Each year the Canada Post Board of Directors establishes new targets. That is why you can never be sure if the CTI will pay out any money.

The potential payout: The CTI provides for a potential payout of 3% of regular wages to eligible employees. If the targets are surpassed, the CTI will pay more than 3%. If the targets are not met, the payout will be less than 3%. Management reserves the right not to pay out any CTI if profits are low.

The payout is based on a percentage of regular wages at the straight time rate. For example, all eligible full-time mail handlers would receive the same payout. MAM 11’s would receive more than mail handlers because their regular wage rate is greater. If Canada Post met all of their targets at 100% in 2007, the CTI would pay $1,396.29 to each eligible full-time letter carrier or postal clerk. MAM 11’s would receive $1,580.93.

Past performance: In recent years the CTI targets have been surpassed. There is no guarantee that will happen again.

Eligible employees: Regular full-time employees who work and are paid for 520 hours during the year are eligible for the CTI. Regular part-time employees who work and are paid for 175 hours are also eligible.

Temporary employees do not receive the CTI.

National performance only: The collective agreement guarantees that the CTI will measure only national performance and not individual work performance or the performance of a work complement or facility. The language states: “The Corporation recognizes the Corporate Team Incentive is used to measure the overall national performance of the Corporation”. The union’s legal council has confirmed that the language is iron clad and that this aspect of the CTI cannot be changed during the life of the collective agreement.

A pensionable lump sum: The CTI is a lump sum and not cumulative like a wage increase. The CTI is pensionable. Employees on leave without pay will be able to buy back the CTI portion of their pensionable earnings.

The targets: Most of the CTI is based on Canada Post’s profits, delivery performance and customer satisfaction. In 2006, 2.5% of the CTI was based on how well Canada Post did concerning their objective to reduce the national injury rate and 2.5% was based on their results concerning their objective to reduce absenteeism nation-wide.

Cannot take it to the bank: No member should base their financial planning on the CTI. The tentative collective agreement includes increased wages, premiums, and benefits that will put real money in your pocket. The CTI may provide some one-time bonus cash, or it may pay out nothing at all.

The CTI and the CUPW national constitution: CUPW’s policies, as included in our national constitution, declare the union’s opposition to productivity bargaining and incentive programs. The union continues to oppose productivity bargaining and incentive programs. The 10.9% real wage increases and other improved benefits and premiums negotiated in this agreement are not linked to performance targets or incentives. The union has made it clear to Canada Post that we will not promote the CTI nor will we encourage our members to modify their behaviour in the workplace to meet arbitrary CTI targets. However, the union is prepared to accept the CTI in order to achieve an otherwise good collective agreement.

In solidarity,
Pat Bertrand
CUPW Chief Negotiator

21st Century Canadian Letter Carrier

1. The lack of any language to address the overburdening and ever increasing expectations placed on inside workers, and,
2. The unmitigated attack on our jobs with the Corporate Team Incentive (CTI) program

In the coming weeks I will address the dangers of the CTI but for now the lingering question asked by many members across the country is what happened to our demands:

• No contracting out
• Extended door to door delivery
• Improved night recovery leave
• One day paid leave at the employee's discretion
• Comp time Group 1
• Reduction of weight limits
• Standardized leaves for all groups
• Contracting in work
• 100% top up for parental, maternity and compassionate care leaves
• Maintain current number of staffed installations
• Improved harassment protection under article 56
• 5 minute hourly rest period for prolonged standing
• Deletion of "operational requirements" from 19.13
• An actual, identified relief system for inside workers

This list just scratches the surface of unrealized demands. It's important everyone understand a vote against this tentative agreement is NOT a vote for a strike. A NO vote sends a clear and strong message to the boss and the negotiators that we're not prepared to settle for less then our fair entitlement. The fact that we're being asked to ratify this tentative agreement by the most divided national recommendation in the history of CUPW is proof this tentative agreement is WEAK!! The fact that we jumped the gun prior the 60 day conciliation process and prior to securing a strike mandate from the membership has the majority of activists across the country asking WHY? We've always negotiated more when we followed the process so why are we now being asked to accept less?

