seccl.weebly.com€¦ · web viewthe preparation for the next round of collective bargaining is...

CG 13-10-03,04 / 012

TOWARDS THE 2014-2015 NEGOTIATIONS

FIRST PHASE OF MEMBERSHIP CONSULTATION

Strategic frameworkIntersectoral demands

Alliances

TO INSPIRE THE UPCOMING NEGOTIATIONS

Guide for unions

Fall 2013

2

INTRODUCTION

The preparation for the next round of collective bargaining is already underway. Too early? No. Respect for the membership and respect for a democratic process compel us to begin, well in advance, the debates that will allow us to define the stakes that will be put forth in these negotiations that will begin when we table the demands, at the end of October 2014 as mandated by the Labour code.

Until then, we must specify all the elements of the strategic framework and the schedule of operations that go along with it.

That is why, as early as the fall of 2013, the membership is being consulted on the main directions for these negotiations.Afterwards, the main lines favoured by the membership will be refined by the governing bodies and hypotheses of demands will be developed. These hypotheses will be submitted to membership consultation in the spring of 2014.

The present consultation concerns the intersectoral stakes, those negotiated with the Treasury board. Habitually, these demands cover: salaries and premiums, parental rights, regional disparities and pension plan.

Many factors generally condition the choice of demands put forth at a bargaining table: the economic context, the political context, problems with work organization, the need to improve certain work conditions, the will to preserve ones purchasing power, etc.

Finally, the planning of a collective bargaining process must also take into account the term of the collective agreement, the length of the process and the relative weight of union demands.

This framework (which includes a schedule of operations) that we qualify as strategic, must also be applied to sectoral negotiations, those under the jurisdiction of the federations. It must be a contributing factor towards achieving the primary objective of any bargaining process, that being, in the end reaching a satisfactory agreement.

These elements, the topics to be negotiated, the factors or variables that condition the choice of the demands and the management of the process are set forth in the following pages. They should be looked upon as objectives to serve in achieving a satisfactory agreement. Thus they could be modified during the process if it is deemed by the membership or the governing bodies that they could put the objective at risk.

3

ECONOMIC FORECAST

It is difficult to predict the economic situation that will prevail in 2014-2015. It is just as difficult to predict if the minority government will survive until then. All that can be said now is that Quebec's economic situation is far from perfect. What will it be in 2014-2015?

It is too early to predict whether Quebec will be done with the lingering depressed economic climate subsequent to the financial crisis of 2008. However, the risks of a second recession seem, for the most part, to have subsided and all indicators point to a modest level of GDP (gross domestic product) growth over the next few years.

This modest growth rate is not the only factor putting pressure on the financial situation of the government of Quebec. Many political choices, as much by past governments as the present one, limit the budgetary room for maneuver of the government. The legacy of the tax cuts over the last decade and the timid fiscal reform (4th income bracket, mining royalties, etc) also contribute in reducing the government's budgetary room for maneuver.

External factors could also compromise the possibility of a sufficient increase in the financing of public services whilst at the same time maintaining a balanced budget: reduction of federal transfer payments, review of the equalization program, increase of interest rates,etc.

The government's present game plan for the years 2014 through 2017 provides for a 3,2% annual increase in program spending whilst maintaining a balanced budget. This is based on autonomous revenue growth rate hypotheses that seem too conservative. The room to maneuver will be tight but far from nil.

4

THE POLITICAL SITUATION

It is possible that there will be a general election in 2013 and even more so in 2014.

Considering that a new administration usually takes 6 months to get a hold on all dossiers, a 2013 election would not necessarily have an impact on the preparation of the collective bargaining process. The tabling of the demands is scheduled for October 2014, unions may be rushed by activities related to an election but still have enough time to properly run the operations related to membership consultation.

However, a 2014 election, especially if it occurs after the month of March, could postpone the beginning of negotiations. If the unions are capable of running all the necessary operations, including tabling demands (except in case of a fall election), it is possible that the employers may not have enough time to answer within the time frame mandated by the Labour code unless the Parti Québécois is reelected. In that case, the PQ would only need enough time to pick up where it left off.

5

TYPE OF DEMAND

For the previous round of collective bargaining, it had been decided to focus on a short set of demands, both at the sectoral and intersectoral levels.

The motives supporting such a strategy were numerous:

it is not necessary to attempt to resolve all the problems in a single round;

certain problems that we try to resolve in the negotiations are of a technical nature, others concern few members. These demands often quickly end up being put aside.

considering the weight of public opinion, our demands should seek solutions to widely recognized problems;

finally, the demands had to be a response to problems shared by the majority, if not all, the membership.

In addition to these motives the report drawn up following the previous round stated that members more easily identified themselves with a clear and precise set of demands containing a limited number of priorities.

This way of doing things was unusual. Except for a few occasions, negotiations usually begin on the basis of a set of demands that contains solutions to all the problems raised by the organizations and the membership. That could be called a broad negotiation, often called “cover to cover” because it contains all the provisions of the collective bargaining agreement.

Although a broad negotiation approach allows us to put forth all the demands, it does not resolve all of them. Such a situation can create a feeling of frustration.

A negotiation focussed on a short set of demands does not take into account all the specific demands but guards us from going off in all directions and allows for a quicker pace for the process.

Obviously with a small number of demands each one of them becomes very important. Letting go of a demand takes on a whole different meaning and the bargaining strategy must be adapted for such a situation.

It is not a matter of putting a number on the amount of demands to be included in the list in the context of a focussed process. It will be up to the Conseil général de négociations, for intersectoral topics and the federations for the sectoral topics to define how such a political will is to be reflected in the demands taking into account the specificities of each organization.

6

Should the membership decide to limit the number of demands we expect that the employer will act accordingly. This objective must be discussed with the employer as soon as possible after our governing bodies will have thus decided.

1. THE QUESTION

What type of bargaining process do you favour for the intersectoral demands (salary, regional disparities, parental rights, pension plan)?

Broad Focussed

7

THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS

For the previous round we wanted to achieve an agreement as close as possible to the expiry date of the collective agreements that were in force. A large number of new provisions, unlike salary, cannot be applied retroactively. Moreover, within the framework of a process focussed on a short set of demands, the new provisions are inevitably of significant importance and one would want them to be in force as quickly as possible.

Obviously the schedule of operations for the bargaining process must envisage the situation where it is impossible to attain the objective of a settlement at or around the expiry date of the agreement in force.

Our first and foremost goal is to achieve a satisfactory agreement. Should that not appear possible after a certain period of bargaining, we would then have to set in motion the usual mechanisms to facilitate a settlement (mediation) or to increase the pressure.

2. THE QUESTION

While recognizing the objective of a process aimed at achieving a satisfactory agreement, what type of schedule do you favour?

