Friday, November 26, 2004
NEGOTIATIONS MESSAGE:
After months of waiting for the universities to put their written proposals on the table, the hard bargaining has finally started. Part of this wait was due to the employers seeking relief from negotiating at a single table with all three parties present. Another part of this wait has to do with the employers' wish to split the local. The union successfully appealed to the provincial government to remind the employers of the intent of the order in council, it's regulations, and it's interpretation. The result of this action is that we are meeting at one bargaining table.
This round of collective bargaining is to be fought on the battleground of ideologies and control, in a climate of very poor labour relations. Just how bad are labour relations? The union has several unfair labour practices filed against the universities, the number of arbitration cases concerning outstanding grievances are on the rise, and the number of grievances being filed are numerous, at the University of Saskatchewan they number nearly fifty.
Over the years, the universities' administrations have spent much time trying to convince the union of their autonomy from the government, and that this autonomy is absolute. The universities' belief has been betrayed by proposing the provincial wage mandate and the voicing of grave concerns, implying dire consequences, if this mandate is not adhered to. It became very clear from the outset of bargaining that the universities are looking to take their lead from the provincial government and to go a step further by proposing concessions. The employers are crying poverty, due to lack of funding, and a heavy debt load. Because of this, benefits are in jeopardy, especially at University of Saskatchewan, and the wage increases are to follow the provincial mandate.
The universities have also expressed a great many concerns regarding the excessive rights of the employees, (we have too many didn't you know,) and that these rights interfere with their administration practises. To regain control of the workforce, the universities are proposing that we give up our rights so that they may manage without the interference of a collective agreement. Seniority is a good example; we are proposing campus wide seniority at the University of Saskatchewan. The employer would agree to this proposal if seniority had no consequences and a merit-based system of job hiring to take its place. The universities define seniority as entitlement as opposed by the union's view that seniority is a hard earned right. The universities have belittled the restrictive barriers of qualifications and demonstrated efficiency that we must first overcome before seniority plays a factor in the hiring.
So, confronted with this tale of woe, are we willing to die at the top of the hill for it? You bet! We have a plan!
Submitted on behalf of the CUPE 1975 negotiations committee:
Bob Van Kampen
Negotiation Dates
Between CUPE 1975, the University of Saskatchewan and the University of Regina: August 31 in Saskatoon, September 15 in Regina, October 13 in Saskatoon, October 25 & 26 in Regina, November 19 in Saskatoon, November 25 in Regina, December 2 in Saskatoon, December 9 & 10 in Regina.
Your CUPE 1975 negotiation committee,
Don Puff, Glenda Graham, Bob VanKampen, Wayne Turner, Rick Kerr, Brad McKaig, Kate Hodgson(alternate) along with our National representatives Don Moran & Lois Lamon.
posted by Glenda Graham
Thursday, November 18, 2004
Quest for excellence ignores union
The StarPhoenix
November 18, 2004
I recently noticed the University of Saskatchewan is back in action (Investing in the future: U of S fundraiser aims to net $100 million SP, Nov. 5), soaring to the next level of "excellence."
But does a university actually strive to be "first and best" by competing for funds, students, faculty and staff? Isn't it the other way round -- with students, faculty, and staff competing to attend or be employed by a publicly funded educational institution committed to excellence?
Worse, doesn't the emphasis on competition undermine the university's commitment to excellence?
But then again, is it merely a set of new buildings that make a university? Competition for funds apparently includes requesting donations from workers on campus. The members of CUPE 1975 have been subsidizing the U of S for years by living with a discriminatory wage system that was to be resolved with a joint job evaluation plan.
Just as support staff was looking forward to the implementation of a fair and equitable wage system that would bring them into the 21st century, the university violated the jointly negotiated collective agreement by abandoning the job evaluation process at the eleventh hour.
CUPE 1975 will continue to strive for both excellence and equity, while maintaining our commitment to fairness and the respect that is due our members -- the people who keep the campus operational and functional for all. Excellence, after all, is achieved through co-operation, not competition, something the co-operative history of our province has already shown.
