucun crédit de congé d’accumulé, elle doit faire une demande d’assurance-emploi, ce qui lui donnera un revenu hebdomadaire de 501 $.
De retour au travail, le compteur est à zéro. Si un travailleur tombe malade durant l’année, il recevra automatiquement des prestations d’assurance-invalidité. Mais s’il tombe malade plus d’un an après son retour au travail, il n’aura accumulé que 15 jours de congé de maladie.

FAIT : La plupart des fonctionnaires fédéraux prennent entre 0 et 8 jours de congé de maladie par année, pas 18.

Selon le Conseil du Trésor, les fonctionnaires fédéraux à l’administration publique centrale prennent, en moyenne, 18 jours de congé de maladie par année : 11,11 jours payés et 6,85 jours non payés. Il s’agit de moyennes artificielles qui ne représentent pas fidèlement l’usage que font les fonctionnaires de leurs crédits de congé de maladie.
Ainsi, le gouvernement n’explique pas que la moyenne de 11,11 jours payés est faussée par le petit nombre de fonctionnaires, comme, par exemple, ceux qui travaillent dans des milieux à haut risque et très stressants, tels que les services correctionnels, et qui doivent prendre plus de congés vu la nature de leur travail. Ce chiffre englobe aussi les personnes qui souffrent d’une maladie prolongée qui écoulent leurs congés de maladie avant d’être admissibles à l’assurance-invalidité. Le gouvernement passe aussi sous silence le fait que la moyenne de 6,85 jours de congé non de maladie non payé englobe les personnes qui touchent des prestations d’invalidité de longue durée et celles qui reçoivent de l’assurance-emploi en attendant que l’assurance-invalidité prenne le relais. Les statistiques du Conseil du Trésor révèlent que, dans la majorité des cas, les congés de maladie non payés sont utilisés par des employés qui sont absents durant une grande partie de l’année. La réalité, c’est que 95 % des fonctionnaires fédéraux n’utilisent pas de congés de maladie non payés.
Le concept des « moyennes quotidiennes » est trompeur. Si l’on n’a pas les données exactes ou si l’on ne connaît pas l’usage médian des congés de maladie payés et non payés, on ne peut que tracer un portrait approximatif de la situation. Et il est bien plus probable que la majorité des fonctionnaires fédéraux prennent entre 0 et 8 jours de congé de maladie payés par année plutôt que 18.
L’AFPC aimerait savoir combien de travailleurs, craignant de perdre leur emploi, iront travailler même s’ils sont malades. Or, le fait de travailler tout en étant malade ou blessé ou de faire des heures supplémentaires non essentielles et non payées est néfaste à bien des égards : les employés sont malades plus longtemps, l’équilibre travail/vie personnelle est compromis et la productivité en souffre.

FAIT : En général, on ne remplace pas les fonctionnaires fédéraux pendant leur congé de maladie.

À quelques exceptions près, comme là où un nombre minimale d’employés est exigé (services d’incendie dans les bases militaires, services correctionnels, douanes ou certaines centres d’appels), on ne remplace pas les fonctionnaires fédéraux quand ils sont absents pour quelques jours. Dans la plupart des cas, leur travail les attend lorsqu’ils rentrent d’un congé de maladie. Selon le Conseil du Trésor, on remplace quelque 20 % des employés pendant leur congé de maladie, un chiffre qui nous semble gonflé. Nous aimerions avoir les détails.
Toujours selon le Conseil du Trésor, les congés de maladie coûtent au gouvernement un milliard de dollars par an. Mais ce chiffre tombe de moitié quand on tient compte du faible taux de remplacement et que, contrairement au Conseil du Trésor, on ne compte pas chaque jour d’absence comme un jour de travail perdu. En effet, si on multiple l’utilisation « moyenne » dans la fonction publique (11,11 jours de congé de maladie payés) par le salaire quotidien, puis par le nombre total de fonctionnaires, on obtient un demi-millard de dollars, et non un milliard. Mais il ne s’agit pas d’un coût « nouveau », car il est déjà compté dans les salaires. On peut seulement parler de « perte de productivité » représentant la valeur du travail qui n’a pas été accompli. En somme, le calcul du Conseil du Trésor ne reflète pas la façon dont fonctionne un gouvernement fédéral moderne, ni l’avantage qu’il y a à garder les malades à la maison et à contenir la contagion.
Un calcul juste du coût des congés de maladie et d’invalidité doit reposer sur des données solides qui reflètent le coût réel du remplacement.

FAIT : Comparer les congés de maladie du secteur public et du secteur privé, c’est comparer des pommes à des oranges.

