Friday, June 17, 2011

Thumbs up for CUPE 59

Every now and then people surprise you and serve as a reminder that there is good and bad in everyone and especially when we speak of organized groupings. So today I applaud CUPE Local 59, the city's largest union, and the city's negotiating team for settling their contract without sabre-rattling, threats or disruption of service to the public. From the newspaper report (June 17/11) the settlement was reasonable. They exemplify how labour and management should work.

I expect this settlement will set the bar for the many groups yet to come, although I expect it will not be the case with transit. This group is already pointing to transit wages in Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg. The big difference is those named cities range in population from a half to one million people and they operate successful public transportation systems. Count on a transit strike for school opening in September.


  1. "The big difference is those named cities range in population from a half to one million people and they operate successful public transportation systems"

    Ahh... another of Elaine's rabid arguments devoid of facts or logic.

    1) How does the size of the city have anything to do with the wages? They're doing the exact same job.

    2) By what statistical/researched measure do you compare the "success" of the transit systems?

    3) One of Transit's complaints is that they are not given say in day-to-day operations. How can they be blamed for management of the system?

  2. ahhhh the ignorance of another union member. enjoy your strike Anon 2:05, hope it is a long one.

  3. Anon 2:05 pm
    Once again you are here just to blast the Mistress.

    I didn't see the Mistress indicate it was the "employees" fault for the system that is in place, but I could be wrong you never know what is negotiated into a union contract that makes many adjustments by management unattainable. Just look at the Postal workers as an example. Protection of how the operated in the past is not only the problem but a road block to a solution to moving forward.

    I won't speak for the Mistress however I have never believed that comparing your job to someone in another province is anywhere close to reality. Anon you say they "do the same work". On that basis maybe we should be comparing them to a bus driver in Mexico?? Me thinks quality of living is more important than the dollars and cents.

  4. And, Anon above, your job too can be done more cheaply by Mexicans. Enjoy the race to the bottom.

  5. Why must the union folk get so sensitive when others disagree with them? The top poster asks what difference the size of a city has on comparisons in terms of wage? The second poster notes, that if that's the rationale then any city can be used in essence.

    Union folk, especially public sector ones, need to realize that for much of society there is not a big sympathy to see them earn inflated wages. I'll prefer to stay out of private companies and their unions as that is their business, but when dipping into the coffers of taxes to draw your wage you better have a pretty good excuse why you need a raise. All that these unions seems to march out is that "everyone benefits when unions earn higher wages".

    It's a shame that so many people are so greedy.

  6. Anon 9:09
    You are obviously not interested in the actual discussion as I never indicated that I believe we should hire Mexicans however, that taking monetary amounts only in union comparisons isn't how I would determine the compensation package.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.