National Grievance File

The CUPW grieves that Canada Post is violating Articles 47, the Letter Carrier Route Measurement System (LCRMS) Manual, Appendix V, Appendix CC, and to the extent that it applies, the Mail Services Courier Workload Structuring System (MSCWSS) Manual, as well as all other applicable Articles and Appendices of the Urban Operations Agreement. The Corporation is calculating travel time to, from, within, and between different functions on motorized and other letter carrier routes in a manner that is not correct and not consistent with the Urban Operations Collective agreement and the LCRMS and MSCWSS Manuals. In regard to the MSCWSS Manual, the Corporation has not sought or obtained the Union’s agreement to calculate travel times for letter carrier routes in the manner being done. In addition, by changing the method of calculating transportation time, the Corporation is asserting that timing of travel times is now part of the preparation phase of the restructuring process rather than part of the restructuring phase. The impact is to limit CUPW’s right to employer paid observation of these timing exercises.

CUPW has learned that the Corporation is violating sub-paragraph 7.2 (d) (ii) of Appendix “D” of the collective agreement by refusing to pay 2.3 ¢ for each piece of householder mail on a compressed delivery schedule, and, more specifically, for all householders intended for same-day delivery.

The Canada Post Corporation (CPC) has informed the Union that it intends to contract out undeliverable publications mail to Vangent Canada Limited. In so doing, the Canada Post Corporation is violating the provisions of the collective agreement.

The employer violated the provisions of the CUPW-CPC collective agreement, including, but not limited to, Appendix “MM,” when the definition of seniority was amended to add to the seniority already recognized, the length of continuous service within the Post Office Department or the Canada Post Corporation between the first date of hiring to carry out bargaining unit work and the date on which the employee became a regular employee. On or about December 12, 2007, when the new seniority lists were established and posted, CUPW members noticed that the employer had granted periods of seniority that had already been lost to employees who had worked in other bargaining units. This constitutes a serious violation of the collective agreement and is prejudicial to the Union and its members.

The Union grieves the employer has failed to provide the Union with proper notice as required under clauses 29.03 and 29.04 of the collective agreement in respect of a technological change entitled “Modern Post”.

Furthermore, the Union grieves the employer has been distributing information regarding its plans in respect of the “Modern Post” directly to bargaining unit members in violations of article 3, 29 and other related provisions of the collective agreement.

Canada Post has violated the collective agreement and the provisions of Part II of the Canada Labour Code by developing and implementing work procedures and standards for letter carriers which jeopardize their health and safety. More specifically, Canada Post improperly requires letter carriers to read and revise mail and to obtain mail from their satchels while walking between points of calls. Canada Post has unilaterally and improperly altered established work procedures and standards and has amended the Letter Carrier Handbook, the CMS and applicable policies in respect of health and safety. In so doing, Canada Post is in violation of the collective agreement including Article 33 and Appendix Vi and Vii and the provisions of Part II of the Canada Labour Code.

The Canada Post Corporation is violating the collective agreement by not modifying the sortation and preparation standards for routes with a high number of points of call.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) grieves that the Canada Post Corporation (CPC) has violated Article 12 and other relevant provisions of the collective agreement by creating, in the wicket or counter sections of staff offices grades 9 and up, a total number of part-time positions that exceeds ten per cent (10%) of the number of full-time positions in the wicket or counter sections of staff offices grades 9 and up.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers finds that the Corporation has failed to abide by Appendix “P” of the collective agreement by not maintaining the ratio of regular full-time employees at 78 %, in violation of paragraph 1 (b) of this Appendix, and by not creating the required number of regular full-time employees, as set out in paragraph 2 (d). Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, CUPW further submits that the employer calculated the adjustment rate and the adjustment factor as described in sub-paragraphs 1 a) v) and vi) incorrectly and in a manner inconsistent with past practice and inconsistent with representations made to the Union in past rounds of bargaining when the Appendix P ratio was negotiated and renewed. CUPW maintains that these are deliberate violations of the collective agreement. The Corporation’s actions also violate clauses 39.02, 39.03 and 39.06 of the collective agreement.

On or about February 27, 2008, the Union was informed that the employer is implementing a policy/directive entitled “Managing Medical Certificates” by Manulife Financial. This policy/directive violates the provisions of the collective agreement, more specifically Article 10.

The employer’s Labour Relations branch has issued a policy/directive that violates the collective agreement. In its policy/directive, the employer states that employees who volunteer to work overtime can use their seniority to select a portion of the route prior to those who have been asked to work overtime in accordance with clause 15.14 of the collective agreement.

The employer has issued guidelines concerning the application of Article 54 of the collective agreement. These guidelines were sent to all CPC representatives for implementation. The guidelines concerning Article 54 and other provisions are contrary to the collective agreement. Therefore, the employer is in violation of the collective agreement.