L’examen de la structure des groupes professionnels piétine

Le 17 janvier, devant l'insistance de la présidente nationale, Robyn Benson, le Conseil du Trésor a enfin admis qu'il ne pourra pas boucler l'examen de la structure des groupes PA et TC avant 2017-2018 au plus tôt.
L'examen piétine depuis plus de 18 mois. Il y a eu roulement de personnel responsable de la question au Conseil du Trésor. Il semble que les ressources ne sont pas au rendez-vous, étant donné l'obsession du gouvernement pour la réduction du déficit et l'abolition de postes.
Le Conseil du Trésor a néanmoins confirmé qu'il allouera des ressources à long terme pour la réforme de la structure des groupes professionnels. Mais le syndicat n'est pas convaincu que l'employeur a un plan réaliste, clair et assorti d'un calendrier, comme nous le lui avons demandé. Nous continuerons à faire pression pour que le Conseil du Trésor remplisse ses engagements.

Le point

En 2012, le Conseil du Trésor avait fait des progrès, en proposant de diviser le groupe des PA en trois unités principales. À l'époque, l'AFPC croyait que les nouvelles normes de classification seraient adoptées à l'automne 2012 et que le travail se poursuivrait pour les trois nouveaux groupes. Mais rien n'a été fait.
Le Conseil du Trésor et l'AFPC avaient également entamé les discussions sur le calendrier de l'examen de la structure du groupe TC. On avait commencé à consulter les ministères et les Éléments. On s'était mis d'accord sur les prochains groupes à traiter (SV et EB) une fois le travail terminé pour les unités PA et TC. 
Ça fait déjà cinq ans que l'AFPC négocie, dans le cadre de l'entente sur le groupe PA. Il faut que le Conseil du Trésor s'engage dans un processus sérieux avec le syndicat pour revoir la structure des groupes professionnels au sein du gouvernement fédéral.

30 Janvier 2014 - 09h15

Occupational group structure review has stalled

At a meeting on January 17, after being pressured by national president Robyn Benson, Treasury Board finally admitted they will only complete the group structure exercise for the PA and TC groups by 2017-18 at the earliest.
Work on the occupational group structure review has been at a standstill for over 18 months. There have been changes in personnel at Treasury Board responsible for the occupational group review. It also appears that there was a lack of long-term commitment of resources, given the government’s focus on deficit reduction and job cuts.
Treasury Board also confirmed they will allocate long-term resources to classification reform. However, the union is still not convinced the employer has a realistic plan in place. We have demanded that the employer provide a clear plan and timetable for the work that needs to take place and wewill continue to push Treasury Board to meet its negotiated commitments.

The review so far

Progress on the review looked promising in 2012 when Treasury Board outlined its proposal to divide the PA group into three new occupational groups. At that time PSAC expected the new occupational group standards would be adopted by the fall 2012 and work on the new classification standards for the three new groups would follow. None of this work has been done.
Treasury Board and PSAC had also begun to discuss timelines for the occupational group review of the TC bargaining unit, and to begin consulting with departments and Components. We also agreed that the SV and EB groups are supposed to follow once the PA and TC groups are completed.
It already has been five years since PSAC negotiated a commitment from Treasury Board in the PA agreement to engage in a meaningful process with the union to update the classification system in the federal government.

January 30, 2014

Épinglettes et certificats pour souligner les années de service, membre honoraire et membre à vie – AFPC

Bonjour,
La plupart des activités du Syndicat des employées et employés nationaux et de l’Alliance de la fonction publique du Canada ne seraient pas possibles sans le travail incessant de nos nombreux bénévoles. C’est pour cette raison que c’est avec grande fierté que je les remercie sincèrement.
L’Alliance de la fonction publique du Canada a toujours rendu hommage à ses agents en leur remettant une épinglette et un certificat pour souligner leurs années de service. Ces prix sont remis aux personnes qui ont accumulé 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 ou 40 années de service ou aux membres honoraires ou aux membres à vie.
Si votre section locale souhaite présenter la candidature d’un membre, veuillez remplir le formulaire et joindre tous les antécédents en matière de service de la personne. Remplissez avec une attention particulière la section qui porte sur la période de service. Vous pouvez obtenir les critères d’admissibilité, ainsi que les formulaires d’applications, sur le site web de l’AFPC.
Si les récipiendaires préfèrent recevoir leur prix lors de notre congrès à Victoria, les candidatures doivent être soumises au bureau du SEN au plus tard le vendredi, 25 avril 2014.
En toute solidarité,
Doug Marshall
Président national
Syndicat des employées et employés nationaux, AFPC

