CPCFTW

Except it's just the evil CEOs and upper management that get benefits comparable to the lowliest of public sector workers.

You need to find a retirement calculator and see what the real vavlue of a DB pension plan that is based on your 5 highest earning years. The value of the pension plan is probably an additional 20k/yr. One top of health benefits and any overtime pay, it's quite possible that the total compensation for a new hire in the post office is close to 80k/yr.

I know the history of unions. They did a good job of ensuring that workers are not exploited. I don't really mind if the private sector unions want to ship all their jobs overseas, but public sector unions are taking taxpayer money to demand arbitrarily "fair" wages that are way out of line with the compensation in the private sector. We don't live in the same times as when public sector unions were necessary. Now it is the non-unionized private sector employees being oppressed by these unions. The irony is that it is the private sector that pays for the public sector's existence, but if that wasn't enough, now the private sector must also subsidize the public sector buying them up in their pension plans. The private sector pays (through taxation) the public sector to be bought/taken over (through pension plans). Public sector pension benefits are invested into private sector company bonds and equities which must generate an acceptable return to attract investors. Private companies generate the acceptable return by cutting labour costs and compensation to the private sector employees since this is the easiest (or even the only) input to cut back on in a service economy. The private sector essentially winds up paying taxes to fund the public sector's operations and salaries, and then paying their profits to the public sector's pensions. Once again, companies generate these acceptable returns by cutting private sector labour costs. The private sector is being bought up by the public sector AND paying taxes to fund the operations of the private sector. It is becoming a two tier society where the private sector is oppressed by the public sector. It is completely oppressive on the private sector. If you can't recognize this then we'll have to agree to disagree. Look at what the private sector has been reduced to to satisfy the return expectations of the public sector pension funds: http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110625/unpaid-internship-exploit-workers-110625/20110625/?hub=EdmontonHome Entry level graduates in the private sector are being forced to accept slave labour while the public sector whines that their newly hired high school drop outs will have to accept around $20/hr and a mere defined contribution pension plan rather than defined benefit pension plan. This is beyond communism/socialism or any of those pretty ideals. This is oppression, plain and simple, and it has to stop. The employees that are being oppressed are the ones who get no ownership stake in these private companies... the employees of the private companies themselves. Instead of giving an ownership stake in the form of stock options or pensions to its own employees, the private companies must cut back on these costs to fund the public sector buying up all the ownership interest. It's a difficult concept to grasp, but the reality is that the public sector workers are the "elites" of this society. They are oppressing the private sector employees.

Incorrect. I believe Bill C6 should have never been necessary. No public service unions = no bill.

Canada would be a much better place if people were paid what the market dictated. The government already intervenes enough with minimum wage laws and progressive taxation. If you're an incompetent high school drop out delivering mail for a living, you can still live off of a tax-free 20k/yr (which is roughly min. wage in ON). Maybe throw in some kind of bonus or profit sharing. As the less incompetent people are able to generate more wealth and create more jobs, the market will be able to bear higher and higher minimum wage rates so that the minimum standard of living continues to rise. A rising tide lifts all boats. Furthermore, as impediments to job creation (such as excessive labour costs from unionization, corporate taxation, etc.) are relaxed, the market may become saturated with jobs such that there is a shortage of labour. Companies will then have to raise their wages above minimum wage rates to attract employees. Of course, there should be some way to ensure that the job creators have significant Canadian ownership or are heavily taxed for repatriating earnings to prevent too much wealth from being siphoned out of the country.

Sounds reasonable. Why not just give every public sector worker a million dollars of the private sector's money and harem of 100 private sector virgins? Or at least as many private sector virgins as we can.

Why not involve unions in any way shape or form when determining a fair wage for a union of workers? If you really insist on not comparing to private unions, then using non-unionized comparable private workers would be much more palatable than simply demanding more and more compensation throughout every phase of the business cycle. Of course if we were to use that method, public service workers would be getting a 50% pay cut.

If only a few of the employees were cashiers, why was one of the unions demands that CP start offering more banking services? Were the couriers going to cash cheques while en route delivering mail? Or is it more likely that cashiers compose a little more than "a few" of the 50k employees?

Why not? Is constantly demanding more compensation while screaming "strong middle class" and "living wage" is a better way to find a fair wage?

Ok good so we're still friends?

Oh it was Battletoads... I'm sorry I got you mixed up. I hope you don't think you're just an irrelevant, anonymous internet poster to me.

I would say I disagree because the Canadian people wouldn't stand for the private sector being too oppressed. We are already witnessing a backlash against the unions. However, when I read people like Bloodyminded vehemently claiming that the median income in Canada is close to 70k, I start to have my doubts. Maybe the bleeding heart lefties will be blinded to the plight of the private sector until it is too late. Here's to hoping the Harper government continues to gouge the socialist state we've created.

Not a single person is considering Newman being able to afford his foot bath.

I always wondered why the union cared so much about new hires who weren't even part of the union yet. Why strike just because future hires won't get the same benefits? Makes sense now. They want to pass down the welfare to their children.

Except that would overweight seasonal work and temp jobs. Here is a better link: http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil105a-eng.htm $28k

Here you go. http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil105a-eng.htm What's that I smell on your breath? Smells a little like crow.

hint: http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil105a-eng.htm (pre-recession personal income levels around 25-28k) Open a newspaper, go to the classified section, find the ad saying "looking for couriers to deliver your city's Sun/Citizen, etc.", call the number and ask the guy for a job. There's your evidence. While we're digging up stats, why don't you provide evidence that only "a few" of the 50k + DB pension employees are cashiers.

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil105a-eng.htm Go to bed child.

That's household income. We've been over this.

So out of touch. the same people who deliver newspapers for that amount at 3am. Have you been to a Canada Post location? They have cashiers.

I suggest you find a dictionary and look up the term "require".

How is that to the point of a filibuster drinking game thread? And why would they end the lockout so that the workers can resume rotating strikes when the lockout was because of lost revenue from the rotating strikes?

So you're not a teacher? Why didn't you just say so? You hope to make others poor? The true nature of those who incessantly try to claim the moral highground is revealed. Anyone with a differing opinion should be made to suffer! How altruistic of you! I wouldn't complain too much though, automation is progress towards a more productive society. But first, can you design some robots to roll around and drop mail in people's boxes? It would surely be easier to design than one to do my job. Yours is a good career, but that doesn't mean that you know anything about economics. Furthermore, it doesn't mean that anyone with a degree should make 95k within 5 years of graduating.

Take a shot whenever the NDP pats itself on the back for being a "true opposition" by filibustering unlike the liberals who actually let the governing party govern. Take a shot whenever an NDP member lobs a softball question to another NDP to reiterate their boring talking points. Take a shot whenever the NDP insults the liberals for having so few seats. Take a shot when the NDP caucus bangs their tables and cries "here here" in self-righteous approval. Take a shot whenever an NDP member becomes red-faced and feigns indignation when a conservative MP questions the NDP's motives and who they truly represent. "Strong middle class" take 1/5th of a shot.

These are the hallmarks of public service unions. The cops feel entitled to beat down civilians just like the postal workers feel entitled to extort Canadian taxpayers. I'm not as annoyed with paying above market value for police though... they carry guns not mailbags. It can be argued that the negative externalities of an underpaid police force far outweigh the savings. I can't really think of many negative externalities of underpaid paperboys.