OC Transpo Strike – Who Is To Blame

It is really easy to blame the drivers, mechanics and their union for the strike. However the facts do not support that.

The strike was called when the employer, the City of Ottawa and OC Transpo, presented a final offer and stated that they were not willing to negotiate any further (and they have not moved from their bottom line position since then). That left the workers with the choice of accepting an unsatisfactory offer or going on strike. Further negotiations were no longer an option (although the union indicated its willingness to accept the federal mediators proposal as a way of ending the strike within days of it's start).

We could still blame the workers and their union if the strike had been the result of unreasonable demands by them. But it was not.

The strike was precipitated by an attempt by the City of Ottawa and OC Transpo to rollback previously bargained for benefits relating to the scheduling system. This was a system that was proposed by the employer and negotiated in a non-confrontational interests-based bargaining process over an extended period of time. It was also a proposal that, despite the rhetoric (lies?) of Larry O'Brien and his cohorts, did not cost the City and OC Transpo anything because the workers took a reduced pay increase to pay for the extra costs.

The strike can be settled immediately if City of Ottawa and OC Transpo would accept the workers and their union's reasonable proposal to send the financial package to arbitration and the scheduling issue to a mediation process. The system was developed in a non-confrontational process over an extended period of time. If the city believes it has problems that need to be fixed that is the process to use, a process that may be able to find improvements that benefit both the workers and the employer.

The facts make it clear that it was the City and OC Transpo that that caused the strike and it is the City and OC Transpo that are responsible for it continuing.

City of Ottawa Does Not Believe It's Own Rhetoric – OC Transpo Strike

Special Saturday Fifth Column

The Amalgamated Transit Union has made a proposal that could end the OC Transpo strike almost immediately by sending the financial offers to binding arbitration and submitting the scheduling issue to a mediation process.

Mayor Larry O'Brien, the City of Ottawa and OC Transpo claim that they have made a fair and reasonable offer to the Amalgamated Transit Union and claim that their new scheduling proposals are better for the drivers and are just not well understood by the drivers and their union.

If that is true why are they afraid to send their financial offer to binding arbitration without preconditions and submit their scheduling proposal to a mediation process where it can be explained to and understood by the union and it's members.

There is a word for it when you tell other people something you do not believe to be true.

Should Public Transit Be Declared An Essential Service

As an environmentalist, I am inclined to say yes to that question because of the extensive environmental benefits provided by public transit systems, the main one, of course, being the fact that it reduces automobile use considerably and in some cases can make car ownership unnecessary.

But the first question we have to answer is what does that mean.

If public transit is essential, like police and health care services, then it must be provided. There must be legislation requiring municipalities above a certain size to provide a public transit service.

If public transit is essential, then it must be publicly provided. It cannot be left to the whims of the private sector that will only provide service where it is profitable.

It must be a meaningful service so the legislation must provide standards of service that must be provided.

It must also be affordable to all citizens, especially lower income citizens. In order to do this fares must only be used to cover a portion of the costs, no more than fifty percent.

Since municipalities have the least effective and least equitable taxing powers of all levels of government, funding must be provided by all three levels of government, municipal, provincial and federal.

And for it to be effective in getting people to make permanent lifestyle changes it must be reliable and provided without interruption.

This would require removing the right to strike from workers and the right to lock-out workers during labour disputes from management and replacing it with a fair system of compulsory arbitration when negotiations and mediation fail. It should also be noted that despite whatever legislation may be in place strong unions always maintain the ability to strike if the alternative measures are not applied fairly.

Legislation declaring public transit an essential service must include all of these factors if we are truly treating it as an essential service. It has to be a lot more than just taking rights away from workers.

While we are discussing declaring services essential for their environmental benefits, I would suggest that a comprehensive system of commuter bike routes also be declared an essential service that must be provided by all municipalities.

Solidarity Forever: It Is Time For OC Transpo to Negotiate in Good Faith

In the late 1990s working conditions and morale at OC Transpo were such that it was described as a poisoned workplace, which culminated in the tragedy of the Ottawa Massacre.

Both union and management knew that something had to be done and that the usual confrontational approach to labour-management relations was not working. They sent their negotiators to Harvard University for training and embarked on what is called interest-based bargaining.