PSAC pins and certificates for years of service, honourary membership and lifetime membership

Greetings,
At the Union of National Employees, and at the Public Service Alliance of Canada, much of what we do wouldn’t be possible without the tireless work of our many volunteers. That is why I am proud to take this opportunity to extend a sincere thanks to those members.
The Public Service Alliance of Canada has a tradition of honouring long-term officers of the PSAC with service pins and certificates. These pins and certificates can be awarded to those with 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 years of service and to honourary members and lifetime members.
If your Local wishes to nominate a member, please complete the application form and enclose a complete service history of the individual. Please pay careful attention when completing the period of service section of the form. The eligibility criteria and application forms can be found on the PSAC website.
If recipients wish to receive their award during our convention in Victoria, their nominations must arrive at the UNE office no later than Friday, April 25, 2014.
In solidarity,
Doug Marshall
National President
Union of National Employees, PSAC
/

Benefits won’t be lost, Clement tells public servants

Treasury Board President Tony Clement said his plan for a new short-term disability scheme for Canada’s public servants won’t claw back benefits but rather replace them with an improved system that will ensure those who fall ill get the time and care needed to get better and back to work.
Clement weighed in with his position as federal unions signed a historic pledge to reject any clawbacks of existing sick leave and disability benefits as the two sides gear up for a watershed round of collective bargaining.
“Our government intends to introduce short- and long-term disability plans that will help public servants get healthy and get back to work. We are committed to providing public servants with the best care possible,” Clement said in an email.
The pledge marks the first time in nearly 50 years that unions agreed to present a common bargaining strategy when each begins talks with government as their contracts expire over the next year. All but one of the 17 unions has signed the pledge. The holdout, the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers that represents 7,500 prison guards, is still consulting its members.
“Let’s hope the minister is not being misleading. We are open to discussing positive changes but we are not interested in making any concessions,” said Chris Aylward, vice-president of the giant Public Service Alliance of Canada.
The much-anticipated negotiations will be closely watched. It parallels the run-up to the 2015 election and the Conservatives would like to have a deal when they hit the campaign trail that will show they are good economic managers who reined in overpaid and malingering bureaucrats.
Clearly, the union leaders have their backs against the wall. They’re walking into this round of bargaining with a new set of rules, legislated by Parliament last month, that diminished unions’ bargaining clout and significantly strengthened the hand of the government.
The big issue is accumulated sick leave and disability, a benefit public servants have enjoyed with few changes since collective bargaining was introduced in 1967.
Unions argue the passing of the new legislation was the final galvanizing push for them to work together and refuse clawbacks.
With the reforms, government can decide which unions can strike or go to arbitration to resolve any contract disputes. They also give the government the exclusive right to decide which workers are essential and can’t strike. The changes also reduce the independence of arbitrators and ensure they base their awards on the government’s budgetary priorities.
The unions will still negotiate separately and make decisions in all other areas of bargaining independently in the interests of their members, but they pledged to negotiate with a “common” strategy on sick leave. They vowed not to consider concessions unless given something of similar value to employees in return. They also want the government to present the business case defending a new short-term disability plan and why the existing sick leave and disability regime can’t be fixed.
Under traditional rules of bargaining, the unions would have been in a relatively strong bargaining position. Sick leave is a big concession and unions would want something in return to give it up. The new rules, however, effectively jettison that give-and-take.
The first contracts to expire are those for the chargehands working at National Defence’s dockyards in Halifax and federal lawyers working at the Justice department. Both unions have filed formal notice to bargain, which set the wheels in motion for the controversial round to begin.
Treasury Board has also appointed a new senior bureaucrat to oversee negotiations, Manon Brassard, will take over as the assistant deputy minister of compensation and labour relations on Feb. 3.
Last week, some 200 delegates from Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada met in Ottawa to develop its bargaining strategy. PSAC is holding a similar meeting in February.
The unions represent a broad range of workers from clerks and electricians to scientists and diplomats., They often have similar positions on bargaining issues, but have never taken such a public and formalized stand with a signed “solidarity statement,” said Daniel Boulet of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
“I don’t ever recall a situation when the government politicized bargaining to this extent, which is what drove the unions to get together on a common front. I can’t think of another government so willing to throw their employees under the bus.”
Many unions felt blindsided in the last round of bargaining when they lost severance pay. In that case, the government struck a deal with PSAC to give up severance for a 0.75-per-cent raise and, as the largest union, the deal set the precedent for the rest.

