Canada Post Strike

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

Well, what do they start out at, then? Do you know? Can you inform us, instead of just telling us a newspaper article is wrong? Most folks start out with 2 weeks, and every 4-5 years get one more added.

Assuming they start (we'll be generous) at 3, and every 5 years they get 1 more, they won't reach 7 until after putting in 20 years of service. That's not unreasonable...so is it accurate, then?

Depends on the industry you are in actually. I believe most Oil and Gas companies you start at 3 weeks. Which I believe is what it is at CP, I was going to check but their website is down.

You are correct, you don't get 7 weeks until either 20 or 21 years. So no it would not be accurate since it says new employees get 7 weeks vacation.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Depends on the industry you are in actually. I believe most Oil and Gas companies you start at 3 weeks. Which I believe is what it is at CP, I was going to check but their website is down.

You are correct, you don't get 7 weeks until either 20 or 21 years. So no it would not be accurate since it says new employees get 7 years vacation.

7 weeks.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

7 weeks.

Haha good eye...I wish I got 7 years vacation

[chemgear]

http://www.cupw.ca/index.cfm/ci_id/6067/la_id/1.htm

• 3 weeks per vacation year with less than 7 years of continuous employment.
• 4 weeks per vacation year with 7 years of continuous employment
• 5 weeks per vacation year with 14 years of continuous employment
• 6 weeks per vacation year with 21 years of continuous employment
• 7 weeks per vacation year with 28 years of continuous employment

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Third I don't see 3.3 and 2.75 percent increases as outlandish. If you boss came to you and said for the next 2 years I will give you a 1.75% raise, then I will give you a 1.9% raise and in the 4th year I will give you a 2% raise....Would you be happy with that? I doubt it."

My raises are dependant on

first - how well the company did
second - how I perform.

So my last 3 years were - 0%, 1.4% and 2%

Was I happy? No. Was I furious? No. I understood the economics and the situation we were all in.

The vacation schedule is good, but not outlandish as the article pointed out as implying everybody got 7 years vacation. I will concede that point.

If Canada Post pays out the "sick" days, but eliminates sick day banking from now on, would the Union accept?

Note that even if STD is categorized as "sick days", most companies don't let people bank STD either.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Firstly, they don't get 7 weeks vacation to start. Just like any job they work their way up to that.

Secondly, yes it's stupid they get vacation days banked but this has been going on for probably about 15 years. I don't think the big sticking point is to continue banking these sick days, the bigger issue is that CP wants to get rid of previous banked days without a pay out or anything at all. Hate if you want but CP originally negotiated banking sick days years ago and now wants to back of out it scott free.

Wow, what an unreasnoable stance by CP. I can't beleive they don't want to pay employees for days they worked and already got paid for.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Wow, what an unreasnoable stance by CP. I can't beleive they don't want to pay employees for days they worked and got paid for.

So CP agrees to bank sick days, a very nice perk to gain and retain employees (for many years) and now wants to get rid of these days with no penalty at all to them? Pretty sure if your company tried to pull something like that you would be up in arms too.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by bomber317

My raises are dependant on

first - how well the company did
second - how I perform.

So my last 3 years were - 0%, 1.4% and 2%

Was I happy? No. Was I furious? No. I understood the economics and the situation we were all in.

The vacation schedule is good, but not outlandish as the article pointed out as implying everybody got 7 years vacation. I will concede that point.

If Canada Post pays out the "sick" days, but eliminates sick day banking from now on, would the Union accept?

Note that even if STD is categorized as "sick days", most companies don't let people bank STD either.

I can't say for sure if the union would accept if they paid out accrued sick days and eliminated it going forward. From the posties I've talked to and the impression they have gotten from their co-workers they probably would.

My point about the sick days is that CP chose to accept banking them in their previous deals with the union so I don't know why all the fallout is falling on the workers? It's not like CP agreed to banking holidays only for the last contract, it has been ongoing for many contracts with the union. CP is just looking for an easy way out of something their poor management agreed to for many years. If I make a poor decision in life more times than not I am not let off the hook, why should this billion dollar company get off without a slap on the wrists?

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

So CP agrees to bank sick days, a very nice perk to gain and retain employees (for many years) and now wants to get rid of these days with no penalty at all to them? Pretty sure if your company tried to pull something like that you would be up in arms too.

During the Oil and Gas boom a few years ago, I was getting some perks at work that made me sit back and think "This is awesome while it lasts. I'm going to enjoy it all now, because there is no way the world can keep working this way". Sure enough, I've lost many of those perks.

Postal workers have enjoyed such perks for decades, sometimes it's time to step aside and say it was a good run while it lasted.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

During the Oil and Gas boom a few years ago, I was getting some perks at work that made me sit back and think "This is awesome while it lasts. I'm going to enjoy it all now, because there is no way the world can keep working this way". Sure enough, I've lost many of those perks.

Postal workers have enjoyed such perks for decades, sometimes it's time to step aside and say it was a good run while it lasted.

Easier said then done when you are part of a union.

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I can't say for sure if the union would accept if they paid out accrued sick days and eliminated it going forward. From the posties I've talked to and the impression they have gotten from their co-workers they probably would.

My point about the sick days is that CP chose to accept banking them in their previous deals with the union so I don't know why all the fallout is falling on the workers? It's not like CP agreed to banking holidays only for the last contract, it has been ongoing for many contracts with the union. CP is just looking for an easy way out of something their poor management agreed to for many years. If I make a poor decision in life more times than not I am not let off the hook, why should this billion dollar company get off without a slap on the wrists?

that's perfectly fair, I didn't know they wanted to cut what they have already banked.

I imagine a settlement of some sort to close out the already accumulated sick days and then stopping the accumulation altogether would be reasonable.

The fallout is falling on the workers because they have a pretty good gig going on and it "appears" they want to keep status quo. The talks so far seem to be kept close to the chest, so I have no idea what they are asking for in reality.

If the talks ARE to keep status quo, then they deserve the flack.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by burnin_vernon

I don't know where to begin. First of all, any CP worker I know isn't really concerned about the wage increase. The major sticking point is that they want to take away our sick time. Currently we get about 1 1/2 days per month which can be accumulated and used for illness or injury. We have to have a doctors note every time we use it, and there is no credit for having extra days when we retire. Most of us have over 200 sick days saved for when we hit 50+ years old and the wear and tear of the job has claimed knees, feet, necks, backs, shoulders, etc.. I work with a 50 year old who currently needs a hip replacement and is walking his 10K a day until he gets the operation.

So between the ages of 50 and retirement at 55 with likely 6-7 weeks of vacation, plus weekends and holidays off, plus 200+ banked sick days, the average lifer postal worker only needs to work about 2.8 days a week to receive full pay, and all his days off need to be filled by other workers, presumably temp or on OT effectively making them cost the system double.

Doesn't sound like a bad deal to me. What's the top pay rate?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

So between the ages of 50 and retirement at 55 with likely 6-7 weeks of vacation, plus weekends and holidays off, plus 200+ banked sick days, the average lifer postal worker only needs to work about 2.8 days a week to receive full pay, and all his days off need to be filled by other workers, presumably temp or on OT effectively making them cost the system double.

Doesn't sound like a bad deal to me. What's the top pay rate?

Except you can't take your 200+ accrued sick days without a doctors note.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Except you can't take your 200+ accrued sick days without a doctors note.

Like those are tough to get.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Like those are tough to get.

Sounds like you just need a tiny reason to hate something, even if it isn't rational.

Not all people fake injury/illness and get fake doctors notes.

I probably shouldn't even bother talking to you about this since your point isn't even valid yet you defend it anyway.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Sounds like you just need a tiny reason to hate something, even if it isn't rational.

Not all people fake injury/illness and get fake doctors notes.

I probably shouldn't even bother talking to you about this since your point isn't even valid yet you defend it anyway.

It doesn't bother me all that much if Canada posters get some perks, but if we are talking about something not being rational, then being able to bank sick days is exhibit A.

Sure, not all people will fake illness to get a doctor's note, but a large portion will take what they think is entitled to them, and if they went to all the trouble of banking up loads of sick time, many are going to use it.

I've worked enough around unions to know how union culture is. If postal workers are wanting to be compensated for their lost banked sick days then they likely intended to use them. If not, then why would they care?
They would just take their sick days when they are sick and bring in a doctor's note. The average person isn't sick anywhere close to 18 workdays a year anyhow.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

So CP agrees to bank sick days, a very nice perk to gain and retain employees (for many years) and now wants to get rid of these days with no penalty at all to them? Pretty sure if your company tried to pull something like that you would be up in arms too.

The idea of banking sick days is sick. Sick days are to be use when you are sick and not as vacation days.

[Devils'Advocate]

I haven't taken 18 sick days in my 15 years of working. At 1.5 sick days per month, or 18 a year, I have well over 200 days banked.

It pisses me off when I see so many colleagues taking "mental health days".... or worse, "mental health vacations" (the latter being where someone gets a quack doctor or family friend doctor to sign off on extended leave for either a non-existant or minor injury). And don't tell me that calling in sick when you are not is a government only thing... just as many people in the private sector were playing the same games with their sick days.

I am a project manager and if my staff are calling in sick... and I know they are faking being sick.... it's my neck in a sling when the project is late. But I have no right to demand a doctor's note. And as mentioned, even if I did want a doctor's note, it's not hard to find a quack willing to sign off on it....

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

It pisses me off when I see so many colleagues taking "mental health days".... or worse, "mental health vacations" (the latter being where someone gets a quack doctor or family friend doctor to sign off on extended leave for either a non-existant or minor injury). And don't tell me that calling in sick when you are not is a government only thing... just as many people in the private sector were playing the same games with their sick days.

Just to be a Devils' Advocate myself, how are you sure that these people taking mental health days are actually faking it? Mental health is extremely important, misunderstood and varies person to person.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by darklord700

The idea of banking sick days is sick. Sick days are to be use when you are sick and not as vacation days.

At what point did I say use them as vacation days?