PI Review: Help us help you!

(Posted October 20, 2007)

Dealing with the PI Review is a lot like that carnival game of 'Whack a Weasel' - every time you hit one of the pests, it pops up in another place.

As you know, the recently-finished PI Review dealt with job description issues, but only at the time Agriculture Union members filed their grievances in June of 2000.

We are now in discussions with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency over the impact of changes in job descriptions that have occurred since 2000.  Obviously, the more information we have to present the employer, the stronger our case.

As a result, we're setting out to gather as much information from our EG members as we possibly can.  We need to know new tasks they have been doing since June 2000.  And when these new tasks first began.

So, help us help you.  Send this information as soon as you can to your Agriculture Union Regional Vice-President, who in turn will send it on to our National Office for action.  If you are unsure who that person is, the information can be found by clicking here.

Several grievance options open to dispute result of CFIA PI-EG Review mediated job descriptions

(Posted October 18, 2007)

As we recently noted on our Web site, a number of our PI-EG members employed by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency are dissatisfied with the results of the classification exercise applied to mediated job descriptions.

Two important points need to be made.

First, the classification decisions based on the revised work descriptions and point ratings were made unilaterally by the employer, and did not involve the input or support of the union.

We understand and share the disappointment felt by some EGs. CFIA management needs to hear your concerns and complaints.

Second, there are several grievance options available to those members who wish to challenge the employer's decision.

Situation 1 – You are satisfied with your job description but are not happy with the classification level.

In this case, you need to file a ‘Classification Grievance’.  This must be done even if you had already filed a classification grievance in 2000.  The classification grievance filed in 2000 was on the job description given in 2000.  As a result of the mediated settlement, you now have a new job description.  Accordingly, you need to file a new classification grievance.

Here is the correct language to use in this particular grievance:

Details of Grievance:

I grieve that my position is incorrectly classified at present.

Corrective Action:

That my position be reclassified to a higher classification level.  I request to be present at the hearing, be represented at all levels of the grievance procedure and to be subjected to no prejudice in regards to this grievance.

Situation 2 – You feel that your work is more accurately reflected in another job description rated at a higher classification level.

In this case, you should file a ‘Statement of Duties’ grievance based on the employer having applied your current responsibilities to the wrong generic job description.  This grievance will not change the mediated generic job description.  It will, however, correct the employer's error in having applied wrong generic job description.

Here is the correct language to use in this particular grievance:

Details of Grievance:

I grieve the fact that the employer has failed to provide me with a complete and current statement of duties and responsibilities of my position.  I was mapped to the wrong generic job description.  This is contrary to Article 55 of my collective agreement.

Corrective Action:

That I be provided with a complete and current statement of the duties and responsibilities of my position in accordance with Article 55 of my collective agreement.  I request to be present at the hearing, be represented at all levels of the grievance procedure and to be subjected to no prejudice in regards to this grievance.

Situation 3 – You believe the employer’s decision should have taken into account time spent in an acting position.

In this case, you need to file an ‘Acting Pay Grievance’.  It is advisable to file this grievance along with either or both of the classification and statement of duties grievances.

Details of grievance:
I initiate this grievance on interim work because I feel that, though the employer determined the level of my position, I have been performing the duties of this position since ....

Corrective Action:
That the salary, as well as all benefits, be paid to me for the interim period. I request to be present at the hearing, be represented at all levels of the grievance procedure and to be subjected to no prejudice in regards to this grievance.

New CFIA contract increases timeline for grievance filing

(Posted October 16, 2007)

As a ‘separate employer’, the collective agreement that covers our Canadian Food Inspection Agency members is distinct from the contract that governs labour-management relation in the wider federal public service.

One of the key differences in the recently-negotiated CFIA agreement relates to the timeline for launching a grievance. That time line has been modified from 25 working days to 35 calendar days from the date of the incident giving rise to the grievance.  And remember that these are calendar days, not work days.

This change was made to ensure the CFIA is in compliance with legislated changes in the recently-adopted Public Service Labor Relations Act (PSLRA).

The precise wording in the current collective agreement is as follows:

     17.10 An employee may present a grievance to the First Level of the grievance procedure in the manner

     prescribed in clause 17.05 not later than the thirty-fifth (35th) calendar day after the date on which he or

    she is notified orally or in writing or on which he or she first becomes aware of the action or circumstances

    giving rise to the grievance.

As for our members in the wider public service – commonly known as ‘Treasury Board employees’ – grievances for now must be launched within 25 working days…with one exception.  The outer limit for classification grievances is 35 calendar days.

We expect that the upcoming round of negotiations with Treasury Board will result in all grievance limits being standardized at 35 calendar days in conformity with the PSLRA.

A final contribution by retiring Local Presidents and Secretary-Treasurers…

(Posted October 11, 2007)

As we noted last month, the latest revisions and additions to the Agriculture Union’s Key Info quick-reference information binder were mailed to Local Presidents and Secretary-Treasurers in September.

These valuable binders can, however, be misplaced or go missing. Every time we send out binder updates, we hear back that Locals have misplaced or lost their copies of Key Info. This is particularly the case when previous Local officers have retired.

Additional copies can be purchased from the National Office at a cost of $40 per binder.

However, we have a better idea. When your Local President or Secretary-Treasurer steps down after years of dedicated service to the membership, don’t let them out the door until they surrender their binder!

CFIA PI Review: National Office aware of concerns of members over classification letters

(Posted October 5, 2007)

Members have are receiving letters from the employer outlining the results of the CFIA’s PI classification exercise. As expected, some members have questions and concerns regarding the content of the letters.

The Agriculture Union National Office is aware of these concerns, and is actively looking into the matter.

We are in discussions with senior management at CFIA on a number of issues and will be communicating our recommendations/advice with respect to filing grievances prior the end of the time limit.

We thank you for your patience

.

Our September ‘Rand’ campaign winner is…

(Posted October 3, 2007)

Congratulations to Pamela Snow!   Pamela is the latest monthly winner in our coast-to-coast campaign to sign up ‘Rands’, dues-paying co-workers who, for one reason or another, have yet to sign a union card.

Pamela is a newly-signed-up member of Local 76, which represents our Canadian Food Inspection Agency members in Western Newfoundland.

Her name also joins those of all Rands who sign membership cards by year’s-end in becoming eligible for our year-end grand prize – two round-trip tickets to anywhere in Canada that Air Canada flies, or $1,000 in cash.