A minority federal government doesn't want to risk a "non-confidence" vote over a nation wide postal strike and Canada Post doesn't want to go in front of an arbitrator trying to justify an unreasonable expectation for more profits at our expense during the most profitable time in its history. This is our time to be strong and demand our FAIR share of the company's success.

Canada Post has prospered because of our efforts and not in spite of them! Don't be fooled or intimidated into accepting less then we're owed and less then WE DESERVE!!!

Send the negotiators back to the table!!! VOTE NO!!!!!

In Solidarity,
Terry Langley
Shop Steward
Hamilton 548
February 21, 2007

To All Urban Operations Members
CUPW Local 576, North Bay

Sisters and Brothers,

I will give our newer members, and members not familiar with the negotiations process a quick overview. If you are familiar with this process feel free to proceed to the heading below "Issues at Hand".

Almost a year ago our local had a General Membership Meeting (GMM) to put forth resolutions (demands) for the upcoming negotiations. These resolutions were voted on locally, and if passed were sent to the Regional level.

All resolutions that passed locally by our regions 40 locals were categorized and tabulated by collective agreement article number or appendices. A Resolutions Committee was selected, comprised of our five full-time officers at the Regional office, and eight executive members from our locals. This committee distilled, through debate and information exchange, the 400+ submitted resolutions to approximately 170 resolutions that were sent to the National level.

The National Executive Board (NEB) then distills the resolutions from our country's eight regions into the program of demands. During this round of bargaining the NEB saw fit to limit our demands to 72, despite many omissions. This program was voted on here in September 2006 and ultimately passed.

The Negotiating Committee (NC) was selected and comprised of 4 negotiators, 1 chief negotiator, and an advisor from our National office for a total of 6. There are also hired advisors, lawyers etc.

All negotiations performed by the NC are to pass through the NEB which is comprised of all nationally elected officers (7) and the National Director from each region in the country (8), for a total of 15 members of the NEB.

In regards to the present tentative agreement the NC recommended to the NEB to accept Canada Post's (CPC) final offer. The decision to accept in principle this tentative agreement split the NEB with an 8 yes, and 7 no vote.

Now the tentative collective agreement will be printed, sent out to the locals to look over, and voting will begin near the end of March to accept or reject the proposal. If it is accepted by the membership we are stuck with the language for the next 4 years possibly more, and if we reject it negotiations continue with the real possibility of a strike or lockout.

Issues at Hand

On February 8, 2007 the National Executive Board (NEB) accepted the recommendation of the Negotiating Committee (NC) to agree in principle with the offer of the employer on a Proposed Tentative Agreement.

One of the main issues is CPC's demand for us to accept the Corporate Team Incentive (CTI). This is a productivity based incentive that is in direct opposition to our Union's constitution. In our policy section B-1 titled Free Collective Bargaining states "…the Union rejects all forms of wage restraints, whether in direct form or indirect, such as "Taxation Incentive Programs" or productivity-based increases." These policies are created using a similar process as the negotiating process mentioned above. It was pointed out during the National Presidents meeting that in the event of such programs being introduced the Union must carry on intensive education programs to end wage controls (CTI). Which begs the question why recommend it in the first place?

Policy A-6 titled "Equal Collective Agreement For All" states "The Union will negotiate collective agreements that will provide equal benefits for all members within their bargaining unit." Yet the CTI will not apply to temporary workers.

CPC threatened that if the Union took a strike vote all issues would be off the table and that our acceptance of the CTI was a strike issue to them. I believe the first question that should come to everyone's mind is "Why would CPC state that our refusal to take a possible $60 million a year be a strike issue?" This should raise the hair on everyone's neck. CPC and Moya Greene have been shouting poor from the rooftops ever since her appointment to CEO of CPC. This does not add up. Remember Moya Greene was instrumental in the privatization of CN Rail and the deregulation of the airline industry in Canada, as well as the architect of the Employment Insurance (EI) program.