A short schedule A schedule with no set deadline

8

THE TERM OF THE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT

The objective of unions has generally been to conclude 3 year agreements as mandated by the Labour code. In the last round of collective bargaining some Common Front unions would have preferred a shorter term, as short as 18 months, in the hope of reaping the benefits of an economic upturn in the mean term. The 5 year term as provided in our present agreements nonetheless allowed us to benefit from an improving economy.

A satisfactory settlement is conducive to accepting a longer term for an agreement. In the last round, the results for intersectoral topics were deemed satisfactory, except for the wage increases that were not sufficient but considered acceptable given the circumstances. As for the sectoral results, they were seen as satisfactory and in some cases very satisfactory which could be an explanation for the fact that very little criticism of the term of the agreement has been voiced.

A variable that will now be taken into account in the debate concerning the term of the agreement will be the effect of the “period of grace” afforded by a longer agreement which allows to fully experience the new provisions of the contract and to run union activities without being rushed by the preparation of a new round of bargaining. Comments heard reflect a degree of satisfaction at all levels (local, regional and provincial). On the other hand, a lengthier term can mean a gradual implementation of some new provisions thus retarding sorely needed modifications.

It is difficult to take a decision on this matter without knowing whether we can achieve satisfactory agreements both at the sectoral and central tables. The decision will also have to take into account the foreseeable economic forecast for the years after a 3 year term.

9

THE ALLIANCES

Considering the nature of inter-sectoral demands and considering the fact that these provisions are applied to all public sector workers; we feel that it is preferable to approach the employer as a united front representing the largest number of members possible. Therefore we believe that it is desirable to establish the largest possible inter-union common front.

Should a common front come to be, we would have to consider committing to a non-raiding agreement between all participating organizations. Not knowing at this time the make up of said common front, we cannot identify those organizations that would covered by such an agreement.

3. THE QUESTION

What is your opinion with regards to negotiating intersectoral matters within the largest possible inter union common front?

Agree Disagree

10

INTERSECTORAL CONTENT

It can be expected that the intersectoral topics to be discussed at the central table will remain the same as usual: salaries and premiums, parental rights, regional disparities and pension plan.

SALARIES AND PREMIUMS

1. Caution

This document contains a list of arguments and parameters that can be used to construct a salary demand. No choices have been made with regards to the content of the demand. Each element can be taken alone or in conjunction with any or all others.

2. Principles supporting our salary demand

Normally, the determining of salary levels does not rest on fixed economic criteria. However, the formulation of certain principles allow us to justify and defend our salary demands with our membership and the general population. Historically, four main pillars served as a frame to construct salary demands for unions in the public and parapublic sectors.

For each of these principles we will first present the evolution of government employees' wages correlated with various criteria and then demonstrate how these principles could be applied in the upcoming negotiations.

2.1. Protection of purchasing power against inflation

Firstly it has always seemed essential that wage increases guard the purchasing power against inflation.

2.1.1. Salary evolution with regards to this principle

Whether we compare the evolution of wage levels in the public sector and the cost of living increase over a period of 40 years or within the last decade we acknowledge the same fact. The wage increases were not sufficient to maintain the purchasing power.

As shown in graphic 1 only the historical gains of the 1970's made government employees actually richer. Since the salary cutbacks imposed in 1982 their purchasing power has either stagnated or declined.

11

Graphic 1 Compared evolution of public sector wages and the cost of living. Quebec, 1970 to 2014

According to the most recent economic forecast, the purchasing power of public sector employees will have diminished by more than 5% between the year 2000 and the end of the present collective bargaining agreement. In fact, wage increases were superior to the rate of inflation only 8 times out of 15.

Table 1 Evolution of the purchasing power of public sector employees, Quebec, 2000-2014

Year Wage increase rate Inflation rate Purchasing power gain or loss

2000 2,50 % 2,46 % 0,04 %2001 2,50 % 2,30 % 0,20 %2002 2,50 % 2,04 % 0,46 %2003 2,00 % 2,50 % -0,50 %2004 0,00 % 1,95 % -1,95 %2005 0,00 % 2,30 % -2,30 %2006 2,00 % 1,68 % 0,32 %2007 2,00 % 1,56 % 0,44 %2008 2,00 % 2,08 % -0,08 %2009 2,00 % 0,62 % 1,38 %2010 0,50 % 1,23 % -0,73 %2011 0,75 % 3,05 % -2,30 %2012 1,00 % + 0,50 % 2,11 % -0,61 %2013 1,75 % * 1,50 % 0,25 %2014 2,00 % * 1,90 % 0,10 %Total

2000-2014 24,00 % 29,29 % -5,29 %

* Supplementary adjustment of 1,5 % is possible according to GDP growth.

12

2.1.2. Element of a demand with regards to this principle

The basic demand should include a central element concerning the preservation of the purchasing power of our membership. This part of the demand may be formulated by using variable parameters (the rate of inflation for the previous year) or fixed parameters based on historical estimations (average rate of inflation since 2000= 2%). The government will surely feel more comfortable with fixed parameters. Just as our membership, the government likes being able to forecast the evolution of its salary mass.

2.2. External parity

Comparison between private sector and public sector working conditions was originally jointly used by the unions and the government. However, the public sector not being the locomotive since the past few years, it is principally the union organizations who use this comparison to request that wage levels catch up with the private sector.


The results of the Enquête sur la rémunération globale des employés (ERG) published on November 29th show that wages and social benefits provided for a comparable job in the public sector are 6,1% lower on average than those provided for workers in all other sectors combined. If the global remuneration of public sector workers is slightly higher than that of workers in the private sector, we can observe that this advantage disappears when the comparison includes only unionized private sector workers. The gap becomes almost abysmal when the comparison is between the Quebec public sector and other public sectors (municipal, federal, crown corporations), as shown in this graphic.

13

Graphic 2 Comparison of global remuneration of public sector employees, Quebec 2012. Percentage.

A more detailed study of the components of global remuneration brings to light the salary gap affecting Quebec public sector workers. This gap is, in relation with all other workers, of 11,2% or 7,8% in relation with private sector workers. The costs related to pension plans, in percentage of wages, represent less or an equivalent burden when we compare the situation of our members with that of other workers or the private sector. So, the RREGOP provides the double advantage of being a good social safeguard and being relatively economical for the government.

Graphic 3 Comparison of components of the global remuneration, Quebec 2012. Percentage.

14

Although methodological changes brought in 2007-2008 preclude any analysis of the progression of this gap since the year 2000, the impression given by historical data leans markedly towards a continual widening of the wage gap between our membership and their counterparts in the private sector.


This criteria could serve to determine increases in percentage points up to a maximum of 8% over the term of the agreement. The comparison with private sector wages is probably the most justifiable one in the eyes of public opinion.

Whether or not this principle is utilized in the construction of our demand it nonetheless constitutes a central element of our arguments. The ERG data does away, without the shadow of a doubt, with the long standing fat cat image given to public sector employees.

