"Unionizing" the CF (merged)

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Going back to the article that kicked off this latest 'discussion,'  what would a military union do that is not already the purview of the Ombudsman and his staff?

Not worry about getting appointed again?

And not everything needs to go to the highest court in the land.....

 

[Jed]

Can you explain or just quote stuff you haven't any experience in?    What BS does a Union "throw in"?  If just throwing the word 'good leadership" was the answer, then why are we even talking about this?

And in the last 28 years I've been in a few SHTF situations and it doesn't effect it one iota.  My boss directs and I do.......

I have had 21 years dealing in the Federal Unions and about 10 years with a provincial union. That does not count any 2nd hand experience picked up with the Unions my spouse has had. No, I never worked internally as a union worker. I refused to do this when given the opportunity at a personal cost in the pay cheque.

I deplore unions with a passion, just about as much as I deplore Communism. In my experience they eventually all become just another Religious Cult that does a disservice to the individual and the common good.

For example: The SUN or SRNA The Sask Nurses.  40 years ago the Nurses were getting a raw deal hence big fights to establish a Union. Now Nurses are extremely over worked, Bad Nurses skate on through to the detriment of the patients and their capable colleagues; and the Courts attack someone calling a spade a spade and fine them for speaking their mind.

The Teacher's Unions begin to totally slant how our children perceive the world and our western society starts to bubble wrap our children and prevent any freedom of thought and action. Besides that they screw up the works for the others in our society due to the culture of entitlement.  Then people start to vote for idiots that couldn't find their way out of a wet paper bag.

But hey, that's just a grumpy old guy opinion.  [


If you have seen the show 'Little Big Man' I probably relate to the Cheyenne 'Contrary'

 

[sailorprivateer]

I'm currently in a unionize workplace and I kid you not, it's a mess. Right now we are voting for the new CBA. People who are with the other plant for 25+ years want wage increase like we're still in the 80s, while the new guys are willing to take a paycut to retain 80% health benefits plus a $500 signing bonus.

Imagine if the AF, RCN, and Army would each demand specific things. Unionize is not a bad thing, I think it's better to have civilian workplaces to deal with it rather than in military.

 

[Navy_Pete]

What function would a union bring that isn't already available somewhere?

Off the top of my head, if there is something wrong, everyone has the following options to report/look for redress;
-use the CoC
-use the unofficial CoC channels
-grievances
-padres
-ombudsman
-UCRs (amazing how everyone knows a piece of kit sucks but never gets reported properly)
-EAPs
-general bitching at town halls

I'm not really sure what other function a union would bring to the table.  Also, if you divide it along jobs, would you have a number of different unions for each trade, lump them together, etc etc.  You'd end up with half a dozen different unions at every small unit; seems like it would add a lot of politics.

There are already more than enough processes in place; should we not just use those first and fix the problems?  Having said that, I've generally had a pretty good CoC support when needed, and tried to do the same for folks below me in the chain, so maybe that's why I don't see the necessity. 

 

[sailorprivateer]

I'm not really sure what other function a union would bring to the table.

I guess you have a union steward present with you when you get written up or sent to the office (or whatever is the equivalent in the military).

 

[mariomike]

Also, if you divide it along jobs, would you have a number of different unions for each trade, lump them together, etc etc. 

May we use The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) as an example?  I understand they are "civvies", not CAF.

"Many of PSAC’s 172,000 members work for the federal public service, crown corporations or agencies as immigration officers, fisheries officers, food inspectors, customs officers, national defence civilian employees, and the like. However, an increasing number of PSAC members work in non-federal sectors: in women’s shelters, universities, security agencies and casinos. In Northern Canada, PSAC represents most unionized workers employed in the Yukon, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories."
http://psacunion.ca/

This may, or may not, be of interest to the discussion of unions,

The Mounted Police Professional Association of Canada is comprised of regular members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
http://mppac.ca/

Would a ( hypothetical, of course ) CAF union represent reserve members?

