| Site Search | |
|
|
|
|
News - August 2008 Previous Month Following Month
The headlines for current month's news items are listed immediately below. Click on the headline of your choice to see the entire text of the article. Agriculture Union press release accusing Minister Ritz of misleading public receives heavy media attention Media frenzy over Maple Leaf Foods recall sees Agriculture Union raise our concerns with inspection system failings Our ‘virtual’ Triennial National Convention – It’s the next best thing to being there! PSAC negotiation team members send ‘open letter’ CFIA EG/PI Review: Update re grievances concerning Agriculture Union press release accusing Minister Ritz of misleading public receives heavy media attention (Posted August 29, 2008) A news release issued Thursday by National President Bob Kingston, attacking Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz for misleading public comments, has continued to see heavy reporting of the Agriculture Union’s position on the unfolding listeria controversy. Kingston took strong issue with the Minister’s totally inaccurate claims over the issue of adequate federal inspection and supervision of the domestic food processing industry. Click HERE to see the text of our news release. The text of a Canadian Press article that appeared in many of today's newpapers is reproduced below: Government backs off claim meat plant inspectors spend half time on site OTTAWA - The federal government is backing away from previous assurances that its health inspectors spend at least half their time doing on-site physical inspections at meat processing plants across the country. Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz made the claim this week, in the face of a deadly listeriosis outbreak linked to a Maple Leaf Foods processing plant in Toronto. But under a deluge of criticism from the meat inspectors union, federal officials now say there's a difference between the "design" of the inspection system and the daily reality of its operation. The about-face came after Bob Kingston, president of the agricultural employees wing of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, issued a statement Thursday accusing Ritz of misleading the public. Kingston called it “pure fiction” to claim that inspectors spend only half their time on paperwork under a new system introduced in March. The union claims the system, brought in by the Conservative government, has turned inspectors into paper-pushers who don't spend enough time on first-hand monitoring of conditions on the plant floor. Confronted with Kingston's claims, Ritz declined comment and handed the matter off to bureaucrats from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Paul Mayers, a CFIA official, told an Ottawa news conference the new system was designed with the goal of a 50-50 split between hands-on work and paperwork, but acknowledged the practical reality is more complicated. “It is intended to be divided equally, as the minister noted,” said Mayers. “We recognize that, from one day to the next, the absolute amount of time on a particular task may not be exactly equal.” Mayers later phoned The Canadian Press to further nuance his remarks, saying the real measure of the new system is its “outcomes” - whether the inspectors can perform all the tasks they need to carry out. He insisted there was no contradiction between his explanation Thursday and Ritz's remarks 24 hours earlier. Ritz, responding to critics on Wednesday, had categorically rejected claims that inspectors weren't speeding enough time on the production floor. “We are saying that's not true,” he declared. “About 50 per cent of an inspector's time is spent on the floor of the plant, the other 50 per cent is overseeing paperwork, most of it scientific in nature.” Federal officials also maintain that the Maple Leaf plant at the heart of the listeriosis outbreak was subject to daily inspections because of its size. But Kingston challenged that, saying size has nothing to do with how inspectors budget their time. The one inspector responsible for Maple Leaf was also responsible for six other facilities – two meat processing plants and four cold storage operations. That meant he would often make the rounds and bring the paperwork from the other sites back to his base plant, which happened to be Maple Leaf, said Kingston. “So, yeah, they spend a lot of time there, but not on the plant floor . . . He doesn't even spend all his time at that (Maple Leaf) plant dealing with that plant.” Instead, said Kingston, the inspector was often in his office sifting through the documentation from the other half-dozen facilities he had to keep tabs on. Kingston said that, after Ritz's claim of a 50-50 split, he was flooded with calls from inspectors across the country challenging the minister's assertion. Nearly all the 40 inspectors who phoned estimated they spent about 25 per cent of their time in plant-floor work and 75 per cent on paperwork, said the union official. A number of inspectors are “champing at the bit” to speak out publicly about their personal experiences, said Kingston, but "”every one of them is afraid of being fired if they do.” He acknowledged, when pressed, that nobody has been directly threatened. “It's just the climate of the day,” he said, noting that CFIA has told its employees all comment on the matter must come through agency headquarters in Ottawa. There was also disagreement Thursday about whether inspectors apply higher safety standards to meat destined for export to the United States than they do to products sold in Canada. Mayers said the Maple Leaf plant was certified for export production, even though all the products being turned out at time of the listeriosis outbreak were intended for domestic sale. The bottom line, says CFIA, is that all the production at the plant is held to the same standard, no matter where the products are sold. Kingston agreed that's the case, but said it's a different story at some other processing plants, where products destined for Canada don't have to meet U.S. regulatory requirements like pasteurization.
