Latest News

2011 Provincial Election: Party Responses to Society Questions

Dear Society of Energy Professionals member,

As you are no doubt aware, this Thursday October 6 is election day in the province of Ontario. By all accounts, this is shaping up to be an incredibly close race, and the outcome of this election will have major impacts on each of us, our families and the communities in which we live.

As the president of a union representing members who work in Ontario’s electricity sector I have followed the campaign closely, as the future of the electricity sector and the future of collective bargaining rights for our members have both found their way prominently into party platforms, debates and media commentary.

First and foremost, I encourage each and every one of you to make your voice heard and get out and vote on Thursday. It is easy to become cynical and jaded about the current state of our politics, but seeing the daily life and death struggle of citizens from many countries around the world for voting rights should remind us never to take our democracy for granted.

In addition, I encourage everyone to become as informed as possible about each of the parties and their platforms. Knowledge truly is power.

Historically, the Society has never made a partisan endorsement of any party, nor will we do so in the current election. We have, however, made efforts to ensure that our members have access to party positions on relevant issues, as provided by the parties themselves. To that end, as we have in years past, The Society has asked each party to answer a list of standardized questions that we believe will be of interest to our members. You will find those questions attached to the pdf version of this letter.

We have received responses from both the Liberal Party of Ontario and the Ontario New Democratic Party, which we have provided for you in full and unedited form. Unfortunately, the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario declined to respond to us at all after many attempts to contact party representatives and provide them with our questions. I leave it to you to make of that what youwill.

Finally, each of the major parties has posted their full platforms online and they are all well worth reading and considering.

Sincerely,

Rod Sheppard

President, The Society of Energy Professionals

Attachments:

Bruce Power Local settles four-year agreement

After a tumultuous round of bargaining, the Bruce Power Local and its employer have settled arrangements to be in effect until 2015.

“We were able to come up with a solution that met the needs of both parties,” said Local VP Dave Myette. “I think it’s a pretty good settlement, and most everybody seems pretty happy with it.”

On June 4th, more than 600 Local members voted to ratify the deal, with a margin of 93 per cent.

Hightlights of the settlement:

Wage increases of 2.75 per cent on January 1st of 2011, 2012, and 2014, and 3.5 per cent in 2013
Cost of living escalator will be in effect in contract years 2012 through 2014 for CPI increases above the amount of the wage increases
Working conditions—including vacation entitlements, holidays, sick leave, health benefits, etc.—for temporary employees (less than 24 months) are vastly improved
Parental leave—the two-week unpaid waiting period (before collecting employment insurance benefits) is now paid at 93 per cent (supplementary unemployment benefits plan)
The Parties (and the PWU) will “work collaboratively … to investigate options and consider solutions to alleviate the impacts of a decline in the expected average solvency ratio and the continued low interest rate environment and to secure the long term sustainability of the pension plan.”

The Parties found a way to resolve the major sticking point in bargaining this round—Management’s demand that the Local allow them to tear up the “purchased services” (contracting out) procedure. The Local agreed to suspend its role in decision-making around purchased servicesl, while all other aspects of the procedure—notice, record-keeping, provision of information regarding workplace planning, etc.—would remain. This agreement expires on December 30th, 2014, so the decision-making role is automatically reinstated for bargaining of the subsequent renewal agreement.

On May 6th, Sisters in Society sponsored a ride on the Big Bike on University Avenue in Toronto. Participants raised almost $1800 for the Heart and Stroke Foundation.

In return, Bruce Power undertook that the company would maintain a bargaining unit of at least 1,000 Society-represented employees, including at least 285 in the Engineering Division. In addition, no employee will be laid off as a direct result of contracting out.

“The position they came to the table with was to delete, then they fell back to neutering it,” said Myette. “It’s much better than that, and the head count gave us the guarantee we needed to ensure our members weren’t rolled out of the business altogether through attrition.”

