As you are probably aware, Triple A Living Communities has applied to the Alberta Labour Relations Board for a Board Conducted Proposal Vote. In other words, the employer is asking the Board to force a vote on Triple A’s last contract offer. If approved, the vote will likely take place within the next few weeks.
AUPE is challenging Triple A’s application. We will ask the Board to rule on certain items in the offer that we feel violate the Labour Relations Code. We hope to have a hearing with the Board on Jan. 7. We’ll keep you posted as things develop.
First off, the offer includes a provision banning all casual employees from participating in union activities, such as attending Convention or taking union education courses. It also includes return-to-work protocols that put the employer under no obligation to schedule shifts for casuals when the lockout ends. Including such punitive provisions in the employer’s offer is clearly, in our opinion, bargaining in bad faith.
Second, the offer includes a “retirement bonus.” In other words, Triple A wants to pay you to quit your job. Again, in our opinion, this is intended to be “union cleansing” and is bargaining in bad faith.
We are reasonably confident that the Board will see through Triple A’s transparent attempts to manipulate you, but we must also be ready in case the Labour Relations Board approves the forced vote.
It is important to understand that this offer is substandard. By the end of the contract in 2016, most employees will be even further behind the industry standard than they are now.
Housekeepers, for example, could make 51% less than employees of Alberta Health Services doing the same job were paid in 2015 and 32% below the average for housekeepers in private, for profit seniors homes — and that’s not counting shift premiums.
Likewise, in 2016 Health Care Aides at Monterey would make 29% less than HCAs with Alberta Health Services in 2015, and 16% less than the average in the for-profit sector. Again, that’s not counting shift premiums, which makes the gap even wider.
And there are no set timelines for when employees would receive the raises. This proposal calls for raises to be awarded “upon completion of actual hours,” not on specified dates.
This proposal is about dividing and conquering members of AUPE. The employer is once again trying to poison your resolve.
If we stick together and reject this proposal, there will be a greater chance for a fair contract down the road.
Posted on Thu, December 27, 2012
by Diane Johnston