Strike

[Remius]

It's actually not hard. Document (feedback notes) the transgression a couple times with low level intervention attempts.

Then start the admin process. And nothing says you have to start the admin process at the beginning, you can jump right to C&P; and thats the last chance for them to correct themselves.

It’s essentially the same thing in the PS. If it’s a performance issue then there is route for that. If it’s disciplinary you go another route. The member can redress it and can seek union representation if required. But as with the CAF it’s the paperwork and steps that need to be taken.

 

[Kat Stevens]

It's much easier to get kicked out than get a new trade, unless you're on of the Shiny Ones.

 

[dimsum]

It's much easier to get kicked out than get a new trade, unless you're on of the Shiny Ones.

or fail Pilot training.

...not speaking from personal experience, funny enough.

 

[The Bread Guy]

It’s essentially the same thing in the PS. If it’s a performance issue then there is route for that. If it’s disciplinary you go another route. The member can redress it and can seek union representation if required. But as with the CAF it’s the paperwork and steps that need to be taken.

The weak link in these chains is the willingness of 1) the supervisor/managers to do all the steps needed (in writing as needed, too) to document the problem, and 2) the directors to support said supervisors/managers. I've talked to public sector union people (not in my own union) who've said they sometimes don't like defending miscreants, but if the employer doesn't follow due process, well, that's the minimum that's due the employee so the union has to say, "uh, didn't do this right." YMMV, though, depending on the union and workplace.

 

[Furniture]

The weak link in these chains is the willingness of 1) the supervisor/managers to do all the steps needed (in writing as needed, too) to document the problem, and 2) the directors to support said supervisors/managers. I've talked to public sector union people (not in my own union) who've said they sometimes don't like defending miscreants, but if the employer doesn't follow due process, well, that's the minimum that's due the employee so the union has to say, "uh, didn't do this right." YMMV, though, depending on the union and workplace.

Same things happen in the CAF as well, the immediate CoC might want to move with an IC, RW, etc., but someone one or two steps up might decide the member "just needs more mentorship"...

I suspect some of it comes from laziness, but I think a lot of it comes from the fact that nobody will lower your PAR score because you gave someone another chance, but they might get real mad about you getting them caught up in a grievance/harassment investigation.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Same things happen in the CAF as well, the immediate CoC might want to move with an IC, RW, etc., but someone one or two steps up might decide the member "just needs more mentorship"...

I suspect some of it comes from laziness, but I think a lot of it comes from the fact that nobody will lower your PAR score because you gave someone another chance, but they might get real mad about you getting them caught up in a grievance/harassment investigation.

And let's be honest - the tough conversations can be tough to have. Yeah, I know if someone's a boss, that's what they get the big(ger) bucks for, but that factor isn't zero either.

 

[lenaitch]

The weak link in these chains is the willingness of 1) the supervisor/managers to do all the steps needed (in writing as needed, too) to document the problem, and 2) the directors to support said supervisors/managers. I've talked to public sector union people (not in my own union) who've said they sometimes don't like defending miscreants, but if the employer doesn't follow due process, well, that's the minimum that's due the employee so the union has to say, "uh, didn't do this right." YMMV, though, depending on the union and workplace.

A Union is essentially legally bound to ensure 'the process' is followed. Even the most distasteful union member has the right to have the process respected.

I imagine in the CAF 'the process' isn't aided by the fact that senior command changes every couple of years and the HR process takes so long. By the time senior staff appreciates the scope of a problem employee he/she is already partway through their posting (or just says 'screw it - make it the next guys problem).

 

[mariomike]

Interesting exchange of ideas and information about how to get people fired.

Maybe Dimsum had a good idea,

How about a trade change instead?