2.3. Participation in the collective enrichment

The objective of obtaining a better redistribution of economic growth is gaining importance for unions. The will to insure that government employees participate in the collective enrichment has often served as a basis for our demands.


Even with a depressed economic climate, the collective wealth produce per capita in Quebec has risen by 2% per year over the last 5 years. This annual rate of increase surpasses that provided for our membership (1,5% per year over the same period). The government's income being directly related with the increase of collective wealth, it is reasonable for government employees to claim part of this wealth. Even more so when the government's financial woes are due less to a weak economy than to decisions to forego on important revenue sources by lowering taxes as was done over the last decade.

Additional arguments can be put forth around the ideas of the difficulty in attracting and retaining expertise and the contribution of public sector wages towards the reduction of overall social inequalities.


As in the last settlement, we could demand that public sector salary increases be adjusted if the economic situation is better than that forecast during the bargaining process. This also provides a safeguard in the eventuality of an agreement covering more than 3 years.

15

2.4. Internal equity: reduction of wage gaps within the public sector

On a few occasions workers agreed amongst themselves to demand a reduction of wage gaps within the public sector. This principle led to the pay equity process, the demand for a minimum wage and more recently, the demand for a fixed amount increase.


Equity between public sector workers can be examined on many different levels. Pay equity processes are aimed at eliminating historical and structural inequities that brought about wages gaps between women and men. An eventual agreement concerning “relativités salariales” will aim to rationalize the wage scales of all job categories so that they better reflect the competences, formation, difficulties and responsibilities specific to each one.

Historically public sector unions have also attempted to reduce wage differences between lower and higher paid workers. This objective led to the demand for a minimum public sector wage by the first union common front. In 1988, a fixed amount of 10 cents an hour was granted to all over and above the percentage increases. An important reduction of wage differences can be observe up until the 2000's, followed by a stabilization of the situation. At the beginning of the 1970's a person in one of the better paying jobs (equivalent to level 24 today) earned 4,8 times more than a colleague at the beginning of the scale (level 3). Today, that ratio is only 2.53. Although the difference is stable since 2000 in relative terms (ratio of 2,53 since 2000) in nominal terms we have seen an important increase. The salary difference that was at 36000$ in 2000 is now at 43600$.

A review of the decent minimum wage demand in the public sector reveals an important degradation of the quality of life of those at the bottom rung of the salary scale. Had the minimum wage of 165$ per week obtained in 1976 kept in step with the inflation rate it would have attained 712$ per week by the end of the present agreement. Yet the increases granted to workers at level 1 provide for 667$ per week in 2014, a 6,7% loss of purchasing power.

Contrary to certain claims, the application of a fixed amount increase would not disturb the coherence of the wage structure established following the pay equity process. A fixed amount applied uniformly to each level would simply raise the entire curve without affecting its form.

16

Graphic 4 Effect of a fixed amount wage increase on the wage structure


The updating of the minimum wage for the public sector that would represent a salary of about 700$ per week could be a way of putting forth a fixed amount increase. We would have to apply a catch up process at a rate of 45$ per week (2340$ annually) over a three year term for workers at the low end of the salary scale. This increase would be applied to all workers, regardless of their job category. This fixed amount increase would have an impact of an additional 2.2% increase for workers at level 1 and 0,96% for workers at level 24.

3. The government's ability to pay

Another factor, beside our guiding principles, will provoke public debate concerning our wage demands: the government's ability to pay. Public sector negotiations are not a regular labour relations exercise but more of a political struggle and we cannot put aside this aspect when we construct our arguments. Firstly we must be able to mobilize our membership behind the demands. Also this argumentation is essential if we are to gain support in the public opinion.

17

4. THE QUESTION

In your opinion, what are the principles that our salary demand should be based upon and what level of priority, if any, should each principle be assigned (1 being the utmost priority, 4 the lowest and 0 indicating that a principle should not be considered)?

- Protection of purchasing power: _____

- Catching up with private sector wages (external parity): _____

- Participation in the collective enrichment: _____

- Diminishing the gap between the lowest and highest wages (in-ternal parity): _____

PARENTAL RIGHTS

In the last round, our demand for the adoption by the government of framework legislation with regards to work family conciliation was not accepted and was carried over in other forums of discussion. On the other hand, the work of a technical committee aimed at better adapting the collective agreement with the various social legislation had better success.

The present provisions of the collective agreement and the Labour Standards Act seem to provide sufficient protection so as to not have to consider parental rights as a priority for the upcoming negotiations. Thus we could, if that comes to pass, simply put forth certain adaptations that have become necessary and certain technical corrections to facilitate the application of specific provisions.

5. THE QUESTION

Which do you favour?

A technical review (adaptations and corrections)

An improvement of the benefits with regards to parental rights

18

REGIONAL DISPARITIES

The framework for the provisions regarding regional disparities in our collective agreements date back to the end of the 1970's, beginning of the 1980's.

As a rule these provisions are found in a specific section of the agreement. These are provisions that are qualified as being intersectoral because they offer, save a few exceptions, the same benefits to all school board employees, health and social services employees, college employees regardless of the job category, employer or union filiation.

Being of inter-sectoral nature these provisions are negotiated at a central bargaining table where the parties are represented by their provincial level governing bodies. The demands with regards to regional disparities are presented directly to the Treasury Board by the CSQ, in the situation where there is a common front or some other type of alliance these demands would have to be harmonized with the demands coming from the other organizations.

The provisions regarding regional disparities concern a variety of areas. Apart from isolation premiums there are subsidized lodging, paid outings, reimbursement of food transportation costs, etc. The agreement defines who can benefit from these provisions and to what extent.

In the following pages a brief history of the negotiations with regards to these provisions is presented to better understand the structure. We will also examine some of the elements that were put to question in establishing the isolation level of the workers concerned by these benefits. Finally we will touch on the benefits offered and identify to whom they may be applied.

1. History

1.1 Before 1979

At the outset, the provisions varied somewhat from one sector to another within the public sector. The integration of the public sector as a whole not be quite completed. The amount of the premiums was the same for each community in one sector or another but which communities were actually covered could vary. One thing in common however is that these premiums were only available for those workers recruited outside the community.

In the public service sector the civil servant's agreement offered isolation premiums along the following divisions:

Sector 1 Far northern quebec

Sector 2 The territory situated between the 51st and 55th degree of latitude as well as the territory of the Lower North shore from east of Havre-St-Pierre to the Labrador border including Anticosti Island

19

Sector 3 The territory of the Lower North shore east of the Moisie river up to and including Havre-St-Pierre

Sector 4 The Magdalen Islands, the north west section of Champlain riding (Laviolette) that includes the communities of Parent, Clova and Sanmaur as well as communities located in excentric regions of Quebec namely: Chibougamau, Chapais, Matagami, Joutel, Lebel-sur-Quévillon and Temiscaming.