Glenda Graham
President CUPE 1975
posted by Glenda Graham
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Costs of university education in Saskatchewan among highest in Canada
A new report published by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) shows students in Saskatchewan pay higher tuition and fees and graduate with greater debt loads than students in most other Canadian provinces and public universities in the U.S.
The author calls on the government to put an immediate two-year freeze on tuition and fees at the province's universities. During this time period, the author urges the provincial government to undertake a full review of university funding and student financial assistance, similar to ones currently underway in Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador.
"Saskatchewan students pay more than 15% the national average for tuition and fees," says Professor John Conway, the report's author. "In the last four years undergraduate tuition and fees have increased by 46%, from $3,784 in 1999 to $5,526 this year."
Enrollment in Saskatchewan's universities decreased by 2% between 1999 and 2003. Across Canada, enrollment has increased by 20%. Saskatchewan is the only province where enrollment is decreasing, according to a report last week by the Canadian Millennium Scholarship Foundation.
Research shows that 63% of students in Saskatchewan graduate with a median debt of about $20,000, considerably higher than in most other provinces.One of the most troubling implications of the findings, says Conway, is the lack of access for rural students, lower-income students and families and Aboriginal students.
"One half of Saskatchewan university students live further than commuting distance from either the University of Regina or the University of Saskatchewan," Conway says. " In no other province do half of the students have no choice but to live away from home to attend university. Lower- and middle-income students from rural Saskatchewan simply can not afford the costs."
Conway says that the Saskatchewan government must look to other provincial jurisdictions that have taken action to address the escalating cost of a university education. Tuitions have been frozen in BC, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. Tuition increases are capped at two percentage points above the rise in inflation in Alberta, and at two percent in arts and science colleges in Ontario.
Some provinces require that universities devote at least one-third of any increase in tuition to student grants and scholarships."Saskatchewan's approach of providing graduates who remain in the province with a $500 tax credit does little, if anything, to improve access to education," says Conway.
Report's Author
* John Conway is Professor Emeritus at the University of Saskatchewan where he served as the first elected chair of the University Council..
Professor Conway has also served as a senior policy advisor on universities in the Saskatchewan Department of Learning. (Note: This is not the Regina-based John Conway who is a member of the Regina Public School Board.)
Lynn Gidluck Director Saskatchewan Office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) 2022 Montague Street Regina, SK, Canada S4T 3J7 Phone: (306) 924-3372 Fax: (306) 586-5177 E-mail: ccpasask@sasktel.net
The CCPA is a non-partisan, non-profit research institute dedicated to promoting progressive economic and social policy research of importance to Canadian and Saskatchewan citizens.
posted by Glenda Graham
Monday, November 08, 2004
WHAT'S HAPPENING regarding JE??
The following dates have been set to continue our complaint against the universities with the arbitration board:
October (18,19, were cancelled due to illness) 27,28, (November 29 cancelled due to the unavailability of a witness), March 7,8,9,10,11..
We started on June 29 & 30th 2004.............Well folks there just wasn't enough time to have to have the case heard in two days.
The first day was spent mostly on preliminary objections (by the University of Saskatchewan)
Your CUPE 1975 negotiating committee for Job Evaluation, Don Puff, Glenda Graham, Bob VanKampen, Michael Brockbank, Rick Kerr, Brad McKaig, along with our National representatives Don Moran & Lois Lamon.
posted by Glenda Graham
Thursday, September 23, 2004
Contest CLOSED Sept 30th, 2004!!
Thank you for your submissions
Union Wear for CUPE 1975
1. We are planning a logo/slogan design contest. The winner will receive a Canadian-made, union-made leather jacket with our new logo/slogan. Submit entries to the union office c/o CUPE 1975 Slogan/Logo contest @ 21 McLean Hall.
