On 202 Workshop: inefficiencies and underperformance

[George Wallace]

Bruce.  Not to argue with you, but I have formed an opinion that some Unions are good Unions who are working hard for their membership; while some Unions are not, working only to benefit and profit the Union leaders, or working solely to create a work place where members get paid whether they are productive or not.  It would appear from what is said here, that the unions at 202 are of the latter type, creating a situation where their members are less than productive, and perhaps criminal in their actions.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Bruce.  Not to argue with you, but I have formed an opinion that some Unions are good Unions who are working hard for their membership; while some Unions are not, working only to benefit and profit the Union leaders, or working solely to create a work place where members get paid whether they are productive or not.  It would appear from what is said here, that the unions at 202 are of the latter type, creating a situation where their members are less than productive, and perhaps criminal in their actions.

How are the Unions creating a workplace??  Management creates a workplace...........the Unions follow the rules that management lays out,,,,,,,,,,,,,now, if management is crooked....

 

[Fishbone Jones]

How are the Unions creating a workplace??  Management creates a workplace...........the Unions follow the rules that management lays out,,,,,,,,,,,,,now, if management is crooked....

Bruce, I'm not going to lecture. We, you and I, know for a fact the unions, and workers, do not always follow the rules management lays out.  The OHSA lays out the rules and standards for ALL workplace parties to follow. It's part of the IRS. Section 28 states the rules for workers. A large number of contraventions I cite and tickets I give is because the WORKERS consistently fail to follow the law or employers terms of employment.

There are also workers, in certain bargaining units, that consistently do work refusals to get immediate attention, even though they know their WR will be changed to a complaint under section 43. Yet they persist in wasting money and tying up valuable resources calling them in anyway, in order to score a large number of safety points against the employer for grievances and bargaining purposes. I have yet to attend a work refusal, and I've done more than a few, with that bargaining unit that actually fit the definition of a work refusal. They were all changed to complaints, even the ones that the union, who knows they are not WRs, also launched. Why? Because they think they are more important that the critical injury I'm attending, where someone has fallen two stories and is laying there with two broken legs and a broken pelvis.

The Internal Responsibility System is not a one way street with the employer responsible for everything.

And make no mistake. I've had unions try bend the rules, utilize a partial phrase instead of using the whole section in context, sit at the table banging on it with fists and hurling expletives, at the calm, composed employers like a bunch of out of control chimpanzees throwing feces.

All that saying is, that contrary to your opinion, it is a two way street. The unions and workers can, and are, just as culpable as the employer for many of the problems found in workplaces.

Let me put another spin on it. Some of the cleanest, safest workplaces, with excellent safety records and workers earning competitive wages and benefits, while enjoying all kinds of perks for productivity and gladly sharing equal responsibility, with the employer, for the workplace, are non union shops.

I wonder why that is.

 

[Kat Stevens]

My son works in a manufacturing plant in Edmonton, non union shop, in the QC and inspection department.  A number of years ago their shop began to fill up with machinists who were refugees from the failed Ontario auto industry.  They bought their union attitudes with them, always doing the bare minimum, and sometimes not even that, all while sitting around and bitching about how shitty Alberta and it's shitty non union shops are.  These guys make pumps and drilling components for the energy industry (we can't call it oil and gas any more because people spit on us when we do), since these guys started showing up the fail/reject/return rate has gone up remarkably.  Before, a guy chucked a piece of stock in his machine, and unchucked a finished component, deburred and polished.  The new dudes apparently think that the deburring fairy will clean up their crap for them.  Morale and productivity are both down, and is attributable to the influx of these guys.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

There are also workers, in certain bargaining units, that consistently do work refusals to get immediate attention,

Say it ain't so my friend. ;D

Let me put another spin on it. Some of the cleanest, safest workplaces, with excellent safety records and workers earning competitive wages and benefits, while enjoying all kinds of perks for productivity and gladly sharing equal responsibility, with the employer, for the workplace, are non union shops.

I wonder why that is.

Good management......

 

[MilEME09]

Talking with a guy in my unit who used to work in the ship yards, its the same way there. Honestly I don't think all unions are bad, however the good ones are few and in industries that don't have major global impacts. Something needs to be done to clean up Unions, to often do i see bad workers a company cant get rid off because of a unions protective blanket. DND is no different

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Talking with a guy in my unit who used to work in the ship yards, its the same way there. Honestly I don't think all unions are bad, however the good ones are few and in industries that don't have major global impacts. Something needs to be done to clean up Unions, to often do i see bad workers a company cant get rid off because of a unions protective blanket. DND is no different

THIS is what galls me.................the UNION does not 'protect' anyone.  Workplace rules dictate this..............if management has done their side of the paperwork then all I can do as a steward is try for the best settlement possible.
We had an issue about 8 weeks ago........airtight case and the best the Union could do was cut a deal for the person to resign and thereby keep some severance benefits.

