Government Operations Committee on June 6th, 2006

[Deborah Bourque]

We're concerned that the new president of Canada Post doesn't understand the union, doesn't trust the union, and doesn't believe she needs to consult with the union or have input from it. She referred to us as a special interest group at a meeting we had recently. We're more than a special interest group; we represent the vast majority of employees that make Canada Post the success story it is. We believe we're a major stakeholder.

We have concerns about the lack of understanding of and lack of trust in the union. We've shown, through negotiations and joint pilot projects, that we're able to resolve problems. We're seeing Canada Post management at the national level step back from some of that joint work, or from some of those projects that we have been successful on over the last 10 years. We're seeing them step back, and there's a lot more resistance to doing that kind of work together.

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I think you can help us more if you can be more specific about what exactly you think the problems are in the direction that management has taken. You're still remaining at an abstract level. See if you can help us, by maybe pointing out one or two major or fundamental issues.

[Deborah Bourque]

I can give you two examples. One is what's called Appendix T, a provision in our collective agreement for a joint committee with funding, and with equal responsibility, allowing us to test new initiatives—job creation initiatives and service expansion initiatives. It allows the corporation to contract out work without taking a whole bunch of risk with their normal operating budget. There is a special fund set aside for these projects. The projects have been extremely successful, but we've been unable to get any projects through that committee for the last two years. We used to be very successful in retail services, expanding retail services, expanding parcel services, and in dealing with new technology, creating jobs for our members and improving service for communities. It didn't cost Canada Post a lot of money. We thought it was a win-win situation, but we're not going anywhere with those any more.

The most recent example is rural delivery. A number of our members in rural communities have invoked their right to refuse under the Canada Labour Code. Legitimate health and safety concerns also have a real impact on service in those communities. Canada Post's response was not to sit down and work with the union and come up with viable options to resolve this issue, but their first reaction was to remove service from those communities, put in community mailboxes without any notice and without any consultation with the communities, and then just live with the resulting backlash that came, justifiably, from those communities.

We're trying right now to find a way to work out those issues with Canada Post, because we're very concerned about our members' health and safety. We're also extremely concerned that this is the first step in the abandonment of rural mail delivery, or at least a demonstration of a lack of commitment to rural service.

We could work this out. We have lots of good ideas, and there are lots of forums for us to work this out together, but we're not seeing any willingness from Canada Post to actually sit down and work this out with the union.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

We'll go to Madame Thibault.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for being here this morning, Mrs. Bourque and Mr. Bickerton, thank you for being here this morning. I have three series of questions to ask. I may not be able to ask them all during this round and I might have to come back. They relate to rural service, the IBM study, and the issue of equal treatment.

First of all, I want to raise an issue that is dear to the people I represent since I represent a mainly rural riding. I hope that the good residents of Rimouski will not be offended.

My question relates to the service in rural areas and the way staff is configured. I would like to know if only the people working in post offices are unionized or if people walking the routes are also unionized, as well as the people having contracts to deliver mail on rural routes. Could you give me a brief explanation about that?

[Deborah Bourque]

Yes, we have 6,600 members across Canada and Quebec who deliver to rural mailboxes and community mailboxes in the area. Prior to January 2004, those 6,600 workers were independent contractors. Their routes came up for tender every five years and they had to bid on their routes.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

They're your union members, if I may say so.

[Deborah Bourque]

Yes.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I read in the papers, and I would like you to confirm or deny that, that some people delivering the mail in rural areas are concerned about their safety because some roads are badly maintained. Our winters are tough and one runs the risk of ending up in the ditch if one gets too close to some mailboxes. Is it true that some people are on the verge of refusing to deliver the mail for safety reasons?

[Deborah Bourque]

Roughly 279 workers have invoked the right to refuse under the Canada Labour Code. All but a couple of those complaints were found to be valid by Labour Canada.

There are two types of risk that have been identified. One is regarding the ergonomic effect of reaching across your vehicle to put mail out the passenger-side door into the mailbox. Canada Post policy is that even if it's safe to do so, workers aren't permitted to exit the vehicle to put the mail in the box.