By Kathryn May, OTTAWA CITIZEN January 26, 2014

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

2014 CLC Convention

Greetings Sisters and Brothers,

The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) 27th Constitutional Convention will
be held from Monday, May 5 to Friday, May 9 at the Palais des Congrès de
Montréal, 201 avenue Viger Ouest, Montréal (Québec).

The registration fee for each delegate is $300 (no fee is required for
alternate delegates) and must be submitted along with the credential
form no later than April 4, 2014.

Important Dates:

The deadline to submit resolutions is February 4, 2014.

The deadline for receiving credentials is April 4, 2014.

For more information on the CLC Convention, including child care and
accommodation please visit the webpage below or contact the CLC directly
at 613-521-3400.

www.canadianlabour.ca/convention/convention-2014 

In Solidarity,

Sharon DeSousa,
Regional Executive Vice-President Ontario
Public Service Alliance of Canada

How Chicago teachers built a fighting union

The Chicago Teachers' Union is a fighting union and the city's strongest advocate for children and youth.

And according to Michael Harrington, the union's director of operations, this didn't happen by accident.

The union built support from its members and the public by focusing on the social model of unionism - empowering members to take action and be involved politically.

In Harrington's opinion, too many of the unions in the United States treat their members like they're their customers. He calls this the service model of unionism.

The members in this model are dependent on what the leadership has to say, and decision making is pretty much top-down. Staff members are responsible for providing the "services" such as collective bargaining, grievances and negotiating benefits.

"Our union took this model and turned it around," Harrington declared during a presentation at the PSAC building on January 21, 2014.

Social unionism

Harrington calls the CTU's model the social organizing model, and its success was exemplified in the well-publicized massive mobilizations of union members and community supporters during the Chicago teachers' strike in 2012. Harrington said they continue to use this approach in the "millions" of campaigns they are currently carrying out.

When Karen Lewis was elected president of CTU in 2010, she came in as part of a caucus of CTU members who wanted to reform the leadership and make the union be more a part of the movement for global social change.

"We saw our rank-and-file as the foundation, the starting point," said Harrington. "We have an enormous amount of time invested in two-way communication between the union members and the officers and staff. We tell our members, 'I may be an elected officer or I may be part of the staff, but I am here to enable, inspire, encourage, support and provide you with resources. Because, really, the union is you.' And we try to make that real and honest, difficult as it may be."

Democratic decisions

While expanding the role of the membership in the union is key, CTU's brand of unionism also means a flatter model in decision making. In the 2012 negotiations, they had an unprecedented 60 members on their bargaining team facing off with the school board.

The 2012 teachers' strike was one of the few recent labour struggles that became high profile due to the fact that it had widespread public support. Harrington also attributes this to the social organizing model of unionism, which he says must have a strong component of civic education.

"Our actions right now are all aimed at educating the public on why unions exist and why matter. We spend a lot of time working with the communities," Harrington said. "We never talk about pay. We never talk about benefits. The public is not interested about that. They're interested in who your job touches. Who your job affects."

