"Unionizing" the CF (merged)

[Blackadder1916]

Many of our European allies have already embraced associations/unions going back many years with little (or no ?) disruption. There is a mix of how they select representatives and for some countries there are separate professional associations depending on rank. As well, there are differences in what services they provide to their members or how representation is made to the various governments. I have yet to hear of any that have any say or input to operational decisions. Links to those that are part of the European Organization of Military Associations and Trade Unions (EUROMIL) can be found at their site. Our members - EUROMIL

Since most of the member countries aren't English speaking, the easiest to understand is probably the Irish. https://pdforra.ie/who-we-are/

 

[mariomike]

When we get to the point where Collective Agreements override National Security, Universality of Service, or the concept of ultimate liability, I am out.

From the article,

Like its sister services in the defence security community, a unionized Canadian military — for obvious reasons — will not have the legal option to withdraw services and go on strike. Nor would it be locked out if contract negotiations reach an impasse. Instead, much like our police and fire services, it would have the options of mediation or binding arbitration to settle any contract disputes.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Don't need a union if a properly self-governing profession is in place. If self-governance has failed and can't be fixed, then the profession has evolved to become an occupation.

 

[Haggis]

What you have to be concerned about with unions - even if they do not have, or seek, the right to strike - is slowdowns, work to rule, mass book offs etc.

A very powerful and recent example of the impact of work to rule (doing your job exactly as ordered, with no exercise of discretion or judgement and following every law, regulation, order, directive, SOP etc. slavishly regardless of how byzantine, irrelevant or unproductive) was the job action by Border Services Officers - who had been without a contract for over three years - in early August. In less than four hours, international commerce and travel essentially ceased just days before the Trudeau Liberals had wanted to re-open the border.

I suspect that Trudeau personally told the president of the TB "settle with them NOW!" as the TB was very quickly back at the table and a deal reached within hours of the job action.

 

[FJAG]

A very powerful and recent example of the impact of work to rule (doing your job exactly as ordered, with no exercise of discretion or judgement and following every law, regulation, order, directive, SOP etc. slavishly regardless of how byzantine, irrelevant or unproductive) was the job action by Border Services Officers - who had been without a contract for over three years - in early August. In less than four hours, international commerce and travel essentially ceased just days before the Trudeau Liberals had wanted to re-open the border.

I suspect that Trudeau personally told the president of the TB "settle with them NOW!" as the TB was very quickly back at the table and a deal reached within hours of the job action.

Two flaws in your argument:

Firstly, the Canada Border Services Agency Act has no equivalent of s79 and 80 of the NDA (Mutiny with and without violence); and

Secondly, National Defence provides no service to Canada whose suspension would have an immediate effect of on the economic well-being of the country. Chances are it would lead to a realization they could do with a lot less people in the department.

(A third one might be that NDHQ couldn't really work any slower )

(Ooh! Ooh! I just thought of a fourth. Most police unions exclude the "officer ranks" which would be some 13,500 commissioned officers out of a total force of 61,000 Reg F. So there'd be one quarter of the force working as per normal and required to pick up the slack - )

 

[Haggis]

Two flaws in your argument:

Firstly, the Canada Border Services Agency Act has no equivalent of s79 and 80 of the NDA (Mutiny with and without violence); and

Would the NDA retain s79 and 80 in their current forms if the CAF unionized?

Secondly, National Defence provides no service to Canada whose suspension would have an immediate effect of on the economic well-being of the country. Chances are it would lead to a realization they could do with a lot less people in the department.

You're likely right, which could lead to job action to protect union positions from being eliminated or contracted out.

(A third one might be that NDHQ couldn't really work any slower )

Imagine how slow it would be if NDHQ worked to rule.....

(Ooh! Ooh! I just thought of a fourth. Most police unions exclude the "officer ranks" which would be some 13,500 commissioned officers out of a total force of 61,000 Reg F. So there'd be one quarter of the force working as per normal and required to pick up the slack - )

If the Reg F were unionized, I expect the P Res would be members as well, no? Unions like members because members mean dues.