Management would rather tell you it's the Union's fault rather then say they're lazy and stupid obviously....

 

[MilEME09]

THIS is what galls me.................the UNION does not 'protect' anyone.  Workplace rules dictate this..............if management has done their side of the paperwork then all I can do as a steward is try for the best settlement possible.
We had an issue about 8 weeks ago........airtight case and the best the Union could do was cut a deal for the person to resign and thereby keep some severance benefits.
If you 'retire'

my apologies, working in a for the most part non-union industry I just get second hand stories of unions coming to the rescue of some worker running a tight rope from an employer.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

my apologies, working in a for the most part non-union industry I just get second hand stories of unions coming to the rescue of some worker running a tight rope from an employer.

No need to apologize at all.......I'd be a moron if I said it didn't happen sometimes.

 

[Pusser]

When dealing with delicate personnel situations, rules need to be followed and be seen to be followed.  They protect EVERYBODY.I can give a number of examples that I've either witnessed or had to deal with over the years:

1)  a young sailor was injured (broken neck) and released.  He appealed his release to a human rights tribunal and won.  The CF had to reinstate him and pay him 2-3 year's worth of backpay.  Had the case been handled properly, the CF could have at least gotten some form or service out him for those 2-3 years.  I will point out that he was fully fit to do his job (boatswain), so this was not a case of hurt feelings.  It was a case of lazy management.

2)  the XO of my ship wanted to simply drum a young sailor out of the Navy for being a liar, cheat and generally useless waste of rations (he was all of those things).  Both his divisional officer and myself were involved in a screaming match with the XO over the handling of the case and our (the DO and I) view that we had to follow the process or it would come back to bite us later.  We argued that we would look pretty foolish if the kid was thrown out and then reinstated on appeal because we hadn't done it properly (the kid was a moron, but his family was rich).  The DO and I won the argument - sort of (the XO writes Head of Department PERs ...) and the kid remained.  Just was eventually served in that the kid was given enough rope to hang himself, which he eventually did (and all fully documented).  Not only was he chucked out of the Navy, he had nice little trip to Edmonton en route.

3)  My Chief Cook wanted to throw one of his junior cooks out of the Navy.  Again, the case was quite clear - kid didn't seem to like to bathe (BAD for a cook), was consistently late, had NEVER passed an ExPres test, ...), but none of it was documented.  The dagger eyes I got from the Chief Cook when I told him that we couldn't proceed with a release under the circumstances were glaring.  Luckily, the Dept Coord took him aside and explained that I was simply doing my job.  In the end, after a period of proper monitoring and documentation, said filthy cook was chucked out, but on an airtight case.  We received no arguments from NDHQ at a time when they were routinely overturning unit recommendations on releases.

4)  This one is actually a union example.  Most of my subordinates in one job were civilians, one of which was giving me significant grief (an ex-army WO who somehow seemed to feel that since he was now in a union, he had a "rights").  I jumped on the problem right away.  I read the collective agreement (this is a key point) and spoke to the Union - who told the employee to get on with it and do his job.  On a health and safety issue, I convened a meeting of the Health and Safety Committee and his own co-workers told to get on with it and do his job.

Although unions are not necessarily friends of management, they are not the enemy either.  A good union will not "protect" a bad employee, but they will ensure that due process is followed.  This protects EVERYBODY.  From a management perspective, if you have a troublesome employee, read the collective agreement (although don't wait until a problem arises), learn the process, follow the rules (to the letter), engage the union and it will all work out eventually.  It may take awhile, but if you do it right, it will be done and it won't come back to haunt you.

 

[upandatom]

Bruce- I will agree that there are some good unions, and some bad ones.
As well- I will agree that Lazy Management that allows CBAs to get to such a ridiculous point where the employees get handwashing mulitple times a day (4 total I believe), as well as some outrageous amounts of holiday period.

However- This is DND, IT has requirements and needs, standards that are to be met. TO a certain extent someone needs to step in and say enough is enough. Stop wasting time and money.

When they came down and said near 100 contract and some odd number of people were not having their contracts renewed. I was smiling, sounds harsh but truthful. I knew that most of those contract workers were playing the system as if they were part of the union. They would come in for overtime, hang out with feet on desks or workstations, or bring in a laptop and play WOW, Battlefield or Starcraft over the wifi for half the time they were on overtime. They had caused their own demise.