Also the CTI is totally in control of CPC. We cannot question or grieve any part of the program. CPC can change the goalposts at anytime as it sees fit. It is not a guaranteed wage increase and will not compound into real wages over time. Bulletin #21 illustrated in chart form that a 0.5% increase per year, as opposed to the CTI would surpass any CTI earnings within approximately 6 years. Also the CTI is solely based on profits and not the operating budget, so essentially it costs CPC nothing. This poses another question "What is CPC's motive for this if it does not hurt them one way or the other?" The only answer that I can come up with is "Control."

The CTI is based on many things including our attendance and injury rates. This could lead to member against member altercations when someone is sick and stays home. As well as the opposite, when members start coming to work sick and making others ill. It could also lead to members not reporting injuries, all so that the bottom line will not be affected as members push to see the CTI payment at the end of the fiscal year. In essence the CTI has the potential to divide our membership and turn us against ourselves.

The question also must be posed, "Why is a public service offering a money incentive for performance?" Canada Post is an entity built out of nothing by our tax dollars. It was created to serve its shareholders, the general public. The Union believes that the profits should go back into that public service; to increase service to the general public and create good jobs in all communities. It should not be used as a carrot that may encourage divisive behaviour on the work floor.

And remember the CTI is already in place for CPC management, so now they have some stake in your attendance and overall performance as well. After all under the umbrella of the CTI we are all on the same "team" now.

Interestingly the CD Howe Institute, a right-wing think tank, just released a 30 page report on why Canada Post should be privatized. Coincidence? Perhaps, but after reading the report and finding statistics in there that were likely supplied by CPC, it makes the report on CBC radio stating that Canada Post has no plans for privatization seem hollow.

The other main issue that was not addressed during this round of bargaining is internal staffing (Group 1). We had many demands on the table to have a real relief complement, and ways to force the employer to backfill absences. There has been a lack of internal staffing for years, with the deletion of full-time positions etc., and this has not been addressed at all. One of the ways we could address it is by using the profits of CPC for more staff, not ghostly pay outs that may or may not appear at the end of the year.

I have attached quite a bit of reading material to this package. There are bulletins from the National Directors of the Prairie, Atlantic and Ontario regions, and some negotiations bulletins of interest. And there is a speech delivered by Moya Greene to the Canadian Bar Association, which is a must read, and much more.

The questions remain; will we end up with less if we turn this tentative agreement down and will we have to go on strike? It is possible. But to buckle under to the threats made by Canada Post over the CTI could prove to be the death knell of our past struggles.

The CTI will prove to be divisive, and is a classic union busting technique. CPC states that the CTI will be a national standard and will not be applied office to office. Perhaps for the life of this collective agreement, but what about the next round when the employer comes back with that very demand? This is a slippery slope and the time to dig our heels in is right now. It could be too late once it is in the collective agreement. It makes no financial sense for CPC to offer us money on their terms, and in the same breath state that if we do not accept, it is a strike issue.

On behalf of the North Bay local executive we urge you to vote NO on the tentative agreement. We will provide you with all the information that we can in the meantime both pro and con so that you can make an informed decision. We need to push back now so that the future of postal workers will, at least, be a tolerable way of life.

We believe this is a fight that is fundamental for a progressive labour movement and equality for all.

In solidarity,

Mark Evard
President, CUPW Local 576
North Bay, ON

It comes with great concern that I am writing this months Bulletin, as most of you are aware our Union's National Executive board by a vote of 8 to 7 recommended to accept a tentative Collective Agreement with Canada Post.

As a vote that close would indicate this agreement is very contentious and divisive. For the reasons I am about to explain the Calgary CUPW Executive board and I have recommended the agreement be rejected by the Local at ratification vote to be held in the next few weeks.