That process resulted in the current scheduling system, a proposal that originated with the management negotiators. The union agreed to take a 2 % lower pay increase to pay OC Transpo's added costs due to the system.

As a result of this new approach to labour management relations, working conditions, employee morale, and customer service improved and there was a steady increase in ridership levels over the years.

Then Larry O'Brien was elected Mayor of Ottawa.

It is no surprise that Larry O'Brien does not have a clue when it comes to labour-management relations. What is a surprise is that OC Transpo's top management seems to be eager to join in Larry's union busting strategy. What is not a surprise is that his attempt, bordering on bargaining in bad faith, to go over the heads of the workers elected bargaining committee and appeal directly to the workers has been overwhelmingly rejected by the union membership.

And now, apparently, the city is considering embarking on an all out labour war by using scabs to drive OC Transpo buses.

Do they really think CUPE is going to sit idly by while the city goes after one union at a time. I would not expect to see one snowplough on the road, or any other unionized City of Ottawa worker on the job, the moment after the first scab sets foot in an OC Transpo bus. Larry and his cohorts underestimated the workers solidarity once. Let us hope they do not do it again and cause even more havoc for the residents of Ottawa.

The weather is nice down south. It is time to send Larry O'Brien and senior OC Transpo managers on a vacation and bring in some professional negotiators who are willing to bargain in good faith to go back to the table with the union.

The workers have been on strike for over a month. They are anxious to negotiate a fair agreement. All that is required to settle this dispute is for OC Transpo to bargain in good faith. A little of the co-operative spirit of the 1999 negotiations might help too.

Larry O'Brien's Lies and the Tragic History Behind OC Transpo's Scheduling System

This post is dedicated to the memory of Clare Davidson, Brian Guay, David Lemay, Harry Schoenmakers, and Pierre Lebrun, victims of the poisoned work environment at OC Transpo.


Ottawa Mayor Larry O'Brien would have us believe that it was the union that precipitated the OC Transpo strike and that the scheduling system is costing the city and OC Transpo money.

The truth is the strike was precipitated when management presented a final offer and made it clear that it's scheduling proposal was not negotiable, leaving the union with only two options, accept the offer (the substance of which had already been rejected by 98% of the membership) or strike. Further negotiations were not an option, and as we have seen, are still not an option as far as Larry O'Brien is concerned. Although the union has proposed changes to the current scheduling system to try and address OC Transpo's concerns.

But the biggest lie is that the scheduling system is costing the city money, while the truth is OC Transpo workers absorbed the costs of the scheduling system.

In an effort to improve the working conditions, the Union’s membership voted overwhelmingly to pay for these additional costs itself. Drivers did this by accepting a sub-standard wage increase in 1999. This substandard pay rate continues today. As recently reported in the Ottawa Citizen newspaper, Ottawa’s transit workers are paid many thousands of dollars lower than transit workers in other Ontario municipalities of similar size. Simply put, Ottawa’s drivers are paid lower rates for the benefit of having the current scheduling system.

But the real story behind the strike is the unspoken tragic history of how the current scheduling system came about, a history that I am sure is on the minds of OC Transpo workers everyday they are on the picket line.

In the mid-1990s morale at OC Transpo began to fall, it hit bottom in 1998 and 1999. In response to this both the Union and Management knew that it had to carefully examine ways to turn the workplace around. Management at OC Transpo recommended to Regional Council, and Council approved a study by KPMG that cost in excess of one million dollars.

KPMG recognized the problem, noting in its February 1999 report:

"…[reduced public funding, deteriorating bus fleet, and increasing cost of providing public transit services] contributed to the strife between OC Transpo and its workers, demoralized workforce, resulting in poorer customer service…"

KPMG also noted that both the union and management shared a concern and hoped to work together to improve working conditions. KPMG went on to observe:

"There has been a strong commitment from both the unions and management to recognize the shortcomings of the system and to implement change and improvements as quickly as possible. The level of co-operation, and the commitment to consultation between the unions and management has improved dramatically.”

The KPMG study recommended that management allow the drivers, including their union, to have a greater role to play in the operation of the workplace. KPMG rejected the prevailing attitude in the workplace concluding that “the philosophy that “I put up with it so you have to” has been recognized as inappropriate in today’s environment.”