Finally, the Parties came to a resolution of an issue of particular concern to the Company, who are currently paying the full salaries of two Society Principal Officers on full-time release. In future, when an employee of Bruce Power is elected a Principal Officer, Bruce Power will be responsible for an amount that is equal to the ratio of Bruce Power members to other members of the Society, and the Society will reimburse Bruce Power for the rest. Since members of the Bruce Power Local are currently about one-eighth of the total Society membership, Bruce Power will be responsible for about one-eighth of the salaries of the two Principal Officers involved.

Negotiations were relatively acrimonious for the Bruce Power context, with the Parties walking away from the table from time to time and trading accusatioins of unfair labour practices (see Newscasts 2010:03 and 2011.01).

The Bruce Local’s bargaining team was made up of Myette, unit directors Shirley Hayes, Ken Martin, and Bob Wells, delegate Kimberly Holmes, and past Local VP Rob Stanley, Society President Rod Sheppard participated in many of the bargaining discussions. Society staff officers Greg Spencer and Andy Todd provided staff support.

OEB Local secures first renewal collective agreement

Strong workplace support and innovative approaches have helped the Ontario Energy Board Local to achieve its first renewal collective agreement.

With the employer determined not to move off its McGuinty wage-freeze schedule increase of zero percent for two years, and members resolved not to accept a settlement that would set them back years behind their peers in other workplaces, it looked for a while that there was no settlement to be had.

“Our membership was certainly not prepared to take what management was prepared to give,” said Edik Zwarenstein, Local VP, “and they were prepared to fight for a reasonable increase.The bargaining team, delegates, and many volunteer communicators in the workplace were in close touch with what members wanted, and knew they could win. Members embraced an early “No to zero and zero” campaign with signs all over the workplace. A communiqué showing how bad were the effects of management’s zero and zero proposal had a similar effect, showing that a two year freeze on an employee with 17 years of service would cost a $100K employee $140,000 to $266,000 over her/his lifetime, when compared with a two to three per cent increase in each year.

According to Society members, the “buzz” in the workplace over the communiqué was everywhere. And ultimately it resulted in a proposal which would avoid a freeze in base pay.

A win-win solution was found by forgoing a portion of their non-pensionable incentive payments to get base pay increases of 2.75 per cent in the first two years, and three per cent in the last two years of a four-year agreement.

(The OEB has an “incentive” plan, which, providing corporate targets are met, results in employees getting payments amounting to between 4.5 and 10.5% of their salaries.)

For the first two years, incentive payments will be lower by an amount equal to 2.75 per cent of base pay. Incentive payments will be restored completely in the third year. The two year reduction in incentive payment is mitigated by a signing bonus in each of those two years, and by the increased base pay which would result in larger incentives in subsequent years. In accepting the agreement, employees minimized the long-term effects, and ensured there’d be no impact on their pensions.

“Our members solidly rejected a base pay freeze,” Zwarenstein said. “We had tremendous support from other units of the Society and that support, added to the determination of the membership resulted in a very respectable settlement that we were prepared to recommend.” The four-year deal is structured in such a way that the schedule increases total just over 12 per cent over the four year period.

Some dissatisfaction with the temporary incentive reduction was reflected in that despite strong membership support for the team and a strong recommendation that members should support the settlement, only 86 per cent of members favoured the settlement, compared with 95 per cent in the previous collective agreement settlement.
The relationship between the parties did not develop as hoped during operation of the first collective agreement. Though the Society sought a genuinely consultative and professional relationship, nothing of the sort arose. In April Rosemarie Leclaire became CEO, having built a solid record of positive labour relations at Hydro Ottawa. The Society is hopeful that the relationship will improve over the coming years.

Economic highlights of the agreement:

Salary increases: 2.75 per cent as of January 1st for both 2011 and 2012; 3.0 per cent in each of 2013 and 2014
Signing bonus: $500 each on ratification, $500 on April 1st, 2012
Retiring allowance: 0.5 per cent of base salary for those who retire before April 1st, 2012; 1.0 per cent for those who retire between April 1st, 2012 and April 1st, 2013

The “retiring allowance” is a form of compensation for those who retire during the time they are not earning their full incentive pay.

