Postal Strike Imminent

Battletoads · May 31, 2011

Yes economists, statisticians, and financial professionals believe "this shit". Even when the market fails, monopolization cannot really exist when there is an anti-trust regulatory body in place. Equity returns on the S&P500 over the last 10 years have been around 0.6%/yr. Equity prices reflect the profitability and future growth prospects of companies.

And your proposed minimizing force is laughable. When has the public sector ever "died"?

I don't think you know what your talking about, if you think a regulated market is a free market.

and parts of the public service have been cut on numerous occasions...

Battletoads · May 31, 2011

Are you under the strange illusion a bunch of clerks in a mail-room decided to use the legislation provided for by parliament to put a rival out of business? I mean, REALLY???!

It was a bunch of highly paid three piece suits sitting in a board room who made that decisions. And for this you call the striking workers "pieces of crap". Are you for real??

If you understand that Shady thinks of the unionized middleclass as the enemy, and the corporate upperclass as gods who walk the earth his statement makes more sense.

fellowtraveller · May 31, 2011

Best check your facts.

I didn't know that.

Ah, it is explained by the 'Southern Ontario' note under your name, home of exclusivity and privilege not enjoyed by others in Canuckistan.....

Hereabouts if you live in the sticks you get mail at a community mailbox or in the nearest town from a post office. If you live in a small community there is no home delivery and has not been for eons.

If you are in a city where there is mail delivery but live in a community/subdivision built since 1985(and there are many such), it is exclusively community mailboxes.

Same conclusion: home delivery is an expensive and solely political pandering to unions, enjoyed by increasingly few at the expense of all. I also get home delivery, and would give it up in a heartbeat. It would force me to walk up to 100 metres per day.

AngusThermopyle · May 31, 2011

So lets get this straight then. You yourself have home delivery yet you state that nobody gets home delivery?

And this contradiction helps your arguement in what manner? Other than rendering it meaningless and devoid of truth that is.

PIK · May 31, 2011

A friend of mine got a job at the post office and was embarressed when cashing her check, for what little they do,(her words). And she is right, the gravy days are over and unions better get that in thier head. The posties might get a little surprize with this strike. Now a PS friend of mine is telling me that they are changing something about severence, something about they can no longer get it when they retire, and he will be given a check for 28g's in a little while. Severence when retiring????? Not to long ago he recieved a check for 30g's for pay equity. When is this BS going to stop. And the worse thing he feels he is getting ripped off.This fellow who says he fell a whole 2 feet and could not work for years and comp gets him this job at the goverment and to this day he still recieves 8g's a year for comp. Some really know how to play the game and of course he is a liberal. lol

Edited May 31, 2011 by PIK

fellowtraveller · May 31, 2011

So lets get this straight then. You yourself have home delivery yet you state that nobody gets home delivery?

??? Nothing i have said is contradictory. I happen to live in an older neighbourhood that gets delivery. Nobody in a neighboiurhood newer than 1985 gets it. Do you want me to use words of one syllable or less to make it easier for you?

What I want is for home delivery to be eliminated in Canada and switched to community boxes as already exists in very large chunks of the country. It will involve a loss of privilege for you, and for me, but tough noogies.

CPCFTW · May 31, 2011

A friend of mine got a job at the post office and was embarressed when cashing her check, for what little they do,(her words). And she is right, the gravy days are over and unions better get that in thier head. The posties might get a little surprize with this strike.

Is she a cashier (I mean "post office clerk")? Who wouldn't feel embarrassed cashing a $1500 cheque for 2 weeks work as a low volume cashier while the cashiers across the aisle at Shopper's are making $700 for working twice as hard?

Edited May 31, 2011 by CPCFTW

fellowtraveller · May 31, 2011

Let's do the math. 15,000 letter carriers times $75 k per carrier($50k salary plus $25k benefit cost, minimum)= $1.125 billion per annum. Let's forget aboput the ongong pension and medical benefits for now.

You still need perhaps 2000 people to replace them , sorting mail to the household level but not delivering it, and the sort function can be done by contractors for perhaps 2/3 cost, anybody who knows the alphabet can sort mail at the householder level(all the main sorting to post code level is mechanized).

So 2000 trained chimps at $50k each = $100 million.

Call it a cool $1 billion saved, every year. Knock off a couple hundred million for investment in boxes the first year. We could subsidize Bombardier to build those for a million each or so......

Scotty · May 31, 2011

??? Nothing i have said is contradictory. I happen to live in an older neighbourhood that gets delivery. Nobody in a neighboiurhood newer than 1985 gets it. Do you want me to use words of one syllable or less to make it easier for you?

What I want is for home delivery to be eliminated in Canada and switched to community boxes as already exists in very large chunks of the country. It will involve a loss of privilege for you, and for me, but tough noogies.