Hardly nobody gets fired anymore. At least not in the "muni". Lol Still happens on ocasion, but unless you become a public disgrace, they will tolerate almost anything. Worst they ussually do now is transfer you to another department. Like Parks. Might make a good Ferryman. A fresh start. Keep your pay rate, and raises. They're actually doing you, and public safety , a favour when operational burn out gets that severe. Cumulative Mental Stress they call it now. It's not like the old days. Back then, you would get transferred, but lose your pay rate.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The weak link in these chains is the willingness of 1) the supervisor/managers to do all the steps needed (in writing as needed, too) to document the problem, and 2) the directors to support said supervisors/managers. I've talked to public sector union people (not in my own union) who've said they sometimes don't like defending miscreants, but if the employer doesn't follow due process, well, that's the minimum that's due the employee so the union has to say, "uh, didn't do this right." YMMV, though, depending on the union and workplace.

Yep, we went through all the steps to fire someone and actually went even further with documented efforts to help them. All our paperwork was airtight and we presented it to our non-union management who refused to allow it, likely because it involved a female of colour. All the unionized staff in the unit wanted them gone, as they were frustrated by the lack of action by management on the issue. So an outside might blame the union, but really a lot of it is cowardly senior management. Don't want any blemishes affecting their career moves.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Same things happen in the CAF as well, the immediate CoC might want to move with an IC, RW, etc., but someone one or two steps up might decide the member "just needs more mentorship"...

I haven't seen much discipline dispensed under the new MJUL sphere.

I've heard of people putting 200+ hours into a UDI and charge only to have it dropped for aledgeddly frivolous reasons. I wouldn't want to bother charging someone after that's happened a few times.

 

[Furniture]

I haven't seen much discipline dispensed under the new MJUL sphere.

I've heard of people putting 200+ hours into a UDI and charge only to have it dropped for aledgeddly frivolous reasons. I wouldn't want to bother charging someone after that's happened a few times.

My understanding is that the new system is supposed to prevent that sort of thing for minor offenses, but like you, I haven't seen it in action yet. Likely helps that I work with mostly civies, and Snr NCMs.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

My understanding is that the new system is supposed to prevent that sort of thing for minor offenses, but like you, I haven't seen it in action yet. Likely helps that I work with mostly civies, and Snr NCMs.

The new Summary Hearing process is good for dealing with basically workplace misconduct. Its a corrective action for folks that have made a mistake, are being taken to task for it, but will take their licks and move on from it be better soldiers for it. Those cases are very much a slam dunk for someone conducting the UDI and the OCSH. I say this having worked at a school and saw the switch yield more investigations, but better processes overall.

When things escalate up to Courts Martial territory, then it rightly becomes more involved.

The main gripe that I have is that some CoC would rather just document in a Feedback Note that there was poor performance, when in reality the member fucked up pretty bad and it needs to be resolved publicly. Conversely, I have seen things brushed under the rug when someone was actually having a serious administrative issue that would be easily nipped in the bud if folks actually read DAOD 5019-4.

We are our own worst enemy when it comes to cultivating a culture that is accountable to itself. Its no wonder we have had the microscope under us when we cannot see to police our own with existing regulations and policy.

 

[Quirky]

How about a trade change instead? Maybe that person is not a great AVN Tech, but could be a good clerk?

I would suggest that before punting them from the CAF.

Or punt them from the CAF and they can reapply to clerk. Why does the CAF owe anyone employment?

 

[Furniture]

Or punt them from the CAF and they can reapply to clerk. Why does the CAF owe anyone employment?

The CAF doesn't own people a job, but throwing away an already trained person that can do another job you need done, rather than move them to where they are better suited, is wasteful. We don't have enough people to throw away people who can work.

 

[Eaglelord17]

The new Summary Hearing process is good for dealing with basically workplace misconduct. Its a corrective action for folks that have made a mistake, are being taken to task for it, but will take their licks and move on from it be better soldiers for it. Those cases are very much a slam dunk for someone conducting the UDI and the OCSH. I say this having worked at a school and saw the switch yield more investigations, but better processes overall.

When things escalate up to Courts Martial territory, then it rightly becomes more involved.