As always,  not to say a union is a good, or bad, thing for the CAF and its members. 

 

[Remius]

May we use The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) as an example?  I understand they are "civvies", not CAF.

"Many of PSAC’s 172,000 members work for the federal public service, crown corporations or agencies as immigration officers, fisheries officers, food inspectors, customs officers, national defence civilian employees, and the like. However, an increasing number of PSAC members work in non-federal sectors: in women’s shelters, universities, security agencies and casinos. In Northern Canada, PSAC represents most unionized workers employed in the Yukon, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories."
http://psacunion.ca/

This may, or may not, be of interest to the discussion of unions,

The Mounted Police Professional Association of Canada is comprised of regular members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
http://mppac.ca/


Would a ( hypothetical, of course ) CAF union represent reserve members?

As always,  not to say a union is a good, or bad, thing for the CAF and its members.

I belive  they use the term REGULAR to differentiate between uniformed paid officers as opposed to Civilian Members which are/were not PS employees.  Not the same way the CAF refers to regular forces.  I say are/were since they are all being converted to the PS this year I believe. I know they have auxiliaries as well but as far as I know they are not paid employees.

Good question but I suspect they would or could be covered the same way any part time employee would be covered.

 

[mariomike]

Good question but I suspect they would or could be covered the same way any part time employee would be covered.

Our union did not have part-time members, so I had to look it up,

Do part-time employees pay reduced union dues?

No. In accordance with the relevant collective agreement, the employer must deduct an amount equal to the monthly union dues from the pay of any employee in the bargaining unit.
https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/labour-management/union-dues/frequently-asked-questions-union-dues.html

 

[jollyjacktar]

My experience with being a Union member was to see my dues taken each month without my having the feeling of money well spent, just like being forced to be a Mess member.  Unlike Mess dues, however, I could at the very least claim my Union dues at tax time.  So, maybe a little more useful. 

I understand the general distrust or unease with the thought of a Union of any sorts within the CAF.  But, there must be some reason the Europeans got together with a compact or Union or whatever you want to call it and some reason why they still have one in force.  I am damned if I know as I have never had the opportunity to ask anyone about it from across the Pond.

 

[TCM621]

Going back to the article that kicked off this latest 'discussion,'  what would a military union do that is not already the purview of the Ombudsman and his staff?

The problem with the ombudsman is that he can't claim to speak with our voice because we didn't put him there nor can we get rid of him if we are not satisfied with his performance. I don't want people to think I don't appreciate the work the office of the ombudsman does  I definitely think they try hard,  but on major issues they have been ineffective. Part of the reason might be that the public does equate the ombudsman with he voice of "the troops".

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

Edit: spelling

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

What function would a union bring that isn't already available somewhere?

Off the top of my head, if there is something wrong, everyone has the following options to report/look for redress;
-use the CoC
-use the unofficial CoC channels
-grievances
-padres
-ombudsman
-UCRs (amazing how everyone knows a piece of kit sucks but never gets reported properly)
-EAPs
-general bitching at town halls

I'm not really sure what other function a union would bring to the table.  Also, if you divide it along jobs, would you have a number of different unions for each trade, lump them together, etc etc.  You'd end up with half a dozen different unions at every small unit; seems like it would add a lot of politics.

There are already more than enough processes in place; should we not just use those first and fix the problems?  Having said that, I've generally had a pretty good CoC support when needed, and tried to do the same for folks below me in the chain, so maybe that's why I don't see the necessity.

The answer is simple:  Lobbying power and money to back it up and deal with the courts.  If it improves our equipment, housing, services for veterans, etc.  I'm all for it.

 

[mariomike]

The answer is simple:  Lobbying power and money to back it up and deal with the courts.  If it improves our equipment, housing, services for veterans, etc.  I'm all for it.

That sounds good. But, how would the 27,000 PRes members feel about paying the same union dues as the Regular Force?