I'm sure if you ask them Canada Post will be pleased to hold your mail at the local office so you can go down and pick it up.

Shwa · June 1, 2011

Canada Post has a legislated monopoly which means it can charge whatever it needs to charge to cover inflated union benefits. Eliminate the monopoly and you might have a case. As long as the monopoly exists Canada Post unions are a drain on Canadians.

But again, your premise is based on "inflated union benefits" which is an opinion of limited substance and not any sort of fact. Canada Post is Crown Corporation making profit; CUPW has a legitmate and perfectly legal collective bargaining agreement. Why on earth would anyone - union or not - voluntarily give up a benificial position when the employer is making money and senior management is raking in big salaries? Seriously, would you?

Because it IS a Crown Corporation AND making a profit, I see no reason whatsoever that the employees - those who actually make the enterprise profitable in the first place - should not share in that wealth.

So there is no "drain" on Canadians at all because they are making a profit.

Shwa · June 1, 2011

Fixed.

And here's some proof:

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/CTVNewsAt11/20060414/whistleblower_mail_060427/

This is directly from your "proof:"

"It's not the fact that it is a significant portion of our business its more the fact that we believe what they are doing is against the law," said Melanson. "This is our business and we will defend the business because we have to service all of Canada."
Melanson is referring to Canada Post's obligation to distribute mail to all locations within Canada, no matter how remote and no matter what it costs. He said it needs the revenue derived from international mailing to make up the difference.

All you did was post a boo-hoo article about some illegal business distributing international mail.

So again, do you want to try and show how UPS and CanPar can deliver the mail cheaper than Canada Post?

Scotty · June 1, 2011

I think a lot of the anti union people are simply jealous. They're working in areas which give few benefits and little vacation, and instead of resenting their employers they resent other workers who have what they don't have. But it isn't greedy to want to have vacations. Around the world, most countries mandate far more vacation than we get in Canada. In most of Europe, you're looking at a starting vacation, mandated by government, as of your first year of working, of four or five weeks. Generally, government workers in Canada start at 3 weeks, and jump to 4 weeks after about ten years. Five weeks doesn't come until, I think, the eighteenth year of service, and six weeks at close to thirty years. Places like Finland and Austria START at six weeks vacation!

Then there's the sick leave. Generally, in the government, you get about fourteen days or so a year. Smart people bank that vacation so that when they're older, if they have a bad illness, heart attack, stroke, cancer, whatever, they'll have it to fall back on. Even if not, well, as you get older, as you move into your fifties and sixties (not all government workers retire at 55) you get a lot more aches and pains. Nice to have sick leave to fall back on. Canada Post wants to cut sick leave down to 5 days a year, and have it non-bankable. Now you might think the workers have it cushy as it is, but why on earth would you think it reasonable for them to just shrug and say "Sure, go ahead. Cut our sick leave in half. You deserve more profits, after all."

And by the way, while unions are asking for 'outrageous' wage increases like 3%, executive pay went up another 13% last year. So all across the country companies and governments are trying to hold down worker pay increases, but the big shots are certainly not holding back their own pay increases. It's "Let the good times roll!" for them. You can be damned sure the CEO of Canada Post isn't worried about paying his bills.

Recession, what recession?

TimG · June 1, 2011

I think a lot of the anti union people are simply jealous. They're working in areas which give few benefits and little vacation, and instead of resenting their employers they resent other workers who have what they don't have.

It has nothing to do with that. I have to compete internationally with other companies that can pay skilled workers a fraction of what they make here. The reason they can do that is the cost of living in these societies is much lower so the wage they pay in terms of purchasing power is not so bad. For that reason I get really annoyed when I see unions abuse their monopoly power and increase the cost of living in Canada. Such demands undermine the competitiveness of Canadians busineses who generate the money that pays their salaries.

Bottom line: if Canada Post workers don't want to reduce their wages and benefits to reasonable levels we should end their monopoly.

Lasty, I find it tiresome that unions constantly whine about CEO pay as if it is a justification for rediculous union pay and benefits. The fact is most executive compensation packages are usually a tiny portion of company revenues which means they do not impact the bottom line in the same way union costs do.

Edited June 1, 2011 by TimG

MiddleClassCentrist · June 1, 2011

It has nothing to do with that. I have to compete internationally with other companies that can pay skilled workers a fraction of what they make here. The reason they can do that is the cost of living in these societies is much lower so the wage they pay in terms of purchasing power is not so bad. For that reason I get really annoyed when I see unions abuse their monopoly power and increase the cost of living in Canada. Such demands undermine the competitiveness of Canadians busineses who generate the money that pays their salaries.

Yeah, people with a lower quality of life cost less.

Cost of living is much lower in societies where the standard family has 3-5 kids in 2 bedroom houses and apartments.