 

[dimsum]

the easiest to understand is probably the Irish.

Well, there's a first for everything, I guess.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I think it would be good to have some kind of mechanism to push back when the GoC arbitrarily changes some of the compensation rules. The ones around the 'separation entitlement' that caused havoc years ago, as well as the TB rules around the depressed market laws that led to big grievances come to mind.

I think an effective 'Military Ombudsmans' office would be able to provide some kind of help if that sort of function to review compensation policy changes might be a workable option, and honestly without a collective agreement a union would be a waste of time, as the GoC can update our current compensation and benefits package at will, and all we can do is lump it or leave, as they have no legal obligation to negotiate that prior to changing it.

Similarly, as long as the GoC is talking to the Legion as the primary veterans organization we're hooped.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Re: Unionization of the CAF: just what we need- another industrial revolution “solution” to our 21st century issues…

 

[mariomike]

Saw this in "Rebuild basic officer training". It has to do if there is, or is not, need for a union in the CAF.

Don't need a union if a properly self-governing profession is in place.

Despite the name, regulatory Colleges are not teaching institutions. Instead, under statutory authority, they provide oversight of the profession belonging to the College, which includes determining the scope of practice, initial education and continuing competency requirements for membership, conducting quality assurance, investigation of complaints and discipline of it's members when necessary.

A regulatory College is statutorily charged with protecting the public interest by setting educational requirements, competency profiles and standards of practice, developing and enforcing a Code of Ethics, ensuring professional competency through quality assurance, promoting inter-professional collaboration, maintaining a public register of members, conducting public outreach, and responding to public complaints.

A regulatory College has no impact on the role of unions / associations.

Unions / associations represent the rights and interests of employees in relation to employers.

Some professions ( such as physicians, nurses, paramedics ) have both.

 

[KevinB]

No effective Army unionizes.
Each of the EU union Armies are absolute trash.

 

[Bluebulldog]

Some professions ( such as physicians, nurses, paramedics ) have both.

Unless I'm mistaken, only ACP paramedics are governed / regulated. PCP Paramedics aren't.

I do think they need to be. I've had some interactions with some superior people in the field, I've also seen some pretty big $#itpumps.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Unions / associations represent the rights and interests of employees in relation to employers.

Compensation is somehow bound to public service and the service has its own processes for grievances (which, already noted, may not currently be working well). What's left for unions?

 

[mariomike]

What's left for unions?

Judging from this 10-page discussion, quite a bit, apparently.

Civilians complaining about Police/Emergency Services' Pay

It seems that any time the yearly salary of a police officer is brought up, most people seem to complain that "police are grossly overpaid for what they do". I have a serious bone to pick with this issue. It's so evident that the general public is simply unaware of just how risky and demanding...

www.milnet.ca

At least at the municipal level in Ontario.

Escalating Emergency Services Labour Costs and the Ontario Taxpayers’ Ability to Pay

https://www.amo.on.ca/AMO-PDFs/Reports/2011/2011AbilitytoPayPositionPaper2011.aspx

Unions work for members of our emergency services. RCMP members voted to unionize not so long ago.

That is not to suggest the CAF should have a union.

 

[Eaglelord17]

If true; when I hear a ship and crew were sent to back sea 4 days after 1 month of post-deployment leave; from a grueling 7 month confined to ship tour for another 5 weeks sail I am not sure I can say leadership has the best interest of the rank and file anymore.

Could it be worse than we already have ?

Leadership isn't supposed to have the best interest of the rank and file at heart in every action, they should have the best interests of the country at heart. Many times the what is the best interest of the rank and file and serving the country can coincide, other times they cannot.

The way leadership should think is Mission, Troops, then Self. Priority is always the Mission and if you have a very limited number of troops and ships available it means you will have send them out without rest whether or not you want to as a person. It is the same thing as ordering a bunch of troops into a battle even though you know it could likely be their death.