Cette comparaison n’a aucun sens. Dans le secteur privé, les employés malades étant rarement en congé payé, on ne peut comptabiliser leur absence comme un congé de maladie. Dans le secteur public, les employés embauchés par l’entremise d’agences de placement temporaire n’ont pas droit au congé de maladie avec solde.
Les employés du secteur public disposent de meilleurs avantages sociaux en cas de longues maladies ou d’invalidité, et de congés plus généreux pour obligations familiales. Les employés du secteur privé aux prises avec une grave maladie doivent souvent arrêter de travailler. On ne peut donc pas comptabiliser leur absence, car ils ne font plus partie de la population active.

FAIT : Nos conventions collectives donnent aux gestionnaires les moyens de gérer les congés de maladie de façon responsable.

Les gestionnaires ont déjà les moyens de gérer convenablement ce type de congé. Tout d’abord, ce sont eux qui l’approuvent. Si un gestionnaire soupçonne un employé d’abuser de ses congés de maladie, il peut lui demander de produire un certificat de maladie. S’il pense qu’une section tout entière est problématique, il peut résoudre la situation par le biais d’une rencontre syndicale-patronale. S’il détermine qu’un employé a un problème d’absentéisme, il peut lui parler, lui demander de consulter les services de counselling ou adopter des mesures disciplinaires si abus il y a.

FAIT : Le gouvernement doit faire plus pour promouvoir la santé au travail, prévenir la maladie et aider les employés à se rétablir pour pouvoir rentrer au travail.

Quand on dit à Tony Clement, président du Conseil du Trésor, que les compressions au gouvernement fédéral rendent les gens malades, il répond : « N’importe quoi! ». Mais les chiffres le contredisent : depuis 2006, on note une hausse de 37 % des demandes de prestations d’invalidité. Le nombre d’appels au Programme d’aide aux employés de Santé Canada, où les fonctionnaires fédéraux peuvent consulter des professionnels de santé mentale, a fait un bond en 2012, au plus fort des coupes. À la fin de l’été passé, 150 personnes qui avaient fait appel au Programme étaient considérées comme suicidaires. Pour la dernière année dont on connaît les chiffres, 2011, plus de 48 % de toutes les demandes de prestations d’invalidité étaient liées à la santé. On ignore si la prise de congés de maladie ou les demandes d’indemnisation des accidentés du travail sont en hausse pour la même période.
Avec toute une gamme de compressions supplémentaires qui s’en viennent, le gouvernement devrait s’assurer que les lieux de travail soient sains et respectueux. De même, il doit voir à ce que les employés aient accès à du soutien pendant leur maladie et lorsqu’ils sont prêts à rentrer au travail.

Federal government workers and sick leave: the facts

FACT: Unused sick days aren’t a “perk.” Federal government workers can’t cash out unused sick days or use them to retire early.

It is misleading to cost unused sick leave as a $5 billion “liability”. Federal government workers can’t cash out their sick leave or use it to retire early. In fact, workers must leave any unused sick leave behind when they retire. That means that without more data, we can’t know how much is used and how much is left behind.

• See also Government needs to stop misleading Canadians about sick leave

We negotiated the right for our members to save up sick leave for a reason: it’s like an insurance policy. Workers pay into it and use it when they need it. Like insurance, saved up sick leave can be indispensable. Workers battling a chronic or serious illness have to wait at least 13 weeks (65 working days) – or, if they have more than 65 days in sick leave, use that up until it’s gone – before their disability insurance kicks in. If they have no saved up sick leave, they are forced to rely on Employment Insurance through that period – that means earning a maximum of $501 a week.
Those returning to work must start all over again – if they get sick within a year they automatically go back on disability insurance. But if they get sick more than a year after returning to work, they will have, once again, started with just 15 days of sick leave to draw on.

FACT: Most federal government workers are taking between 0 and 8 days in sick leave per year, not 18.

Treasury Board says that federal government workers in the core public administration use an average of 18 sick leave days a year: 11.11 in paid and 6.85 in unpaid sick leave. But these numbers are just random averages and don’t accurately reflect what most federal government workers actually use.
The government doesn’t say, for example, that its average of 11.11 paid sick days is skewed by a small number of workers – like those in high-risk and high-stress workplaces such as correctional services – who need more time off because of the nature of their work. That number also includes workers with extended illnesses who are using up sick leave credits before qualifying for long term disability. The government also doesn’t say that the average of 6.85 days in unpaid sick leave includes those who are on long term disability and those who are on Employment Insurance while waiting for their long term disability to kick in. Treasury Board’s data shows that most “sick leave without pay” is used by employees who are off work for most of the year. 95% of federal workers don’t use any sick leave without pay.
The concept of “daily averages” is misleading. Without seeing the data, or knowing what the median use of paid and unpaid sick leave is, we can only estimate what the true picture is. And it seems far more likely that the majority of federal government workers are taking between 0 and 8 days of paid sick leave per year – not 18.
PSAC would like to see data on how many workers, worried about losing their jobs because of the cuts, are going to work sick. Going to work despite illness or injury or working extra unnecessary and unpaid hours often results in workers getting much sicker in the long run, unhealthy work/life balance and lower productivity.