To further demonstrate their willingness to overcome problems, representatives from both management and the union attended negotiation training sessions at Harvard University. The result was a commitment by both sides to embrace “interest based negotiations” – a process where the parties openly share their concerns, expectations and information in negotiations. The Harvard program was partially funded by the federal Mediation Services department.

Improved morale could not come quick enough though – on April 6, 1999 an employee had entered the Belfast Road bus depot and opened fire – killing four long-service workers. This terrible event, and the memories of four workers, reinforced the need to make improvements in this workplace.

One such improvement was the scheduling system that is presently in dispute. The proposal originated with the employer negotiators – a way that drivers could have more input into the nature of their work. Prior to this, drivers reported in and were assigned routes and times. There was frustration and a feeling that drivers did not have even this small amount of control over their working lives.

The employer’s 1999 proposal on scheduling was also a method to relieve junior members from working less desirable times. For example one driver, Craig Watson recently commented, “under the old system I worked weekends for ten years, under the current system I had a better balance between weekends and weekdays.”

To create this flexibility the union and management agreed that more senior drivers could bid on weekend work in addition to their normally assigned hours. This would give the more junior members time off. The freely negotiated schedule did result in more overtime for those senior members – approximately 0.6% in 1999. The company said that while it supported the scheduling flexibility, it did not want to shoulder the additional cost, even though it was a small one.

The scheduling system now under assault by the City was the product of interest based negotiations in 1999 – for their efforts the Employer’s negotiators won an prestigious award for innovation and leadership. That isn’t being duplicated today.

As a result of those co-operative efforts made by workers and managers, employer and union, working conditions, morale, and service levels began to improve.

Then Larry O'Brien was elected Mayor of Ottawa.


Sources:
Ottawa Transit Strike - The History of the Current Scheduling System
The Canadian Encyclopedia: Ottawa Massacre

What's The Big Deal About OC Transpo Scheduling

The OC Transpo strike is not about the money. If the proposed changes to the scheduling system were taken off the table the drivers and mechanics would be back to work immediately and accept OC Transpo's wage offer without the signing bonus.

So what is the big deal about the scheduling system that gives drivers with more seniority better routes and schedules.

Perhaps, if your a new driver, you might think you could even benefit if the older drivers don't get the best routes and schedules. Until, of course, you realize driver fairness would not be a factor in scheduling, only administrative convenience.

As a newer driver under the current system you know you are going to get stuck with the worst routes and schedules now when you are young, to benefit from the system when you are older and family time is more important to you. If your an older driver, that did his time under the system, no doubt you are very upset to possibly lose the benefit that you paid for as a younger driver.

How does OC Transpo, the city and bus riders benefit from the current system. Well for one it is a great incentive for driver loyalty, and the more experienced drivers there are in the system the more efficiently the whole system will run, contributing to cost savings for the city.

The benefit of being able to choose your routes, even when your at the lower level, gives drivers a feeling of empowerment and belonging. For senior drivers the, system probably contributes to keeping the same drivers on the same routes, getting to know the routes and the regular passengers. It contributes greatly to job satisfaction, which is very important for workers who are dealing with the public on the front line, and that easily translates into rider satisfaction.

So why does the city want to change a system that works to everyone's benefit for some theoretical cost savings and put bus riders through a strike, that the city very well might lose, to try do it.

OC Transpo Union Chief - World's Worst Communicator

Some of you may have thought it was Stéphane Dion, but as OC Transpo workers start a strike that will impact thousands of members of the public, the award must go to Amalgamated Transit Union Local 279 President André Cornellier.

When you are a public sector union, public opinion is very important. I saw the union president interviewed on CTV and he came across as very arrogant and not caring about the public. I do not believe that he is, is but that is the impression he presented. And he failed to present the union's case very well, mainly because the facts he was trying to present got lost in his attitude.

And the union itself has not presented any information supporting their position on their website, not even a single press release.

So let me try to do what the union and it's president have failed to do so the public can see that the hard working OC Transpo workers do have a reason to strike.

The Ottawa Citizen reported the facts this way.