Put your money where your mouth is, join that lower cost and quality of living. Just move your business there!

Alternatively, you can advocate that Canadians live in straw shacks or mud huts. That would bring the cost of living down.

Lasty, I find it tiresome that unions constantly whine about CEO pay as if it is a justification for rediculous union pay and benefits. The fact is most executive compensation packages are usually a tiny portion of company revenues which means they do not impact the bottom line in the same way union costs do.

Yeah. Let's stick it to unions who complain when CEO's get raises and bonuses in bad economic times!

Conservative minded indivuals would never complain about workers getting a raise or bonus in a recession... oh wait :rolleyes: .

Edited June 1, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist

fellowtraveller · June 1, 2011

Now either you'd have to increase subsidies massively to Canada Post to maintain service, or you'd give a good old 'fuck you' and let rural areas do without any affordable postage/shipping. If you took the former option I doubt any money would be saved by 'opening the market'.

Red herring alert!!

It does not follow that rural or remote areas would need 'massive subsidies' to get first class mail, the transport infrastructure that flies mail into Iqualuit today is not owned or operated by Cabada Post now, nor would it be tomorrow. The volume of mail into Iqualuit or Dognuts, Manitoba is nothing, a complete insignifigance compared to first class volumes into and around large centres. If a first class letter cost $10 instead of $.57 to send there, it would be meaningless compared to the money Canada Post makes on first class mail elsewhere.

Look at their revenue streams and how they get to a profitable position......

Admail: this is flyers and all that useless crap you get in your mailbox every day, unaddressed mail. Makes plenty o' money.

Courier mail, ExpressPost etc: in direct competition with UPS, FedEx, and Canada Posts private sector Purolator. Profits unclear.

First class mail: they cannot help but make buckets of money because they have a legislated monopoly and can charge more or less what they please, though the information age has obliged their own customers to seek many other ways to communicate and bill their clients.

All these revenue streams and more have some huge competitive advantages over their competitors, except first class mail where they have no competition.

A big advantage is infrastructure, Canada Post was gifted a complete, functional network of real estate, buildings, equipment when they were made a semi-autonomous Crown agency. Since then, they have closed thousands of retail operations that make no money, and spent billions on facilites to improve the network that does enable the revenue streams above. Tons of the local operations have been contracted out and saved them billions in costs with far less risk exposure.

By retaining their monopoly in first class, they can piggyback their profitable courier and admail operations, which reduces their overhead expenses significantly.

If they lost their first class monopoly, the whole house of cards crashes.

Implications for Canadian business and individuals? For the vast majority, the cost of delivering first class mail would drop considerabl;y. Household delivery would be replaced by community boxes, which are already very common as Canada Post has long recognized that it is very costly for them. Rural areas would be served by private sector carriers at greater cost, perhaps subisdized by the savings elsewhere.

In any case, the true cost of mail would be evident instead of hidden in the layers of politics, subsidy and privilege that exists today.

bjre · June 1, 2011

Yeah, people with a lower quality of life cost less.

Yeah, you can have a higher quality of life because more raccoons can live with you

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18973&view=findpost&p=676975

TimG · June 1, 2011

Put your money where your mouth is, join that lower cost and quality of living. Just move your business there!

A lot of businesses are doing that. Of course, that means less work for Canadians and a dropping standard of living for everyone. This drop in standard of living is made worse by greedy unions that fight to protect rediculous wage packages.

Alternatively, you can advocate that Canadians live in straw shacks or mud huts. That would bring the cost of living down.

Of course, I am not advocating that. I am saying pubic sector unions should see wages and benefit rollbacks to match what people in the private sector are facing.

Yeah. Let's stick it to unions who complain when CEO's get raises and bonuses in bad economic times!

Sure. Many CEO compensation packages are rediculous and I support the effort by the large investors like the OTPP to bring them in line via the proper channels. But two wrongs do not make a right. Union benefits must come down even if executive pay has issues. Edited June 1, 2011 by TimG

PIK · June 1, 2011

I think a lot of the anti union people are simply jealous. They're working in areas which give few benefits and little vacation, and instead of resenting their employers they resent other workers who have what they don't have. But it isn't greedy to want to have vacations. Around the world, most countries mandate far more vacation than we get in Canada. In most of Europe, you're looking at a starting vacation, mandated by government, as of your first year of working, of four or five weeks. Generally, government workers in Canada start at 3 weeks, and jump to 4 weeks after about ten years. Five weeks doesn't come until, I think, the eighteenth year of service, and six weeks at close to thirty years. Places like Finland and Austria START at six weeks vacation!