The main gripe that I have is that some CoC would rather just document in a Feedback Note that there was poor performance, when in reality the member fucked up pretty bad and it needs to be resolved publicly. Conversely, I have seen things brushed under the rug when someone was actually having a serious administrative issue that would be easily nipped in the bud if folks actually read DAOD 5019-4.

We are our own worst enemy when it comes to cultivating a culture that is accountable to itself. Its no wonder we have had the microscope under us when we cannot see to police our own with existing regulations and policy.

There are some things that give me serious reservations about the new system, particularly the extent someone can be punished for a event which is unproven. Basically it is as close to guilty until proven innocent as possible.

Where we went wrong as a military was when we stopped charging people for little things. Basically the same time we took those powers and delegated them higher and higher up. Those issues progressively got bigger and instead of having corrected behaviours early they became the disaster which required OP Honour.

Talking with older former members from the 60s-80s some of them got charged for small stuff, but they all admitted it was necessary and fair. Sometimes a little correction goes a long way.

 

[Furniture]

There are some things that give me serious reservations about the new system, particularly the extent someone can be punished for a event which is unproven. Basically it is as close to guilty until proven innocent as possible.

This doesn't align with this

Talking with older former members from the 60s-80s some of them got charged for small stuff, but they all admitted it was necessary and fair. Sometimes a little correction goes a long way.

All the back in the good old days, stories I heard essentially boiled down to "March the guilty bastard in", followed by "Accept guilt like a man, or it will be worse for you".

We ended up not charging people because we had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone had done something, knew they ought to have not done the thing, and did it with intent. Now, for serious offenses that makes good sense, but when someone shows up to work 20 mins late every second month it's a bit much.

 

[Eaglelord17]

This doesn't align with this

All the back in the good old days, stories I heard essentially boiled down to "March the guilty bastard in", followed by "Accept guilt like a man, or it will be worse for you".

We ended up not charging people because we had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone had done something, knew they ought to have not done the thing, and did it with intent. Now, for serious offenses that makes good sense, but when someone shows up to work 20 mins late every second month it's a bit much.

I have seen people beat summary trials. Yes, I have heard the whole ‘March the guilty bastard in’ thing, but generally speaking most those charges went through because there was enough evidence.

With a system which is balance of probabilities, coupled with the ability to deprive people of freedom, demotion, or reprimand, that is a lot of power in punishment over something that wasn’t 100% proven.

 

[Furniture]

I have seen people beat summary trials. Yes, I have heard the whole ‘March the guilty bastard in’ thing, but generally speaking most those charges went through because there was enough evidence.

With a system which is balance of probabilities, coupled with the ability to deprive people of freedom, demotion, or reprimand, that is a lot of power in punishment over something that wasn’t 100% proven.

I saw a lot of things that should have been Summary Trials not go that route because of minor technicalities that impacted "beyond a reasonable doubt", but wouldn't have matter with "balance of probabilities".

You're unlikely to see someone spend time in cells, or get demoted based on weak evidence, there is still oversight. You are more likely to see someone fined for AWL, even if the ROs posted in canteen flats are a week out of date though.

 

[Remius]

Looks like the strike is over as of 9am. Today.

Deal has been reached. highlights:

Tentative agreement reached with Treasury Board for 120,000 members

After nearly two years of bargaining leading to one of the largest strikes in Canadian history, PSAC has reached tentative agreements for the more than 120,000 Treasury Board workers who deliver critical services to Canadians.

workerscantwait.ca

 

[dimsum]

On the strike: Tomorrow is May Day - International Workers Day. Watch for PSAC leadership to declare victory and back to work he following day.

You were almost right - they didn't even give their workers May Day

Looks like the strike is over as of 9am. Today.

Deal has been reached. highlights:

Tentative agreement reached with Treasury Board for 120,000 members

After nearly two years of bargaining leading to one of the largest strikes in Canadian history, PSAC has reached tentative agreements for the more than 120,000 Treasury Board workers who deliver critical services to Canadians.

workerscantwait.ca

Who are the remaining 35000? I thought PSAC said they had 155000 striking personnel?