Other highlights:

Vision care increased from $400 to $500 every 24 months
Prescription drug reimbursement increased from 90 per cent to 100 per cent, beginning 2013
Laser eye surgery coverage increased to $2000 lifetime, beginning 2013
Major restorative dental coverage annual maximum increased by $1000 to $3500, beginning 2013
Payment for major restorative dental increased from 50 per cent to 60 per cent, beginning 2014
One-half day paid holidays on the last working day before Christmas and New Year.
Improvements to temporary employee rights, union representation rights in meetings with HR, harassment grievance rights, and others

The OEB Local’s bargaining team consisted of Edik Zwarenstein, Unit Director Michael Bell, and elected representatives David Brown, Paul Crawford, Roy Hrab, Robert Stephen , and Society President Rod Sheppard. Direct Staff support was provided by Staff Officers Sonia Pylyshyn, Blaine Donais, Frank White, Cheri Funston, Elena Medina, Jim Bell, and IFPTE staff member Anna Liu.

Board highlights: June

The Society Executive Board met on Tuesday, June 7th.

Recognition: The Executive Board recognized the following for outstanding contributions to the Society:

Scott Forsythe, former delegate at Darlington NGS, who was tragically killed in early June in a motor vehicle accident; he and his contributions will be remembere
The members of the Scholarship Selection Committee—Kelly Brace (ESA), Shirley Kung (OPG), Andrew Stock (New Horizon), and Elan Thomas (Kinectrics)—for their work and dedication, and staff officers Brian Robinson and Cheri Funston for their crucial logistical and procedural contributions
Former IESO Local VP Scott Travers, who recently stepped down, for his long years of service to the Society as delegate, UD, and Local VP
The Bruce Power Local bargaining team—Shirley Hayes, Kim Holmes, Ken Martin, Dave Myette, Rob Stanley, Bob Wells, Society President Rod Sheppard, and staff officers Greg Spencer and Andy Todd—for leading that local through a particularly tense round of negotiation (see article, above)
The Ontario Energy Board Local bargaining team — Edik Zwarenstein, Michael Bell, Roy Hrab and Robert Stephen—for persevering to get a collective agreement with a Management who gave every indication of not wanting one (see article, above)
Former Society staff officer Matthew Kellway, who on May 2nd was elected the Member of Parliament for Beaches-East York in Toronto

Collective Agreement Renewal Fund: The Executive Board approved a change to the upper and lower limits of the CAR Fund, or Defence Fund. When the Fund falls below its lower limit, a special levy of $3 per week from each member is triggered, until it is filled to its upper level. Currently the lower and upper levels of the Fund are $14 and $15 million. The Board approved changing those amounts to $16 million and $25 million.

On Wednesday, May 5th, the Society’s Pensioners Chapter held its sixth Annual General Membership meeting, at St John’s Anglican Church in North York. Pictured at head table are George King, Peter Matthews, President Dave Jeffords, Bill Jones, and David Young.

The change in the CAR Fund arises out of a direction from the 2010 Society Council that the Executive Committee should consider ways of expanding the Fund. Council wanted the Fund to be sufficient to deal with a situation in which several large locals were experiencing labour disruptions at the same time. The Board decided the new upper and lower levels resolve that difficulty, and will recommend the changes to the 2011 Council.

The changes will not come into effect before Council approves them. Council’s approval will not trigger a special levy—the Fund is currently above $16 million.

Scholarship program: The Executive Board approved the recommendations of the Scholarship Selection Committee regarding the recipients of Society scholarships for the 2011-12 academic year (see article, below.)

Pension Risk Mitigation Sub-Committee: Pension fund deficits (on a wind-up basis) have increased significantly. Poor investment returns, low long-term interest rates, a history of several years of employer contribution holidays, and employers taking the option to fund without indexation have exacerbated the trend. The latter practice, done to save operating funds, is of particular concern in employers where there is a greater chance that the company may go out of business. If this were to happen then pension plan members would not get the full value of their pension – in some cases it might even be less than 60 per cent.