The union has been without a contract since March, and the two sides have held talks off and on over the months. Things heated up last week when the workers voted 98 per cent to reject a city offer and to give their leadership a strike mandate.
…

The main unresolved issues are wages, scheduling, sick leave and contracting out work.

The city is offering a three-year deal with three-, two- and two-per-cent wage increases in each year, retroactive to April 1st and a one-time $2,000 signing bonus to each member.

The union is proposing a three-year contract with increases of 3.5 per cent in each year and has said they will not accept smaller wage increases than other city unions have received recently, which are minimum three per cent per year.

The city is proposing to take some scheduling control away from workers in order to run operations more efficiently, while saying it will respect booking seniority rights. The union wants to maintain the current scheduling practices.

The city is looking to relax language about contracting out work, which prevents non-unionised workers from performing some duties, too.

So the first thing we note is that the union has given the bargaining process a long time to work before deciding it was necessary to go on strike to get the City and OC Transpo to pay attention to their concerns.

While this may not be a good time for the union to ask for new benefits, their major reason for striking is management's attempt to take away previously won contract provisions regarding scheduling and contracting out. If there is one thing that workers will strike for it is to protect hard earned rights and contract provisions, and attempts to replace their jobs with non-unionised contract employees. Such attempts are almost always certain to lead to strike action. According to the union, such attempts made in the past have always been withdrawn.

The one area that the union is asking for increased benefits is sick leave, where they are asking for the same sick leave provisions as other city workers. As well, in regards to wage increases, they are asking for the same increases given to other city employees.

These do not seem like extravagant demands being made by some of the hardest working city employees with very demanding and stressful working conditions.

So why has OC Transpo forced them to strike. One thing to note is that everyday OC Transpo operates it costs the city money. Everyday they are on strike the city saves money. An OC Transpo strike is an effective way for the city to save money while deflecting the blame for the inconvenience onto the OC Transpo workers and their union.

Is this a strategy dreamed up by Mayor Larry O'Brien or just the result of his arrogance and continued inability to lead the city.

Happy International Workers Day

Happy May Day

Should the Right to Strike be Sacrosanct

The labour movement has always held the Right to Strike to be sacrosanct. In reality though, the biggest gains made by workers have been gained during illegal, rather than legal strikes. Indeed it is union solidarity rather than the legal Right to Strike that is key. Workers will always have the effective ability to strike as long as they have solidarity in their ranks.

But that does not mean that strikes are always the best way to settle a dispute that cannot be settled at the bargaining table. As one who worked for, perhaps the most essential of public services, democracy itself, I did not have the Right to Strike. Instead we had compulsory arbitration. On at least one occasion simply serving notice of arbitration brought the employer (House of Commons) back to the table with an offer we could not reject. I have to admit it was somewhat reassuring to not have to worry about going on strike and losing income to settle a bargaining dispute. And, of course, the bottom line was that as long as we had solidarity we always had the effective ability to strike if that became necessary.

The recent TTC strike fiasco is an example of the ineffective use of the legal Right to Strike. The TTC workers are one of those groups of public sector workers that have a fictitious legal Right to Strike. It is often expressed this way by politicians: “we will respect your Right to Strike as long as you do not abuse it”. And by “abuse it” they mean actually “go on strike”.

The TTC strike was a fiasco because the workers went on strike knowing they would be legislated back to work and knowing they did not have the intention, or the solidarity, to continue the strike after they were legislated back to work. So all they accomplished was upsetting the general public. There was obviously something else going on there. The strike was more of an “emotional” response to something going on between workers and management beyond the terms of the proposed contract or something going on between the workers and their union leadership.

The real problem with public sector strikes is that they do not affect the employer’s bottom line. In a private sector strike you shut down production and the employers revenues and profits go down. In a public sector strike you shut down public services and the employers costs go down. There is a real bottom line incentive in that situation for the employer to try to manipulate the union into a strike.

A more effective TTC union response would have been to take the initiative to propose arbitration at the same time they announced the membership had rejected the tentative agreement. This way they could have not only avoided the wrath of the public but gained their support. Instead they called a strike they had no intention or ability to continue, knowing that the end result would be compulsory arbitration.

Why is arbitration not used more often voluntarily in the public sector.