The tentative deal falls well short in a number of areas including:

• Wages…the 4 year agreement would provide for only a 10.9 % wage increase over the life of the Contract. Calgary's inflation rate is running at nearly 6 % annually. Postal workers in this city continue to lose ground financially.
• Staffing…Internal members will continue to deal with the lack of proper staffing. Canada Post has not addressed the issue, which means more work for fewer people.
• Letter Carriers…The modest 1/3 a cent per piece for unaddressed admail and tiny increases in time values don't meet the growing demands on Letter Carriers. The option of being able to use a cart will not solve the problem of overburdening.
• Group 3 and 4 (Tech services)…these members will continue to see their wages slip in relationship to the private sector and the Corporation is not dealing with the issue of contracting out of our members work. This is simply not acceptable.

During this round of bargaining the Union presented only 73 demands, of these less than half were dealt with at the bargaining table. This is a clear indication that the tentative agreement does not meet the needs of our members and their families.

The most contentious issue is Corporate Team Incentive. This issue is far more than simply money, the consequences of accepting a bonus structure into our contract is enormous. The Corporation holds all the cards in deciding how and when the bonus will be paid. It's at the Corporations discretion on which facility, section or group would receive the bonus.

This has the potential to divide our membership to its core. At a time when the pressures and demands of the workplace are increasing the last thing that is needed is a program built around forcing competition among workers when we the goal should be uniting workers. You must ask yourself why the Corporation would insist on us accepting their bonus plans and risking a strike over an issue like this. What is the Corporations ultimate plan, to weaken the Union by dividing the membership?

This is a crucial time in the history of our Union and our Public Post Office; only postal workers will fight to defend the survival of this vital institution. No one should doubt our resolve. In the past our Union has achieved much by standing together against an unreasonable employer, this is no time to back down.

The consequences of rejecting this tentative deal are uncertain, but the Executive and I believe that agreeing to this deal would have a profoundly negative affect on the Union as a whole. Leading up to ratification there will be much contradictory information put forth, however our local will be positive and firm in our opposition to this bad deal. I will make an effort to see many of you and discuss your concerns around this debate.

The decision is ultimately the memberships and I have confidence that you will see this deal for what it is!!!

In Solidarity,
Robert Scobel
President Calgary Local CUPW

Mary Traversy
Vice-President, Operations Transformation Canada Post Corporation
2871 Riverside Drive, Suite N1200 Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0B1

Re: CUPW-CPC negotiations and Corporate Team Incentive (CTI)

Ms. Traversy:

This is to confirm the position of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers with respect to the Corporate Team Incentive (CTI).

The Union has reluctantly agreed that the CTI will apply to employees represented by CUPW in order to reach a negotiated tentative collective agreement that improves the wages, benefits, job security and working conditions of our members.

The Union does not support incentive programs such as the CTI and will not participate in any promotion of the incentive program, nor will we encourage our members to modify their behaviour in any way to support Corporate targets and objectives.

CUPW believes that the hard work and productivity of our members already contributes to the financial success and service performance of Canada Post. We will not encourage our members to come to work sick and will continue to encourage them to avail themselves of their rights under the collective agreement. We will not tolerate harassment against our members in any way, shape or form to increase productivity. We will not allow the employer to pit member against member in the workplace in order to increase productivity or meet corporate targets and objectives. We will conduct education campaigns with our members to warn them about the dangers of participation in incentive programs.

I would also like to confirm that you have assured me that the CTI will not be used by management to importune our members for their use of sick leave nor will it be referred to in attendance interviews.

I trust this is satisfactory.

Yours truly,
Deborah Bourque
National President CUPW

Like many other locals, the Vancouver Local has taken a very different view of the Corporation's offer. On February 13, 2007, the Vancouver Local Executive Committee voted unanimously to recommend rejection. We are recommending rejection because we feel that he global offer does not go far enough in terms of meeting the mandate of our members. To be clear, we will not be voting on whether we are to go on strike; we will be voting on the global offer as it currently stands. We simply want the Negotiations Committee to go back to the table and follow through on its mandate by addressing some of the inadequacies in the global offer.