For teachers, the premiums were allotted according to the territories covered by the school boards in these areas. Three levels were specified basically along the same lines as those of the public service. Premiums were also allotted for the communities covered by the Commission scolaire du Nouveau-Québec. There were two levels, whether the community was situated above or below the 58th parallel.

1.1.1 Construction of the union demand

In preparation for the 1979 round of bargaining, the union demand project was drawn up by an inter-union technical committee based on advice formulated by the unions. In fact, the CSQ (then CEQ) took charge of the work.

1.1.2 Structure

One of the questionable characteristics of the system in place at that time was the implicit hypothesis that these territories were homogeneous. The parallels (51 st, 55th

and 58th) were rather arbitrary boundaries to define the sectors whereas diversified conditions could be observed between communities situated within these vast zones. The union in northern Quebec(AENQ) after some research and membership consultation suggested division made up of a vast zone grouping the James Bay communities that were accessible by road and Fort-Chimo (Kuujjuaq) based on the level of services available in those communities. Two other zones were identified by grouping communities sharing similar characteristics with regards to difficult communications, availability of services, access to basic products, cost of food, etc. This is what led to the creation of sectors 3, 4 and 5 as we know them.

At the same time the Syndicat de la région du Fer felt that a distinction had to be made between the mining towns (Gagnon, Schefferville and Fermont) and the communities along the Lower North shore east of Havre-St-Pierre due to the extreme isolation of those small enclaves reached only by sea. That led to the regrouping of these localities with those covered by the large sector 3 territory.

All in all, the far north was split into three zones: a vast area covering most of the territory and two enclaves grouping communities where the conditions were deemed harsher. The communities on the lower north shore east of Havre-St-Pierre were also included in the vast area as well as those spread out along the railroad between the Maurice and the Abitibi.

20

The classification of the Magdalen Islands in the old system was also contested. The unions felt that this locality should benefit from a higher classification, it's insular nature being a greater isolation factor than that of the Abitibi or the Temiscaming.

In order to avoid multiplying the sectors yet wanting to maintain sufficient gradation to properly reflect the different conditions it was agreed to compose a sector 2 grouping: the mining towns (accessible only by rail), Havre-St-Pierre (which was not connected by road at that time), and the Magdalen Islands. That entailed a higher classification for Havre-St-Pierre and the Magdalen Islands.

In the demand the communities of Parent, Clova and Sanmaur, located on the railway line between the Mauricie region and the Abitibi were also upgraded to sector 2 because of the lack of availability of services and the absence of a road.

The other communities remained in sector 1, the lowest one, as before.

To better back up the demand, the union plan provided for a cost of living survey in the different communities. The cost of living survey was to be carried out by union officials using Statistics Canada questionnaires to establish the CPI and it effectively began. However, the matter was settled before the survey was completed and it was abandoned.

1.1.3 Premium levels

In accordance with the spirit of the time, the demand was constructed with the goal of reducing the difference between the premiums for the various sectors. Before the remodelling of the sectors the highest premiums was six times the value of the lowest one (2666$ versus 452$). After the remodelling the amount of the highest premium was only the double of the lowest one (4453$ versus 2300$). The project also set the value of premiums with dependants by using an interpolation of the ratio of premiums without dependants (1,4, 1,5, 1,6, 1,7 of sector 1 to sectors 4 and 5). Finally the project provided for increases in relation with the salary demands.

1.1.4 The negotiations

Regional disparities were discussed particularly over two meetings of the Common front central table in October of 1979.

For these meetings the union side called upon an itinerant teacher who helped the other teachers throughout the north. He explained in a quite colourful fashion the daily life of teachers working in the north.

On the employer side, no ideas nor suggestions were put forth.

21

1.1.5 The settlement

On the 6th of November 1979, at a meeting of the central table, the employer submitted a proposal with regards to regional disparities. Concerning the premiums, the employer proposal recognized all union demands, both the level of the premiums and the remodelling of the sectors save one exception. The communities of Parent, Clova and Sanmaur were placed in sector 3, one level higher that requested in the union demand. The employer explained that this modification was the result of a suggestion made by the Minister of Finance who had memories of a distressful train voyage between Latuque and Senneterre. When the employer put forth their proposal they indicated that they were accepting the union demands without prejudice concerning the manner in which they were established.

The employer offer also recognized the union demand to the effect that the premiums be granted to all employees including native ones. The 8% retention premium for Sept-Iles and Port-Cartier was also maintained.

1.2 Since 1979

Since then, some minor adjustments have been made but nothing major. The 1982 decree carried over the status quo.

In preparation for the 1986 round of bargaining the government had conducted, unilaterally, a study of the perceptions of the people working in outlying regions. The result of this study led the government to propose a very important remodelling of the various provisions, particularly with regards to the configuration of the sectors. In fact, the proposal upgraded certain communities from sector 3 to sector 4 and from sector 4 to sector 5; this could have been a positive response to some of our demand. However, based on the same study certain communities in sector 3 would have been downgraded to sector 2, some from sector 2 down to sector 1 and the majority if not all the communities in sector 1 would have been out of the program. Although improving the conditions for some, this proposal would have brought about an important loss of benefits for the majority of the membership concerned. A widespread inter-union movement was set up to counter this study.

In the end, the provisions in force were, in general, carried over and we agreed with the government to set up a working committee that would:

proceed with a cost of living survey in the concerned regions

proceed with a survey of the perceptions of workers, based this time however on objective criteria and employing a scientific method for collecting the data

investigate solutions concerning outings at the Littoral and Fermont school boards.

22

The Bureau de la statistique du Québec (now l'Institut de la statistique du Québec) was given the mandate to run these two surveys. Long discussions with the Treasury board were needed to agree upon the plan for these surveys. Finally, the surveys were done. They produced mixed results sometimes giving arguments to support our positions, other times providing the government with arguments.

We had noticed a certain bias in the methodology that had actually been used and again discussed this at length with the Treasury board and the BSQ. At the end of the day the whole affair was shelved.Concerning the outings the working committee agreed on a set of criteria that was then applied to the Littoral School board employees resulting in the confection of a list of people (teachers) who were granted paid outings. The exercise was never completed for Fermont.

This whole adventure during the 1980's revealed the danger we faced in this area causing us to be wary since then.

For the 1989 negotiation, our priorities were elsewhere. The extension of the agreement in 1992 and the renewal in 1995 did not provide for much movement concerning regional disparities other than adjustments to reclaim the true value of certain benefits that had become taxable in 1986.

Since the 2000's the improvements revolved around the addition of attraction and retention premiums for certain job categories (first for nurses, then teachers and school board professional staff).

