National Grievance File

When an employee who is granted injury-on-duty leave with pay has top-up credits as defined in clause 20.08 of the collective agreement, the Corporation uses these top-up credits to make up the difference between 75% of the regular salary and the minimal amount the Corporation has to pay under the Government Employees Compensation Act and the applicable provincial legislation. In doing so, the Corporation is violating the provisions of the collective agreement and of the said acts.

Following several meetings between the parties, the employer informed the Union on or about February 9, 2015 of an erroneous definition/interpretation it intended to apply to the Short-Term Disability Insurance Plan (STDP) in relation to the definitions of accident and hospitalization when applying Article 20 of the collective agreement.

Furthermore, as part of the final appeal process outlined in Article 20 of the STDP, the employer is adding to the collective agreement. It is imposing a time limit on the union representatives for submitting their arguments at the final level on behalf of an employee, failing which the employer is instructing the independent medical physician to render his or her decision without the Union’s input or arguments.

Canada Post has been organizing and holding meetings with some of CUPW’s members, in certain cities throughout the country, without the Union’s participation and consent, to discuss their working conditions.

This is being done in violation of Article 3 and other applicable provisions of the collective agreement and is viewed as attempting to destabilize the union at this critical period just in advance of negotiations.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers grieves the employer’s violation of Article 30, Appendix N and all other applicable articles and appendices of the collective agreement.

The employer’s long term disability management provider, Sun Life, advised the union that, as of September 1, 2015 there would be charges levied against the union and/or its members for “Access to Personal Information Requests.” This constitutes a change of practice that was not implemented uniformly and changes the access and appeal process agreed to by the parties in the collective agreement, which is a violation.

Canada Post advised the Canadian Union of Postal Workers that they were unilaterally cancelling the intake for the 2015 Apprenticeship program under Article 40 and Appendix T. The cancellation occurred very late in the process and with grossly inadequate evidence being provided to CUPW to justify this action and no meaningful consultation occurring to allow the parties to discuss the issue with the goal of preventing the cancellation from occurring.

In doing so Canada Post violated the collective agreement as any decisions to modify or cancel any part of the program need to be by consent and the deadline to cancel the 2015 intake had long passed.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers grieves that Canada Post has established a post office consisting of two installations that are greater than 40 km from each other. This is in violation of Article 6, 53 and applicable provisions of the collective agreement and the historic practice of the parties in the application of Article 6.05.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers submits that the Corporation has failed to abide by Appendix “P” of the collective agreement by not maintaining the ratio of regular full-time hours in violation of paragraph 1 (b) of this Appendix.

Further, the Corporation failed to create and maintain the required number of regular full-time positions, as set out in paragraph 2 (d), to achieve, and then maintain, the aforementioned ratio.

The CUPW submits that this was a deliberate and calculated violation of the collective agreement by the employer intended to thwart the intent and spirit of Appendix “P” and clauses 39.02, 39.03 and 39.06 of the collective agreement.

Commercial Pickups

In restructuring the routes of motorized letter carriers who perform commercial pickup duties, the Corporation is violating the provisions of the collective agreement.

Specifically, contrary to the provisions of the collective agreement, and more specifically those of Chapters 7 and 16 of the LCRMS and Chapter 5 of the MSCWSS, the Corporation is failing, in the case of certain routes, to combine scheduled commercial pickups and on-demand commercial pickups within a daily delivery window.

Further, contrary to the provisions of the collective agreement, and more specifically those of Chapters 7 and 16 of the LCRMS and Chapter 5 of the MSCWSS, the Corporation is assigning on-demand commercial pickups to certain routes without assigning the scheduled commercial pick-ups to those same routes.

In addition, contrary to the provisions of the collective agreement and, more specifically, to those of Chapters 7 and 16 of the LCRMS and Chapter 5 of the MSCWSS, the Corporation is not evaluating the service time allowance for on-demand commercial pickups using data from a 12-month volume base (excluding July, August and December) obtained from the “PICK” system, but is only using data from the two-week sampling.

Further, contrary to the provisions of the collective agreement and, more specifically, to those of Chapters 7 and 16 of the LCRMS and Chapter 5 of the MSCWSS, the Corporation, in the case of some routes, is determining time values for on-demand commercial pickups based on pickup time data for the entire installation, rather than data from the route.

Finally, contrary to the provisions of the collective agreement and, more specifically, to those of Chapters 7 and 16 of the LCRMS and Chapter 5 of the MSCWSS, the Corporation, in the case of certain routes, is not allocating unscheduled working time.

The corporation advised the union via e-mail on April 29th 2016 and at subsequent consultation meetings held on May 11 2016 and June 23 2016 that the corporation will end past practice application of chapter 16 of the LCRMS and that the corporation will restructure routes after the 5-day verification using the validated sequence level by the individual LDU.

The corporation is in violation of the collective agreement and the LCRMS specifically but not limited to article 47 and LCRMS chapter 16.

Employees who have successfully completed the Apprenticeship Training Program are to be paid at the maximum MAM-11 Apprentice hourly rate of pay until they obtain a MAM-11 position and are to remain members of Group 3. The Employer has violated the Collective Agreement by unilaterally reclassifying these employees upon their successful completion of the Apprenticeship Program, not paying them at the appropriate wage rates, returning them to the classification they previously held prior to their apprenticeship and wrongfully deleting positions from the bargaining unit.

In doing so Canada Post has violated Articles 13, 40, 53, Appendix “A”, Appendix “T” and all other related Articles as well as the past practice.

Additionally, Canada Post is estopped from taking such actions in light of the prior representations to the affected employees and the Union that employees who successfully complete the Apprenticeship Program would remain members of Group 3. 

On or about February 18, 2016, CUPW was informed that the Canada Post Corporation has been failing to abide by its obligation under Article 12 of the collective agreement by having a higher number of part-time positions than allowed in the wicket/counter sections of urban offices. This constitutes a violation of the collective agreement, which is prejudicial to the Union and the employees.

Canada Post Corporation (CPC) is in violation of the collective agreement and of the Letter Carrier Route Measurement System (LCRMS) as a result of its refusal to include in the letter carriers’ workload actual tasks performed in loading and unloading vehicles effective as of the date of implementation of the new routes.

The Corporation refuses to pay retroactively from the date of implementation the letter carriers who performed these tasks.