Jump to content

Ontario CUPE union threatens insurrection


West

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. I know of no admin. clerical, custodial or other non teachers getting EI in the summer. It is not a part time job.

2. Well, they could have been laid of, without pay yet the government kept them on and aid them full time, for 2 years.  They have been offered 2.5% per year, more sick days, pension increase and other benefits, no pay cut.

3. And I will not play "inflation is high" game. It is high for everyone in the country no matter where they live.

4. Should every employer give every worker 11% per year raise? Michael, you are better than that.

1. Custodial work in the summer, at least frequently, because the schools are 'in use'.  I know an EA and he gets EI.
2. So nice of them to do what many other employers did anyway.  Laying them off would have been a very difficult task bureaucratically and I doubt they wanted to chance rehiring quickly when the pandemic cleared.  It was a tactical decision by the government, clearly not largesse.  "Effective" pay cut meaning when inflation is 6.9% and housing is increasing at more than that then - yes - 2.5% is a cut.  
3. Weird that you think it's a game.  Of course inflation is high.  Of course every employer should match the cost of living.  Those who don't will lose out in the labour market.  
4. I won't play the 11% game.  We know they were never going to get that.  You start negotiations by asking high.  We also know they were never going to get the 1% Ford offered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Custodial work in the summer, at least frequently, because the schools are 'in use'.  I know an EA and he gets EI.
2. So nice of them to do what many other employers did anyway.  Laying them off would have been a very difficult task bureaucratically and I doubt they wanted to chance rehiring quickly when the pandemic cleared.  It was a tactical decision by the government, clearly not largesse.  "Effective" pay cut meaning when inflation is 6.9% and housing is increasing at more than that then - yes - 2.5% is a cut.  
3. Weird that you think it's a game.  Of course inflation is high.  Of course every employer should match the cost of living.  Those who don't will lose out in the labour market.  
4. I won't play the 11% game.  We know they were never going to get that.  You start negotiations by asking high.  We also know they were never going to get the 1% Ford offered.

1. Part time workers, temps and, contract workers may have gotten EI but, School Board employees did not.

2. As I said, no employer can ever match short term inflation. I sure did not when in the early 80's it was 10+% for over 3 years and mortgages were 18+%.  When inflation was low, unions asked for more than inflation deals in their contracts (IE Ontario teachers). That is the game I speak of.

3. The keeping up with inflation game.

4. As I said, 2.5% plus pension benefit increase plus sick days increase and I cannot remember the rest is not good enough? And then for them to make it about the kids??/No, it is all about them using kids as a bargaining chip. Nope, wrong tactic.

Edited by ExFlyer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. Part time workers, temps and, contract workers may have gotten EI but, School Board employees did not.

2. As I said, no employer can ever match short term inflation.

3. I sure did not when in the early 80's it was 10+% for over 3 years and mortgages were 18+%.  When inflation was low, unions asked for more than inflation deals in their contracts (IE Ontario teachers). That is the game I speak of.

4. The keeping up with inflation game.

5. As I said, 2.5% plus pension benefit increase plus sick days increase and I cannot remember the rest is not good enough?

6. And then for them to make it about the kids??/No, it is all about them using kids as a bargaining chip. Nope, wrong tactic.

1. Have to agree to disagree I guess.
2. Well, they're presumably increasing their prices so if inputs can go up so can outputs.
3. I guess you lost the game.  Did the unions try for increases ?  Did they try for COLA ?  
4. Funny you mention mortgages.  I assume that's why people settled, ie. they had a good enough living to pay mortgage and decided to accept what was offered.  I doubt those making $39K even consider that they will buy a home some day.
5. I don't know about the other benefits but I assume that 2.5% and the rest don't add up to inflation.
6. I agree that they are fighting for themselves but both sides are using the kids as bargaining chips, or - alternately - using the only tools at their disposal.  Check that, Ford is using a new tool which is suppression of worker rights in the constitution.

Look - labour peace is a fragile thing.  Governments do what they can to win.  McGuinty also tried to force back-to-work so it's not just Conservative governments.  But surely the use of notwithstanding for something like this is a terrible precedent.

Like I say, imagine what an NDP government would do to you without the constitution.  The people blubbering about Pat King can't even begin to imagine it and they're largely silent.  I suppose because they never understood laws to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Have to agree to disagree I guess.
2. Well, they're presumably increasing their prices so if inputs can go up so can outputs.
3. I guess you lost the game.  Did the unions try for increases ?  Did they try for COLA ?  
4. Funny you mention mortgages.  I assume that's why people settled, ie. they had a good enough living to pay mortgage and decided to accept what was offered.  I doubt those making $39K even consider that they will buy a home some day.
5. I don't know about the other benefits but I assume that 2.5% and the rest don't add up to inflation.
6. I agree that they are fighting for themselves but both sides are using the kids as bargaining chips, or - alternately - using the only tools at their disposal.  Check that, Ford is using a new tool which is suppression of worker rights in the constitution.

Look - labour peace is a fragile thing.  Governments do what they can to win.  McGuinty also tried to force back-to-work so it's not just Conservative governments.  But surely the use of notwithstanding for something like this is a terrible precedent.

Like I say, imagine what an NDP government would do to you without the constitution.  The people blubbering about Pat King can't even begin to imagine it and they're largely silent.  I suppose because they never understood laws to begin with.

What I can say is government is offering 2.5% per year plus other increases in benefits.

The government kept paying them for 2 years even though they did not work.

Yes, using the notwithstanding clause is a step too far but, when there is no movement even though goodwill was given for 2 years, there seems to be none from the union side. Unions are quick to forget when it is not getting their way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. What I can say is government is offering 2.5% per year plus other increases in benefits.

