Thursday 15 November 2007

From the President

As most of you know by now the National has invoked Article 15.02.04 of the National Constitution on Local 592 preventing us from conducting a ratification vote on the tentative agreement until the Wage Delegates take it to the P&P Caucus on December 9th. In the mean time we will be meeting with all of the Catalyst Locals on Friday November 16th to give them our presentation and hopefully alleviate some of their concerns, and also explain to them why we felt compelled to entertain some of these "out of the box" ideas.

This is our third round of discussions over the last 2 years to try and secure a future for our mill. We knew that if we were to succeed this time around that we would have to talk about and consider issues, that we have in the past, considered to be absolutely sacred ground to this Local. But the one thing we could all agree on was we had to get our costs down to the point of making this a long term, viable operation. That was and still is our goal. So far we have managed every road block that was thrown in front of us and we will get around this one as well.

I will readily admit that this is not fair and equal to all of our members, especially the shift workers, but if we were going to be serious about getting those costs down, we had to look at the biggest opportunities and the shift scheduling was one of the biggest. It would be a huge change for people to grasp this idea and accept it but the alternative is not acceptable by any ones standards. It's ludicrous to think that any of the Wage Delegates have embraced this proposal but it would also be totally irresponsible of us to just walk away and say F--- it. We took this on for the benefit of our local as a whole and we will finish it. To that end I am going to let my name stand for nomination for another term as President and hopefully have your support and be assured that we have your confidence in what we are doing.

Pete Rayburn

8 comments:

  1. Keep going Pete. You have the right idea as the aternative is no jobs at all.

    Signed, shift worker.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I applaud the hard efforts of our wage deligates and want to support the agreement, but there is a "substantive issue" that scares our tourworkers, other locals and the national. That is "losing the right to choose when you have a day off" in the operations schedule.
    There IS a different alternative to the operations schedule that could be amended with "no addtional cost to the agreement package" and allows the company its desired leave smoothing. I believe most tourworkers would join in and support our deligates then.
    But, Buckhorn and the company are trying pressure and threaten us to accept this "as is" as quickly as possible.
    I believe anger is being misdirected amongst ourselves and at our union while the company "drives a wedge between us".
    I would be sick if we were forced to accept "as is" and then alienate our tourworkers and the rest of the caucus.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd like to ask pete when he refers to negotiating for the benefit of the local as a whole what is in it for a 592 operator with 21 years ? i probably wont have a job at all here any more but to take away my department senority - wheres the cost benifit ? its all about costs please explian where the benifit is ..

    ReplyDelete
  4. How much money is saved by implementing these concessions? Let's see some figures!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. First to try and answer Dave's concern, If you can find an alternative shift system that will smooth time off with out adding the extra cost of carrying relief to cover for that time off with four crews then lets see it. If you add people and cost then we are sewered before we start. I know it scares the shift guys, I'm one of them.

    And to the other commenters, you want a reply then please leave your name.

    Pete

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous said...
    I'd like to ask pete when he refers to negotiating for the benefit of the local as a whole what is in it for a 592 operator with 21 years ? i probably wont have a job at all here any more but to take away my department senority - wheres the cost benifit ? its all about costs please explian where the benifit is ..

    Thu Nov 15, 05:09:00 PM PST


    Anonymous said...
    How much money is saved by implementing these concessions? Let's see some figures!!

    Thu Nov 15, 05:10:00 PM PST

    i'll put my name to these questions from out here in montana and from hearing from coworkers this proposal does not take care of all 592 workers not even close like the past agreements like the port alberni solution and others did.seems i have been on the bubble all my career in the mill and always been one to recieve a lay off notice but have been granted the opportunity to work again through deals the past executives have come up with and its seems this one wont do that.i dont know where they want to draw the line so to say but we all have senority and everyone pays the same union dues but seems some get represented better than others ..

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have read , with great interest, the letter circulating around the mill asking 592 Members to vote no on the tentative agreement. First of all, if you have such strong opinions, you should at the very least have the guts to post your name. After all, are you even a menber of this local? And if you do persuade enough people to say No, they are saying: No,I don't want members back to work.
    No,I don't want to see this mill remain viable.
    No,I don't want to work here at all in the future because they will just shut down the other macine.

    Thats a pretty big request from someone who doesn't even have the fortitude to add his name to the document.

    What are you afraid of, this is after all,is a democratic Local Union and you can voice your concerns at the Union Hall at any meeting, or are you one of the many that just show up when you are concerned about your pay cheque.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I really appreciate all the time and effort that you guys have put into this agreement, I'm sure its been a rough go.
    I also believe that there are other scheduling options, especially if we are 'out of the box'.
    These shifts are unacceptable as far as I am concerned.
    These programed days off are third world.
    I want to VACTION down south in the SPRING , jump into the boat during fishing SEASON or going hunting during openings. If I NEED a day off I want that option.
    Its great to get the old farts out the door so that they can go fishing or golfing every day, its great to make bigger bonuses for the Catalyst head office, but what about us shft workers that are left, what is the cost to us?Quality of life is worth alot

    I also think that 592 and 686 have to sit down together and work on this agreement together because one without the other is a wasted effort, why hang us out as the sacraficial lamb alone. There would be no point in going against caucus without 686 onboard, as the agreement will be VOID anyhow. We could be stirring things up for no reason. If we can't get an agreement with 686 why even talk to Catalyst. The mill will be going down any how. We have to have the same goals as our BROTHERS at 686.
    I'm sure Catalyst management is just loving all of this, the 'fracturing of solidarity'

    ReplyDelete