In January the Board struck a Pension Risk Mitigation Sub-Committee to steer these issues. In the June meeting the Board approved the Sub-Committee’s terms of reference. The PRMSC will, among other things:

Review /update of risk and exposure issues including legal, actuarial, and accounting opinions (with collection and professional examination of specific plan information as appropriate as well as determination of further research needs and professional expertise)
Review /update recommendations for bargaining improved pension security
Develop recommendations for Society representative education including advice for monitoring plan status
Encourage Society representatives from all Locals to support stronger bargaining objectives relating to pensions
Explore specific initiatives to prepare in advance for any potential windups, partial wind-ups, sales of all or part of the business, acquisition of new business, or any other business transition that affects the pension plan
Explore risks associated with defined contribution (DC) plans
Develop an action campaign including a coordinated lobby effort across Society locals, and with external parties who share our concerns, to raise awareness, build solidarity and support legislative action

The PRMSC is chaired by EVP Policy Leslie Forge and vice-chaired by Inergi Local VP Dianne Mowat.

Budget 2011-12: Reduced operating expenditures forecasted

At its August Board meeting, the Board will be presented with the 2010-2011 Audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended March 31st, 2011.

On a very rainy morning, Wednesday, June 22nd, a hardy group of Society members showed up at Dundas and Yonge to participate in a support rally for locked-out postal workers. Their Union, CUPW, was resisting the imposition of two-tier wasges and pensions for new hires. Sound familar?

Preliminary 2010-11 year-end results report operating expenditures of $9.3 million on revenues of $11.96 million (includes distributions from Bruce Power). The Board’s currently approved budget foresees expenditures of $8.8 million (a reduction of $0.5 million from last year’s actual expenditures), with revenues planned at $7.62 million (a $4.3 million reduction from last year’s revenue).

The good news to report on last year’s financial performance is that actual operating expenditures were seven per cent less than budgeted.

“Managing operating expenditures without compromising member services, as well as maximizing all sources of revenue, continues to be the finance department’s priority,” said EVP Finance Rob Stanley. “We are currently reviewing our entire investment strategy as one of the measures to address our predicted revenue shortfall for this current budget cycle.”

While Stanley is anxious to report to members on the full state of Society finances, the Society is receiving advice from its auditors on how to account for certain outstanding liabilities, and the Executive Committee’s decisions on the treatment of these liabilities are pending.

“The decisions on the treatment of these year-end accruals will have a material effect on the year-end financial results and these results will be communicated to the membership once finalized,” Stanley said.

Society: OPA not planning for economic recovery

The Ontario Power Authority’s draft Integrated Power Supply Plan (IPSP) will meet the needs of an economy that remains in the doldrums, says the Society. But the OPA and the government need to aim for the electricity needs of a recovered and growing economy.

“We need to be more ambitious,” said Society President Rod Sheppard. “The reductions in demand of the last three years are largely due to economic decline, and everybody hopes it’ll recover.”

“We need to plan for growth, even as we learn to use power more efficiently.”

The Society’s prescriptions for an improved IPSP can be found in its submission to the OPA of June 17th, 2011. The submission is the Society’s contribution to the current stage of the IPSP consultations. Members can find it on the Society’s web-site (documents arising out of policy).

The Society notes that there are risks in keeping to the Plan as it’s currently formulated, including:

Increases in demand resulting from economic improvement
Reductions in demand have masked much inefficient use, making future conservation targets vulnerable
As more non-hydro renewable capacity is added, sufficient capacity reserves have to be available
Completion of electricity projects is often slower than planned
The Ontario Energy Board is forcing Hydro One to downgrade much needed system-wide infrastructure renewal in order to favour new connections to renewable plant

Nuclear

While the Society agrees that nuclear capacity should remain at at least 50 per cent of supply, which the draft IPSP foresees will include 6,300MW at the Bruce and 3,700MW at Darlington, the submission notes that the IPSP is silent on Pickering. The Society says, “continued operations at Pickering are essential to allow proper coordination of nuclear refurbishment at Bruce and Darlington in a way that does not expose the Ontario electricity system to potential reliability risks with respect to baseload.”

The crucial role Pickering’s capacity could play in the schedule for new build and and refurbishment makes keeping it in operation “good value for money.”