In 2003-2005, the employer put forth a few different ideas. Firstly they wanted to proceed with a revision of the entire chapter to verify if the existing measures actually produced the desired effects (from an attraction/retention standpoint) and bring modifications if need be. After a while the employer expressed the opinion that these matters should be discussed at the sectoral level. We had made proposals to correct some very specific issues and had even reached some agreements with the Treasury board (concerning the definition of dependants for example). These agreements were not included in the special legislation that ended the process and we had to reopen the contracts later on to include these provisions.

In 2008, still fuelled by a fear of a possible employer position that would bring about a loss of benefits for some of the membership whilst increasing them for others and within a strategic framework favouring a very focussed set of demands we chose to make no demands with regards to regional disparities benefits. This decision should have been implemented by all Common front organizations however a CSN federation put forth some demands that resulted in the setting up of working committees to examine regional disparity benefits in the health and social services sector. There is no formal coordination of these discussions on the union side.

23

2. Elements of analysis

The working committee that was set up following the 1986 round of bargaining drew up a data sheet to be used as a tool for the perception survey. Both parties agreed on the objective data that would be analyzed.

Without getting into all the details of the questionnaire, we will point out some of the elements that were used to evaluated the level of isolation of the workers concerned by the regional disparities benefits package.

The geographical situation:

This involved determining the exact geographic position of the community namely with regards to the distance in air miles from Montreal.

The population:

This involved indicating the size of the population of each community and specifying the percentage of francophones, anglophones and native people along with order of importance of the usage of each language.

Passenger transport:

This involved identifying the various means of passenger transportation modes:◦ by air: type (plane, float plane, ski plane, helicopter), the existence of an

airport, of landing strips, control towers, the frequency of flights, the number of places available, the flight delays, etc.)

◦ by sea: frequency, period of the year, length of trip◦ by road: period of the year, type of road, length of the trip

The services:

This involved identifying the nature of services available to the population:◦ health and social services: existence or not of a hospital, presence of

specialists, emergency ser vices, nursing stations, child care services◦ Education: presence of schools offering, pre-school, elementary, secondary,

technical and vocational training, adult education, post secondary levels, language of instruction, etc.

◦ Municipal: nature and availability of services (roads, sewage system, water system, drinking water, waste removal)

◦ Police services, Fire department, postal services, banking services, media access: the nature and availability of these services

◦ Restaurants, hotels, leisure activities, bar: the nature and availability of these services

24

Food supply

This involved identifying the various existing sources of food supply, the means and time required for transportation of perishable goods, the availability of perishable goods.

Consumer goods

This involved identifying the various sources of supply or servicing of consumer goods available: (furniture, motor vehicles, electronic devices, etc.)

Physical environment

This involved describing the elements of the physical environment of the community (climate, vegetation,etc)

Housing

This involved identifying the availability of housing, the right to own a property, the existence of a rental market, etc.

3. General framework

Three criteria determine the type of benefits granted, the level of these benefits and the individuals to whom they are granted: the sector, the point of departure, the presence of dependants.

3.1 The sectors

The area covered by the regional disparity benefits is divided into 5 sectors, sector 1 being considered as the least isolated and sector 5 as the most.

Sector 1 comprises: 25 communities, 2 in the Abitibi, 2 in the James Bay area and 21 in the Temiscaming (ex: Chibougamau, Matagami, Ville-Marie).

Sector 2 comprises: all communities east of the Moisie river (east of Sept-Iles) up to Havre-St-Pierre, Fermont and all the communities on the Magdalen islands (ex: Rivière-au-Tonnerre, Cap-aux-Meules).

Sector 3 comprises: 9 communities north of the 51st parallel (ex: Kuujjuaq, Whapmagoostoui, Radisson), 3 communities in the upper Mauricie (ex: Clova) and all the communities east of Havre-St_pierre (ex: Blanc-Sablon).

Sector 4 comprises: 8 communities situated on Cree or Inuit lands (ex: Waskaganish, Inukjuaq).

Sector 5 comprises: 9 communities situation on Inuit land (ex: Salluit, Tasiujaq).

25

There is a distinct amount of isolation pay attached to each sector. Some benefits are only granted in specific communities or sectors (ex: food transportation costs, outings).

3.2 The concept of point of departure

The “domicile in the legal sense of the word” is used mainly to determine accessibility to paid outings. In fact, the agreement states that this benefit is granted to those recruited at more than 50kms of the locality where he is employed. This person is entitled to the reimbursement of the cost of the trip between the place of work and the point of departure.

This criteria has for effect that some workers are entitled to paid outings and others in the same community, aren't.

3.3 The concept of dependants

This criteria is mainly used in determining the level of the premium, the amount of kgs available for food transportation and access to paid outings.

4. Main benefits

4.1 Premiums

There are premiums for those “without dependants” and for those “with dependants” specific to each sector (ex: in sector 1 the premium without dependants is of 5388$, with dependants it is of 7707$, in sector 5 the premium is 10436$ or 18399$ as per the case).

All workers in the sectors benefit from this premium. This premium is the same for all public or parapublic workers in these sectors.

There are other premiums linked to “attraction/retention” issues or to nursing stations that apply differently depending on the job category as will be shown further.

4.2 Transportation and moving costs

The employers pays for transportation costs of the individuals, their personal belongings and moving costs when the person is recruited over 50kms from the place of work. The point of departure and number of dependants criteria come into play with regards to this benefit.

4.3 Outings

The employer reimburses the costs related to 3 outings per year for those workers recruited at more than 50kms of their work place and their dependants (4 for workers without dependants in the health and social services sector) working in

26

Fermont, in most communities comprised in sector 3 and all the communities in sectors 4 and 5.

The workers in Clova, Parent and Sanmaur (sector 3), Havre-St-Pierre and the Magdalen islands (sector 2) are granted 1 paid outing per year.

The reimbursement covers the cost of travel between the community where the person works and the point of departure.

The dependant and point of departure criteria come into play with regards to this benefit. Thus workers recruited locally do not benefit from paid outings.

4.4 Food transportation

The employer reimburses the cost of food transportation between the place of work and the most easily accessible or most economic source of supply. This covers up to 727kgs per year for an adult and 364kgs per child under 12 years of age.

This benefit is granted for all communities in sectors 4 and 5 (Cree and Inuit communities) and some localities situated in sector 3 (Cree or Inuit communities and Radisson).

The benefit is granted to all workers without regards to a point of departure.

It should be noted that some of the modalities ( source of supply, means of transportation, reimbursement process) related to this benefit are different in some collective agreements.

4.5 Housing

The provisions concerning housing are rather vague as they simply refer to obligations and practices in force at the time of hiring. Some collective agreements contain more specific provisions namely with regards to rental fees.

The “general” text does not exclude any communities but specifies that the rental fees are frozen for some communities.

