禍民殃己。罷工何時休？ （郵務罷工 1）

加拿大的工會厲害是出了名的。工會合法當然罷工合法。至於罷工合不合理那是另一回事。

加拿大航空的3800名員工罷工，被1700名管理人員取代超常運行，我當時就想，要那麽多的管理層何幹？員工的法定退休保險沒錢支付，何不各打五十板：解雇兩個員工就要搭配解雇一個管理層；減少兩個員工的一塊錢就搭配減少一個管理層的一塊錢；--- 真這樣的話，每年可以省下三個億，三年就是10個億，勞保的缺口就可以補齊了。哈珀的多數政府下令他們強行複工，結果那症結又放在哪沒人管，按現有的方式繼續運行下去，那勞保的缺口隻會繼續加大下去，終有一天這“缺口”會引起大爆發，就像美國兩房的次貸。當然，最壞的結果就是加航再宣布破產一次，反正破過一次，在破一次還那回事。破罐子破摔，誰怕誰。最後全讓政府埋單 --- 當然就是納稅人埋單。

本來，郵局Canada Post與郵政工人工會的勞資合約就是寅吃卯糧，那退休的供款差額在過去15年累計達31億，早該找個方式減少減少。雙方對工資的合約達不成協議，當然對怎麽減少CPP的供款差額更是南轅北轍。Canada Post作為獨立核算的國營壟斷公司，管理層倒挺硬，就是不願意在這樣的條件下讓工會複工，因為越經營缺口越大，幹脆關門停業得了。哈珀的聯邦政府於6月20日向國會提交了一項強製郵局員工複工的特別法例，要求郵政總局頒發複工令。哈珀政府給出的條件比郵局管理層開出的還苛刻，這些郵差工會的頭頭當然沒臉認賬，工人從6月18日起在多倫多、溫哥華等城市集會示威，反對政府的強製複工令。

加航罷工害的是旅客、旅遊業和政府的營收。郵局的罷工害的是每個進出口公司的文件傳遞和支付、每個國內的小件服務及偏遠地區的郵遞。看來不大抵，其實影響麵非常的大。讓人每天抓頭皮。

我說，這些工會的頭頭、管理層的主事者、哈珀政府的談判代表，都他們的沒誠意，非要把一方的怒氣加大，讓一方下不了台。為什麽不各打五十板呢：員工12月凍結，管理層15月凍結；第二年員工漲1個點，管理層漲0.9個點；第三年員工漲1.2個點，管理層漲1個點，把與2個點的差額全部填進CPP供款差額，這樣大約八年，CPP供款的缺口會從現在的30個億降到10個億。

------------
1。加拿大郵局從6月14日起關門歇業locked- out，但勞資雙方有言在先：全國性的退休金（Canada Pension Plan）、老人年金（Old Age Security）、退伍軍人年金 (Veterans Affairs Pension Plan) 、俗稱牛奶金的加拿大兒童稅務優惠 (Canada Child Tax Benefit) 、卑詩家庭津貼 ( British Columbia Family Bonus) 及保障收入津貼 (Guaranteed Income Supplement) 等支票派送服務仍於6月20日如期遞送，郵政工會仍遵守承諾，派送200萬張以上的支票。但是，對於各省的就業保險金（Employment Insurance）、統一銷售稅（HST）退款、以及個人或企業退稅支票(Tax refund or rebates for individuals and business)則不在派送範圍內。各省對以支票方式領取收入補助的民眾，可親赴省府駐各地辦事處或服務處自取支票。

2。哈珀的聯邦政府6月20日提出強製郵政工人複工的法案，法案中包含了薪資條款，建議在2011年加薪1.75%，2012年加1.5%，2013和2014年均加2%。郵政工人工會Canadian Union of Postal Workers對此表示不滿：政府的加薪幅度比資方加拿大郵務公司Canada Post的還低，郵局的方案是在2011、2012和2013年分別加薪1.9%，2014年加薪2%。

聯邦反對黨NDP以及勞工關係專家都批評政府過早介入郵務公司的勞資糾紛，本身不中立。

3。美國宣布從上周六中部時間11時59分起，暫停接受寄往加拿大的郵件。美國郵政USPS繼續接受全球特快速遞服務向加國的投寄信件及包裹。

[楊子]

最新消息：罷工還有得等

OTTAWA — The federal NDP has said they are ready to use every trick in the book to delay passing back-to-work legislation, and help ensure locked-out Canada Post employees have as much time as possible to negotiate a settlement with their managers.


The Conservatives, who introduced the bill Monday, won't back down from a lengthy battle, but are working to have it passed as quickly as possible.


"We will continue sitting . . . until we finally dispose of the back-to-work legislation," Conservative House leader Peter Van Loan said Wednesday. "If everybody wants to co-operate, we could finish as early as Thursday or early into Friday. If the other parties are determined to prolong this matter, we could be sitting through the weekend."


Canada Post locked its employees out June 14, after 12 days of rotating strikes by the Canadian Union of Postal Workers.


Less than one week later, Labour Minister Lisa Raitt tabled Bill C-6, which would force the employees back to work at lower wages than a proposed settlement the Crown corporation had put on the table.


Opposition MPs have condemned the wage reductions specifically and the bill as a whole, saying it undermines the right to collective bargaining.


Before debate on the bill resumes in the House of Commons Thursday, there will be some procedural bits and pieces to get through.


For example, MPs will decide on the parameters determining how the bill will be passed — how many times it has to be read, whether it has to go to committee, and the intention to not stop debate until the bill is voted on.