In other units, if you are not qualified on kit, equipment you don't work on it. Or someone that is qualified will go over your work. In that unit, doesn't mean jack, you work on what you want to work on, you don't need qualifications, just follow the sheet in front of you (in French, and god forbid you are an Anglo and ask for an English copy, that isn't going to happen)

While there I would frequently hear Good Job Speeches, and Kudos from Higher ranks (LCol and above). However, having dealt with kit from 202 that was supposed to be "Serviceable" and it not working, or missing pieces, or fails a rattle test with screws floating around inside, I fail to see how a good job is being accomplished. Even when kit was sent back, the paperwork clearly traced it to the technician that worked on it, there were no consequences for the poor quality of work.

They write their own rules there. I was told more then once "we are our own, we do things differently"
And seeing/reading more and more lets me know its all over the place there.

 

[Halifax Tar]

They write their own rules there. I was told more then once "we are our own, we do things differently"
And seeing/reading more and more lets me know its all over the place there.

This seems to be popping up all over.  It makes me scratch my head.  We have orders and directives for a reason yet some feel they can do as they please.

 

[captloadie]

I don't fault union members from applying the collective agreement to their advantage. I have found that the more "difficult" the individual, the more knowledgeable of the collective agreement they are, which is no different than the barrack room lawyers we have in uniform.

I also think that we also confuse the Union with the CHRO advisors and other civilian "management". I have never had real issues dealing with the Union representation, but when trying to take action regarding civilian performance or disciplinary issues, it is usually the Labour relations personnel who throw up the roadblocks. Their mantra is usually "well, yes you could do that, but it will likely upset the union, so we recommend some other/less effective course of action." They often confuse upsetting the union with the union doing their job in representing their members.

Where I disagree with Bruce is the opinion that all decisions are taken by "management" and not the Union or union members. 202 Workshop sounds like the perfect example where many of the decision makers don't where a uniform, fill management positions, are full Union members (often senior members in a Union) and make biased decisions to satisfy Union pressures rather than organization/mission goals. This doesn't make the Union bad, it means that particular local has "bad" people in it.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Where I disagree with Bruce is the opinion that all decisions are taken by "management" and not the Union or union members. 202 Workshop sounds like the perfect example where many of the decision makers don't where a uniform, fill management positions, are full Union members (often senior members in a Union) and make biased decisions to satisfy Union pressures rather than organization/mission goals. This doesn't make the Union bad, it means that particular local has "bad" people in it.

This may sound like a broken record but "The Union" doesn't get to "make" decisions. If they do then there are some really pathetic folks calling themselves supervisors.
  This workplace sounds like a spot where MANAGEMENT has let it go so wrong that closure might be the only option.  Hey, there's a reason we stick someone of a higher, and hopefully capable, rank with the troops.................if everyone did exactly what they were supposed to be doing totally unsupervised then why even bother having ranks and stuff??

Just a reason to pay some people more??

 

[upandatom]

This may sound like a broken record but "The Union" doesn't get to "make" decisions. If they do then there are some really pathetic folks calling themselves supervisors.
  This workplace sounds like a spot where MANAGEMENT has let it go so wrong that closure might be the only option.  Hey, there's a reason we stick someone of a higher, and hopefully capable, rank with the troops.................if everyone did exactly what they were supposed to be doing totally unsupervised then why even bother having ranks and stuff??

Just a reason to pay some people more??

There are many in there that should not be getting paid at all, let alone in charge.

 

[Will M]

Interesting comments many with substance. I was at 202 for 2 years 78-88. It seemed on the wpns side both small arms and Leopards at the time that some civilian and military individuals did not have the training or were incompetent. Our small arms civilian boss made more work for us than necessary just by being incompetent, and one civilian ex mil employee the same.  Once the civ. boss ordered us to sand blast and parkerize all the bad worn firearms parts and then put them back in the drawers with the new parts. All the explaining never reached passed his skull so we did it. What a Sh...t show relacing parts, over half did not work and the time wasted was incredible. With the Leo rebuild it seemed they didn't know how to test internal air pressure in the crew compartment, I had to tell them you won't get the numbers you require until you stick a casing or round up the breech to plug that 105mm hole.
Once we had a couple Leos running up until the building was evacuated for the afternoon. Piss off the civies and they know the tricks. Once the line stopped because both civilians , the only ones who knew how to wire the turret both went off sick due to being harassed by mil staff. Morale was not there and for mil personnel it was not a place to be posted since factory work is not what they signed up for.
I must say there were some great civilians and mil. there also which most likely was responsible for keeping 202 alive.
One word of warning to managers, don't trust anyone who volunteers for lockup, I knew one who made it into a shopping trip. Biked out with a heavy backpack each evening. I think he could have set up his own machine shop.