Saving schools

It is by design, therefore, that the 2012 teachers' strike is widely credited for preventing some school closures in Chicago and winning some gains in the contentious issue of standardized testing that has been deemed detrimental in student learning.

"We want to be and be seen as Chicago's chief advocates for children," said Harrington.

Compte rendu du webinaire sur le projet de loi C-4

Le 12 décembre 2013, le projet de loi C-4 a été adopté. C'est une loi omnibus sur le budget qui change profondément les lois du travail relevant du fédéral, notamment :

• en donnant au gouvernement le droit de décider unilatéralement qui occupe un poste essentiel en cas de grève ou de lock-out
• en ordonnant aux arbitres de mettre en application les politiques du gouvernement, ce qui porte atteinte au processus d'arbitrage
• en changeant la définition de ce qu'est un danger, nous faisant ainsi retourner en arrière.

En décembre, l'AFPC a donné des webinaires sur le projet de loi C-4, dont le compte rendu est à présent disponible. 
Pour en savoir plus, lisez Défendons nos droits.

Bill C-4 webinar recordings available

Bill C-4 became law December 12, 2013. The omnibus budget bill brings with it significant changes to federally-regulated labour laws, including:

• giving government unilateral authority to decide who is essential in the event of a strike or lockout
• giving arbitrators direction to enforce government priorities, hijacking the arbitration process
• changing the definition of ‘danger’ to erase decades of gains for workers

PSAC conducted webinars on Bill C-4 in December.  The recordings are available now.
Read more on the Conservative government’s legislative attack on workers.

Victoire du syndicat : L'échange de postes sauve des emplois!

Sans l'AFPC, affirme Vi Noonan, elle n'aurait pas de nouveau poste.
Comme des centaines de membres de l'AFPC, Mme Noonan a reçu en septembre 2012 un avis lui annonçant qu'elle était une « personne touchée ». Elle a ensuite appris que son poste au ministère de la Justice allait être aboli. Déclarée excédentaire, elle a tenté à maintes reprises d'échanger son poste avec des collègues désireux de prendre leur retraite. En vain.

Cette situation s'est répétée dans plusieurs ministères. Certains gestionnaires ne voulaient rien entendre de l'échange de postes et refusaient les propositions en ce sens sans motif valable. Les membres et les sections locales en ont informé l'AFPC, qui a alors déposé un grief de principe.
Il y a plusieurs années, l'AFPC a réussi à obtenir des protections pour ses membres dans l'Appendice sur le réaménagement des effectifs, annexé aux conventions collectives. Heureusement, car les compressions du gouvernement conservateur ces dernières années ont été drastiques. Mais si les conventions collectives ne sont pas respectées par l'employeur, elles perdent tout leur sens.

En avril 2013, l'AFPC a eu gain de cause devant la Commission des relations de travail dans la fonction publique, qui a ordonné au Conseil du Trésor et aux ministères de mettre sur pied un système efficace d'échange de postes. En outre, la Commission leur a interdit de refuser les échanges de postes, sauf dans des cas exceptionnels prévus par les conventions collectives.
La Commission a laissé au syndicat et à l'employeur le soin de décider comment aider les employés à qui on avait refusé l'échange de postes sans motif valable. L'AFPC et le Conseil du Trésor se sont entendus là-dessus, et plusieurs ministères ont adopté un meilleur système d'échange de postes.

C'est ainsi que Mme Noonan a eu plus de temps et une seconde chance de trouver quelqu'un avec qui échanger son poste.
« L'AFPC a envoyé un sondage à ses membres dans la fonction publique, raconte-t-elle. Comme ça, le syndicat a pu savoir qui était prêt à prendre sa retraite et qui voulait échanger son poste, comme moi ».