2. Yes, using the notwithstanding clause is a step too far but, when there is no movement even though goodwill was given for 2 years, there seems to be none from the union side. 

Ok , agreed to disagree...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2022 at 8:59 AM, West said:

Cupe is now violating the law and committing an insurrection.. 

Oh, you know he wants to sooo bad!  It’s not his jurisdiction, it’s not Emergency Act material.  We are in the middle of a commission that’s investigating his abuses of the Emergency Act.

But none of that matters to Trudeau.  He wants to hit that switch so bad he can taste it!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

Oh, you know he wants to sooo bad!  It’s not his jurisdiction, it’s not Emergency Act material.  We are in the middle of a commission that’s investigating his abuses of the Emergency Act.

But none of that matters to Trudeau.  He wants to hit that switch so bad he can taste it!  

Ontario has the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90e09

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2022 at 12:08 PM, Michael Hardner said:

Ok , agreed to disagree...

Here are some facts:

"Ford has been cutting education, a false premise - In the 2017-18 school year, there were 125,980 teachers plus 9,054 early childhood educators overseeing 2,020,301 students. Now we have 130,923 teachers, plus 10,072 early childhood educators for a student population of 2,025,258. We’ve gone 16.1 students per teacher in 2018 to 15.4 last year and the government is still hiring more people.

In 2017-18, the total education budget was $29 billion, it’s now more than $32 billion with spending increasing every year and hiring increasing every year as enrolment is flat.

CUPE’s initial ask was for 11.7% annual increases for three years, the government’s offer was 2% per year for four years. The government came up to 2.5% for the lowest paid workers and 1.5% per year for those making less than $43,000 per year.

the idea that CUPE workers only earn $39,000 a year, that is utterly false. It depends on the job, the skill level and whether the worker is full-time or part-time. CUPE has a lot of part-time workers who, according to their contracts, work six hours a day for 194 days a year. Once holidays, PD days and March Break are factored in, that’s a 10 month-a-year part-time job.

This is why hourly wages are the better comparison.

The maintenance staff represented by CUPE in the Toronto District School Board earn between $20.82/hour for a part-time cleaner, up to $42.23/hour for a building automation specialist. Head caretakers earn between $30 and $35/hour."

There is more, read the entire piece.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-facts-dont-back-up-school-union-claims-on-wages-or-cuts-to-education

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Sorry, the Sun is a proven disreputable paper.

The main point of contention I have is that the constitution is being abused, and now I see that the union is accepting less than inflation and the government is still refusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have said your part, I already said i agreed to disagree. I don't think the union has to accept a pay cut because of so-called Goodwill during covid, and beyond that some of the facts you stated are accurate but I still don't agree.

The worst part of this is misuse of the Constitution and that Trump's all other issues in this discussion.

Edited by Michael Hardner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2022 at 1:15 PM, Moonbox said:

I don't think that's as cynical as going on strike early in the first full school year since 2018-2019 and as we head for recession.  

If people knew what most of the support workers actually made, they'd probably be sympathetic under different circumstances.  Striking right now is incredibly tone-deaf and is only going to align the public against them.  It seems self-defeating to me.  ?‍♂️

Because they don't care, it's all about them. I and many others are happy to have leadership again in this province. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Sorry, the Sun is a proven disreputable paper.

The main point of contention I have is that the constitution is being abused, and now I see that the union is accepting less than inflation and the government is still refusing.

This is an opinion post and the guy uses the Union contracts facts, he has it linked.

For sure the use of notwithstanding clause is over reach. Thing is, they went out in Friday anyway. Lets see how far he is willing to go with his power now.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The main point of contention I have is that the constitution is being abused, and now I see that the union is accepting less than inflation and the government is still refusing.

The constitution is not being abused when an integral part of the constitution is being invoked.

Btw, were you similarly concerned when Quebec invoked it twice last year on behalf of a bill to further 'protect the french language' which was itself based on extremely tenuous evidence of danger?

Edited by I am Groot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The constitution is not being abused when an integral part of the constitution is being invoked.

Btw, were you similarly concerned when Quebec invoked it twice last year on behalf of a bill to further 'protect the french language' which was itself based on extremely tenuous evidence of danger?

Yes I was.  There's no American equivalent to this... if there were then the Southern states would have ignored the Civil Rights Act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes I was.  There's no American equivalent to this... if there were then the Southern states would have ignored the Civil Rights Act.

Unlikely. The Notwithstanding clause can only be used for certain portions of the charter.

In any event, your being bothered by this seems to be an indication you have a respect for the charter I completely lack. Realistically, it's nothing of importance since the nine political appointees can simply interpret it any way they want to. As they have on the issue of strikes. Don't forget a previous panel of political appointees said there was nothing wrong with the government legislating workers back to work and that the Charter did not protect strikes. This panel is further to the Left so has redecided issues based on their personal beliefs.

Edited by I am Groot
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sharkman said:

Oh, you know he wants to sooo bad!  It’s not his jurisdiction, it’s not Emergency Act material.  We are in the middle of a commission that’s investigating his abuses of the Emergency Act.

But none of that matters to Trudeau.  He wants to hit that switch so bad he can taste it!  

Trudeau is fine with this protest clogging up young and dundas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, sharkman said:

Yes, but it’s Trudeau I was talking about.  He can’t use the Ontario act.

Why would you even talk about or even bring up trudeau as this is solely an Ontario issue??

He has nothing to do or say about this.  Stay on topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,764
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    robretpeter42
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...