4.6 Retention premium

An 8% retention premium is granted for workers in Sept-Iles and Port-Cartier. As a point of comparison that represents 4000$ per year for a 50000$ annual salary whereas the premium without dependants granted in sector 1 is set at 5300$ per year.

27

4.7 Other premiums

There are other premiums granted to workers in outlying regions that are not part of the regional disparities package in the collective agreement. These premiums are different depending on the communities and job categories to which they apply.

6. THE QUESTION


The status quo

The improvement of benefits with regards to regional disparities

29

PENSION PLAN

The RREGOP was not part of the mandate of the D'Amours commission(from the name of the president of the commission) but nothing says that it could not be put in question in the work following the tabling of the commission's report. On the one hand, such discussions could raise ideas that would bring the government to propose modifications to the benefits provided by the plan or the management of the plan. On the other, these discussions could raise questions within union organizations that could bring about proposals to modify the benefits provided by the plan or the management of the plan. Such proposals would be the result of reflections with all the unions concerned by the plan and would be submitted to membership consultation in the second phase of the process.

We consider that the context is inauspicious to put forth a demand aimed at improving the benefits provided by the plan. Over the past few years, pension plans have been the target for all kinds of attacks: reduction in benefits, accusations of golden retirement payed for by a majority but extended to a minority, elimination or severe reduction of cost of living indexation, transformation of defined benefit plans into defined contribution plans, etc. So much that a special commission was set up to study the whole matter.

7. THE QUESTION


The status quo The improvement of the benefits provided by the plan

INTERSECTORAL PRIORITIES

8. Should the bargaining process bring us to favour one intersectoral topic vis-à-vis the others, in your opinion, what order of priority should be assigned to each topic (1 being the highest, 4 being the lowest)?

Salaries and premiums: ____

Parental rights: ____

Regional disparities: ____

Pension plan: ____

30

ACTION AND MOBILIZATION

THE CONTEXT

The matter of action and mobilization was discussed at the meeting of the Conseil général des négociations (CGN) held in the fall of 2012. We brought to light certain observations made in the general report concerning the last round of colletive bargaining that will have to be taken into account for the construction of our action plan, such as the number of operations and the need for better coordination between actions within the federations, those within the Centrale and those within the common front.

We came to an agreement to reestablish the strategy group whose primary mandate was to prepare the content of the meeting of the “réseau des responsables de l'action et de la mobilisation (RAM) to be held in March, before the CGN meeting in April of 2013.

One of the goals of said meeting being to update the understanding of the issues. More over the strategic group wanted to better equip the new RAMs by preparing a tool box in the winter of 2013 that could be upgraded in accordance with the needs and operations. It should be noted that it was a first experience for more than 65% of the participants.

The conclusions of the working group on action and mobilization also raise some questions. The membership participation at general assemblies could be augmented if we took into account some of the observations of this group concerning: the information and type of message aimed at the membership, the goals pursued, the need for human contact and the integration of new members.

The following pages will serve as a working paper that will be adjusted in accordance with our strategic framework, our inter-union alliances and the orientations that will be defined following the presentation of the conclusions of the report of the working group on action and mobilization.

THE OBJECTIVES

In his working paper we focus on two operations:

A visible official launching of the bargaining process at the time the union demands will be presented possibly in October 2014;

An operation in support of the first day of negotiations in the winter of 2015

Five goals are pursued:

To ameliorate the participation level in general assemblies that decide on the stakes and orientation of the upcoming bargaining process

31

to rally members around the stakes and orientations pursuant to the first phase of consultation

to foster an increased participation in the second phase of consultation

to foster greater support for all sectoral and intersectoral demands

to materialize the support of the union demands by collective action.

We are aware that these are ambitious goals and that in order to attain each stage and to foster their achievement one after the other, sustained and constant efforts will be needed at at all levels, locally or regionally.

INFORMATION

Excerpts from the report of the working group on action and mobilization

With regards to the source of the information

Someone we know personally:

The membership needs to identify in their work environment a person who is responsible for action and mobilization issues who can inform, rally, encourage and mobilize all the workers regardless of their job category or union affiliation.

With regards to the means of communications

Get back to human contact, a more personal approach:

The membership needs to be viewed as being important in the eyes of their union representatives, they want them to be present in their work environment and to have informal periods to share views and discuss issues.

The membership needs to be recognized on a regular basis rather than once every 5 years, they want feed back concerning their actions, they want to be informed of the results of their mobilization.

In the last general report it was observed that in the fall of 2009, everything had to be done at the same time: raise awareness, inform about and participate in a common front action plan operations, and for certain federations participate in an action plan supporting sectoral demands.

We are more than a year away from the presentation of the union demands. The first phase of consultation could begin in the fall of 2013 depending on the strategic framework that will be adopted.

As of now, if it has not already been done, we encourage you to put into place the necessary means to facilitate the circulation of information to achieve the 5 goals mentioned previously.

32

To this effect the following avenues are suggested:

increase the presence in the work places: for the persons designated as RAM as well as the members of the executive body to be better known and recognized;

foster personal contact by, amongst other, holding informal meetings on the work sites during breaks, lunch period, between shifts;

utilize phone chains to personalize invitations to general assemblies;

deliver invitations or information leaflets in person rather that in the mail box or by e-mail.

At the CSQ, the persons designated as RAM who participated in the meeting and who gave an e-mail address will be provided access to the extranet and to document sharing. More over, some information will also be made available via social media.

Everything possible must be done to enhance membership information in the preparation of the 2 phases of consultation concerning the principal stakes and demands. In doing so we will promote stronger membership participation in this process and stronger support in actions to come.

THE MESSAGE TO THE MEMBERSHIP


The membership need clear, concise, positive and focussed information.The action must be linked with the cause.The relevance of the demand must be demonstrated.The ins and outs of the message must be understood.The union locals must be supplied with information, they will mobilize the membership.

For any communication to the members we suggest that the 3 following questions be considered:

What is your objective?

What is at the heart of the message?

What information could you provide that may enhance participation ( respect of schedule, welcoming of first timers, snack provided, etc.)

The following are some suggestions for written communications with the membership:

Have a clear message and original and dynamic content (photos, images);

Work on providing a dynamic content (photos, images, light text)

33

Be clear and precise

More over we suggest that you make yourself available to answer question after the message has been sent.

At the CSQ, during all the preparation period for this round and during the bargaining process itself the “service de l'action terrain” will work hand in hand with the communications service on the nature of the message and the means of communicating it.

A meeting of the RAM persons may be held between the first and second phases of consultation to share local practices that will have enhanced participation in the first phase and discuss possible solutions that could lead to a greater still participation in the second phase and eventually in other operations.

TIGHTER COORDINATION


The “réseau de l'action et de la mobilisation” must envisage various alternatives namely in hypotheses with regards to inter-union action or regionally coordinated action.

We must work towards a tighter coordination of operations to take into account the general report on the last collective bargaining process. We must also, as much as possible, focus our action.