2. Our 2nd Vice President, Linda Reiber, is coordinating an order for some union made goods printed with a CUPE 1975 logo/slogan for members of CUPE 1975 to show their union pride. Everything will be handled on a cost recovery basis. The local plans to cover the costs up front, and then effectively be reimbursed as items are purchased. If you have any suggestions about what you would like to see ordered, please contact Linda with your preferences i.e. jackets, t-shirts, sweat shirts, shorts, sweat pants, mugs, watches, date books ...apparently the possibilities are limitless!! . Email Linda Reiber with your suggestions! reiber@sask.usask.ca
Friday, August 20, 2004
Strike Preparation workshop
STRIKE PREPARATION (This workshop was a huge success!!. If there is enough interest we will be scheduling another date. Please leave your name at the union office to be placed on a list if interested)
A hands-on workshop aimed at locals who may need to prepare for a strike. The workshop also covers important issues around strike aversion.. Melanie Medlacott will be the Facilitator.
There will be a limit on the number of people who can attend this workshop. If there is a lot of interest and the first class is full we will put your name down for the next set of workshops. Email Evelyn with your RSVP, Your hours of work and your department head's name or to the person who is to receive your work release.
In Solidarity,
Linda Reiber
2nd Vice President
Thursday, August 12, 2004
What members have to say!
Welcome to the world of media misrepresentation. Be glad they printed half of what you said and didn't make all of it up as has occured in other instances.
I thought the article was good, surprising because it was hard hitting but I think you came across well. It will be an eye opener for some people, especially those in management. They might well say, get on with the negotiations and quit farting around.
Hang in there sister.
Since I don't think it would be appropriate for me to write the Star Pheonix as an individual member on a union subject I decided to ask you if you, or someone in the Union Office, would make it painfully plain to the city's newspaper that there is not "wage disparity between women and men working the same jobs".My best understanding of job equity is that it is a disparity between wages between jobs. I am willing to be corrected on that. But I do know that if a man were hired to do my job he would be paid exactly the same wage as I am to do the same work.
I was wondering why no information regarding a possible strike was sent out to union members. I was rather surprised to open my morning paper to find on the third page an article stating that CUPE may be preparing to strike. What is going on?
I am forunate to have all the staff in the building informing us that I am going on strike. Pray, tell what for???
I have explained to a few people that the notice of motion is just to give the executive the right to call for a strike vote which actually they have anyway. Actually I thought the SP article was quite splendid and your comments very true(even _____'s Boss felt sympathy with the union - but people had to read it carefully...which they don't always do do they?
I am really disappointed with the article"University union ponders strike" in the Star Phoenix, August 11, 2004.After our email discussions of August 10th, you had stated "it is premature to have a strike vote".You quote in this article "Our members are wanting to have a strike vote", I think is so totally unfair to members that don't even know what is on the bargaining table. When you state"our members" - how many members are you talking about?"One member requested a notice of motion for a strike mandate as soon as it is practical" - don't you think that actually telling the Star Phoenix readers - rather than the CUPE 1975 members first is really inappropriate. I for one, and believe me, I am not the only one, am not pleased with the way that this was handled.I think that if you are going to speak on behalf of "all the members", that it should be "all the members" who are wanting to have a strike vote, not just because one member made a motion.My feeling after talking to a few CUPE 1975 members, regarding this article, will be that more members are really upset, and hopefully will speak out at the next membership meeting (which unfortunately, I will not be able to attend).
all in all I believe it is a good article however it has shook a few folks up that were not to be shaken
I thought it was a great article, forgetaboutit
Hey- nice article today! Did the SP contact you or did you contact them?
I LOVED the article in the Star Phoenix. I thought you sounded very knowledgeable, very reasonable, and most of all - you sounded like a human being who cares about her coworkers.When management is quoted in the media they sound like talking heads. Congratulations for being a whole person!The current Skopein also shows us up as a proud and strong union. I think our solidarity is increasing.I also think we (union leaders) need to start making plans for meetings to let the membership talk about the issues as a group. And we need to reassure and EDUCATE them. There's some fear-mongering out there, saying that we are going on strike. That's a big misrepresentation.