Fossil

The Society notes that while the government’s goal of reducing the emissions of fossil stations is laudable, shutting down the coal-fired stations themselves, long before the end of their useful lives, would be wasteful. Lambton and Nanticoke GSs are valuable electricity infrastructure that could be—and should be—converted to burn natural gas.

Doing so would have the additional benefit of retaining the crucial niche Lambton and Nanticoke occupy in following demand. While the newer combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT) typically cannot run at lower than 60 per cent of capacity (330MW in a 550MW turbine), Lambton and Nanticoke’s Conventional Steam Turbines (CSTs) can run at seven per cent (38MW in a 550MW turbine).

At a moment where only 100 MW of additional electricity is required, it makes no sense to be generating 330 MW from a CCGT station when 100 MW could be dispatched by a CST station.

Transmission

The Society’s submission is critical of the OPA’s insistence that the matter of infrastructure renewal is “outside the IPSP.” In fact, the Society says, there is a pressing need for renewal of Ontario’s transmission infrastructure—it is a grave mistake to set it aside in the way the OPA and the provincial government have done.

Public comment and concern over predicted increases in the cost of electricity prices have infected the Ontario Energy Board. Out of concern for consumers pocketbooks, they have directed Hydro One to give higher priority to Green Energy Act-mandated connections to new renewable generation over the pressing need for renewal of the system as a whole.

The Board concludes that in light of the significant increased expenditures associated with the Green Energy Plan, there should be significant efforts to contain spending in other areas of the distribution business. The Board acknowledges that spending at the Minimum Level may not be appropriate over the longer term, but it is appropriate to consider limiting spending to this level during this period of accelerated Green Energy Plan expenditures.

The submission calls such reasoning “political,” and advocates for the OPA not to ignore the needs of the system as a whole while we engage in the project of cleaning our generating capacity.

Other recommendations

The Society also recommends:

The ban on OPG participation in the provision of non-hydro renewable generation is bad for consumers (as it misses an opportunity to build clean capacity without the need for FIT-style subsidies), and should be overturned.
Incentives included under the Feed-in-Tariff program are too rich, so politically unpopular that they endanger the move to green power in the eyes of the public. A Request-for-Proposals system would be more cost-efficient.
The OPA should be more ambitious in its pursuit of hydro and pumped-storage options.

The Society’s submission was prepared and drafted by Staff Officer Mike Belmore, as directed by Society President Rod Sheppard, with input from a large number of Society subject matter experts from the OPG, Hydro One, and other locals.It can be downloaded by Society members from the “internal policies” section of the Society web-site.

Arbitrator: Society POs not “staff”

The President of the Society is not an “employee” of the Society, an arbitrator has ruled.

The ruling by Arbitrator George Surdykowski settles a dispute between Bruce Power and the Society over who should pay for the release time involved when Bruce Power employees are elected Society principal officers. Currently both Society President Rod Sheppard and EVP Finance Rob Stanley are on full release from their Bruce Power positions.

The dispute culminated in a rare Employer grievance, with Bruce Power claiming reimbursement for the full terms of both Sheppard and Stanley. Since Sheppard has been a principal officer since 2002, a ruling in favour of the Employer would have made the Society liable for a reimbursement in the neighbourhood of $1.5 million.

Article 32 of the Collective Agreement with Bruce Power deals with what happens when the Society hires a Bruce Power employee as a Society employee. When that happens, Bruce Power places the employee on leave of absence, and the Society assumes the cost of that employee’s salary, pension contributions, benefits, etc. Article 33 deals with the “release of Society (elected) representatives,” who Bruce Power releases for their duties.

To make their case, Bruce Power argued that Article 33 applied only to local representatives, persons whose duties as representatives were limited to within Bruce Power. Employees elected to central Society positions, they argued, are “employees” of the Society, and the Society is responsible for their upkeep.

Arbitrator Surdykowski ruled that the meaning of Article 32 is clear and unambiguous, that it does not apply in any way to the elected positions of Society President, etc. He therefore denied Bruce Power any reimbursement of principal officer salaries.

