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

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Slava

I just wanted to comment on this because its a conversation I have with my kids. I understand the sentiment that people in minimum wage jobs work really hard (I worked for minimum wage for years!) I get that people want things done cheap but to me it does come down to how replaceable you are and what skills you bring to the job. I've delivered flyers, had a paper route as a child and was paid horribly for both of those jobs, literally because anyone can do it. That's how things work in the world though. Top athletes get paid top dollars because they can do things that not many others can do. Same with top lawyers, doctors and entertainers. Basically that is how things work in any field; if you're not replaceable or not easily replaceable then you command a larger salary and better benefits and perquisites.

I'm not sure why the post office is above that either. Is it important that we get our packages and mail? Sure. Should we pay a great wage, full benefits and DB pension for that service for people...well I guess that is debateable in my mind.

That's a good point and a fair one to make. The problem that is out there right now, though, is someone has to do these jobs. Undesirable, unskilled work will remain. Should people at these jobs make minimum wage and collect food stamps and other government hand outs because they cant make ends meet to prop up businesses' with artificially low wages? I don't think that's right.

The average mail carrier makes 44k a year. Is that so high of the hog? It seems like a decent wage to me weighing cost of living and the job itself.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Dion

Right and the union was never going to strike?

The employer has the right to lockout employees in an effort to get them to accept a contract. It's no different than the employees striking to get the employer to agree to their demands. In this case the employer is forcing the issue on their terms as opposed to the union choosing a date where they think they can hurt he employer the most.

Even though you claim you've been in a union I have to think it was either a long time ago, or, you got canned and the union couldn't get your job back so now you have an ax to grind. The vast majority of contracts are negotiated without a labour dispute. Labour disputes aren't used anymore as a primary tool for unions. Even secondary. They're a last resort if the company isn't interested in good faith bargaining, or, refuse to come off draconian concessions.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm not sure why the post office is above that either. Is it important that we get our packages and mail? Sure. Should we pay a great wage, full benefits and DB pension for that service for people...well I guess that is debateable in my mind.

Why do construction labourers make so much money? They are easily replaceable. The reason is because those companies need this workers to make money, they don't make it without them. A lot of companies recognize this, but most don't. And society always seems to pick on fast food employees and consider them useless, fact of the matter is the macdonalds employee makes his company more money in 8 hours than the construction worker does.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

That's a good point and a fair one to make. The problem that is out there right now, though, is someone has to do these jobs. Undesirable, unskilled work will remain. Should people at these jobs make minimum wage and collect food stamps and other government hand outs because they cant make ends meet to prop up businesses' with artificially low wages? I don't think that's right.

The average mail carrier makes 44k a year. Is that so high of the hog? It seems like a decent wage to me weighing cost of living and the job itself.

Forget the cost of living though; that isn't the bar to measure this against. The reality is that if you have other people who are just as qualified to perform this work and many of them, the wages are less. The cost of living isn't a factor in determining that wage. I know that sounds terrible, and maybe it is, but its reality. I question whether that $44k is accurate also. Does that include benefits and pensions? Seems like it would be a significant amount higher. Regardless though the test isn't where the wage matches up with the cost of living.

If these jobs aren't paying enough, less people will do them and the wages will rise. This is exactly what happened in oil and gas in Alberta in the past 15 years...we had less qualified people so companies had to pay a lot and offer great packages to acquire talent.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Why do construction labourers make so much money? They are easily replaceable. The reason is because those companies need this workers to make money, they don't make it without them. A lot of companies recognize this, but most don't. And society always seems to pick on fast food employees and consider them useless, fact of the matter is the macdonalds employee makes his company more money in 8 hours than the construction worker does.

I don't think that just anyone can do construction. That might be the position you could take if you're sitting in your car at a stoplight watching them do something, but there is a certain amount of knowledge you need of a construction site, and certain tasks you have to be able to perform.


I worked fast food as a teenager. Those people are paid poorly because almost anyone can do that work. It has nothing to do with how much profit is generated; you're replaceable by nearly anyone and within a moments notice.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Slava

Forget the cost of living though; that isn't the bar to measure this against. The reality is that if you have other people who are just as qualified to perform this work and many of them, the wages are less. The cost of living isn't a factor in determining that wage. I know that sounds terrible, and maybe it is, but its reality. I question whether that $44k is accurate also. Does that include benefits and pensions? Seems like it would be a significant amount higher. Regardless though the test isn't where the wage matches up with the cost of living.

If these jobs aren't paying enough, less people will do them and the wages will rise. This is exactly what happened in oil and gas in Alberta in the past 15 years...we had less qualified people so companies had to pay a lot and offer great packages to acquire talent.

Yes it is terrible. Full stop.

Why go on with this insane argument? Let me guess, you think there should be no minimum wage?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

They can strike if they choose to, however not every round of bargaining ends with a labour dispute, workers typically don't want to strike, because well you know, they don't get paid they're regular wages and ca never fully recoup that. If you want to say they get strike pay, I hope you've done your homework to see that that is less than ei. Striking is a last resort.

I've been on a strike and know what strike pay is and how it doesn't cover wages. At the same time workers can do other jobs during a strike to cover wages lost which is what I did.

In this case Canada post did not even give all their proposals to the union, with how you put it, essentially guaranteeing a strike, the same argument could be made that the union was going to agree with all their proposals once received. We will never know in either case, for either of us to make any statements based on best guesses and put them forward as likely outcomes is fairly pointless. Sticking with the facts, the company is doing well, yet they seem to not want to negotiate with their employees.

You have the union putting it's best spin out there to make CP look bad in an attempt to gain favour from Canadians saying they don't want to negotiate when in reality it may not be the case. You can't take the union at face value and the same with CP as there things going on behind the scene that we don't know about.

The facts are taxpayers had to bailout CP when it was losing money. Something the union fails to remeber.

[Jacks]

The letter mail (monopoly) portion of their business is declining rapidly and being replaced by parcel service. With parcel service they need to compete with a whole bunch of other companies, they need to have similar staff costs as their competitors or be much more efficient to survive. They also have to deal with their legacy costs from workers on pretty good pensions. They may be profitable right now but unless they keep finding efficiencies that won't last long.

There is nothing wrong with companies making a profit, unions tend to see any profit as a reason to ask for more and more (or to keep a current compensation level that isn't competitive). That isn't a "race to the bottom" it's the free market. Consumers will spend their money where the best price and/or best service can be found.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Yes it is terrible. Full stop.

Why go on with this insane argument? Let me guess, you think there should be no minimum wage?

I have no issue with a minimum wage actually, I just don't think that we need to ensure that low-skill jobs pay a certain amount to those employees "just because". Is there a major difference between a postal carrier and a newspaper carrier? So why is the wage significantly different?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Even though you claim you've been in a union I have to think it was either a long time ago, or, you got canned and the union couldn't get your job back so now you have an ax to grind. The vast majority of contracts are negotiated without a labour dispute. Labour disputes aren't used anymore as a primary tool for unions. Even secondary. They're a last resort if the company isn't interested in good faith bargaining, or, refuse to come off draconian concessions.

Where did I say otherwise?

That's the union side of the story. There's also the company side where they've had to shutdown operations because they couldn't afford to stay open due to union demands. Touche!

Somewhere in between is the truth when it comes to negotiations.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't think that just anyone can do construction. That might be the position you could take if you're sitting in your car at a stoplight watching them do something, but there is a certain amount of knowledge you need of a construction site, and certain tasks you have to be able to perform.


I worked fast food as a teenager. Those people are paid poorly because almost anyone can do that work. It has nothing to do with how much profit is generated; you're replaceable by nearly anyone and within a moments notice.

I worked in fast food as well and I worked with people who just couldn't do, I know of at least a few who couldn't do that job, which I found fairly simple personally, that are now engineers. Figure that one out lol

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Slava

I have no issue with a minimum wage actually, I just don't think that we need to ensure that low-skill jobs pay a certain amount to those employees "just because". Is there a major difference between a postal carrier and a newspaper carrier? So why is the wage significantly different?

How much should someone working at McDonalds make per hour?

[burnin_vernon]

Originally Posted by Dion

The facts are taxpayers had to bailout CP when it was losing money. Something the union fails to remeber.

When did this happen? Canada Post has been profitable for 18 of the last 19 years. They haven't touched the taxpayers' money.

Canada Post has seen a ton of income/growth from parcels and admail revenue. The first quarter of this year was one of their strongest ever ($44 million). They have cut starting wages by $5/hour, reduced sick pay, and slashed jobs by 30-55%.

Now they want to cut the pension, take away lunches, reduce vacation pay, transfer employees with less than 10 years service anywhere in their province, and reduce physio benefits, among other things.

When Postal Banking was proposed, Canada Post did an 800 page report on it which concluded that it was a good idea for everyone. When asked to reveal this report to the press, 700 pages of it mysteriously disappeared and they've dismissed the idea ever since.

For a corporation with 22 Vice presidents who keep collecting bonuses, they can't be hurting that much.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

This thread is getting a bit off track, no?

Fact of the matter isn't that CP employees make too much in base salary. It is that they want too large a work force, with too many sick days, too much pension, too much double and triple lay OT etc.

Once again, if Canada post was making billions like a big bank or insurance company or one of the big telecoms I'd say why not? These people are helping drive some of the most profitable companies around. But they aren't. Canada post and its ilk are too big and too inefficient to justify the disproportionate benefits that their employees get. Off the backs of the taxpayer no less.

Then again one could argue that if all for profit companies that have real competition had insane inefficiencies like cp or ahs or the city or provincial bureaucracies that they'd be out of business.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

This thread is getting a bit off track, no?

Fact of the matter isn't that CP employees make too much in base salary. It is that they want too large a work force, with too many sick days, too much pension, too much double and triple lay OT etc.

Once again, if Canada post was making billions like a big bank or insurance company or one of the big telecoms I'd say why not? These people are helping drive some of the most profitable companies around. But they aren't. Canada post and its ilk are too big and too inefficient to justify the disproportionate benefits that their employees get. Off the backs of the taxpayer no less.

Then again one could argue that if all for profit companies that have real competition had insane inefficiencies like cp or ahs or the city or provincial bureaucracies that they'd be out of business.

How many sick days do they get? How many do you get?

What is there pension plan? What is your like?

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by burnin_vernon

When did this happen? Canada Post has been profitable for 18 of the last 19 years. They haven't touched the taxpayers' money.

The Corporation has losses in 2011, 2012 and 2013.
https://www.canadapost.ca/assets/pdf...nancial_en.pdf

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Canada post and its ilk are too big and too inefficient to justify the disproportionate benefits that their employees get. Off the backs of the taxpayer no less.

Then again one could argue that if all for profit companies that have real competition had insane inefficiencies like cp or ahs or the city or provincial bureaucracies that they'd be out of business.

In all fairness they have actually become pretty efficient. From what I've seen that is a result of the reorganization that they have been undergoing. The postal plants today don't look anything like they did several years ago, much more automated. That being said, if they hadn't started changing and cleaning up their act a few years ago they would be hemorrhaging money today rather than turning a profit.

[burnin_vernon]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

The Corporation has losses in 2011, 2012 and 2013.
https://www.canadapost.ca/assets/pdf...nancial_en.pdf

The 2011 losses were due to a lockout, not operations.

There was no loss in2012. The Conference Board of Canada (which Chopra sits on) predicted a huge loss, when, in fact, CP made $98 million.


2013 was CP's only loss due to operations in the last 19 years.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

How many sick days do they get? How many do you get?

What is there pension plan? What is your like?

How is any of his relevant to the discussion?

[Finger Cookin]

I wonder if I would have noticed this next month if I missed this thread.