Cheers to you
I was glad to hear the caretakers mentioned. I know you represent us all
It's too bad though that we can't organize a strike for the 1st week of Sept. ... if we're going to do it, of course that would be the best time to hold it, as it would probably be most effective then and wouldn't (hopefully) last very long. Maybe if it drags on long enough they can make it for the 1st week of January in T2?
I know these things take a long time though...
posted by Glenda Graham
Wednesday, August 11, 2004
University union ponders strike Pace of negotiations irks 2,700 support staff
Darren Bernhardt
The StarPhoenix
August 11, 2004
The universities of Saskatchewan and Regina face a rocky start to the academic year if 2,700 support staff, some of whom are calling for strike action, walk off the job next month.
"Our members are wanting to have a strike vote. They are disgruntled and antsy," said Glenda Graham, president of CUPE Local 1975 in Saskatoon. "We are not very happy with the universities."
The CUPE unionized employees include caretakers, food services staff, heating plant operators, electricians, plumbers, personnel who feed animals at the barns and clerical staff. The impact would also be felt at Royal University Hospital and the dental clinics on campus, where members operate ECG machines and perform office work.
"These are the people who keep the place running. They clean up after the students, they answer the phones, they cook the lunches," said Graham. "It would be quite a sorry state of affairs to have nobody cleaning the university for even a short period of time."
The university most impacted would be the U of S, which employs 2,100 of the members. The other 600 are in Regina. The collective agreement is a tri-partite agreement between CUPE Local 1975 and the two institutions. No one from the U of S returned phone calls for an interview.
It's been nearly eight months since the contract expired Dec. 31 and "we haven't even finished exchanging proposals (with the universities)," Graham noted. "We are in limbo, stuck in this black hole of red tape the university insists on living with."
The union last met with the negotiator representing the universities May 10. A meeting set for June was cancelled by the universities.
The next negotiation meetings are scheduled for Aug. 31 in Saskatoon and Sept. 15 in Regina.
"Certainly our members are getting angry and restless and I don't blame them. As a matter of fact, at our last general membership meeting, one member requested a notice of motion for a strike mandate as soon as is practical," said Graham.
The most practical time would be after the start of the school year, when staff have returned from summer holidays, said Graham, a medical receptionist. "We certainly have some members who are ready to walk off as of yesterday but I don't know if that's in our best interests," she said."It would be a last resort (to go before the fall session of classes begins) but everything's possible."
The union is upset about the universities' decision about job evaluation. For years, the two sides have been discussing ways to address the wage disparity between women and men working the same jobs. However, the sides couldn't agree on the formula to use. In December, the universities unilaterally decided how it would be done and ended the debate.
While it pleased some employees, it further angered others. "Once they pulled the plug on the job evaluation, they also threw out the issue of pay equity and that has our members hopping mad," said Graham. She also accuses the U of S of "arbitrarily cooking up" its own job classifications.
"That's illegal according to our contract. They aren't allowed to go off willy-nilly on their own and do this," she said, adding the university also eliminated the campus-wide job-bidding seniority enjoyed by clerk-stenos. "They now only have departmental seniority. So if you're a steno in a small department, you could be stuck there forever. There's no room to move around," Graham said.
"What they've done is bring back the pink ghetto to campus," she added, referring to female-dominated positions with no opportunity for advancement.
A strike preparation workshop is scheduled for Sept. 7 in Saskatoon to get ready, in the event a strike is initiated. "We want members to know what they could be getting into. We don't want there to be any illusions should it come to that day," Graham said.
Monday, May 03, 2004
CUPE 1975 JOB EVALUATION NEWS: May, 2004
Action and Events:
1) DISCOVERING THE TRUTH The Union met with Craig Dotson and John Biss, two government officials, on Thursday, March 25, 2004. At this meeting, it was disclosed by government that representatives from the University of Saskatchewan (UofS) and the University of Regina (UofR) had approached them seeking to rescind the Order in Council that allows our two locals to bargain jointly. It is apparent that the universities are seeking to split CUPE Local 1975!
On Wednesday, April 21, 2004, CUPE 1975 met with Andrew Thomson, Minister of Learning, to present CUPE 1975's concerns about the direction the universities are taking regarding job evaluation and pay equity. They are also seeking clarification of the government's role regarding these issues.
2) SKOPEIN ARTICLE PUSHES BUTTONS Due to some factual comments from union members regarding their frustrations around JE and the University of Saskatchewan's recent actions, the UofS has claimed defamation and demanded an apology from the Union. The Union contends that there is no basis for such an allegation and are prepared 'to go to the wall' for our members.
3) UNIVERSITY MAKES A U-TURN IN JOB-EVALUATION DISPUTE The University of Saskatchewan did a u-turn at the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board (SLRB) hearing on Monday, March 29, 2004, after months of insisting the job evaluation dispute is not arbitrable.
Don Puff, the local President at CUPE 1975 (UofR) stated, 'I am happy the SLRB referred the matter to arbitration.'
The SLRB stated that if any labour-relations issues remain outstanding after the arbitrator's decision on the violation of the Collective Agreement, the Union is to come back to the SLRB for a decision on the violation of the Trade Union Act.
It is a known fact that the general membership is frustrated over the long, drawn out JE process. Please be assured that Union members serving on the various JE committees will continue to work tirelessly to ensure fair and equitable results for all members. The dates for the arbitration to be heard are June 29 and 30th.
4) HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION COMPLAINTS The Union is waiting on the Human Rights Commission to interpret the act pertaining to our concerns regarding the lack of action on pay equity by the universities and their statements that JE is dead. We are still encouraging our members to file complaints. The required forms are available from our website.
5) UNILATERAL JOB CLASSIFICATIONS IMPOSED ON THE CLERICAL AND LIBRARY WORKERS The Union has filed another grievance and another unfair labour practice against the universities for the above.
6) UNION ACTIVITY ON JOB EVALUATION The Union's Job Evaluation Negotiating Committee, along with members from the JESC, are continuing to meet and discuss strategies to bring the universities back to the negotiation table. These strategies include, but are not limited to, legal actions, meetings with both government officials and union leaders, public awareness initiatives, job action and, last but not least, continual communication with our membership.
On April 20, 2004 the Union JE Negotiation Teams and members of the JESC met with a JE expert consultant who confirmed the integrity of the consistency review process. The UofS management team alleged that the jointly gathered JE data lacked integrity. They walked away from the JE process effectively derailing the completion of JE.
Please direct questions or comments to:
Glenda Graham grahamglenda@hotmail.com
or
Don Puff puffdo@uregina.ca
Sunday, March 21, 2004
What CUPE Saskatchewan has to say about the U of S (excerpt from the President's Report to the March 2004 Annual Convention)
Just as progress was about to occur, after six years of bargaining the University of Saskatchewan announced that it would no longer participate in the agreed to Joint Job Evaluation with the union. Shortly after being hired out of Alberta, the new head of Human Resources at the U of S announced the process was flawed and refused to negotiate.
Perhaps the single most important obligation for unions and employers is to bargain in good faith with the aim of concluding an agreement. One would think U of S President Peter McKinnon (lawyer and husband of Janice McKinnon) would understand this basic concept, but unfortunately that perception seems to escape him.
Setting aside the obvious violation of the Trade Union Act, we need to be concerned about the motives of management at the U of S. Historically, universities have been known as a bastion of social justice.. The very idea of higher learning is to make the world a better place and when those entrusted with overseeing the administration of post-secondary education exchange this view for some bottom-line mentality, it is time to replace them. Women and men who work for the U of S deserve far better from their publicly funded employer.
posted by Glenda Graham
Wednesday, March 17, 2004
News item From Regina Corrine Gogal
writes about Marlys Upton's penny success
posted by kate hodgson
Friday, February 27, 2004 Response to this week's memo from University of Saskatchewan HR to Clerical and Library workers
I have had many emails and calls regarding the memo sent to Clerical and Library workers this past week and the Union Office has been overwhelmed with calls as well. As a clerical I recieved the memo too and I can tell you the union is not pleased.