To be fair, we acknowledge that the global offer contains a few improvements, but it also has some very serious deficiencies. A more detailed local perspective will follow shortly, but the following information is a very brief summary of several shortcomings in the global offer that we feel support our recommendation of rejection.

Corporate Team Incentive (CTI)

Just weeks ago, the National Union condemned the CTI as the "Employer's demand". At the present time, the National Union is promoting a global offer that contains the CTI. For the uninitiated, the CTI is a performance incentive plan, the terms of which are dictated solely by Canada Post. The incentive payment, if any, will be based on achieving certain goals. Unsurprisingly, those goals are tied to performance (see increased productivity) and "employee engagement". The CTI is a carrot being dangled to our membership as a means of squeezing water from stone without any guarantee of payment.

In our view, the CTI represents an insidious end run around the work measurement systems that Canada Post has been attacking for the last several years. Aside from the fact that the CUPW National Constitution proscribes the Union from endorsing productivity-based incentive plans, the CTI also excludes temporary employees. How could anyone in good conscience support a global offer that discriminates against temporary employees (who are likely the most abused segment of our membership)?

Householder dimensions increased by 29%!

The global offer contains language that allows Canada Post to increase the dimensions of unaddressed admail by up to 29% (9" by 12"). Our membership provided no such mandate! In Vancouver, oversized householders have contributed to our current overburdening problems. Although the Corporation's offer provides for a very small additional payment to be attached to the delivery of oversized mailings, it is less than the amounts that are payable each time the CUPW National Office agrees to enter into national agreements for the delivery of oversized items. Letter Carriers already carry enough weight on their backs. We cannot accept larger householder mailings.

No improvement to Group 1 Staffing!

Since the inclusion of Appendix P in the 2000 collective agreement, the Corporation has been obligated to maintain a minimum ratio of full-time employees. Appendix P marked a significant change to the manner in which temporary employees could be utilized in Group1 facilities. Under the new language, temporary employees could be used in a six (6) hour window without any further obligations other than the inclusion of those hours into the staffing ratio. Moreover, the use of temporary employees within that window no longer triggered extended hours and overtime.

Even at the time of its introduction, it was recognized that Appendix P had serious limitations in terms of maintaining a minimum ratio of full-time employees in any specific work area, section or post office. In Vancouver, the shortage of staffing has become acute, impacting on health, safety, and job rotation. Furthermore, Canada Post now routinely deletes vacant day shift positions, which has impacted on our seniority rights because of the additional difficulties that have been created during annual shift bids.

To deal with those concerns, our Group 1 members provided a mandate. Our Group 1 members wanted teeth put into the existing language. Our members wanted language that would compel Canada Post to maintain an adequate level of full-time staffing in work locations where part-time and temporary employees frequently outnumber full-time employees. Rather than negotiate such language, the Union succeeded only in obtaining the right to engage in consultation. We say that the Union already has that right.

Householder time values inadequate

Many Letter Carriers in Vancouver are experiencing serious overburdening problems. In the past several years, we have lost jobs with every restructure. We have not lost jobs because of a decrease in mail volumes; we have lost jobs because Canada Post has exploited every possible loophole in our collective agreement. The Letter Carrier Work Measurement System (LCRMS) has been undermined and no longer ensures an equitable and safe workload.

During the last round of collective bargaining, our members were told that increased motorization would lead to improved health and safety. In reality, increased motorization has led to the increased use of off-site lunch facilities, which in turn has substantially increased the workload of our members, particularly for those who deliver on foot. Admail is another problem in itself. During the past several years, unaddressed admail volumes have skyrocketed, further contributing to the problem of overburdening. There can be no question that we need time values for unaddressed admail. However, the time values contained in the Corporation's global offer are inadequate and will not address our overburdening problems.

Postal workers suffer the highest rate of injury in the federal sector. Unless we are able to make significant improvements to the LCRMS, it will only get worse. Can we go another four years without relief?