L'AFPC l'a mise en relation avec un autre membre travaillant aux Ressources humaines du ministère des Affaires étrangères, Commerce et Développement. Après plus d'un an comme excédentaire, Mme Noonan a pu trouver un poste où ses 25 années d'expérience seront fort utiles.
« Je suis contente et soulagée, avoue-t-elle. Sans l'AFPC, je ne serais pas là aujourd'hui. Et puis, j'adore mon nouveau travail! »

Victory! Union helps avoid job losses through alternation

Vi Noonan says that if weren’t for PSAC, she would not have her new job.
Like hundreds of PSAC members, Noonan received an “affected notice” in September 2012 and later found out that her job at the Department of Justice was being eliminated. She was placed on a surplus list and made several attempts to swap jobs with colleagues that were interested in retiring early. She initially had no luck.

Many other union members faced the same problem. PSAC heard from members and local representatives that some departments and managers weren’t participating in the alternation process or were denying alternations without good reasons, so we filed a policy grievance.

PSAC negotiated the collective agreement protections in the Workforce Adjustment Agreement many years ago. The severe cutbacks by the Conservative government in the past couple of years have made these protections even more important. But collective agreement provisions mean little if the employer isn’t implementing or enforcing them.

In April 2013, we won our grievance at the Public Service Labour Relations Board. The board ruled that Treasury Board and departments had to set up an effective alternation system, and could not deny alternations except for the very specific reasons allowed in the collective agreement.

The board left it up to the union and the employer to work out how we would implement the ruling and help employees who had been wrongly denied alternations. We eventually came to an agreement with Treasury Board and many departments starting adopting better alternation processes in the meantime.

For Noonan, this meant that she was given more time and another opportunity to find someone who was interested in swapping jobs with her.“PSAC put a survey out to members and was able to identify members who wanted to retire and others like me, who wanted to stay in the public service,” said Noonan.

Our union was able to connect Noonan with a member who worked in Human Resources at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development. After more than a year on the surplus list, Noonan was able to secure a new job and continue to put her 25 years of experience to good use.“I am so happy,” says Noonan. “This would not have happened without PSAC. I love my new job.”

Are you in the loop? Êtes vous au courant?

Hey everyone,

Did you know you can get UNE news delivered to your virtual doorstep? We’re launching the third edition of the UNE’s bi-weekly newsletter today!

It only takes a few seconds to sign up on our website: http://bit.ly/1dvlZUT. It’s just another way we’re trying to bring you the news that affects you.

Don’t forget: you can also find us on Facebook and Twitter!

In solidarity,

Ben René
Communications Officer
Union of National Employees

Bonjour à tous et à toutes,

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez recevoir de nos nouvelles au pas de votre porte… virtuelle? Nous lançons aujourd’hui la troisième édition de notre bulletin électronique bimensuel!

L’inscription ne prend que quelques secondes; cliquez sur le lien suivant : http://bit.ly/18xuACM. C’est tout simplement une façon additionnelle de vous informer le mieux possible sur les nouvelles qui vous touchent.

N’oubliez pas : vous pouvez aussi nous trouver sur Facebook et Twitter!

En toute solidarité,

Ben René
Agent des communications
Syndicat des employées et employés nationaux

Op-Ed: Public sector pay promotes equality - Ottawa Citizen January 13, 2014

With the passage of Bill C-4, the Conservative government not only “stacked the deck” in terms of collective bargaining process, but it will also eliminate the only independent federal organization that provides comparative information on the compensation of federal public service workers.