If you're lucky enough to have a bench seat in your car, you can reach across--there are still problems with the reach--but if you have a console, it's incredibly difficult to do that. That is the nature of the smaller number of the complaints.

The majority of complaints are about the particular highway conditions: very narrow shoulders, very high speed on the highway, very high traffic areas, visibility problems, curves, or hills. If a rural letter carrier has 900 households on his or her route and complains about three of them and says that three of those households are unsafe, we believe we have to look at those three delivery points and make those safe. Canada Post's reaction has been to pull delivery from all the houses on that route and make all those people go to community mailboxes. We think that's the wrong way to do it.

We need to look at each problem area and figure out what the options are. In some cases it may be simply a matter of moving the mailbox back a few feet. If there's a way to turn around, the worker could drive into the driveway. We certainly don't want them backing into those unsafe highways. We could reduce the speed on that area of the highway. We think there are lots of ways of resolving these problems.

But, instead, we're hearing now about people in these communities--seniors, people with disabilities, people with small children--who are forced to travel as far as 20 to 30 kilometres, in Fredericton, for instance, to get their mail from community mailboxes. They're quite justifiably outraged. Unfortunately, many of them are outraged at our members for having the audacity to complain about their health and safety when they should be angry at Canada Post for taking the easy way out and yanking service from those communities.

We also believe that if community mailboxes are the only way to make delivery safe on a particular portion of the route, then that should be a last resort, but they should be more accessible for people. It's unthinkable that people should have to go 20 kilometres to pick up their mail.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Do you think this is only a first step? In the communities I represent, this could lead to the closure of the post office because there would be no reason to keep it open. That's already happened in one case. In small communities, it may happen that the person managing the post office has to leave town or passes away. At that time, Canada Post tries to find a small business like a corner store or a gas station to provide the service.

One of my concerns is that once that step is taken, who knows where that kind of reorganization might lead, even though we're being told that there's no plan yet. I will come back later to the issue of the Québec City sorting plant.

Last June 1st, during a meeting of the Standing committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, the CEO stated that they don't have any reorganization plan for the whole of Canada but, when I see some of the decisions being made with the union, I am concerned. It's only a feeling I have. Do you have more than that? Do you have any evidence? I know my riding. In some ridings, that first step was taken and it led to closures or to a drastic reduction of services. Are your members aware of that or am I the only one to have this feeling?

[Deborah Bourque]

We share your concerns. We have serious concerns that the closure of the Quebec City letter sorting facility is the first step in downsizing.

There are 22 mechanized postal facilities across the country. In many provinces, there is more than one postal facility, and in some provinces those two postal facilities are within driving distance of each other, the way Quebec City and Montreal are.

We're concerned that this is the first step. Canada Post announces a review. They say now they had no plans, but then why did they give the union notice under our collective agreement that they were going to be explicitly reviewing their network of postal facilities? They gave us that notice—we didn't dream that up—that they were starting with Quebec City. Three weeks later, they announced they were closing the Quebec City facility. We couldn't believe they would conduct a serious review and make that decision in three weeks. In fact, an arbitrator informed us that the decision had actually been made back in February, in violation of our collective agreement, and they hadn't informed the union.

It raised some alarm bells for us that this was the intention in terms of the rest of the network, that they were going to look at those opportunities where they believed they could downsize their network of post office facilities. So we're very concerned that Quebec City is just the tip of the iceberg.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We'll go to Mr. Kramp.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very kindly for coming in here today.

I want to touch on a couple of concerns. One, of course, is the rural closings, or potential closings and/or service to rural areas. Like many members, we represent rural concerns.

Another area I want to touch on, of course, is the repetitive stress injury situation. I can comment on this from some personal involvement, as I have many, many friends, associates, and relatives who work with Canada Post and have reported to me their personal or anecdotal comparisons as to what has taken place.

Might I just ask a couple of questions, then? Do you have any information about other jurisdictions, public and/or private, and/or competing influences, that have reported repetitive stress syndrome?