Employers have often expressed a dislike for it because it means turning over “budgetary decisions” to a third party, or so they claim. They also, apparently, fear costlier settlements than those after a strike. It also means they do not have the savings from unpaid wages during a strike to offset wage increases awarded by an arbitrator.

Unions do not like it because of the feeling that the Right to Strike is sacrosanct and that agreeing to arbitration can be seen as a sign of weakness.

Strikes are not always successful. The big problem with public sector strikes is that they affect the public more than the employer and indeed they can save the employer money. Another way that does not upset the public is worth trying. I think public sector unions have a lot to gain by giving arbitration a chance. It does not require giving up your Right to Strike, just not using it for one set of negotiations at a time.

It may very well be that in many cases the employer will reject arbitration. So be it. The employer can then feel the wrath of the public when workers are forced to strike.

Solidarity Forever

TTC Strike - Special Weekend Fifth Column

So what is going on here.

The first factor to consider is why did the membership reject the tentative agreement, proving yet again, that despite what the right wing says about radical union leaders, it is often the rank and file that is more radical than the leadership. When the leadership negotiates what it believes is the best agreement it can get and it is rejected, it is usually a sign that there is a bigger problem than the contract provisions. Usually it means there is a bigger labour-management issue than wages and benefits and that the workers feel ill treated or not respected by the employer. Or, as some have suggested in this case, it can mean that the members do not feel well represented by their leadership.

What of the union response. The official response is a legitimate one. If the union had announced a strike would begin at the beginning of the work week on Monday there would have been considerable public outrage over the weekend and grounds for concern for the safety of the workers.

What if the union had responded otherwise. The union is in a legal strike position and the membership had democratically rejected the tentative agreement by a significant margin. If the union had not announced an almost immediate strike allowing the system to be shut down in an orderly manner, there would have undoubtedly been wildcat walkouts leading to a disorderly shutdown of the system and greater public outrage.

As it is, the union leadership’s response sets the stage for transit service to resume on Monday morning.

Folk Music Heroes on Television This Week

Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger fought the battle for the rights of common people and workers with music.



Tuesday at night at 9:00 PM on Vision TV, Bound for Glory, the biography of Woody Guthrie, will be shown. It will be broadcast on Channel 61 on Rogers Cable in Ottawa.

Bound for Glory is a New York Times Critics Pick.

You can read more about Woody Guthrie on the Woody Guthrie Foundation website.



Wednesday PBS features the documentary, American Masters: Pete Seeger: The Power of Song. I was unable to determine the time or channel it will be shown on in Ottawa even though it was featured in the Ottawa Citizen’s TV Times, but I found it listed on several PBS stations at 9:00 PM.

Mark Klempner reviewed the documentary for the Huffington Post.

You can read more about Pete Seeger on the Pete Seeger Appreciation Page website.



My daddy was a miner
And I'm a miner's son
And I'll stick with the union
Till every battle's won

Workers of the World Unite

Today is May Day, also known as International Workers' Day.

The first day of May is a day of celebration and solidarity for working people around the world. International Workers’ Day celebrates the unity of workers and their unions in the cause of equality, justice and the daily struggle to improve the quality of life of our families and communities. (Canadian Labourt Congress)

On May 1, 1886, Chicago unionists, reformers, socialists, anarchists, and ordinary workers combined to make the city the center of the national movement for an eight-hour day. Between April 25 and May 4, workers attended scores of meetings and paraded through the streets at least 19 times. On Saturday, May 1, 35,000 workers walked off their jobs. Tens of thousands more, both skilled and unskilled, joined them on May 3 and 4. Crowds traveled from workplace to workplace urging fellow workers to strike. Many now adopted the radical demand of eight hours' work for ten hours' pay. Police clashed with strikers at least a dozen times, three with shootings.... Inspired by the American movement for a shorter workday, socialists and unionists around the world began celebrating May 1, or May Day, as an international workers' holiday. In the twentieth century, the Soviet Union and other Communist countries officially adopted it. The Haymarket tragedy is remembered throughout the world in speeches, murals, and monuments. American observance was strongest in the decade before World War I. (Encyclopedia of Chicago)

For more information see the May Day Archive.