First Society scholarships awarded

Thirty-one young students have been selec9ted to receive Society scholarships for the 2011-12 academic year.

“I was truly honoured and privileged to be the one to tell these students that the Society would be helping them with their studies,” said EVP Member Services Dennis Minello. “The Selection Committee worked very hard to come up with its recommendations—there were so many very fine applicants.”

The Society Educational Scholarship Program is an important part of the “Solidarity Project” approved by Society Council in 2009 (see Newscast 2010:02). It’s an element of the Society’s strategic plan designed to reach out to young people who may well be future Society members.

The winners are:

Society Future Leader Awards ($2,500):

Jacqueline Beaudry, York University
*Eleanor Campbell, Milliken Mills High School, Markham
Alexandra Finstad, St. Joan of Arc, Vaughan
Breanna Hall, R.S. McLaughlin Vocational Institute, Oshawa
Joshua Liu, University of Toronto
Lisa Jagan, McMaster University
Sarah Neil, University of British Columbia
Katrina Pullia, Uxbridge Secondary School
Beatrice Raczynska, Queen’s University
Lauren Sham, University of Western Ontario
Renee Sparkes, Université de Moncton
Samiya Tabassum, University of Toronto
Shannon Walters, Wilfrid Laurier University
Bingxi Wang, McMaster University
Amanda Wittmann, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Oakville

Society Performance Excellence Awards ($1,000)

Dilara Alpli, Nelson High School, Burlington
Caitlyn Buhay, Humberside Collegiate, Toronto
Heather Kokus, Holy Trinity, Simcoe
Devika Jain, The Woodlands School, Mississauga
Erinn Ipsen,University of New Brunswick
Jerome Liu, University of Toronto
Liliane Sparkes, Fanshawe College
Matthew Cheah, McMaster University
Grace Glofcheskie, University of Guelph
Allison Holla, University of Guelph
Merissa Elyse Michell, Wilfirid Laurier University
Emily Paolucci, Villanova College, King City
Courtney Price, Leaside High School, Toronto
Katlyn Schultz, Durham College
Nadia Shahjahan, RH King Academy, Scarborough
*Kelsey Stemmler, University of Waterloo

* Scholarships funded by the Pensioners Chapter for the children of their members

Applications were accepted through the Society web-site in January and February, and the Selection Committee met in March through May to assess the applications and make recommendations to the Society Executive Board, which accepted them in their June meeting.

“It was a rather long process, and I’m sorry the applicants had to wait so long to find out the results,” said Minello. “But it was our first time doing this. We wanted to make sure we were doing it right, that our processes were fair, and that we maintained the confidentiality of all the information that our applicants entrusted to us.”

The Committee’s most important decision, said Minello, was to remove names from all the applications, so they’d be judged entirely anonymously. “In fact,” Minello said, “it will only be by reading this Newscast that the Selection Committee members themselves will find out the names we’ve attached to the awards.”

The Selection Committee consisted of Minello, Kelly Brace (Electrical Safety Authority), Shirley Kung (OPG), Andrew Stock (New Horizon), and Elan Thomas (Kinectrics). Staff support was provided by Communications Officer Brian Robinson and Staff Officer Cheri Funston.

Nuclear industry social networking

Friends of the nuclear industry in Canada who are on Facebook or who are Tweeters have a number of new resources they can take advantage of for up-to-date news on the nuclear industry.

First and foremost is the “Talk Nuclear” Facebook page, published by the Canadian Nuclear Association. Launched just after the February, 2011 CNA conference and trade show, the CNA’s Facebook page is a good way to follow news in the nuclear industry. It was especially valuable during the events following the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, pointing its readers to the latest bulletins of, for instance, the Nuclear Energy Institute and TEPCO.

The Facebook page of the Canadian Nuclear Association is a great way to keep up with nuclear industry news world-wide.

You can find it by using the “search” window on the top of your own Facebook account, or by pointing your browser directly at TalkNuclear. Find the “like” button (sometimes down a ways on the left-hand side, sometimes at the top), click it, and then your news feed will update you every time the CNA posts something there.