Structured MSC work given to part-time PO-4s

If accepted, the global offer will allow Canada Post to legitimately reassign structured MSC work to part-time postal clerks. In Vancouver, grievances were filed after Canada Post recently assigned part-time PO-4s to the task of unloading MSC vehicles. Since MSC schedules are based on a work measurement system, the erosion of structured MSC work will contribute to the reduction of MSC jobs. Unless the membership votes not to accept the Corporation's offer, we will lose MSC jobs and there will be no language with which to effectively force Canada Post to create full-time PO-4 positions.

No improvement to Longevity Pay

During the last round of collective bargaining, there was much discussion on the issue of severance pay. While the Union conceded on the issue of severance pay, longevity pay was introduced to provide an additional payment to long-term employees whose tenure had met the qualifying period. At the time, it was felt that we could reduce the qualifying period in the next round of collective bargaining. To no surprise, that was precisely the mandate that was given to the Negotiations Committee during this round of collective bargaining. Unfortunately, that mandate seems to have been dropped at the negotiations table.

These are only a few of the concerns that have been raised with the Corporation's global offer. Ultimately, the membership will decide whether to accept the Corporation's offer when casting their votes. Until then, we believe that it is important that you consider our local perspective regarding the global offer. Four years is a very long time to live with our current staffing and overburdening problems. This will be our only opportunity to address the shortcomings in the Corporation's offer. Please think about your future and whether you can live with what is essentially a status quo contract.

Voting no to the global offer does not mean the same thing as voting yes to a strike! No one wants a strike, including Canada Post. We want the Negotiations team to return to the bargaining table and address the shortcomings in Canada Post's global offer. If there really is money for the CTI, then there is money for a real wage increase and/or the improvements that will help to ensure our health and safety in the future.

I hope that this bulletin has been informative. We will provide more detailed information from our local perspective very shortly.

If you have any questions regarding the Corporation's offer, please speak to your shop steward or feel free to contact any of our local officers.

In solidarity,

Ken Mooney
President

With the approaching Membership vote on the Tentative Agreement, our Union is at a major turning point in its history as a militant and staunch Union that does not compromise its principles in advancing the cause of the rank and file members.

NEVER in the history of our Union has the National Executive Board of our Union been so divided in recommending a Collective Agreement to our members.

NEVER has a National President been required to break a tie in order to provide the narrowest of possible margins of support for a tentative agreement.

NEVER have any of our past Negotiating Committees ever been prepared to even consider such proposals as CTI which stands completely counter to one of our Union's guiding Policies which is entrenched in our National Constitution.

NEVER has our Union been prepared to allow incentive pay systems to divide and conquer our ranks by forcing individual members to consider compromising their rights such as sick leave, etc. in order to enable the Corporation to meet some arbitrarily established targets thereby resulting in the payment of some paltry sums to our members. Our Union has always BARGAINED definite wage increases and has NEVER left it to the employer to pay our members wages based upon "Potential" productivity gains.

In the upcoming Ratification Votes on this Tentative Collective Agreement, I, as your Local President, am encouraging you to consider all of the implication of this very dangerous provision in the proposed Collective Agreement. Ask yourself… "Where will I be next round of bargaining when the employer will want to force more of my wages to be governed by "Potential Productivity and Engagement Gains?"…"Will I be better off than with a definitive and negotiated wage increase?" The answer will be OBVIOUS!!!

Postal Workers all across Canada are speaking out and STRONGLY opposing this MAJOR directional and orientation change for our Union. There has NEVER been such a united cross-country opposition to a proposed Tentative Agreement as there is for this one.

As your Local President I propose the following:

• Send a Strong message to the National President (Deborah Bourque) and The Negotiating Committee that they are to return to the Bargaining Table to negotiate an agreement which meets the needs of Postal Workers and does NOT violate our Policies and principles.
• Vote NO on this proposed Tentative Agreement and send the message that Postal Workers will not go blindly into an uncertain and merely "potential" future based upon the Employer's whims and arbitrarily established productivity and engagement targets.
• Send a Strong message to the National President that Postal Workers are NOT interested in this fundamental change to our Union's long standing orientation.
• Vote NO and send the message that we, as the rank and file, deserve better than this employer driven agenda.