To that end the frequency at which the strategy group meets will be increased as needed. In the 2009-2010 round this group fostered the sharing of information concerning sectoral action plans. This exchange of information is also a form of coordination of common front operations.

In due time, the strategy groups will suggest that each region designate a person in charge of action and mobilization to help coordinate regional operations.

Two coordinated operations

Lets go back to the two operations identified in the objectives.

The operation to promote the visibility of the presentation of the union demands concerning intersectoral matters would be a CSQ driven operation or a common front one, if that comes to be. The same goes for the operation in support of the first day of bargaining of intersectoral matters in the winter of 2015.

The federations could also use the idea of an operation to draw attention on the beginning of the negotiations at the table with a schedule that would set different dates, spread over a few days, for each federation or sector in order to maximize visibility.

34

These operations would be coordinated, at least within the CSQ, and the schedule would be constructed with the help of the strategy group, if possible. Three types of set-ups need to be considered:

CSQ or common front

By federation

By sector (school board, collegiate, health and social services)

TO TAKE HOLD OF CONCERTED ACTION


On actions

The membership in outlying areas need to be able to participate in operations that are geographically closer to home but at the same time being aware that the same actions are being held in other regions.

On the feeling of belonging

Helpful:

When the union keeps us informed and is present at the work sites.We we feel we can change things.

Harmful:

Sentiment that everything is decided in advance.Not being involved in the decision making process.

An action plan within the common front, within the CSQ, within the federation

Historically, Common front or CSQ action plans were made up of large operations at the provincial level: important marches or other visibility operations or concerted regional operations (CSQ or SISP or common front). The Common front action plan for the 2009-2010 negotiations contained provincial, regional and local operation.

For this round of collective bargaining we are proposing a CSQ or common front action plan based on important provincial operations or regional visibility operations (large marches, visibility operations such as “la tempête de neige”).

Any other type of action in support of intersectoral negotiations proposed by the common front or the CSQ will be considered, by the federations, as suggestions (visits of MNAs, local operations, etc.).

35

These suggestions could be discussed at the CIN or, if need be, at the CGN but their acceptance would remain up to the federation (probably through their provincial governing bodies). Upon acceptance they would then be integrated into the federation's action plan. Ultimately, that would mean that each federation would have only one action plan.

The adoption of the action plan in support of sectoral demands is presented and voted upon in some local union assemblies which fosters a greater participation in the operations. We believe that, to join all the operations in one plan to be presented to the general assemblies will help increase the feeling of belonging at least for those in attendance.

A unified action plan would also mean a simpler message in support of the demands.

We believe that inter-union liaising must be encouraged as much as possible but not be obligatory in all circumstances. Our membership must not have to wonder who is doing what and why; they must be able to identify themselves within the operation they join.

CONCLUSION

Taking into account the general report for the 2009-2010 negotiations and the report from the “groupe de travail sur l'action et la mobilisation” we realize that things must be done differently to:

Foster greater membership participation Promote a feeling of belonging Justify union action

We must improve because collective action is essential to support our demands.

In the coming months this working paper will be fine tuned. All together we will construct an action plan that reflects us, that unites us and that will lead us towards the ultimate goal: a satisfactory settlement.

The CGN adopted the following two recommendations at it's meeting held on April 24th and 25th 2013:

The CGN agrees with the actions put forth and fosters their implementation by the affiliated organizations.

The CGN accepts the action plan working paper as presented.

36

Communications

The upcoming round of collective bargaining is already part of the concerns of the CSQ communications service. During a meeting held last January we began thinking of ways to prepare and develop the tools for communication in the upcoming negotiations.

It is an indisputable and inescapable fact that the upcoming round will occur in the era of Web inter-activity. That entails the fact that with the social media, general assemblies for one, will not only be held between four walls at a specified moment. They will be held before, during and after the actual meeting and on various platforms. The same goes for preparatory meetings, meetings with the government and other meetings: the control of information will not be at all the same, hence the importance to be prepared in consequence and as best as possible.

The present text constitutes a working paper as we will have to wait for an official strategic framework and action plan to formally construct a proper communications plan. We should be in a position to propose a plan by next fall when we will be at the beginning of the campaign to raise membership awareness and of an information phase (document A1213-CGN-010 “En action dès maintenant”).

However our preparatory work began with the participants in the “réseau des responsables de l'action et de la mobilisation (RAM) on March 28 th. We wanted to make clear, as soon as possible, the importance of starting off this “2.0 round” on the right foot and in accordances with certain parameters that we also wished to share as quickly as possible.

The following is a brief description of our working paper:

With the strategic framework we will know the priorities for the negotiations. At that moment we will construct a visual identity (branding) for the 2015 negotiations namely a visual brand and a slogan that will be used all during the process.

A Web approach: we brought major changes to the multimedia Centre in 2011 with in mind, namely, the need to be ready for the 2015 round of collective bargaining. One of the changes brought forth was the creation of a community administrator position to develop a CSQ Web community and thus foster the circulation of information on the Web. That is effectively in place since January. In brief, the following is the program for the Web and social media:

o Web: modified infrastructure: more user friendly, more performant, more up to

date Experience in Web broadcasting: for demonstrations, mobilization

operations, conferences, meetings readiness for interactivity and watches Improved extranet for the affiliated unions

37

o Social media: At the first meeting of the “RAM”: presentation of actions brought about by

social media impact Recruiting of members of that group to act as “ambassadors” in an

eventual crisis centre during crucial moments in the bargaining process. Creation of a discussion page... to allow for venting and to “corral” the

various pre and post meetings that may occur. Production of CSQ negotiation blogs with a somewhat different visual

signature.

Publications

o CSQ News: As of September 2013 each issue of the magazine will have a reserved

section for negotiations.

o Info-nego: An information bulletin will be launched as soon as the process assures a

regular sequence of publication. The primary vehicle will be the Web but it will be formatted for printing if necessary.

Press relations

o check the known assignations in the various media and follow up on themo Maintain these contacts namely via Twitter (create an -tag)o Supply visual material via social media and in the habitual fashion for tradi-

tional media (logos, photos of spokespersons, for example)

Support to federations

o Be aware of the prioritieso Establish and maintain contact with Julie-Catherine Pélissier with regards to

sectoral negotiationso Assist, as needed, in information campaignso Act in complementarity with those federations who have a communication

agent

In general, we are strengthening the ties between the communication and the negotiation services as of now and even more so as of the fall of 2013 by holding ad hoc meetings that will become regular scheduled meetings as the process intensifies to ensure a two way flux of information so as to always be prepared to act or react.

38

CONCLUSION

In appendix 1 of this document we present as precisely as possible the schedule of operations that must be run to make it possible to present the demands in observance of the dispositions of the Labor code. This is presented for information purposes.

