Canada Post likely will be locked out/on strike - July 2

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Regorium

One of the biggest issues is that unions at public corporations causes everyone's (including yours and mine) taxes to go up.

If a private corporation had a union of workers who fought against their employers, I wouldn't have any issue with it. Right now, the corporation and the union are playing with my money. They have no skin in the game.

But at least the corporation tries to stay profitable and minimize their tax burden. The union doesn't care about that except to extract as much as possible for themselves.

Subsidizing low wage workers will cost you more in the long run so it's a pick your poison scenario

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I understand the economy is in rough shape, and people are probably frustrated or upset by the impact it's had on themselves or their friends or relatives. But I'll never understand this mob mentality of chastising a group of workers who are trying to not let themselves be bullied into lowering their quality of life because their employers see a convienent opportunity to do so. And when these workers are successful it actually has a positive impact on the economy which is good for everyone.

Do people in none union jobs who have it good ever wonder why they have it good? Because their employer is doing their best to compete with unionized wages. Go back to the turn of the last century, people made peanuts and worked 6 days/week with little to no overtime, what changed that? People who decided to take a stand, and fought and in some cases died for these rights that people take for granted. Whether you're a fan of unions or not, you owe them a lot for what you have. Think about that when you get to spend 2 consecutive days off with your family, or when you get hurt at work through no fault of your own and don't have to worry about making ends meet.

great...no issue with that as long as its a PRIVATE interest that is deciding to pay them that as thats what they deem them to be worth. If those wages are collectively bargained with said company there is no issue.

Now lets compare apples to apples.

Public sector union workers are not worried one iota about the company going under or whether they lose money to any degree. So now we have unionized workers bargaining with a government agency who makes no profit per se but also has what amounts to an endless supply of cash. Taxpayers. So now it comes down to if that unions workers provide a service that is needed by the majority of the taxpaying base...and the answer to that question is a resounding no for the most part.

Which goes back to what i said in my original post that this is the time for the government to crush them as they exist now or at the very least have them sold off as a crown corporation and allow the market to determine their worth. If they want to stay unionized then they can do so and can negotiate with the private entity who will determine their worth.

I dont need to be subsidizing a government agency that has long lost its value and reason for existence.

edit..or i could have read further and just let regoriums post say it all.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Oh no, how will I get my................ Oh wait, literally nothing I care about other than my Flames season tickets package, which I can now completely access on-line has come via mail in the past 5 years.

Maybe now I'll get less junk to immediately throw into to recycling and my drain pipe will no longer be completely crushed because the mail man decides to walk across lawns instead of use the side walk.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

How much are they burdening them? I'm not saying it isn't happening, I've just never seen the numbers, in any case we shouldn't be holding the union responsible for this, the onus is on the people who gave them that deal without any consideration for any future complications. I wouldn't give up my retirement fund, which I likely gave up something to get in the first place, because of someone else's mistake.

From an earlier post of mine.......

Significant volatility in employee benefit expenses continues to pose challenges. The cost of employee benefits for the Canada Post segment rose by $59 million in the second quarter and by $129 million in the first two quarters, compared to the same period a year ago. This is the result of a decrease in the discount rates used to calculate benefit plan costs in 2015, partially offset by strong pension returns in 2014. Employee benefit expenses are expected to remain higher throughout 2015 when compared to 2014.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by transplant99

great...no issue with that as long as its a PRIVATE interest that is deciding to pay them that as thats what they deem them to be worth. If those wages are collectively bargained with said company there is no issue.

Now lets compare apples to apples.

Public sector union workers are not worried one iota about the company going under or whether they lose money to any degree. So now we have unionized workers bargaining with a government agency who makes no profit per se but also has what amounts to an endless supply of cash. Taxpayers. So now it comes down to if that unions workers provide a service that is needed by the majority of the taxpaying base...and the answer to that question is a resounding no for the most part.

Which goes back to what i said in my original post that this is the time for the government to crush them as they exist now or at the very least have them sold off as a crown corporation and allow the market to determine their worth. If they want to stay unionized then they can do so and can negotiate with the private entity who will determine their worth.

I dont need to be subsidizing a government agency that has long lost its value and reason for existence.

edit..or i could have read further and just let regoriums post say it all.

I have no issue with what I believe is your stance on the government privatizing nonessential service companies, however I disagree strongly with your stance on making working class people suffer the brunt of the governments choice to not do that.

Is it the workers fault that the government is keeping this a public entity? Why should they suffer because they just so happen to be in an industry that, while no longer essential, is still government owned. Ask yourself this, if this company is in such bad shape that they need to use taxpayer dollars just to keep it afloat, why hasn't the government gotten rid of it, or at least part of it to keep the costs low for taxpayers? Maybe it makes more money than they let us think and keep it just as a means to hike taxes?

If you have an issue with where your tax dollars are spent, punish the government that chooses to spend them that way, but attacking the worker who is just trying to have a decent life like the rest of us? That doesn't make sense to me

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

From an earlier post of mine.......

Nowhere in that quote does it say if or how much this is affecting taxpayers, there's no figures on how much is actually in the pension fund

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

People will still need parcels delivered, are they the only game in town? No, but it is always best to have competition in an industry. Think about how much a parcel shipment would cost if there was only one company doing it? There's a reason why in Canada we pay much more for domestic flights than most countries, 2 companies hold a monopoly and use it to gouge consumers. And they typically do not share those extra costs with their employees. People blame this poor economy on things like oil, which is a big factor, but they rarely see how big corporations are continuously reducing the amount of money going to the middle class, who are the true driving force to an economy.

This isn't about the union wanting a strike, unions don't want strikes, they are a last resort, this about a big company wanting to make bigger profits at the expense of their employees who at that the end of the day make their money. I wonder if they ever stop to think about the impact of reducing their employee's earnings and how it actually bites them in the ass when they can't afford to even use their service.

Here's a good example of how short sighted some views are on the impact of reducing costs in the name of making bigger profits.

If you've been in a macdonalds recently you've no doubt seen the new screens they use to take your order. Now those 4 screens in the restaurant eliminate 4 jobs in the store, sure that employee probably only made at best $30k a year, but here's where it creates it's impact, that employee can no longer go spend that $30k which has a ripple effect on every business that relies on that customers business. Most people will say, oh but it's not that much money, well if you consider that there are probably 100 macdonalds locations in the province, 4 $30k/year jobs lost at each locations, that would take around $12M out of our provincial economy. Meanwhile your Big Mac hadn't dropped in price, so those cost savings are just going in rotten ronny's pocket.

Yup, and a bunch of jobs got created to make those machines. The MCDs job is simply no longer relevant, but the make the machine job is. Nothing is gained by keeping jobs that no longer meet needs of society.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

If you've been in a macdonalds recently you've no doubt seen the new screens they use to take your order. Now those 4 screens in the restaurant eliminate 4 jobs in the store, sure that employee probably only made at best $30k a year, but here's where it creates it's impact, that employee can no longer go spend that $30k which has a ripple effect on every business that relies on that customers business. Most people will say, oh but it's not that much money, well if you consider that there are probably 100 macdonalds locations in the province, 4 $30k/year jobs lost at each locations, that would take around $12M out of our provincial economy. Meanwhile your Big Mac hadn't dropped in price, so those cost savings are just going in rotten ronny's pocket.

Simply not true. Those Kiosk screens allow the extra staff members who would normally be taking orders to spend time in the kitchen prepping food or bringing it out to the customers table. All McD's is doing is trying to provide better service to it's customers.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Dion

Simply not true. Those Kiosk screens allow the extra staff members who would normally be taking orders to spend time in the kitchen prepping food or bringing it out to the customers table. All McD's is doing is trying to provide better service to it's customers.

I agree with you that MCDs is simply trying to provide better service to their customers, but you are fooling yourself if you don't think those screens come with the benefit of reducing the required staff to take orders, long term. Faster convenient service is what a MCDs customer cares about, they care little about interacting with an actual person and no longer require cash for a transaction, so MCDs has figured out a better way to provide to their customers, that will also save them money in the ability to need to hire less people to run their business, at least in store.

Same with my new favourite toy the order feature on the Starbucks app. They are just meeting customer needs, but the more people that use that app. the less order takers they will need to hire long term.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Yup, and a bunch of jobs got created to make those machines. The MCDs job is simply no longer relevant, but the make the machine job is. Nothing is gained by keeping jobs that no longer meet needs of society.

What if the machine is made by a machine?

Edit: in any case I highly doubt the machine is made locally

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I have no issue with what I believe is your stance on the government privatizing nonessential service companies, however I disagree strongly with your stance on making working class people suffer the brunt of the governments choice to not do that.

Is it the workers fault that the government is keeping this a public entity? Why should they suffer because they just so happen to be in an industry that, while no longer essential, is still government owned. Ask yourself this, if this company is in such bad shape that they need to use taxpayer dollars just to keep it afloat, why hasn't the government gotten rid of it, or at least part of it to keep the costs low for taxpayers? Maybe it makes more money than they let us think and keep it just as a means to hike taxes?

If you have an issue with where your tax dollars are spent, punish the government that chooses to spend them that way, but attacking the worker who is just trying to have a decent life like the rest of us? That doesn't make sense to me

Good grief. I AM attacking the government and hoping they cut off a corporation that competes with private business that also provides far far more jobs than they do.

People lose their jobs ALL THE TIME in private sector businesses when it is deemed they are no longer needed to perform for that company. But because these are government unionized workers ....they somehow deserve protection from losing their non essential jobs for which they are already very healthily compensated between salary and benefits?

Is this really your argument?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I agree with you that MCDs is simply trying to provide better service to their customers, but you are fooling yourself if you don't think those screens come with the benefit of reducing the required staff to take orders, long term. Faster convenient service is what a MCDs customer cares about, they care little about interacting with an actual person and no longer require cash for a transaction, so MCDs has figured out a better way to provide to their customers, that will also save them money in the ability to need to hire less people to run their business, at least in store.

Same with my new favourite toy the order feature on the Starbucks app. They are just meeting customer needs, but the more people that use that app. the less order takers they will need to hire long term.

I know the owner of the High River franchise and a few of the employees. Nobody has lost their job or had their hours reduced because of the Kiosk system. More employees are now prepping your food or prepairing your drinks. McD's has also added another lane to their drive through to speed up service that requires another employee.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

What if the machine is made by a machine?

Edit: in any case I highly doubt the machine is made locally

I'm sure parts of it at least are. We can play this game forever, but at the very least at some point, some humans somewhere are coming up with the idea, engineering it and coming up with the programming. All work created that people care about. There is no sense fighting tooth and nail to protect jobs that become irrelevant simply because they used to exists, because there are other jobs now that never used to exists. Things change.

That's a very, "macro" view point. Not to say real people who either have a passion for a dying job or who's skills and training are on those types of jobs aren't impacted, but what can you do in the long run? As a taxpayer, regardless of the financials, and don't want a single penny more than is necessary than what is required to meet the TRUE demand for postal service of my tax payer dollars to go there, as I know it be better spent elsewhere. And I don't want to see another cent go there simply to support and old and outdated business model for any reason.

And I'd say the same for any money I'd put into a private or publicly traded company.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Dion

I know the owner of the High River franchise and a few of the employees. Nobody has lost their job or had their hours reduced because of the Kiosk system. More employees are now prepping your food or prepairing your drinks. McD's has also added another lane to their drive through to speed up service that requires another employee.

It will 100% happen. They may not fire, but they is,ply won't re-hire. If these screens take off and stick, your HR MCDs will employ less people 5 years from now for sure (it will be less, but that's a nice easy number)

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

It will 100% happen. They may not fire, but they is,ply won't re-hire. If these screens take off and stick, your HR MCDs will employ less people 5 years from now for sure (it will be less, but that's a nice easy number)

The only way they won't rehire is if business drops off.

The Kiosk system allows people to pay cash which still requires someone to take thier money. You also have customers who still prefer to order a drink or a coffee from a staff member as they think it's quicker.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Sure............ Why don't you think taking away the need to use a person to take a customers order will result in less staff?

The only way it won't reduce staff is if these screens actually increase business so they will need more people to make more food (entirely possible I suppose) or if this particular MCDs was understaffed to begin with and now with the screens they are actually able to keep up (also possible I suppose).

[burnin_vernon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

As long as we're playing with rhetoric...

Burying the taxpayer under increasingly burdensome pension plans, as one example, is bad for everyone but the union employees seeking to bully their employer into retaining something that should have been axed years ago.

Originally Posted by Regorium

One of the biggest issues is that unions at public corporations causes everyone's (including yours and mine) taxes to go up.

If a private corporation had a union of workers who fought against their employers, I wouldn't have any issue with it. Right now, the corporation and the union are playing with my money. They have no skin in the game.

But at least the corporation tries to stay profitable and minimize their tax burden. The union doesn't care about that except to extract as much as possible for themselves.

Canada Post is not government funded and has never affected your tax dollars. Their pension in decent shape; the recent funding was only for a solvency deficit.

They are a successful corporation and are growing more than they lead us to believe.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Sure............ Why don't you think taking away the need to use a person to take a customers order will result in less staff?

The only way it won't reduce staff is if these screens actually increase business so they will need more people to make more food (entirely possible I suppose) or if this particular MCDs was understaffed to begin with and now with the screens they are actually able to keep up (also possible I suppose).

The Kiosk system allows for more customers to place orders in a manner that is quicker than waiting in line for an employee to take your order. That means the employees in the kitchen have to prep a larger number of orders in a certain period of time. Allowing for the fact that McD's has a time limit (can't remember the specific number) for orders to be prepped and served to the customer, you need more employees to compensate for that to meet corp standards.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Dion

The only way they won't rehire is if business drops off.

The Kiosk system allows people to pay cash which still requires someone to take thier money. You also have customers who still prefer to order a drink or a coffee from a staff member as they think it's quicker.

Ultimately the goal of any business is fire all their staff and have the whole process automated, at some point in time someone at head office will work out that they save more money by not taking cash and not having any front line staff, that the world is cashless enough that they won't lose that much business.

I utterly refuse to use self checkouts because I know I'm slowly screwing over every kid that needs a starter job if I add to the impetus to close down gas jockeys or checkout girls. Sadly it's pointless and we are slowly moving to a society of 99 percent on welfare and one percent living like roman emperors but I'm not going to help that process.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by burnin_vernon

Canada Post is not government funded and has never affected your tax dollars. Their pension in decent shape; the recent funding was only for a solvency deficit.

They are a successful corporation and are growing more than they lead us to believe.

what are you talking about?

It is a crown corporation.

If I'm wrong and I apologize but I would like you to direct me to who does own it and finance it.