Yes it sucks, but what is your proposed solution? Leadership needs to hire more. Odds are the ones deciding which ships are sailing have no control over who is being hired. That leaves them between a rock and a hard place because they have a duty to ensure that the job gets done.

Similar issue exist in the civilian world depending on the job you may occupy. Lack of personnel leads to the few that remain suffering to make it happen. In my unionized workplace which is chronically understaffed if a critical job comes in there is forced overtime available as a option to management to ensure the job gets done.

From personal experience my opinion of unions is lackluster at best. They can help you, but they can also hinder you just as much. I understand where they can be beneficial, but there is downsides to everything. Issues like factions within the union can cause particular problems because certain groups will work for their best interest against the collectives best interest.

Simple example, my workforce is a fairly senior workforce. We are starting to get some newer members but overall there is a significant number who have been there 25+ years. When you join you get 2 weeks of vacation. Every 5 years they add one week of vacation to a max of 7 weeks (which is pretty good). There is no incentive to try and increase the vacation for the new guys though as the senior guys have already worked though the system and they wouldn't receive any benefit from it despite the fact it would benefit the workforce as a whole going forward. Much like how the older guys are on a defined benefit pension and the newer ones are on defined contribution based off the old guys who never had to switch pensions making the decision for those who joined after them, receiving a lump sum to make the switch. After all it didn't hurt them and they got money from it.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Don't need a union if a properly self-governing profession is in place ...

CF's likely better than most, but there's also enough evidence out there these days to suggest way more needs to be done on this front - which I suspect stirs the "time for a union/professional association" pot.

For more information, there appears to be a European Organisation of Military Associations and Trade Unions representing at least 30 such groups across Europe.

On the right to strike, they had this to say:

“We know that the right to strike in the military can shock some people, and not least within the military. For EUROMIL this issue was never a priority, but the decision of the ECSR is clear” EUROMIL’s President Emmanuel Jacob said. “Let’s compare it with nuclear weapons. Everybody knows who has them and where they are, but nobody wants to use them. But they are often the deciding factor in finding diplomatic solutions. In our position paper the diplomatic solution is the social dialogue and collective bargaining to avoid this right. A strike is not a goal in itself but a deterrent tool” Jacob argued.

One of the axes they're grinding: sexual abuse of women in the Irish military (sadly, sound familiar?) Could such an org have done a better job here on this issue? Can't say - lots depends on the org & how they would have done things. Still, food for thought.

 

[mariomike]

Simple example, my workforce is a fairly senior workforce. We are starting to get some newer members but overall there is a significant number who have been there 25+ years.

Be careful what you wish for.

Might be interesting to hear things from their perspective.

 

[lenaitch]

(Ooh! Ooh! I just thought of a fourth. Most police unions exclude the "officer ranks" which would be some 13,500 commissioned officers out of a total force of 61,000 Reg F. So there'd be one quarter of the force working as per normal and required to pick up the slack - )

Most police senior officers in all but the smallest services have their own bargaining unit that is either legally or effectively recognized by their employer, excluding 'chief' ranks who typically work under individual contracts.

Imagine how slow it would be if NDHQ worked to rule.....

Or forced to actually read the rules and end up having to work harder?
[/QUOTE]

 

[OldSolduer]

At my unionized workplace the union protects the dunderheads who shouldn't be here. It totally ignores those who have a legit beef with the management,

There's a lesson in this somewhere.....

 

[The Bread Guy]

At my unionized workplace the union protects the dunderheads who shouldn't be here ...

Yeah, that pisses me off, too, but it's not always a union thing.

To be entirely fair, did the bosses follow all the steps to deal with the dunderheads?

My experience in public sector unionized environments shows me a big part of the problem can be bosses who don't document & have the difficult conversations when needed, hence leaving loopholes for dunderheads to drive thru.