National Grievance File

When changes are made to a route under Articles 11, 12, 13, 34 and other provisions of the collective agreement, the employer is failing to provide the Transition Committee with all relevant information, in violation of the collective agreement imposed by interest arbitrator B. Keller.

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.

The Canada Post Corporation informed the Union of its intention to unilaterally introduce right-hand drive vehicles (RHD) on RSMC routes. The Corporation also informed the Union of its intention to charge to the RSMC financial cap the costs associated with its decision. The employer is changing the working conditions provided under the collective agreement, including, but without restricting the foregoing, in regards to compensation. The employer is thus violating the collective agreement and applicable legislation.

The Canada Post Corporation informed the Union that it intends to provide/create a DRS-RTS centralization located in the Vancouver Mail Processing Plant (VMPP) and reserves the right to exercise its option of expanding to centralize DRS-RTS work in other areas of BC operations. The DRS-RTS Centralization Project 2011 is a technological change within the meaning of Article 29 of the collective agreement. The employer refuses to abide by the provisions of Article 29 and, more specifically, to provide the information that the Union is entitled to receive under clauses 29.03 and 29.04, which triggers the process specified at Article 29, and to recognize the protection under this Article. The employer is violating the provisions of the collective agreement.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) is filing this grievance without prejudice to the various procedures resulting from the national arbitration decision rendered with regard to grievance N00-03-00005 that the Union has initiated or may initiate with regard to the isolated post travel allowance for employees. On March 5, 2010, the employer informed the Union that it had unilaterally initiated a review of the isolated post program for employees in 2010 and 2011. The Isolated Post Allowance Program (March 4, 2010) violates the provisions of the collective agreement.

The employer has violated the provisions of Article 35 and others of the collective agreement by advising the Union of its intention to apply $6M to the financial cap. The employer alleges that transactions made by the Transition Committee as a result of route restructurings and the fair and equitable redistribution of remuneration had not been factored into the costs to be charged to the financial cap since 2004.

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.