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

That sounds good. But, how would the 27,000 PRes members feel about paying the same union dues as the Regular Force?

Sounds like you pay a different rate, if this is the biggest gripe I'm sure we can come to a collective solution. 

 

[mariomike]

Sounds like you pay a different rate, if this is the biggest gripe I'm sure we can come to a collective solution.

Sounds like you pay the same rate,

Do part-time employees pay reduced union dues?

No. In accordance with the relevant collective agreement, the employer must deduct an amount equal to the monthly union dues from the pay of any employee in the bargaining unit.
https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/labour-management/union-dues/frequently-asked-questions-union-dues.html

 

[SupersonicMax]

You missed the second question:

How are the amounts of union dues to be paid by employees determined?
Union dues are set by the bargaining agents and calculated either by using a fixed rate or as a percentage of the employee’s salary.

 

[daftandbarmy]

A unionized Army was more or less responsible for not preventing this tragedy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre

And, in the aftermath that included the fall of the government of the day, the Dutch committed to never again deploy unionized troops to a war zone, I believe.

And, having worked with both unionized and non-unionized Dutch Marines, I wouldn't put much faith in the former... if at all.

 

[Furniture]

I won't lie, I like the idea of a union to manage out benefits and our schedule baring a national crisis... But in the world of combat and troops deployed in the support of combat I feel like a union is more a source of problems than solutions.

Examples in support of unionization include extra work hours to support poor/ineffective planning by supervisors. Eg, storing ship at 1500 on a Friday two week before a deployment.

Examples in support of not unionizing, troops work as long and as hard as required to accomplish the objectives set forth by the government.

In reality most of the military's effort is spent on example 1, poor planning and no accountability for officers poor planning/ lack of consultation with Snr NCOs. If the CAF had to pay hourly for what we do and what we bring to the table the way we work and the hours we work would be wildly different. As it stands a CO can order his troops to be at work an hour early and stay a few hours late every day and nobody can argue. The Navy does it regularly with cold moves and such and never considers the impact the irregular hours and extra hours have on morale.

If unionized at the very least every hour the military steals from us is accounted for and repaid in some way, that is a massive improvement over how the system works/doesn't work now.

 

[Ostrozac]

If unionized at the very least every hour the military steals from us is accounted for and repaid in some way, that is a massive improvement over how the system works/doesn't work now.

You may be mixing up your observed problem and your proposed solution. The RCMP aren't unionized (yet) but they still get overtime when they work extra hours.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=daftandbarmy] And, having worked with both unionized and non-unionized Dutch Marines, I wouldn't put much faith in the former... if at all.
[/quote]

Do you mind if I ask what were some of the  problems or issues working with unionized Dutch marines you noticed ?

 

[Lightguns]

I won't lie, I like the idea of a union to manage out benefits and our schedule baring a national crisis... But in the world of combat and troops deployed in the support of combat I feel like a union is more a source of problems than solutions.

Examples in support of unionization include extra work hours to support poor/ineffective planning by supervisors. Eg, storing ship at 1500 on a Friday two week before a deployment.

Examples in support of not unionizing, troops work as long and as hard as required to accomplish the objectives set forth by the government.

In reality most of the military's effort is spent on example 1, poor planning and no accountability for officers poor planning/ lack of consultation with Snr NCOs. If the CAF had to pay hourly for what we do and what we bring to the table the way we work and the hours we work would be wildly different. As it stands a CO can order his troops to be at work an hour early and stay a few hours late every day and nobody can argue. The Navy does it regularly with cold moves and such and never considers the impact the irregular hours and extra hours have on morale.

If unionized at the very least every hour the military steals from us is accounted for and repaid in some way, that is a massive improvement over how the system works/doesn't work now.

After 34 years of garrison, exercises and operations and based on an 8 hour day, 5 day week, I likely owe the government a few months.  As for unions, heck, every time, I asked for something or conducted business base side, it always felt like the CF was unionized......