FACT: The vast majority of federal government workers aren’t replaced when they’re sick.

With very few exceptions – such as where minimum staffing requirements are in place for workers like fire fighters on military bases, correctional service workers, border service agents and some call centre workers – the vast majority of federal government workers don’t get replaced if they are off work for a few days. Most workers who are off sick have the work they missed waiting for them to catch up on when they return. Treasury Board puts the number of workers replaced when sick at about 20 per cent of the workforce – that number seems high, and we’d like access to the supporting data.
Treasury Board says sick leave is costing the government $1 billion a year, but that doesn’t add up given the low replacement rate. When calculating that cost, Treasury Board costs every single day of absence as a lost day of work. Half of the $1 billion “cost” – or $500 million – is attributed to the use of sick leave days in the federal public service. In other words, if the “average” usage is 11.11 days of paid sick leave, and we multiply that times their daily salaries and the total number of workers, we get to $500 million. But that’s not a “new” cost on top of the salary being spent. It’s a part of what is spent on salaries. At best, it’s a measure of “lost productivity” representing the value of work that didn’t get done. But that just doesn’t reflect the way in which the modern federal government works. Nor does such a costing reflect the benefit of people not coming to work sick and spreading illness.
We need valid data on true replacement costs in order to accurately cost the additional costs that come from sick leave and disability.

FACT: Comparing public sector sick leave to private sector sick leave is like comparing apples and oranges.

Comparing sick leave in the federal government to sick leave in the private sector is like comparing apples and oranges. For starters, many private sector workers who are off sick aren’t being paid, and therefore aren’t being counted as “off sick”. Federal government workers employed through temporary placement agencies, for example, have no sick leave. If they’re sick, they just don’t get paid.
Public sector workers have better plans for supporting employees with long term illnesses and disability, and better provisions for looking after sick members of the employee’s family members. Many private sector workers without long term disability benefits are forced to stop working altogether when faced with a serious illness. That means that they aren’t counted as off sick because they are unemployed or out of the workforce altogether.

FACT: Our collective agreements give management all the tools they need to manage sick leave responsibly.

Our collective agreements give management all the tools they need to manage sick leave responsibly. All leave is authorized by supervisors and management. If a manager suspects or is concerned that an employee is abusing sick leave they can ask for medical certificates. If a manager is concerned about an entire section’s sick leave, they can seek resolution through the joint union-management committee. If a manager thinks an employee has an absenteeism problem, they can interview the employee, address the issue through counselling and discussion,and engage in discipline if abuse is found to exist.

FACT: The government needs to do more to promote healthy workplaces, prevent illness and help people who are sick get back to work.

Treasury Board president Tony Clement says it is “absolute nonsense” that the cuts are making federal government workers sick. But disability claims in the federal government have increased 37 per cent since 2006, and Health Canada’s Employee Assistance Program, which puts federal government workers in touch with mental health professionals, saw a huge spike in calls in 2012 as cuts from that year’s budget were being implemented. By late summer more than 150 callers had been identified as at risk for suicide. Mental health related disability claims accounted for more than 48 per cent of all claims filed in 2011 – the numbers for 2012 aren’t yet known. Neither is there data available about whether paid sick leave use or worker compensation claims due to workplace injuries have increased over the same period.
With thousands more cuts to be implemented over the next few years, this government should be ensuring that federal government workplaces are healthy and respectful. In addition, the government needs to ensure workers who are sick are getting the help they need, and, when they are ready, the support they need to get back to work.

invitation to the next Ontario Regional Council Meeting

Hello Brothers and Sisters,

I would like to take this opportunity to invite you to observe the
upcoming PSAC Ontario Council meeting, scheduled for  
July 5th and 6th, 2013 at the PSAC Toronto Regional Office 
(608-90 Eglinton Ave E, Toronto, ON M4P 2Y3).
 
Our hours of sitting are: Friday, July 5th from 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. and
Saturday, July 6th from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. 
 
In addition, we will be celebrating our Region’s past leadership
with the unveiling of a PSAC Ontario Regional Executive
Vice-President’s commemorative wall as part of our launching of our
newly renovated Toronto Regional office. This event will take place on
Thursday, July 4th at 6 p.m. in the Regional office boardroom. We will
be joined by Chris Aylward, PSAC National Executive Vice-President.

If you are, or will be in the Toronto area and would like to attend,
please RSVP to my Executive Assistant, Cleo Reid (reidc@psac.com).

Note this event is a scent-free environment.

In Solidarity,


Sharon DeSousa
REVP, Ontario
Public Service Alliance of Canada
90 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 608
Toronto Ontario M4P 2Y3
Telephone No. (416) 485-3558 ext 231
Fax No. (416) 485-8607
Email: desouss@psac.com