Media frenzy over Maple Leaf Foods recall sees Agriculture Union raise our concerns with inspection system failings (Posted August 27, 2008) Deserved concerns over the widening Maple Leaf Foods recall of tainted products have provided our union with the opportunity to highlight the many practical flaws of the Harper government’s undermining of the inspection regime. These Conservative changes, designed to place more ‘responsibility’ in the hands of the processing companies themselves, were based more in partisan ideology than in common sense. The Agriculture Union was quick off the mark, with National President Bob Kingston working basically full-time in media interviews. A number of links to national media coverage of our comments are provided below: CBC-TV CTV Global TV
Our ‘virtual’ Triennial National Convention – It’s the next best thing to being there! (Posted August 6, 2008) The Agriculture Union’s 14th Triennial National Convention kicks off next Wednesday, August 13 in Quebec City. Our Locals have each elected delegates to this, the most important event on our union calendar. That doesn’t mean, however, that the rest of our members can’t follow Convention activities and decisions. We’ll be posting updates with photos and capsule comments each day, so that our members across the country can stay on top of events. So, check them out and stay up-to-date as our National Convention unfolds!
PSAC negotiation team members send ‘open letter’ to Agriculture Union members (Posted August 5, 2008) Highly frustrated with the employer’s position at the bargaining table, members of the PSAC negotiations teams have sent the following ‘open letter’ to Agriculture Union members: Dear co-workers: We are all federal government workers and we are also elected members of PSAC negotiating teams that bargain with our employer, Treasury Board. For over a year now, we have been sitting through a great many bargaining sessions, but so far we have made virtually no progress. This lack of progress is due to Treasury Board’s refusal to address the major concerns that we’ve raised at the bargaining table. Our union has negotiated provisions in our collective agreements that lead the way among unionized workers in this country in many areas. But there are still areas that need improvement. Some of the key demands that we are proposing have already been established elsewhere. For example, protections against contracting-out can be found in collective agreements with municipal and other public sector employers across Canada. With respect to wages, over the three-and-a-half years since our last settlement, federal workers who negotiate with Treasury Board have fallen behind wage rates currently being paid to other unionized workers doing similar or the same work. It is clear that our employer wants us to have wages and working conditions that are inferior to those found in other unionized workplaces across the country. We strongly disagree. We are not second class workers. All of us negotiating with Treasury Board provide vital and high quality public services. We work hard and we take pride in the work we do. The public services we provide need to be protected. And, our wages and working conditions should meet standards that are in place for other unionized workers. This fall we will be returning to the bargaining table. We are determined to achieve contracts that protect the services we deliver and that ensure fair wages for the work that we do. We will be calling on you, our co-workers, to help us in our efforts to make this a reality. By working together, we know we can achieve the kind of collective agreements that we deserve. Look for our information and update bulletins as negotiations progress. In solidarity, The members of your PSAC negotiating teams for the Education and Library Science; Operational Services; Program and Administrative Services; and, Technical Services bargaining units,
CFIA EG/PI Review: Update re grievances concerning back-pay and increments (Posted August 4, 2008) As you are aware, a significant number of grievances have been filed further to CFIA’s decision to not provide back-pay for the period of 1997 to 2000 to those Inspectors who have had their work descriptions reclassified upwards effective June 30, 2000. The grievances allege violations to Article 62 of CFIA’s and PSAC’s collective agreement and contest the fact that the employer has failed to place employees at the correct increment level. We have attempted to resolve this outstanding issue through consultation with CFIA’s Vice President of Operations, Cameron Prince. We have, however, been unsuccessful in our attempts to date. Cameron Prince advised us that CFIA VP of Human Resources, Omer Boudreau, would provide the union with written clarifications relating to CFIA’s decision. We are still waiting for this information and will continue to pursue the issue. For the purposes of