Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi
You're of the opinion that a group of workers who's pension plan has a $6billion dollar deficit don't care whether or not it gets fixed? That they also it as not their problem?
|
I am of the opinion that to CUPW, the 'fix' is just to have taxpayers cover any deficits, yes.
Quote:
|
You do realize that your post translates to: I really think they don't care about whether or not they have an income after they stop working and they don't care about looking for ways to ensure they do or at least have a better chance to have one. As is often the case with unions, their members don't see potentially losing 10's of thousands of dollars that they have invested their earnings throughout their entire career for as their problem. Until forced?
|
No, that is not what my post translates to. Because, again I think they are just fine with having taxpayers cover it.
Quote:
|
If that were the case why would they risk getting locked out over this in the first place? They're not being forced to care, by locking them out instead of working on a plan that works for both sides they are effectively being told that the company doesn't care whether they care or not about their at risk retirement savings.
|
They are going to risk being locked out because they aren't willing to make the same change CP's other unions have.