Our first dates with regards to the Unfair Labor Practices that we have filed against the university are March 30,31 and April 2nd in front of the Labor Relations Board.
We believe the university is hoping that our members can be bribed to sell the union out, because - lets face it, our problem is not that we (CUPE members) make too much money.
No mistake you are worth the 6% not just today but years ago when we started the job evaluation project. When we went into this process all parties agreed that there would be back pay as stated in the terms of reference. I also believe that you are worth more.
The problems with the recent scenario from the university for starters include:
1. It takes away campus wide seniority from the clerk stenos. The union felt that this was a toe in the door as far as campus wide seniority goes and we always felt that eventually all CUPE 1975 workers would enjoy campus wide seniority and all that goes with it. Every time we negotiate that is one of the major proposals on the table and one of the last to leave.
2. Looks to me like there is no back pay here. It feels like the university held the members in a vortex while pretending to work on job evaluation in order to achieve pay equity. The union believes that the terms of reference still stand and we now have three Unfair Labor Practices against the University of Saskatchewan and Regina along with an impending arbitration to date.
3. What about other members on campus in female dominated jobs?? Like the food services workers and the dental assistants?? The union represents all workers on campus. The university strategically placed a wage increase to over 800 of our members. There is no doubt in my mind, they thought long and hard about this.
4.The university has not followed the contract to which they are a party. They have decided to only obey the contract when they feel it is in their best interests. This move is not pay equity, by a long shot. With these memos. the university has arbitrarily violated the Trade Union Act and the union will not sit idly by.
Judging from the number of calls and emails the Union has recieved about this memo and the confusion and anger it has caused, the university has underestimated the members in the clerical and library areas.
The union had absolutely nothing to do with this mess, however we are challenging them at the Labor Relations Board. We do not believe that Job Evaluation and pay equity are dead as the university seems to think.
Dangling a carrot in the guise of a home made job evaluation/pay equity plan to our members who have been underpaid for years while we continue to subsidize the university with our low wages. is despicable!!
In solidarity,
Glenda Graham
President CUPE 1975
CUPE 1975 cell: 221-8177 www.CUPE1975.ca
Thursday, February 05, 2004
Latest Press Release from CUPE 1975 regarding University of Saskatchewan
posted by kate hodgson
Monday, February 02, 2004
A walk down Memory lane courtesy of the University Archives.
posted by kate hodgson
Friday, January 30, 2004
What's happening with these classifications for Clerical and Library workers?
Here is what the Union has to say.
posted by kate hodgson
Thursday, January 29, 2004
Up to the present backgrounder on Job Evaluation/Pay Equity Click Here
posted by kate hodgson
Thursday, January 22, 2004
A new set of comparisons for job classifications click here for examples
posted by kate hodgson
Tuesday, January 13, 2004
The corresponding male dominated classifications are intended as a guideline to assist members in the larger female dominated classifications when filing wage discrimination complaints. The selections loosely reflect only the education and experience needed to obtain these positions. This is not meant to be an in depth comparison of classifications or duties but merely recommendations to provide a sample of the most obvious and blaring examples of wage discrimination, as shown by the bolded male classifications. Members are entirely free to choose any male dominated classification for comparison purposes.
Preamble to Wage Comparisons:
How Do I Compare Wages? - You can do this either way:
a) Use the wage increment you are currently at and compare to the corresponding male increment
b) Compare your current wage to the whole male wage range for the male job you choose to use as comparison
Can't Find Your Position? Don't know if a classification is male dominated? Need Help? E-mail your questions to: grahamglenda@hotmail.com or Rhonda.Heisler@usask.ca
Please remember to include your classification and department in your request for help.
Sample form
blank form for you to print off, fill out and submit to the Union Office
posted by Evelyn Wojcichowsky
Friday, January 09, 2004
Rally leaflet and picture
posted by kate hodgson