Other Facebook nuclear sites: World Nuclear News; World Nuclear Association; International Atomic Energy Agency.

For those on Twitter, the CNA also has a Twitter feed one can follow, @TalkNuclear. Check out as well @NucNet, @WorldNuclear, @WomeninNuclear (US), Cheryl Cottrill of Women in Nuclear Canada, and @neiupdates. For a couple of environmentalists who support nuclear power, see @GeorgeMonbiot and @mark_lynas.

Finally, you can read the CNA weblog (blog).

Members can keep up with Society President Rod Sheppard by visiting his Facebook page.

Members who don’t have Facebook or Twitter accounts, but who want to get started, can find Sams Teach Yourself Facebook in 10 Minutes by Sherri Kinkopf Gunter and Twitter for Dummies. Whatever book you decide to use, check the year of publication. Two years is a very long time in the Twitterverse. A book published in 2009 is irretrievably old.

The Social Media Guide appears to be a good resource for how-tos on networking socially.

Understanding the North American Assault on Collective Bargaining

by Blaine Donais

Over the last few weeks, Canada has seen its first American style attack on free collective bargaining. The federal government’s legislation to send Canada Post employees back to work after a very short employer lockout is a clear sign of challenges to come. The federal government introduced legislation that forced an arbitrator to award wage settlements that were less than the employer was prepared to negotiate. What was really at stake, though, was the defined benefits pension plan for new employees. The employer wants a two-tier system and the federal government was prepared to force the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) to accept it.

In January, protestors agitating against Wisconsin governor Scott Walker’s anti-collective bargaining legislation occupied the State’s legislature building.

Tim Hudak, leader of Ontario’s Conservative Party, has made it clear that a Conservative government would put severe constraints on arbitrators’ powers in arbitration of collective agreements. These signals from both the federal government and the provincial opposition party may have significant consequences for all Society bargaining units—whether they be in strike/lock-out or mediation-arbitration paradigm.

Responding to this challenge, the Society of Energy Professionals co-sponsored a high-profile panel discussion on the matter on June 23rd, 2011. Other co-sponsors included the University of Toronto Centre for Industrial Relations and Human Resources, the Ryerson University Centre for Labour Management Relations, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3902, and the Workplace Fairness Institute.

The distinguished panel included Elaine Bernard (Executive Director, Labor and Worklife, Harvard Law School), Robert Hebdon (Professor, Faculty of Management, McGill University), Elizabeth Shilton (formerly of Cavalluzzo Hayes Shilton) and Sam Gindin (Packer Chair in Social Justice, York University). The panel was moderated by Rupa Banerjee (Associate Professor, Ryerson University).

As IFPTE members in New Jersey protested in June against a state bill reducing public employee pensions and other benefits, IFPTE international president Gregory Junemann found himself under arrest. Apparently the police officer was very nice. (It’s his pension, too.)

The panel began by addressing events taking place in the United States, with a special focus on the Wisconsin government’s attempt to legislate away collective bargaining. Ms. Bernard told the audience this was but one of 700 pieces of legislation being enacted all over the US that she was aware of. Fortunately, this most blatant attempt was recently struck down by Wisconsin courts as unconstitutional. But the most frightening pieces of legislation have been in place in the US for some time: the legislation generally referred as “Right to Work” laws. These laws effectively undermine unions’ ability to organize. And according to Ms. Bernard, the incidence of this legislation is rapidly increasing.

One of the concerns raised by the moderator was a growing sense among non-union employees that unionized employees are privileged and their entitlements should not be protected. This concern was echoed by Buzz Hargrove, who was in attendance at the forum. Sam Gindin responded to this concern by pointing out that polls suggest that the majority of employees even in the United States would become unionized if they could and they generally support unionization.

In general the panelists agreed that there is reason to be concerned about government attacks on free collective bargaining on both sides of the border. But they also agreed that we could build from the public outcry that the Wisconsin government created with its most blatant attack. Most believed that this was the wake up call that organized labour needs to move forward. Most also agreed that the first step in challenging these assaults is to get our own membership to understand that significance of union representation both for them and for the rest of society. The first step is awareness.

-end-