But before that discussion even begins, Van Loan is expected to introduce a motion that will forcibly curtail debate on those parameters — an action known as known as closure.


Then once the debate moves on to the bill itself, there's no saying how long that will take, even though the House was scheduled to begin the summer break Thursday.


The longer the debate goes, the more time Canada Post employees and managers have reach a settlement on their own terms — a "fundamental right" the workers are being denied with this legislation, NDP members say.


"We intend to fight the legislation every step of the way, using all procedural manoeuvres that are possible in the House of Commons," said NDP leader Jack Layton.


Neither Layton nor the party whip, Chris Charlton, offered details on which manoeuvres the party plans to pull out in a potential filibuster.


"Well, as you can imagine, we're not going to disclose our parliamentary strategy before we're actually implementing it . . . At this point, I just don't feel comfortable disclosing where we're heading," Charlton said. "We're going to do everything we can to make sure that that legislation doesn't pass."


One tactic MPs have used in the past — a process that took more than 40 hours — was to introduce and vote on hundreds of amendments.


If the House passes the bill before Canada Post reaches an agreement with the union, the bill will be handed to the Senate, for further debate. If the Red Chamber also passes the legislation, the last step is for the Governor General to give his stamp of approval.


Conservative Senator Claude Carignan, deputy leader of the government in the Senate, said the Senate is prepared to sit "as long as it takes to pass the government's agenda."

[楊子]

郵局勞資雙方主要爭議為三部分：

1. 新來的員工是不是可用two tiers工資製度。工會說不行，這樣使得新員工的收入比現有員工少22%。表麵看來工會對資方給出的$24/hr滿意，隻是對入門起步就要達到這個數目不一致。

2. 假期問題。新來的是每年3周，工作25-28年後達到7周。原來工作7年後可休至4周，現在資方要求今後要工作10年才能年休至4周，工會不同意。

3。替工問題。員工病了自然減員了用臨工補上。資方要求以後不能增加零工，由其他工人補上。工會認為加大了工人的強度，堅持沒人替補就減少投遞服務。資方的大意說有些沒必要天天送遞，隔天去一次就夠了。

4。最重要的員工退休供款缺口，勞資雙方誰也不提，就那樣讓它爛下去，唉誰誰。到時由政府一窩端.....

[楊子]

Walkom: Everyone wins with back-to-work bill, except Canada Post workers

By Thomas Walkom, National Affairs Columnist

The politics around the postal and Air Canada labour disputes are complicated. Yes, Stephen Harper’s Conservative government has no love for unions. Yes, too, the government’s bill ordering locked-out postal employees back to work is biased — even insisting on a wage settlement lower than what Canada Post was prepared to offer.

But the Conservatives’ uncompromising stance is not unique. During their times in government, neither the Liberals nor the New Democrats have been loath to use the legislative hammer against striking or locked-out workers.

In 1997, the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien ended a two-week postal dispute by imposing a wage settlement that, like Harper’s today, was lower than the one Canada Post was prepared to offer.

Oddly enough, it was the Reform Party — precursor to Harper’s Conservatives — who complained that this was unfair.

And the New Democrats? This time, they are up in arms. Party leader Jack Layton has attacked the back-to-work legislation as a fundamental assault on the rights of workers.

Well, yes. But in the past, federal New Democrats have been willing to speed back-to-work legislation through the Commons, as they did in 1991, when a grain handlers’ strike threatened the interests of Western farmers.

In 1997, the NDP allowed back-to-work legislation ending that year’s postal strike, including the kind of imposed wage settlement it now calls unjust, to zip through Parliament in return for changes to other aspects of the bill.

Nor have provincial NDP governments been shy to impose back-to-work laws.

In the 1970s and early ’80s, Saskatchewan premier Allan Blakeney legislated an end to labour disputes involving power workers, dairy workers and non-medical hospital personnel.

In Ontario, Bob Rae’s NDP government of the early ’90s famously trampled over the union rights of about 1 million public sector workers through legislation that unilaterally altered their existing contracts.

Now federal Liberal leader, Rae has hinted his party might join the NDP in trying to delay the government’s back-to-work bill.

However, the most curious aspect of Harper’s approach is not his decision to legislate an end to the 18-day postal dispute. Consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments have done that before, most recently in 1975, 1978, 1981, 1987 (twice) and 1997.

Nor is it the speed with which this legislation was introduced. Brian Mulroney’s Conservatives ended one 1987 postal strike after just nine days. In 1997, Chrétien’s Liberal government waited only two weeks before ordering postal employees back to work.

Rather it is Harper’s decision to intervene in the Air Canada strike just hours after it began. Air Canada is not an essential service. There are other airlines and other ways to get around.

More to the point, the strike called by the Canadian Auto Workers was shaping up to be a failure; the company kept flying with little or no service disruption.

Indeed, it’s arguable that by forcing a quick end to that strike, Labour Minister Lisa Raitt did the CAW a favour.

But that’s not how any of this will be played. Layton’s NDP has been accused of straying from its labour-friendly principles. It will find it useful to be seen acting firmly on the side of the unions — particularly in the context of a majority government where its opposition can make little practical difference.

The Liberals will be able to paint Harper’s actions as another example of his abuse of power — without having to dwell on their own view of postal workers.

And the Conservatives will be able to not only please their base but demonstrate to other public-sector employees that they can expect no mercy.

Everyone wins. Except, of course, the workers.

Thomas Walkom’s column appears Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday