BRANTFORD LABOUR UPDATES
Thanks to all affiliate and community members who supported the Striking members of CEP Local 1999
|
|
CEP LOCAL 1999
Workers are fighting back in Brantford
JOIN THEIR PICKET LINE
(RELIANCE HOME COMFORT)
37 Morton Ave
Reliance Home Comfort workers strike after company imposes termsTORONTO, May 2, 2012 /CNW/ - Almost 300 members of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union ofCanada, who work for Reliance Home Comfort Limited, went on strike at midnight, after their employer took the unusual step of imposing working terms and conditions during the collective bargaining process.
"After our membership voted to reject the company's offer, Reliance Home Comfort imposed unacceptable working conditions, forcing a strike," says CEP Ontario Administrative Vice-President Dave Moffat.
"The company has demanded concessions all the way through this bargaining round," says Moffat, adding that "Reliance is a very successful company, and the skill level and dedication of their employees is a big part of that success.
"The company is also demanding a two-tier wage system that discriminates against new hires," he says. "We believe that degrades their skill level and potentially harms customer service."
The 295 clerical and operational employees, members of CEP Local 1999, install and repair heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment for homeowners throughout Ontario. They work out of offices in Windsor, Sarnia, London, Brantford, Cambridge Burlington, Kingston and Thunder Bay, Ontario.
"We want a fair collective agreement, and are prepared to go back to the table at any time," adds Moffat.
For further information:Dave Moffat (416) 460-8443
"After our membership voted to reject the company's offer, Reliance Home Comfort imposed unacceptable working conditions, forcing a strike," says CEP Ontario Administrative Vice-President Dave Moffat.
"The company has demanded concessions all the way through this bargaining round," says Moffat, adding that "Reliance is a very successful company, and the skill level and dedication of their employees is a big part of that success.
"The company is also demanding a two-tier wage system that discriminates against new hires," he says. "We believe that degrades their skill level and potentially harms customer service."
The 295 clerical and operational employees, members of CEP Local 1999, install and repair heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment for homeowners throughout Ontario. They work out of offices in Windsor, Sarnia, London, Brantford, Cambridge Burlington, Kingston and Thunder Bay, Ontario.
"We want a fair collective agreement, and are prepared to go back to the table at any time," adds Moffat.
For further information:Dave Moffat (416) 460-8443
STRIKE ISSUES
READ why CEP Local 1999 were forced to take on Reliance Home Comfort LTD
|
SUPPORT CUPE 966 STRIKE
On the strike line with CUPE 966 click to go to thier website
|
Adam Walker , Chris Baldrey , Bruce Hazelwood , Jeff Van Wyk, Andrew Dukshire
|
|
Click poster to reserve your seats on the free Brantford bus
|
|
|
|
|
|
real solutions - real math - real pension reform click here
Had Enough of Phil read this 3rd party blog !
"OCCUPY PHIL" LEEDS TO FACE TO FACE TOWN HALL on OAS
|
|
To Everyone who attended the OAS Town HAll
Fighting Back Matters !
Read the great coverage from the Front page of the Expositor
TO READ THE FULL STORY In the Expositor CLICK ON PICTURE
Great editorial Cartoon from Brant News and Dave McCreary
|
click to enlarge
|
email Steven Harper click here
25 REASONS WORKERS NEED TO GET RID OF THE
THE HARPER GOVERNMENT
& LINKS TO ARTICLES TO BACK THEM UP
|
THE HARPER GOVERNMENT
WHICH INCLUDES BRANTFORDS OWN BACKBENCH CHEERLEADER PHIL McCOLEMAN ARE PUSHING FOR CHANGES TO OLD AGE SECURITY (OAS) THAT WOULD FORCE YOU TO WORK AN ADDITIONAL TWO YEARS TO COLLECT WHAT YOU HAVE ALREADY WORKED A LIFETIME TO ACHIEVE . THE KEY PART OF THIS EQUATION IS THEY ARE DOING IT WITH A STRAIGHT FACE WHILE SITTING ON GOLD PLATED MP PENSIONS THAT INCREASE WHOPPING 10 % PER YEAR AS MANDATED BY LEGISLATION THEY CREATE AND MANIPULATE IT'S TIME TO CALL THE CONSERVATIVES TO THE CARPET HANDS OFF OAS ! |
Majority of Canadians demand you retreat on attacking OAS EMAIL PHIL McCOLEMAN |
OAS Debate must be based on facts
TORONTO, ON, Feb. 10, 2012/ Troy Media/ -
Faced with an aging population that he claims poses a threat to our social programs, Stephen Harper says that we need to make Canada’s retirement-income system sustainable. He hinted that part of the solution might be to raise the age of entitlement for Old Age Security benefits (OAS), from today’s 65 upward to 67.
The government has since softened on this point, and assured Canadians that any reforms put in place will ensure the security of retirement benefits for existing seniors and future generations, but the idea of pension reform still looms.
Debate must be based on facts
Certainly, the sustainability of the OAS and C/QPP are worthy goals and worth a public discussion and debate as how to achieve this sustainability. But such a debate should be based in fact not perception.
For example, we are told that OAS will cost Canadians $108B in 2030 up from $36.5B today. While both figures are correct, they are meaningless on their own. What we need to know is whether or not such costs are affordable in a growing Canadian economy. Is the system unsustainable?
Thankfully, the answer to this question already exists. The Chief Actuary of the OAS system reports regularly (and publicly) on the financial health of the system. His last published report was the 8th Actuarial Report published in 2008. In that report, he confirms that the cost of OAS (including GIS) would rise to $108B in 2030 consistent with Prime Minister Harper’s statistics. He also points out that while in 2007 there were 4.7 Canadians aged 20 to 64 per individual aged 65+, that that ratio would fall to 2.4 in 2030 or almost exactly in half.
But there are other attributes that need to be remembered. First, OAS is taxable income so a lot of the monies paid out go straight back to Ottawa. Second, the OAS is further clawed back depending on your income. If your own income exceeds $67,668 then you lose your OAS at a 15 per cent claw back rate. If you have income of $110,123 or more, you get no OAS at all. For the GIS, the claw back rate is 50 per cent starting at $3,500 so that if you have income in your own right of $16,230 (other than the OAS), you get no GIS at all. Finally, OAS/GIS costs rise with CPI whereas tax revenues rise with the growth in GDP. Normally, the latter rises faster than the former.
So, do Canadians need to worry about the sustainability of OAS? Not according to the Chief Actuary.
Based on the assumption that the cost of living would rise 2.5 per cent per annum and that earnings would rise at 3.8 per cent per annum (i.e., real wage growth of 1.3 per cent per annum), the Chief Actuary projected that the cost of OAS as a percentage of GDP would be 2.2 per cent in 2007; it would then peak at 3.1 per cent in 2030 and then fall (as the baby boomers die off) to 2.7 per cent in 2050. He further points out that if these assumptions prove to be true, each generation of retirees will receive an OAS benefit that will be a smaller ratio of their final pay (the replacement ratio) than the generations before.
One needs to ask, then, if this indicates that the OAS system is unsustainable. Are we facing a demographic avalanche or a glacier?
Raising eligibility age regressive
Secondly, raising the eligibility age for OAS is regressive legislation. It is well known that wealthy Canadians live longer than poorer Canadians. Look at a blue-collar worker with less than high school education who retires at age 65. That person’s life expectancy could easily be around 10 years. If you raise the age of eligibility for OAS from 65 to 67, you remove 20 per cent of that person’s expected benefits. A wealthy Canadian, on the other hand, could just as easily be looking at a life expectancy of 20 years. Thus, moving this person’s age of eligibility up by the same two years is a 10 per cent reduction in their benefits.
Thus, we see that two key questions need to be addressed in the upcoming debate. First, is raising the age of eligibility for OAS really necessary or is the system sustainable as is?
Second, how does one justify a public policy shift that is so clearly regressive in its impact?
Let the fact-based debate begin.
Robert L. Brown is an expert advisor with EvidenceNetwork.ca and a Fellow with the Canadian Institute of Actuaries. He was Professor of Actuarial Science at the University of Waterloo for 39 years and a past president of the Canadian Institute of Actuaries.
This column is FREE to use on your websites or in your publications. However, Troy Media, with a link to its web site, MUST be credited.
Faced with an aging population that he claims poses a threat to our social programs, Stephen Harper says that we need to make Canada’s retirement-income system sustainable. He hinted that part of the solution might be to raise the age of entitlement for Old Age Security benefits (OAS), from today’s 65 upward to 67.
The government has since softened on this point, and assured Canadians that any reforms put in place will ensure the security of retirement benefits for existing seniors and future generations, but the idea of pension reform still looms.
Debate must be based on facts
Certainly, the sustainability of the OAS and C/QPP are worthy goals and worth a public discussion and debate as how to achieve this sustainability. But such a debate should be based in fact not perception.
For example, we are told that OAS will cost Canadians $108B in 2030 up from $36.5B today. While both figures are correct, they are meaningless on their own. What we need to know is whether or not such costs are affordable in a growing Canadian economy. Is the system unsustainable?
Thankfully, the answer to this question already exists. The Chief Actuary of the OAS system reports regularly (and publicly) on the financial health of the system. His last published report was the 8th Actuarial Report published in 2008. In that report, he confirms that the cost of OAS (including GIS) would rise to $108B in 2030 consistent with Prime Minister Harper’s statistics. He also points out that while in 2007 there were 4.7 Canadians aged 20 to 64 per individual aged 65+, that that ratio would fall to 2.4 in 2030 or almost exactly in half.
But there are other attributes that need to be remembered. First, OAS is taxable income so a lot of the monies paid out go straight back to Ottawa. Second, the OAS is further clawed back depending on your income. If your own income exceeds $67,668 then you lose your OAS at a 15 per cent claw back rate. If you have income of $110,123 or more, you get no OAS at all. For the GIS, the claw back rate is 50 per cent starting at $3,500 so that if you have income in your own right of $16,230 (other than the OAS), you get no GIS at all. Finally, OAS/GIS costs rise with CPI whereas tax revenues rise with the growth in GDP. Normally, the latter rises faster than the former.
So, do Canadians need to worry about the sustainability of OAS? Not according to the Chief Actuary.
Based on the assumption that the cost of living would rise 2.5 per cent per annum and that earnings would rise at 3.8 per cent per annum (i.e., real wage growth of 1.3 per cent per annum), the Chief Actuary projected that the cost of OAS as a percentage of GDP would be 2.2 per cent in 2007; it would then peak at 3.1 per cent in 2030 and then fall (as the baby boomers die off) to 2.7 per cent in 2050. He further points out that if these assumptions prove to be true, each generation of retirees will receive an OAS benefit that will be a smaller ratio of their final pay (the replacement ratio) than the generations before.
One needs to ask, then, if this indicates that the OAS system is unsustainable. Are we facing a demographic avalanche or a glacier?
Raising eligibility age regressive
Secondly, raising the eligibility age for OAS is regressive legislation. It is well known that wealthy Canadians live longer than poorer Canadians. Look at a blue-collar worker with less than high school education who retires at age 65. That person’s life expectancy could easily be around 10 years. If you raise the age of eligibility for OAS from 65 to 67, you remove 20 per cent of that person’s expected benefits. A wealthy Canadian, on the other hand, could just as easily be looking at a life expectancy of 20 years. Thus, moving this person’s age of eligibility up by the same two years is a 10 per cent reduction in their benefits.
Thus, we see that two key questions need to be addressed in the upcoming debate. First, is raising the age of eligibility for OAS really necessary or is the system sustainable as is?
Second, how does one justify a public policy shift that is so clearly regressive in its impact?
Let the fact-based debate begin.
Robert L. Brown is an expert advisor with EvidenceNetwork.ca and a Fellow with the Canadian Institute of Actuaries. He was Professor of Actuarial Science at the University of Waterloo for 39 years and a past president of the Canadian Institute of Actuaries.
This column is FREE to use on your websites or in your publications. However, Troy Media, with a link to its web site, MUST be credited.
QUICK AND EASY LINK TO FLAHERTY JUST CLICK ON SID
Where trade unionists start their day on the net.
|
|
click logo for website
|
WORKERS EXPLODE IN CHANTS OF "SHAME"
AS ANTI SCAB BILL 45 IS DEFEATED
Workers will hold LIBERAL & CONSERVATIVES acountable on the next Ontario Election
|
|
 LIBERALS FAIL TO SUPPORT ANTI SCAB BILL - LABOUR OCCUPIES THE LEGISLATURE AFTER THE VOTE to video click photo |
Get all the Queens Park occupation , news photos ,video ,audio etc . Just download file and click the links in the document List compiled by our freinds at XPDNC.com
| qpoccupationresources.pdf |
OFL: CLOSING OF BRANTFORD’S ECP FACTORY THE DISGRACEFUL RESULT OF PREMIER MCGUINTY'S INACTION
Nearly 100 workers learned that they will lose their jobs as a result of today’s announcement by Intertape Polymer, the parent company that owns the Engineered Coated Products (ECP) plant in Brantford, that it will close the plant this June. This shameful news follows a grueling two and a half year strike, during which time the McGuinty government failed to intervene to ensure a fair settlement.
“Premier McGuinty should be ashamed of his government for letting these workers rot on the picket lines for two and a half years while busloads of replacement workers rolled past them on a daily basis,” said Sid Ryan, President of the Ontario Federation of Labour (OFL). “When there is a protracted labour dispute that is devastating to the livelihoods of workers and their families, the government has a responsibility to intervene. McGuinty failed in that responsibility.”
The 84 members of United Steelworkers Local 1-500 have been on strike since August 23, 2008, when the employer, Intertape Polymer, demanded a 25% roll-back of wages and benefits. During the time since the strike began, the employer used replacement workers to keep the plant operational and avoid negotiating a settlement with its workers. Though prohibited in provinces like Quebec and British Columbia, the use of replacement workers during strikes and lock-outs has been permitted in Ontario since Premier Mike Harris gutted labour laws in the mid-1990s to relax employer obligations towards employees. Since taking office in 2003, Premier McGuinty has failed to reverse Harris’ record and refused to intervene to save the livelihoods of these ECP employees.
“This American company used every dirty trick – they bused in scabs, trumped up false charges against the striking workers and refused to bargain fairly,” said Ryan. “If Ontario had anti-scab legislation, this strike would never have gone on so long. It is a disgrace that American companies are exploiting our lax labour laws and abusing employees when they demand fair wages and benefits.”
The Ontario Federation of Labour is helping to organize a rally at Noon at Queen’s Park on Thursday, March 31 to support a private member’s bill proposed by NDP Member of Provincial Parliament France Gélinas that would ban the use of replacement workers and help to ensure that the rights of workers are respected. The OFL represents 54 Ontario unions and over one million members.
“Premier McGuinty should be ashamed of his government for letting these workers rot on the picket lines for two and a half years while busloads of replacement workers rolled past them on a daily basis,” said Sid Ryan, President of the Ontario Federation of Labour (OFL). “When there is a protracted labour dispute that is devastating to the livelihoods of workers and their families, the government has a responsibility to intervene. McGuinty failed in that responsibility.”
The 84 members of United Steelworkers Local 1-500 have been on strike since August 23, 2008, when the employer, Intertape Polymer, demanded a 25% roll-back of wages and benefits. During the time since the strike began, the employer used replacement workers to keep the plant operational and avoid negotiating a settlement with its workers. Though prohibited in provinces like Quebec and British Columbia, the use of replacement workers during strikes and lock-outs has been permitted in Ontario since Premier Mike Harris gutted labour laws in the mid-1990s to relax employer obligations towards employees. Since taking office in 2003, Premier McGuinty has failed to reverse Harris’ record and refused to intervene to save the livelihoods of these ECP employees.
“This American company used every dirty trick – they bused in scabs, trumped up false charges against the striking workers and refused to bargain fairly,” said Ryan. “If Ontario had anti-scab legislation, this strike would never have gone on so long. It is a disgrace that American companies are exploiting our lax labour laws and abusing employees when they demand fair wages and benefits.”
The Ontario Federation of Labour is helping to organize a rally at Noon at Queen’s Park on Thursday, March 31 to support a private member’s bill proposed by NDP Member of Provincial Parliament France Gélinas that would ban the use of replacement workers and help to ensure that the rights of workers are respected. The OFL represents 54 Ontario unions and over one million members.
ECP CLOSED UP SHOP BUT NOT BEFORE BEING FORCED TO PAYOUT SEVERANCE PACKAGES TO THE PRINCIPLED USW STRIKERS WHO STOOD IN
100% SOLIDARITY
Great videos from our friends at operationmaple.com
will tell their stories for generations
WORD ON THE STREET - TO KILL A UNION
PART ONE
WORD ON THE STREET - TO KILL A UNION
PART TWO
 |
 |
USW LOCAL 1005 PENSIONERS SPEAK OUT
MEET BILL MAHONEY … IN HIS OWN WORDS
U.S. Steel’s greed is unbelievable. How much money is enough for those people at the top who just sweep into Canada, make legally binding commitments to us, our communities and the government and then just ignore them? And what kind of government is it that let’s them? I think Canada’s probably a laughing stock internationally letting this kind of legal theft take place.
I spent 37 years working for the company and I was supposed to get about $2600 a month. My wife and I spent two years crunching numbers to see if I could even afford to retire. We decided that the indexing meant we would be okay and could get by. Hydro’s going up, food, taxes and a million other things are too, so you can imagine how important indexing is. And now, after I can’t do anything about it, U.S. Steel announces it wants to take it away?? It’s disgusting. We fought for the indexing. We gave up wages in exchange for it.
There are a lot of pensioners much worse off than me and you can imagine what they’re trying to cope with. You know, I’ve worked since I was 15 years old. My mom actually cried when I got into Stelco and brought home my first paycheck because even though it was hard, dirty work, she knew I’d be able to live and get by in life. Steelworker kids had decent clothes and bicycles and we knew in those days that if we worked hard and gave it our best, we wouldn’t have to live in poverty. And now here we are with U.S. Steel trying to force thousands of us, after a lifetime of hard work, into the lowest possible circumstances and some even into poverty.
The changes in the economy also mean that many of us pensioners are also trying to help out our children. They’re already in a tight spot. My stepson is out of work – and we’re trying to help him out – a lot of the seniors are doing the same thing. Those temp agencies are taking a big slice of their wages and employers are trying to get them to work for the cheapest wage possible so we all try to help out the younger generation. That results in a lot of seniors ending up at food banks because the money just won’t stretch. I’m a volunteer at a food bank and see it all the time.
Companies like U.S. Steel are trying to crush the younger generation of workers. At least we successfully bargained for defined benefit plans. They’re trying to force the younger new hires to take defined contribution savings plans which are nothing more than glorified saving accounts. Younger workers will be working harder and harder for less and less.
I have no doubt I’m on the right side of this fight. All I have to do is talk to a lot of the widows trying to live on survivors’ benefits. Some of the widows are only getting $300 - 400/month and the indexing is crucial for them. With indexing, $1000 in 1991 means $1361 of purchasing power now. When you’re living close to the line, that’s a lot to lose. We paid our dues to this company and kept up our part of the contract. Now that it comes time to live up to their part, they decide to cheat us. I thought when I retired I would get to relax. I never thought I’d have to keep fighting just to defend my pension.
 BILL MAHONEY |
 |
OFL PRESIDENTS REPORT CLICK HERE
COMPREHENSIVE MEDIA RESOURSE PAGE CAN BE FOUND BY
CLICKING THE POSTER BELOW
FOR THREE FULL DAYS THE LABOUR MOVEMENT CAME IN MASS TO SUPPORT THE ECP STRIKERS
Bill Gibson, CAW Canada Kitchener Area Director, Russ Lucking President CAW Local 4268 and Dave Reston CAW Local 504 Brantford Casino Chairperson presented two cheques of Ten Thousand Dollars each from CAW Canada and CAW Council to Earl Smith Chairperson USW 1-500 at ECP
 |
 |
Brant riding NDP candidate Marc Laferriere (left) and federal party leader Jack Layton listen as Garry MacDonald, president of the Brantford and District Labour Council talks Saturday afternoon about the two-year old strike at ECP on Elgin Street in Brantford. Layton was in attendance at a Pay What You Can picnic in support of the local candidate for the next federal election.BRIAN THOMPSON/BRANTFORD EXPOSITOR/QMI AGENCY
MANY JOINED THE 2 YEARS is 2 LONG ! 72 HOUR SOLIDARITY RALLY GROUP MANY MORE ATTENDED
CLICK IMAGE FOR THE POSTER THAT KICKED OFF OUR EVENTS
READ RESOLUTION AND Who Had the Courage to Support
ONE DAY LONGER !
WORKING CLASS HEROS
 Brother Peter Leibovitch the Labour Movement salutes you! (CLICK PICTURE) |
 Brother Danny O'Regan 1943 - 2010 Click image to read BRANTFORD Expositor Story |
WATCH MOUSLAND BEFORE YOU VOTE IN OUR NEXT ELECTION
 CLICK FOR INFO & EMAIL the MAYOR |
|
BRANTFORD & DISTRICT LABOUR COUNCIL