Finally, it is your right, as a member, to demand that you receive a full and detailed explanation from 50% of your National Executive Board who voted NO on this proposal and demand that one of those members be present at any ratification vote to speak to the membership. Do not accept the National President voting to break a tie to present this collective agreement to the membership.

This Tentative Agreement establishes and sets the precedent of having productivity and engagement increases based upon arbitrarily (Employer) established targets determine the full scope of our wages. In addition, this Tentative Agreement does not deal with the serious issues of Staffing and Workload for ALL of the Groups covered by the Collective Agreement. In other words, this is an EMPLOYER agreement and does not reflect the goals and aspirations of rank and file Postal Workers.

For all of the reasons, I strongly recommend that you vote NO on this agreement!!!

In Solidarity,

Jane Marsh
Toronto Local President
February 19, 2007

The title of the bulletin comes from the National Director of the Prairie Region Sister Cindy McCallum. As you are probably aware the Toronto Local Executive is recommending our members vote NO to this new tentative collective agreement. In a show of Solidarity from coast to coast other Local Executives have also voted No and we will keep you informed of who they are as we receive them.

Local Executives Recommending NO:

National Officers who voted No:

Not all of the Locals have had their executive recommendations but as they come in, and if we are notified we will keep you updated. The National Executive Board was split with an 8-7 yes vote. We discussed this at the Executive meeting and thought it was too close a vote, they need to go back to the table and negotiate a contract that is more acceptable to everyone. Again I will remind the membership that a No vote is not a vote for a strike. A NO vote gives strength to the National Negotiating Committee to go back to the boss and start negotiating for a better collective agreement.

In Strength and Solidarity

Jane Marsh
Toronto Local President
February 18, 2007

The Toronto Local Executive is recommending to the membership to vote NO on the up coming Tentative Collective Agreement. We had a lot of debate at 2 executive meetings and the vote was a solid NO. This included meetings with the National President Deborah Bourque, National Chief Negotiator Pat Bertrand, National Director Irwin Nanda, and Geoff Bickerton. Although there are some positive items in the collective agreement there is a negative impact on the membership.

We want the membership to know that our position to vote no was not solely based on the Corporate Team Incentive. Group 1 staffing including backfilling absences, the lack of job creation for clerks and dispatchers was another reason. We also believe that the letter carrier workload has not been addressed. Benefits and real wages were also in our consideration on why you should vote NO.

The Corporate Team Incentive is being sold as a National Incentive, but we know that it pits worker against worker. The Corporation is deleting all positions due to retirements and transfers in the Group 1 classification which causes an increase in our workload, and this could also lead to future injuries.

The Team Incentive is like the carrot and the stick. Management tells us that it is pensionable when in reality it is a wage freeze. A real wage guarantee is what we need in our collective agreement. A yearly wage increase that we could build on for our future contracts, and at the same time build our pensions.

The boss is in full control of the CTI, not the members who do all the work and create all the profit. This incentive can be snatched away at any time or used to manipulate the membership. The Corporate Team Incentive has a clause that allows the Corporation to withdraw or change the rules at any time. With the amount of members in our Groups when all the 4 points are met we would probably only see $200-400 dollars annually.

We know that the Management Team is out in full force on the workfloor trying to convince the membership to accept this incentive. If the Corporation is in favour of this incentive there has got to be something wrong. The membership are aware who is out on the workfloor harassing them to come in sick, and forcing them to work short staffed and collecting a personal incentive bonus on their backs, it is the boss. Shame on them.

If Canada Post has all this money to pay the workers, then pay us in a fair and just wage increase. That would be the honest and decent thing to do. Vote No and send the negotiating team back to the table. Remember that a NO vote is not a vote to go on strike. It sends a message to Moya that the workers will not accept anything less than what we are entitled to.

In Solidarity