representation of grievances at the first and second levels of the grievance procedure, we are providing you with the following background for your ease of reference: • The inspectors who recently received a reclassification due to a mediated job description were told their classification was effective June 30, 2000. This new job description and reclassification effectively replaces the one they were given in 2000. • Inspectors who were notified in 2000 that they were going from PI3 to EG3 were also given a notice of their new job description with a June 30, 2000 effective date. As well they were told that in recognition of the classification review period (1997-2000) they would be given a pensionable lump-sum payment in lieu of back pay that was based on the difference between the old (PI3) and new (EG3) salary levels and was approximately $8,500. For those who were reclassified to EG2, they received an amount totaling approximately $4,500. Also, in recognition of the review period they were credited with the time for the purposes of determining which increment level they would be placed at as of June 30, 2000. This would mean, for example, that inspectors moving from PI3 to EG3 were placed at the top level increment upon their reclassification on June 30, 2000. Inspectors unhappy with their job descriptions and classification in 2000 grieved, and the result for some was the recent upward reclassification announcement. This recent announcement is clearly not a reclassification from EG2 to EG3, but rather a belated reclassification from PI3 to EG3. As a matter of fact, given the recent announcement, there is no period during which they were actually classified at the EG2 level. No one from CFIA has explained to this day, why the grievors, who had to wait eight years for their correct classification, are being treated so differently from the people who received their EG3 reclassification notice in 2000 and this, when both groups have the exact same effective date for their reclassification from PI3 to EG3 and are both subject to the same Treasury Board Pay Policies. • The grievors are not seeing an adjustment in their lump-sum payment, and are told that the initial review period is not counting towards the determination of what increment they were placed in. This is contrary to CFIA’s and Agriculture Union’s signed process agreements. It was based on that premise that CFIA asked our members to stop filing acting/classification grievances because the review results would be retroactive to all. Our members in general (except for a few hundred) stopped filing their grievances given that they trusted that the CFIA would follow through with their promise to provide retroactive pay to 1997. The concept of equitable estoppel is one that applies in the circumstances. The doctrine of estoppel was once summarized as follows by an arbitrator: “The principle, as I understand it, is that where one party has, by his words or conduct, made to the other a promise or assurance which was intended to affect the legal relations between them and to be acted on accordingly, then, once the other party has taken him at his word and acted on it, the one who gave the promise or assurance cannot afterwards be allowed to revert to the previous legal relations as if no such promise or assurance had been made by him, but he must accept their legal relations subject to the qualification which he himself has so introduced, even thought it is not supported in point of law by any consideration, but only his word.” • It is very unfortunate that an effort to resolve some long-standing problems would stop short of being fair and just. The only explanation that our members can imagine is that they are being punished for having filed grievances and this can be only construed as an abuse of authority by management. We trust this information will assist you in your grievance consultations with the employer.
(Posted August 1, 2008) As many of you already know, workers at the Hilton Québec hotel are now in a legal strike position. The Hilton is one of six Quebec City hotels with unionized staff affiliated with the CSN. Last week these members approved a block of 72 hours of strike action that can be used in a continuous or a sporadic fashion. We are hopeful that both parties will reach a tentative agreement before our Convention; in the meantime we are making arrangements that would prevent serious disruptions. That said, members of the National Executive have agreed that: Union members, including observers, will respect the picket line or face possible discipline; the cocktail reception (Aug 12), the Convention proceedings (Aug 13-15) and the banquet night (Aug 14) to another secure location; with updates; and
|
© 2011 Agriculture Union. All Right Reserved. | Privacy | Report Site Problems | 
Agricultrure Union 233 Gilmour Street, Suite 1000, Ottawa, ON K2P 0P2 Tel: 613-560-4306 Fax: 613-235-0517