Hidden among the dozens of measures targeted at undermining unions and public sector workers, the elimination of the Compensation Analysis and Research Services of the Public Sector Labour Relations Board went somewhat unnoticed. This means the Conservative government can just rely on the results it gets from hand-picked private sector firms before it embarks on bargaining wages and benefits for tens of thousands of federal public sector workers whose collective agreements expire this year.
So why is this a problem — and why should anyone who isn’t a federal public servant care? Aren’t these comparisons straightforward and shouldn’t public sector workers be paid the same as private sector workers?
In fact, pay comparisons are not straightforward and how public sector workers are paid affects all workers, but in different ways than most might immediately think.
There’s a lot of misinformation about differences between public and private sector pay, with the general perception that all public sector workers are overpaid, fuelled by flawed reports produced by business lobby groups. If the federal government just relies on their analysis, we’re all in trouble.
CUPE conducted rigorous analysis of public and private compensation using the most detailed occupational data available from the census. These results, published in detail in the Battle of the Wages report, found that when similar occupations are compared, overall average pay for public sector workers is very similar to the private sector (higher by just 0.5 per cent). While overall averages are very similar, pay scales are very different with public sector pay much more equitable than the private sector. There’s a smaller pay gap for women and pay is also much more equitable by age, region and occupation.
Lower paid occupations tend to do better in the public sector while those in higher paid occupations don’t make as much in the public sector.
Pay for women in the public sector is more equitable largely because of pay equity laws that rarely apply in the private sector. Men in the public sector are actually paid on average about five per cent less than men employed in similar occupations in the private sector.
Other detailed comparisons of public and private sector pay, such as those conducted by the Institut de la statistique du Quebec, have also found no evidence for a public sector pay premium.
Public sector pay is more equitable than the private sector largely because unions advocate and achieve more equitable pay scales — but also because the public would be unlikely to tolerate multi-million executive pay packages or the poverty wages much more common in the private sector. But that’s exactly where we’ll go if private sector pay is used as the model for public sector pay.

Attacking the more equitable pay scales of public sector workers is a tactic used by the federal and many provincial governments to undermine public services, create jealousy and divide workers — and one that would lead to lower wages for all workers, especially the lowest paid. That would have negative social repercussions — and would also be bad for our economy.
The Conference Board, OECD and IMF have all identified growing inequality as a major problem with our economy and as a barrier to stronger economic growth. Many, including those at the IMF, also consider it one of the factors responsible for the recent financial and economic crisis.
More equitable public sector pay should be a model for the private sector and not the other way around. This won’t happen overnight, but we can and should work toward achieving it in a number of ways.
Steps that would help achieve this include: increasing minimum wages; requiring governments and their contractors to pay fair wages and living wages, allowing shareholders to have a say on CEO pay, restricting tax incentives that reward excessive CEO pay, improving public pensions such as the CPP and other social benefits, providing adequate funding for public services, and strengthening instead of undermining unions and workers rights.
We should be under no illusions. The present federal government has shown little interest in measures to boost pay for workers or to improve income equality and in fact has gone in the opposite direction. But measures to improve wages and income equality are supported by a majority of Canadians — and that’s who our governments must ultimately be accountable to.

Toby Sanger is senior economist for the Canadian Union of Public Employees. David-Alexandre Leblanc is senior research officer for the Public Service Alliance of Canada.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

 

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/op-ed/Public+sector+promotes+equality/9382457/story.html

Public service unions brace for coming showdownover sick leave

OTTAWA — A big issue in the Conservative government’s upcoming showdown with federal unions over a plan to eliminate accumulated sick leave is what to do with the $5.2 billion in unused leave that public servants have already banked and rolled over.

Treasury Board President Tony Clement has a few options to choose from when he sends his department’s negotiators into 2014’s round of collective bargaining with orders to attain a new short term disability plan to replace accumulated sick leave.

By all accounts, he has been presented with proposals that range from generous and reasonable compromises to a hard-line approach the unions would never accept.

Many suggest that the one he picks will reveal how big a battle the government is willing to wage with its unions.

But the government’s sweeping amendments to the Public Service Labour Relations Act will so dramatically weaken the bargaining power of 17 unions that many expect Treasury Board will pretty Public service unions brace for coming showdown over sick leave
well get whatever concessions it wants. And if it can’t, the government has the ultimate weapon: it can legislate.

Andrew Graham, a former senior bureaucrat and now a professor at Queen’s University, says the sick leave negotiations could have been among the most divisive and intractable in years — until the government changed the ground rules.

With those changes, he says, the government can effectively call the shots on which unions get to strike and which go to arbitration to resolve disputes. On top of that, it will have the exclusive right to decide which workers are essential and not allowed to strike.

The amendments also reduce the independence of arbitrators and ensure they base their awards on the government’s budgetary priorities and that the recruitment and retention of talent are done at current pay rates.

The amendments mark the biggest overhaul of the law since it was passed by the Pearson
government in 1967, giving public servants the right to unionize and to bargain collectively. Clement has said he wanted the changes in place for the 2014 round of bargaining.
The big question is what the unions will do.

They had a bargaining strategy before learning of the reforms, which were included in the omnibus budget bill. Their leaders have since closeted themselves in secret strategy sessions, exploring the options, implications and repercussions — not only for this round of bargaining but into the future.
So far, they have vowed to try to get the government to remove the amendments from the omnibus bill and discuss new legislation.

“The deal this government makes will depend on how much they want labour peace,” says Graham. “And what will the union position be? Are they going to fight what I think is a losing fight? Despite their public and private protestations, they should look around and see how alone they are in this ball game with sick leave and try and cut the best deal they can for their members. They can be stubbornor have a sweetened transition.”

But Ron Cochrane, co-chair of the union-management National Joint Council, says that while the government may have the power in this round, it still has an obligation to bargain in good faith. “The omnibus bill tilts the bargaining in favour of the Harper government but it continues to be governed by the duty to ... make every reasonable effort to conclude a collective agreement,” Cochrane says.

The government will approach the talks with a basic design that’s built around three critical factors: the number of sick days per year public servants will get, the amount of time the short-term disability plan will cover 100 per cent of salary, and the contribution rates for a revamped long-term disability plan.

An early draft of the business plan obtained by the Citizen shows options that would give public servants between five and seven paid sick days before going on short-term disability. Short-term Public service unions brace for coming showdown over sick leave
disability typically covers employees for 26 weeks, offering graduated incomes that drop the longer employees are off work. Long-term disability kicks in after that.

The parties would have to decide whether to allow the carry-over of unused days, but clearly the government wants to stop the accumulation of unused sick leave.

The government’s plan has been years in the making. In fact, unions were warned changes were coming when Treasury Board launched a $5.6-million disability management initiative several years ago to get a handle on the government’s record-high absenteeism rates and soaring disability rates, led by an epidemic of mental health claims.

The project team set up to lead the initiative developed a strategy for departments, along with a guidebook, manual and training, and was supposed to provide cabinet with a business plan on next steps last year.

The new strategy is aimed at preventing injury and illness in the workplace and getting managers to actively support workers who are on sick leave by ensuring they get early care and return to work as quickly as possible. The team came up with a four-year plan which would cost $26 million to unroll and could generate hundreds of millions in savings by 2018.

One of the big changes is early intervention by third-party case managers who would step in to monitor and support sick and ill employees as soon as they go on short-term disability. But scope of the proposed four-year overhaul is sweeping.

Along with negotiating with unions, the government has to seek tenders for new short- and long-term disability plans. The labour minister has to hammer out new arrangements with the various provincial workers’ compensation boards to improve the timeliness and handling of injury-on-the-job claims. At the same time, the Employee Assistance Program has to be retuned and expanded and Health Canada’s role in conducting the fitness-to-work evaluations could be shifted to the short- and longterm disability insurers.

The unions are in a tough spot. They have been a part of the disability management initiative and they also have concerns about the way sick leave and disability is now managed. Many, however, feel the existing system is workable and can be fixed rather than charging ahead with a wholesale overhaul.

Many of the problems with the existing system are embedded in the design of the plan, which has remained unchanged for 40 years. Managers are failing to monitor and track the use of sick leave like they should, a weakness that when combined with a generous sick leave benefit has invited abuse. 

Canada’s public servants now get 15 days of fully paid sick leave a year. They can carry over any unused days and roll them over year to year, which they do at a cost of $325 million a year. A big question is what will happen to all that banked sick leave that many public servants feel they earned.
The government is worried about a run on banked sick leave from public servants who may want to use it before they lose it. Steps are being taken to ensure that doesn’t happen.