[Deborah Bourque]

In terms of delivery?

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

In other words, is Canada Post the only one that has had this kind of repetitive stress report, complaint, or concern? Have other competing organizations, whether they're private sources or other public systems around the world, had other occurrences like this that you're aware of?

[Deborah Bourque]

The best example for us to look at is rural delivery in the United States. In the United States, they use right-hand-drive vehicles to deliver the mail. Of course, that's another option that exists, as these vehicles are in use in the United States, and mail service couriers and mobile letter carriers in Canada actually use right-hand-drive vehicles.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Okay, there's another question I would have then. Thank you for that information.

This is not a pro union/con union situation--far from it, because I do have total respect for the validity and the purpose and for the sensible.... Prior to the unionization in 2003 for I have no idea how many years--

[Deborah Bourque]

A century.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

--literally, we've had this form of delivery, and yet I've never heard a complaint similar in nature to this from anybody I've ever talked to, nor have I heard of one being reported. All of a sudden there is unionization, which means when we have a complaint we have a problem. The optics of this do not put the union in a good light. That's a reality. Could you just give me a response to that?

[Deborah Bourque]

I've worked with rural and suburban mail couriers since about 1998, I think. We've been organizing those workers since that time, and we were successful in getting voluntary recognition for them in 2004. So I know these complaints have always existed. These routes that are unsafe today have always been unsafe. The difference is that prior to 2004, those workers had absolutely no rights under any collective agreement or in fact under the Canada Labour Code. So they did not have the right to file a complaint with Labour Canada. If they did raise these issues with management at Canada Post, they were routinely told, “If you don't like it, go work somewhere else”. That's why these workers joined a union, because they wanted some protection.

So right now you're seeing workers who legitimately see their health and safety at risk and who now have some rights, the same rights every other worker in this country has, to file a complaint with Labour Canada regarding their health and safety.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

I can appreciate that. I'm just trying to deal with what appears to me to be a reality. I have talked to many members of the union, and they have told me first-hand, “This is horse feathers, it is bogus, it is ridiculous”. They said, “We have delivered mail for x number of years. We can do our job; we can reach it; my heavens!” You can always find an excuse and/or try to find a way to not do your job.

Perhaps I'm living in a cocoon on this issue, because certainly if there's a legitimate concern, as an entrepreneur and/or a government official, I want to deal with that, but the impression I'm getting is that this is just an excuse to not do the job for a variety of reasons. The inference that this is not a legitimate concern is strongly felt out there in my community and in other communities that I've been in.

Road safety I can certainly understand. I really can. We drive in many areas in rural Canada where the shoulders are not maintained to the extent that they could be. But, for example, in most of these cases, they'll make arrangements with the local people. All of our delivery drivers do a bit of their own personal housekeeping, and they find a way to get it through. I see a little too much of the “big brother” approach on this, and we seem to be losing a bit of common sense in application here. I just have a concern that the union is overstepping its bounds. Could you correct me on that?

[Deborah Bourque]

Yes. Let's be clear here. As I said, we represent 6,600 rural and suburban mail carriers. There have been fewer than 300 complaints with Labour Canada. Of course, not all of this work is unsafe. This work can be done safely. People want to do their jobs. I would say that even though these workers have the protection of the Canada Labour Code, they run a risk when they file a complaint regarding their health and safety.

We had a member out in Manitoba who filed a complaint with Labour Canada. Canada Post removed delivery from the households on his route and put in community mailboxes. He lost $12,000 annual wages because he had lost the driving component of his route. The person working next to him on another route, who didn't even file a complaint with Labour Canada, had his route restructured. Community mailboxes were put in and he lost $8,000 off his annual salary. These aren't highly paid workers. They run a real risk when they file these complaints.

The bigger risk for the 279 of them who have filed these complaints is that they're killed while doing their job.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

How many accidents of any serious nature have been reported--a PI, personal injury accident--over this late time period? Do you have any--

[Deborah Bourque]

Two weeks ago, two members in southern Ontario were in a traffic accident while delivering mail on their routes.