Item 6

 President’s Report

Executive Council

September 2003

UTE/CEUDA: 

Other than reporting that all of the transfers have been made, I didn’t think that I would be reporting more on this topic.  However, as I have found out, nothing is as simple as I thought.  In March when I reported at the Presidents Conference, I believed that the transfers would have been completed by the end of July or first of August at the latest.  That meant we would receive the March membership list in June and would match the names using the employer’s disk and the PSAC membership data and the transfers would be completed right after that.  I have found out that it is not that simple. 

We did receive the March membership list in the first half of June and the membership clerks from UTE and CEUDA worked using the employer’s disk to identify the work areas affected.  We also assembled the “protection lists” and the anomalies.  There were meetings to discuss all of these issues.  The identified work areas were then given to the PSAC so they could match the names from the employer’s disk, in the affected areas with the PSAC membership list.  This is the same system that was used when the list was established by the PSAC for the CEUDA affected GST members that were eligible to vote in the CEUDA/UTE vote.  This list had a high percentage of accuracy.  The system and information used by the employer is not compatible with the PSAC membership system thus a manual check of each individual must be done.  The PSAC requires the membership number and/or the Individual Agency Number (IAN – this number replaced the Social Insurance Number) to identify the individuals.  The employer’s disk contains neither however; the CCRA Pay Section has the IANs.  The PSAC has been working with the CCRA to obtain the IANs.  On top of this we lost approximately a month due to the vacation period of the people working on this between CEUDA, PSAC and ourselves.  At this point, the work of the components has been completed for some time and it is in the hands of the PSAC.  Sister Nycole Turmel has also inquired into the length of time that the transfer process has been taking.  I suspect that if the transfers don’t commence soon she will personally intervene.     

I have followed up with CEUDA on their response to the anomalies that were tabled with them.  I was promised feedback prior to this Council meeting.  However, at the writing of this report I have yet to receive any information.  Once we know the status of the anomalies we can go forward with the items under dispute and present them for decision to Sister Nancy Riche.  Once she has made her decision we can finalize the protection list.   

I have to say that I am as frustrated about this process as anyone.  I will take the criticism for the delay but everything that could have been done by our component has been done.  

NEGOTIATIONS: 

As you are aware, a meeting took place between the CCRA, PSAC, CEUDA and UTE to establish the schedule for bargaining.  The CCRA seems determined to drag out the bargaining process by having a limited number days per session and having the sessions approximately a month apart from each other.  This is not the position that had been discussed earlier.  They also were not ready to exchange demands early on in the process close to the “Notice to Bargain” date.  The demands were exchanged on August 19^th and have been distributed to the locals via the PSAC strike structure, as well as through the UTE communication lines and can be obtain through both the PSAC and UTE websites. 

I contacted Dan Tucker after he returned from holidays and Nycole Turmel has contacted the Commissioner, Alan Nymark to try and resolve this issue.  In my discussions with Dan Tucker the CCRA is not prepared to extend the sessions at this time.  However, they will look at how the process is unfolding while at the table and may consider extending the sessions at that time depending on how the process is going.  Brother Lalancette will be providing a more detailed report to the Council and Presidents Conference. 

MEETING WITH COMMISSIONNER: 

I had a meeting with the new Commissioner, Alan Nymark on July 2^nd.  He has agreed to attend our Union Management Consultation meetings in the same manner as Rob Wright.  He will be attending the beginning of the meeting and addressing issues in a global way and then be open to questions.  Some of the issues that were discussed with him are:  CCRA Staffing, more specifically the recourse and competencies, designations and the binding review panel, bargaining (scheduling a meeting to set the schedule, time frames, his availability during the process), the term roll over, union posting and electronic use of communications by the union and AUMI. 

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR NATIONAL UMC: 

I reported in June, the CCRA sent our Terms of Reference to the field for comment.  They have now requested a meeting to discuss their concerns, which are as follows: 

·        They would like a section on the consultation process.  More specifically; the fact that issues should be addressed locally, regionally and nationally, to the extent possible, in an attempt to resolve the issue before it is placed on the agenda.  That would be the general process but there could be exceptions.

·        Some modifications related to local consultation; in particular; as it relates to Headquarters as a “local” and “region”.

·        They want to review the Leave for Union Representatives in the context of the demands at the bargaining table.

·        They want to have rewording related to the attendance of the Commissioner. 

Right after this Council the meeting will be set up to discuss these issues. 

DONATIONS: 

 RANDS: 

I would like to draw to your attention the number of Rands that are in your region.  When you meet with your regions I would like you to raise the issue of Rands and running local campaigns to sign up these members.  If we are successful in getting “Orientation” sessions in each of our offices it should solve the problem for new employees but we must address the issue of the employees who are already in the local but have yet to sign a card.  This is not a monetary issue since these members are paying dues.  However, it is a representation issue, for UTE as a whole, locals and the members themselves.  It impacts on delegate allocation for the UTE at the PSAC convention, the locals at our convention and the members relating to their attendance at union functions, activities and voting.  The number of Rands in each local can be seen in the listing attached to this report. 

INFORMATION TO LOCALS:

 Recommendation 1: 

Whereas the UTE has supplied each local with an e-mail address; and 

Whereas it is faster and more efficient to send information electronically; 

Be it resolved that effective October 1, 2003 the National Office send all information electronically to the locals, where available, instead of hard copy mailing. 

COMMUNICATIONS/WEB PERSON:

At the June Council I reported that we were going to hire a student for the summer to work on the web.  We went through HRDC and interviewed 6 people and hired Sean Karamchandani, a student of Harvard.  Sean has worked on the new web, providing a simpler and cleaner format for updating.  Until we find someone locally to provide the web updating Sean has agreed to do it from Harvard.  Secure access will be provided in order to accomplish this.  He is putting the finishing touches on the new web and we intend to launch it on or around October 1, 2003.

UTE MEMBERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE: 

Over the summer we provided the Council with the final report of Environics, as well as, the verbal answers to questions 61, 62 and 63.  The locals were also provided with the final report.  You were asked to review in depth the results globally for UTE, your region and the commentaries in order to prepare for the workshops that will be held on Friday afternoon of the President’s Conference.  What I expect from the RVPs in the workshops is to review the overall results for UTE, the individual appropriate region and the comments.  This is to pave the way for each region to develop a plan of action to address the weaknesses identified by the members.  There may not be enough time during the workshops to fully develop an action plan so each RVP should consider holding further meetings to finish the process.  I am aware that a couple of RVPs have already scheduled further meetings to accomplish this with their region.  The e-mail addresses that were provided by the respondents are being keyed into a database to be used to send information electronically in an e-mail group called “Members”.  Council will be notified when that process has been completed. 

OFFICE SPACE: 

I’ve put this item in my report just to give Council an alert on this issue.  With the hiring of a Financial Assistant and the possibility of a full time Communications/Web person, I have approached the PSAC to see what they have for more space for the our National Office.  We have also virtually lost our Board Room to storage due to the large quantities of promotional items that cannot be stored in our small and damp storage room in the basement.  I also note that this is an item for open discussion. 

GRIEVANCES: 

As you are aware, I have entered into an MOU (attached) with the CCRA for the handling of a “Definition of a day” grievances.  This was after consultation with the PSAC, since they are the ones that will handle the adjudications.  Attached is the grievance report. 

President's Itinerary

Membership Count