Public service unions brace for coming showdown over sick leave. But the government also has a fiscal imperative to deal with banked sick leave, which if reported as
an ongoing employee benefit that could be payable in the future would be worth $5.2 billion for the core public service and separate agencies. The government is under pressure to record its total compensation costs, including sick leave and disability costs, in its books.

“They want to get rid of it from two perspectives,” says Graham. “First, as a contingent liability on the books and as a residual entitlement. They could let it die out but that would take a long time — it would be years — or they could do what Ontario did and make a deal with unions which essentially gave a lump sum for earned sick leave.”

The joint council’s Cochrane says the unions want to see a business case for the overhaul. They have long suspected the reforms are driven by getting the $5.2-billion liability for accumulated sick leave off the books to help reduce the deficit before the 2015 election. Treasury Board officials say that amount isn’t officially on the books and acknowledge the liability is much less than $5.2 billion because not all public servants will use their banked leave and whatever is left can’t be cashed out.
But some critics say the Conservatives don’t want to shell out more money to public servants, especially when they’re still paying them billions of dollars for buying out of the accumulated severance pay for voluntary departures the government eliminated during the last round of bargaining.
Rather, the government could kill unused sick credits or it could compromise and offer to carry them over to be used only to top up the 70-per-cent salary typically guaranteed by short-term disability plans.

But banked sick leave is just one of the many variables that will be up for discussion.
The number of discretionary sick days will also be a contentious issue. The government would like to limit those 15 days to between five and eight a year. It also wants no further year-over-year accumulation of unused days.

Once those days are used, a short-term disability plan would kick in that would be managed by a plan administrator. With short-term disability comes case management — done by a third party — to help all workers get the rehabilitation, support and medical care needed to get back to work faster.
Another big issue on the table will be the sick leave formula to replace salaries while on short-term disability. The task force recommended a graduated scale that starts at 100-per-cent salary and would fall to between 70 and 75 per cent the longer an employee remains on disability. The parties will have to negotiate the number of days that will be on full pay.

Short-term disability is typically about 26 weeks before long-term disability begins. The hope is that earlier intervention will mean fewer employees will have to resort to long-term disability.
The government will have to call new tenders for its two existing long-term disability plans — one for unionized workers managed by Sun Life Assurance and another managed by Industrial Alliance for executives. The plans could be merged into one and the waiting period would be extended from 13 weeks to 26 weeks that someone could be on short-term disability. Public servants now get 70 per cent of their salary under the existing plan. That’s unlikely to change.
Public service unions brace for coming showdown over sick leave

Contribution rates for long-term disability will also be up for discussion. Employees now pay 15 per cent of contributions and the government covers the rest. A move to shift half or three-quarters of the cost to employees could also be on the table.

The unions did have input into the disability initiative and the government is well aware of their concerns, which could be addressed as trade-offs or “inducements” to help reach a settlement.
Unions have long raised concerns that young or new employees can’t bank enough sick leave to cover recurring or chronic illnesses. At the same time, healthy older workers who have built up lots of sick leave have to exhaust it all if they fall ill before getting the rehabilitation they need. And then the bank is empty if they relapse. Others simply abuse sick leave and feel entitled to use it as they ease into retirement.

The government would prefer to negotiate with all unions, representing employees in both the core public service and separate agencies, all at once. It wants a uniform transition to a new system and to avoid having two systems with some still operating under the old system and others under a new one.
Unions expect the government will approach negotiations similar to the special round of bargaining it called several years ago to get rid of severance pay for voluntary departures.

In that case, the government targeted the largest union, the Public Service Alliance of Canada, struck a deal and then offered the same take-it-or-leave deal to all the other unions. Many objected and took it to arbitration, which eventually sided with the government because the largest union had accepted the deal.

But PSAC President Robyn Benson has been unequivocal in her refusal to negotiate sick leave in this round: “We won’t trade it, sell it, swap it, lose it or give it away.”
Cochrane agrees: “The fact that this government is so anti-employee and will go to the extreme to get its way makes it the bully in the schoolyard that needs to be put in its place. Hopefully the employees will recognize the bully and stand up to it.”

kmay@ottawacitizen.com
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen