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

[Locke]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Canada post owns purolator so while they are losing some business it is certainly not a complete loss

You know who doesnt own Purolator? Postal Workers.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

You know who doesnt own Purolator? Postal Workers.

I did know that, how is that relevant to Canada post losing business as part of this dispute? The employees will lose money that they will never get back, unless they manage to convince Canada post to pay them for lost time, which I think we can all agree is highly unlikely. Even if there is a signing bonus on a new agreement we would never know if it would have been there in the first place.

This is partially why I'm sceptical about Canada post's position on the plan, they stand to lose a lot less in a lockout than the workers and may simply be trying to go with this new plan because it is cheaper than the old plan.

[Jacks]

It may not have a huge effect on their parcel business but in reality people are probably just as likely to switch to UPS or Fedex as they are to Purolator. Where they really lose out is that they force people who haven't gotten around to switching their bills, banking and other statements to go paperless. Also lots of companies still issue paper invoices and paper cheques and are now being forced to look at online alternatives. Good for the environment, terrible for the post office.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Jacks

It may not have a huge effect on their parcel business but in reality people are probably just as likely to switch to UPS or Fedex as they are to Purolator. Where they really lose out is that they force people who haven't gotten around to switching their bills, banking and other statements to go paperless. Also lots of companies still issue paper invoices and paper cheques and are now being forced to look at online alternatives. Good for the environment, terrible for the post office.

I would think the post office has been taking into account the inevitability of those changes being made at some point one way or another, realistically their money is in parcels. Yes those people could go to fedex or ups, at the end of the day though it is Canada post driving the bus if they are serving lockout notice so they are willing to accept those losses in an effort to get what they want. The true motive as to why they want those pension changes so badly is the question only they know the answer to. In my view when a side isn't willing to look at more than one option I consider that suspicious, now if they offered a number of options besides the one reported then that is different.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I would think the post office has been taking into account the inevitability of those changes being made at some point one way or another, realistically their money is in parcels. Yes those people could go to fedex or ups, at the end of the day though it is Canada post driving the bus if they are serving lockout notice so they are willing to accept those losses in an effort to get what they want. The true motive as to why they want those pension changes so badly is the question only they know the answer to. In my view when a side isn't willing to look at more than one option I consider that suspicious, now if they offered a number of options besides the one reported then that is different.

What's difficult to understand? The current pension is underfunded - a problem that is compounding with time.

[Kjesse]

nm

[Psytic]

Management has already been switched to defined contribution. The analysts and support functions (HR, IT, Engineering) have been switched. The only union out of the 3 or 4 at Canada Post still holding out on defined benefit is the mail handlers and deliverers but every other union has already made the switch. Those that have it now are grandfathered so it only affects new hires as well.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Psytic

Management has already been switched to defined contribution. The analysts and support functions (HR, IT, Engineering) have been switched. The only union out of the 3 or 4 at Canada Post still holding out on defined benefit is the mail handlers and deliverers but every other union has already made the switch. Those that have it now are grandfathered so it only affects new hires as well.

What a bunch of fascists over at Canada Post!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Sticking with the facts, it could have a serious consequences, it could also fix itself, also I have no idea how you are taking what I'm suggesting as a wait and see approach. My example has a wait and see for the first two years, yes, but it actually has provisions to address a negative result. It was only an example, they could put increased contributions in today, implement an escrow or something of that nature. The point I'm trying to make is that their is likely a solution that doesn't involve simply axing this plan.

Its not could its will. The aging workforce makes it a certainty that at some point the pension will collapse on itself. When you have more retirees then people working and contributing to the pension then there's trouble, especially when Justin rolled back the retirement age.

I don't believe that you can do a delay the inevitable and leave it alone for 2 years, it has to be controlled starting now.

Personally I think that Canada Post is positioning itself for a long drawn out winner take all fight with the union at this point. They've seen business evaporate and parcel delivery going over to Purolator and fed ex.

Most organizations out there are pushing their customers and venders to e-delivery, and essential deliveries are going to happen.

Canada post can really lock out the employees, especially given JT saying that a back to work legislation is not in the picture.

Chances are with the pension at 6 billion in the hole, in two years it could go to 7 billion, and at some point there's going to have to be a bail out request so that the pension doesn't go blammo.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Sliver

What's difficult to understand? The current pension is underfunded - a problem that is compounding with time.

What I was referring to was what is their true motive behind only considering one option. I think everyone can plainly see there is a deficit within their pensions plan. Is there not the slightest possibility that Canada post is using this problem as a means to roll out this new plan because their contributions are less expensive than another solution that will fix the problem in the current pension plan?

There is currently a $6billion deficit, that did not happen overnight, the current collective agreement was signed less than 4 years ago, in the last round of bargaining the accountants should have been able to see this problem, so f they didn't choose to draw a line in the sand then, I have to ask myself why now? And if they weren't able to see this problem then, why should anyone trust their judgement now on a solution when they couldn't get the math right 4 years ago?

Again there is an issue here and it needs to be addressed, but when a company that either didn't have the foresight to see a problem that they had all the resources in the world to see or apparently didn't choose to address it when they knew there was an issue is now claiming this problem only has one solution and they are certain it will fix and that all of the sudden they are now able to plan for fifty years down the road when before they couldn't even plan for 4, it really makes me think that maybe there's another way and that maybe they aren't really the most knowlegable or trustworthy people to be listening to when it comes to pension plans. That is of course unless this deficit popped up overnight.

[CaptainCrunch]

I don't think there's another way. There are three things that can happen with a pension that's 6 billion in the hole

1) You keep running the status quo where you don't change it, the number of workers collecting it on retirement increases, and it goes bankrupt and everyone loses their pension

2) At some point it becomes an emergency and Canada Post goes to the government for a 6 billion dollar pension bailout, and the government frankly has to refuse to do it.

3) You set a cut off date and new employees go on a new pension program that makes more sense and allows the pension to be in place down the road.

oh wait theres a fourth

4) The union and union employees top up the pension so it doesn't collapse.

I don't see any other way.

[calgarygeologist]

Does anyone else find that the unions new approach really disingenuous and a huge effort of grasping at straws? The union is now claiming that the pay difference between urban and rural employees, which have negotiated separate contracts, is a gender equality issue because 70% of rural carriers are women. It seems like a really strange way for the union to proceed.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't think there's another way. There are three things that can happen with a pension that's 6 billion in the hole

1) You keep running the status quo where you don't change it, the number of workers collecting it on retirement increases, and it goes bankrupt and everyone loses their pension

2) At some point it becomes an emergency and Canada Post goes to the government for a 6 billion dollar pension bailout, and the government frankly has to refuse to do it.

3) You set a cut off date and new employees go on a new pension program that makes more sense and allows the pension to be in place down the road.

oh wait theres a fourth

4) The union and union employees top up the pension so it doesn't collapse.

I don't see any other way.

You say you don't see another way, so I'm just curious, what in the current proposed plan is going to fix the $6billion deficit? It might not make it worse, but nothing I have read has explained how it fixes it. All the new hires will be paying into their new plan, but what part of that addresses the deficit? I see a higher chance of making the problem worse by having fewer people pay into the plan since the existing numbers will dwindle as the current employees retire so there will be an increase in payouts with a decline in contributors.

[Slava]

I just don't know how effective work stoppage will be this time. If people are getting their essential mail, and for other items people will look at other means. I guess we'll see how impactful it is.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Slava

I just don't know how effective work stoppage will be this time. If people are getting their essential mail, and for other items people will look at other means. I guess we'll see how impactful it is.

I don't think Canada post is hoping for customers to put pressure on the union, I think they are hoping that they can break the union by locking them out when they know it is a tough economy and people can't just make up the lost wages by working elsewhere during a strike. Essentially they would be using the economy as leverage to force the union to accept what they want.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I don't think Canada post is hoping for customers to put pressure on the union, I think they are hoping that they can break the union by locking them out when they know it is a tough economy and people can't just make up the lost wages by working elsewhere during a strike. Essentially they would be using the economy as leverage to force the union to accept what they want.

Canada Post's largest union has rejected a proposal from the federal labour minister to undergo binding arbitration to avoid a potential work stoppage.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers said in a statement that it has "politely declined" the suggestion from Labour Minister MaryAnn Mihychuk for binding arbitration, calling it a "matter of principle."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cana...nded-1.3668182

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

What adjustments do you think CUPW is going to support exactly? And by adjustments you mean reduction in payouts correct? Is there some other way to come up with $6B? Or do you think they'll support increases to their contributions with no increase in the pension payout?

I missed this post earlier and think I've given my take on the types of adjustments, but as far as what adjustments I think they would support? That's up to those members to decide and weigh the cons against how much they value maintaining a single pension plan for all employees instead having two tiers.

Here's a scenario I think most people don't consider and it may open some eyes as to why the union opposes a two tier system.

If I were a 20 year old postal worker who just started, I'm on the old pension plan, if they create a new tier for all employees hired going forward, in 40 years when I'm getting close to retirement the plan and compensaion package that I'm voting to "keep" today could be changed in bargaining because any cuts to it proposed by the company wont affect 95% of the workers so they won't have a financial reason to reject a contract offer with such cuts. So it really does have the potential to screw people over long term.

It really is about more than just fixing the deficit, it's about protecting the employees who are agreeing to "fix" the problem.

This is just an example, no need for the "the post office won't be around in 40 years" comments

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

Canada Post's largest union has rejected a proposal from the federal labour minister to undergo binding arbitration to avoid a potential work stoppage.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers said in a statement that it has "politely declined" the suggestion from Labour Minister MaryAnn Mihychuk for binding arbitration, calling it a "matter of principle."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cana...nded-1.3668182

No real surprise there, if they agree to it and the arbitrator rules heavily in favour of the company that wouldn't sit well with its members. Canada post is of course willing to go, at best they get what they wanted, at worst they go with the current plan and if it doesn't correct itself, it's on the taxpayers or the employees who lose their pension. No loss to them other than any possible financial savings to what they would contribute to the new plan.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

No real surprise there, if they agree to it and the arbitrator rules heavily in favour of the company that wouldn't sit well with its members. Canada post is of course willing to go, at best they get what they wanted, at worst they go with the current plan and if it doesn't correct itself, it's on the taxpayers or the employees who lose their pension. No loss to them other than any possible financial savings to what they would contribute to the new plan.

The arbitrator could side with the union and it's demands. I think they're crazy to turn that offer down as they may end settling for a worse offer when workers can no longer afford to be off the job.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Dion

The arbitrator could side with the union and it's demands. I think they're crazy to turn that offer down as they may end settling for a worse offer when workers can no longer afford to be off the job.

If it were me I would not want to gamble on two tiered system. But I could see how some people would. How close a person is to retirement would be a big factor.