For the time being only one decision has been taken by the CGN with regards to these operations and that is the time period dedicated to the first phase of consultation.

In appendix 2 we present a hypothesis of what the bargaining process would resemble if the objective was to be the achievement of an agreement as close as possible to the expiry date of the present collective bargaining agreements. This is also presented for information purposes.

39

APPENDIX 1

SCHEDULE OF OPERATIONS

As of January 2013: exploratory discussions with other union organizations in view of establishing an inter union coalition. These discussions should be held both at a political and a technical level.

Executive committee – January 21st and 22nd 2013: presentation of the main comments following the discussions by the CGN with regards to the strategic framework and the possible consequences for the strategic framework to be proposed to the CIN and CGN. First debate on the content of intersectoral demands. Obtention of a mandate to begin exploratory talks with other organizations and clarifications as to the limits of this mandate.

CIN – February 5th 2013: presentation of the main comments following the discussions by the CGN with regards to the strategic framework and the possible consequences for the strategic framework to be proposed to the CGN.First debate on the content of intersectoral demands. Obtention of a mandate to begin exploratory talks with other organizations and clarifications as to the limits of this mandate.

Executive committee – February 18th 2013: presentation of projected recommendations concerning the strategic framework and the intersectoral demands in view of the membership consultation in the fall of 2013. At this moment in it is unlikely that it will be possible to prepare a precise position with regards to alliances.

Executive committee – March 11th 2013: continuation, if necessary, of the discussions with regards to the strategic framework and intersectoral demands.

CIN – March 26th 2013: presentation of projected recommendations concerning the strategic framework and the intersectoral demands in view of the membership consultation in the fall of 2013. It is possible that the discussions will not be completed at this meeting.

CIN – April 16th 2013: continuation, if necessary, of the discussions of March 26th.

CGN – April 24th and 25th 2013: Adoption of strategic framework and inter-sectoral demands to be submitted to membership consultation.

Fall 2013: beginning of discussion with the Treasury board concerning the organization of the upcoming round of collective bargaining: paid union leave for negotiation, schedule, expectations concerning tabling of demands and offers.

40

CIN – September 17th 2013: follow up of discussions with Treasury board concerning the organization of the upcoming round of collective bargaining: paid union leave for negotiation, schedule, expectations concerning tabling of demands and offers; follow up on inter-union dialogue, on the maintaining of salary equity dossier and on the work being done with regards to regional disparities.

CIN – October 16th 2013: follow up on inter-union dialogue, on the maintaining of salary equity dossier and on the work being done with regards to regional disparities.

September 30th to November 22nd: Consultation with regards to the strategic framework and intersectoral matters.

CIN – November 12th 2013.

November 25th to 29th 2013: compilation of results of the consultation

CGN – November 28 and 29th 2013

Executive committee – December 9th 2013: presentation of the results of the first phase of consultation, first debate on the construction of the inter-sectoral demands and adoption of the recommendation with regards to the strategic framework to be presented to the CIN and CGN.

December 2013-January 2014: inter-union consultation on the basis of the results of the first phase of consultation.

January to March 2014: continuation of discussions with Treasury board concerning the organization of the upcoming round of collective bargaining: paid union leave for negotiation, schedule, expectations concerning tabling of demands and offers.

Executive committee – January 13th 2014: continuation of discussions started on December 9th 2013.

CIN – January 14th 2014: presentation of the results of the first phase of consultation, first debate on the construction of the intersectoral demands and adoption of the recommendation with regards to the strategic framework to be presented to the CGN.

CIN – January 28th 2014: continuation of discussion started on January 14 th

2014.

CGN – February 12th and 13th 2014: presentation of the results of the first phase of consultation, adoption of intersectoral demands to be submitted in the second phase of membership consultation, adoption of strategic

41

framework. These two elements will have to go through an inter-union harmonization process.

End of February to beginning of March 2014: inter-union harmonization concerning intersectoral demands and strategic framework.

Executive committee – March 10th 2014: report on harmonization process. Decisions to be proposed to CIN and CGN.

CIN – March 11th or 12th 2014: (the present schedule sets the 11th but there is a CI meeting that remains to be confirmed): report on inter-union harmonization and proposals to be submitted to CGN in view of the membership consultation with regards to intersectoral demands and the establishing of an inter-union coalition.

CGN – March 13th and 14th 2014: report on harmonization process and adoption of intersectoral demands and type of inter-union coalition that will be submitted to membership consultation.

March 24th to May 15th: second phase of membership consultation.

May 19th to May 23rd: compilation of consultation results.

Executive committee – May 26th 2014: presentation of consultation results. Proposals to be submitted to harmonization process and to the CIN and CGN.

CIN – June 9th 2014: presentation of consultation results. Proposals to be submitted to CGN with regards to demands to be submitted to the harmonization process.

CGN – June 18th and 19th 2014: presentation of consultation results. Proposals concerning intersectoral demands to be submitted to the harmonization process.

Mid-June to mid-September 2014: inter-union harmonization.

Executive committee – September 15th 2014: presentation of harmonization results. Adoption, if necessary, of proposals to be submitted to CIN and CGN with regards to intersectoral demands.

CIN – September 23rd 2014: presentation of harmonization results. Adoption, if necessary, of proposals to be submitted to CGN with regards to intersectoral demands.

If necessary a new round of inter-union harmonization.

42

Executive committee – October 6th 2014: final report on harmonization and, if necessary proposals to be submitted to CIN and CGN.

CIN – October 7th 2014: final report on harmonization and, if necessary proposals to be submitted to CGN.

CGN – October 9th 2014 (if necessary): final report on harmonization and final proposals with regards to intersectoral demands.

October 10th to 27th 2014: writing up of texts regarding intersectoral demands.

Executive committee – October 27th 2104: finalization of intersectoral demand.

CIN October 28th 2014: finalization of intersectoral demand.

October 30th 2014: Presentation of intersectoral demand.

43

Appendix 2

Foreseeable stages on the basis of a bargaining process set to achieve a settlement as close as possible to the expiry date of the current agreements

October 2014: Presentation of sectoral and intersectoral demands.

December 2014: presentation of employer offers.

Second or third week of January 2015: start of sectoral and intersectoral bargaining.

End of February to beginning of March 2015: Implementation of action plan in support of sectoral and intersectoral demands.

Last week of March or first week of April 2015: request for mediation process, if necessary.

Mid-April to mid-June 2015: mediation process (if necessary).

End of May, beginning of June 2015: meetings of governing bodies in view of adopting job action plans (strike) and if necessary remodelling of strategic framework.

May 31st 2015: target for sectoral settlements.

June 30th 2015: target for intersectoral settlement.

End of August to beginning of September 2015: confirmation and use of heavy action (strike) if need be.

seccl.weebly.com€¦ · web viewthe preparation for the next round of collective bargaining is...

Documents