Then there's the sick leave. Generally, in the government, you get about fourteen days or so a year. Smart people bank that vacation so that when they're older, if they have a bad illness, heart attack, stroke, cancer, whatever, they'll have it to fall back on. Even if not, well, as you get older, as you move into your fifties and sixties (not all government workers retire at 55) you get a lot more aches and pains. Nice to have sick leave to fall back on. Canada Post wants to cut sick leave down to 5 days a year, and have it non-bankable. Now you might think the workers have it cushy as it is, but why on earth would you think it reasonable for them to just shrug and say "Sure, go ahead. Cut our sick leave in half. You deserve more profits, after all."

And by the way, while unions are asking for 'outrageous' wage increases like 3%, executive pay went up another 13% last year. So all across the country companies and governments are trying to hold down worker pay increases, but the big shots are certainly not holding back their own pay increases. It's "Let the good times roll!" for them. You can be damned sure the CEO of Canada Post isn't worried about paying his bills.

Recession, what recession?

Our postmaster who just retired, saved everyday of sick leave and gets to not work for 1 1/2 ,before he retires, so are we paying 2 salaries for that job now? Union people are mostly underworked and over paid and the biggest whiners going and thier day is coming because we non-union people are fed up. I don't mind making non union wage, I live a good life but now I am not to sure ,how long that will last, enough of the entitlement attitude in this country. You ain't worth the money and extras you get.

MiddleClassCentrist · June 1, 2011

A lot of businesses are doing that. Of course, that means less work for Canadians and a dropping standard of living for everyone. This drop in standard of living is made worse by greedy unions that fight to protect rediculous wage packages.

Then you should be happy that the free market is fixing the problem!

MiddleClassCentrist · June 1, 2011

You ain't worth the money and extras you get.

Scotty · June 1, 2011

It has nothing to do with that. I have to compete internationally with other companies that can pay skilled workers a fraction of what they make here. The reason they can do that is the cost of living in these societies is much lower so the wage they pay in terms of purchasing power is not so bad.

That's as may be, but with or without unions we in Canada don't want to see a situation in which you can pay skilled workers a fraction of what they're getting now. That wouldn't be good for any of us - except maybe you.

Brazil workers get six weeks of vacation from the get go, you know. So do workers in Peru. How is it outrageous for Canada Post workers to get that after thirty years of work?

Lasty, I find it tiresome that unions constantly whine about CEO pay as if it is a justification for rediculous union pay and benefits. The fact is most executive compensation packages are usually a tiny portion of company revenues which means they do not impact the bottom line in the same way union costs do.

You're completely wrong. Executive compensation and bonuses are probably why we had a recession. All those big shots making short term decisions which will give them fat, multi-million dollar bonuses while driving the companies into the ground. And how many of the CEOs and big shots of the big banks and brokerage houses went bankrupt in 2008?

Scotty · June 1, 2011

Our postmaster who just retired, saved everyday of sick leave and gets to not work for 1 1/2 ,before he retires,

Not unless he has a very cooperative doctor, he isn't. You don't get to use up your sick leave before retirement. And if Canada Post has any doubts about his health they can have him evaluated by their own doctors and cut him off if he's found healthy.

Scotty · June 1, 2011

A lot of businesses are doing that. Of course, that means less work for Canadians and a dropping standard of living for everyone. This drop in standard of living is made worse by greedy unions that fight to protect rediculous wage packages.

That's a pretty low bar you set for 'greed'. Used to be they had to be greedy if they made outrageous demands. Now they're greedy if they won't surrender what they have and take lower wages and benefits.

Of course, I am not advocating that. I am saying pubic sector unions should see wages and benefit rollbacks to match what people in the private sector are facing.

I personally don't know anyone in the private sector who is in the same job but had to take a wage cut. There might be some people whose income is based on sales or such, but most people are making the same as they were last year and the year before, unless they lost their jobs.

bjre · June 1, 2011

Then you should be happy that the free market is fixing the problem!

The market is not free due to laws that make monopoly and unions be able to prevent people enter lots of business and make it extra high price and make people in the law protected business takes much more than others.

If anyone can be a doctor, then the health cost will be 1/10 and no waiting will be needed.

If anyone can be build a house, than the price of house would be pay by less than one year's salary.

If anyone can be a banker, no unfair zero prepare rate mortgage would be allowed for unfair robbery interest.

NO free market in current western world and any place.

TimG · June 1, 2011

That's as may be, but with or without unions we in Canada don't want to see a situation in which you can pay skilled workers a fraction of what they're getting now.

You are ignoring the connection between cost of living and wages. Wages need to be higher here because the cost of living is higher. Government unions affect the cost of living so their wages need to go down to keep a lid on cost of living increases. I am not that worried about what private sector unions demand unless they are expecting a taxpayer bailout.

Brazil workers get six weeks of vacation from the get go, you know. So do workers in Peru. How is it outrageous for Canada Post workers to get that after thirty years of work?

The countries that matter are India and China.