FPSLREB Decisions

Decision Information

Summary:

No summary has been written for this decision. Please refer to the full text.

Decision Content



Coat of Arms - Armoiries
  • Date:  2003-07-29



IN THE MATTER OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE STAFF RELATIONS ACT

AND

IN THE MATTER OF A DISPUTE

BETWEEN

THE PUBLIC SERVICE ALLIANCE OF CANADA
(Bargaining Agent)

AND

STATISTICS SURVEY OPERATIONS
(Employer)

 

RE: Employees Engaged in the Carrying - Out of Survey Activities, Primarily in the Statistics Canada Regional Offices

 

REPORT OF THE CONCILIATION BOARD

 

BEFORE: Philip Chodos, Chairperson, and M.J. (Mike) McTaggart, Member and Representative of the Interests of the Bargaining Agent, and
Richard Nannini, Member and Representative of the Interests of the Employer

APPEARANCES:

For the Bargaining Agent: Susan Jones, Negotiator, and
Bonnie Bates, Research Officer
For the Employer: Nelson Sanscartier, Negotiator

HEARD AT OTTAWA, July 16, 2003.


  1. The Statistical Survey Operations is a separate employer, which is also an integral part of Statistics Canada. It is organized on the basis of five regions, with a workforce of approximately 2200 employees. Of these, approximately 830 employees are members of this bargaining agent and are classified as either Interviewers or Senior Interviewers. These employees receive hourly rates of pay ranging from $10.96 to the maximum of $16.40 for a Senior Interviewer. All of the employees work on a part-time basis, and their main responsibility is to collect data by telephone interviews and thereby obtain relevant statistical information. A portion of this activity is carried out on a cost-recovery basis on behalf of clients, in particular, other federal government departments.

  2. The collective agreement between the parties expired on November 30, 2001. Notice to bargain was served by the bargaining agent on November 27, 2001. The parties began negotiations on January 22, 2002, and met several times throughout that year and into 2003. During this period of time a number of provisions were agreed to by the parties.

  3. From February 24 to 26, 2003, a conciliation officer, Denise Wilson, assisted the parties in resolving a number of additional issues in dispute. However, seven issues remained unresolved and, accordingly, on March 12, 2003, the bargaining agent applied to the Public Service Staff Relations Board (PSSRB) for the establishment of a conciliation board.

  4. The following matters were identified as remaining in dispute:

    • Article 2: "Interpretation and Definitions"
    • Article 25: "Evening and Weekend Premiums"
    • Article 29: "Vacation Leave"
    • Article 45: "Leave With or Without Pay for Other Reasons"
    • Article 52: "Duration"
    • Annex "A": "Hourly Rates of Pay and Pay Notes"
    • Annex "D": "Memorandum of Understanding"

  5. This conciliation board was duly constituted in accordance with section 79 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act (PSSRA). The members of the conciliation board received the Terms of Reference, dated May 23, 2003, from the Chairperson of the PSSRB setting out the issues in dispute as noted above.

  6. The conciliation board met with the parties on July 16, 2003. At this time, the parties exchanged written briefs, which were also provided to the members of the conciliation board. The parties also gave the board verbally a brief overview of the matters in dispute. The board endeavoured to assist the parties in reaching an agreement. However, during the course of the conciliation process, it became apparent to the board that the parties were oceans apart on the critical issue of "Rates of Pay". By the end of the day on July 16, the parties and the members of the conciliation board were all of the view that, notwithstanding that conciliation board hearings were scheduled as well for July 17 and 18, 2003, it would be fruitless and counterproductive to continue the proceedings. Accordingly, the proceedings were terminated on July 16, 2003.

  7. In view of the substantial differences between the parties on the critical pay issue, the conciliation board is unanimously of the view that it would serve no purpose in recommending Terms of Settlement and, indeed, doing so may well diminish the prospects of reaching a resolution of this dispute in the near future.

DATED AT OTTAWA, July      2003.

Philip Chodos,
Chairperson

M.J. (Mike) McTaggart,
Member and Representative of the Interests of the Bargaining Agent

Richard Nannini,
Member and Representative of the Interests of the Employer

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.