I respectfully reject that premise. Both of these corporations have record profits from Precision Scheduled Railroading, a system invented by bean counters that are cutting safety and maintenance to the bone. If they can have record profits, they can pay their guys better.
Are pilots walking miles cranking handbrakes on 300 railcars in -25°C? Comparing the two jobs is disingenuous
I don’t get the sense that was the precise issue.
That is correct from what I know, in order to comply with federal regulation. Talking to some buddies at the railroad the biggest issue is less the deadhead and more the home rest. Also the fact that the railroad is trying to get them hourly like the Americans, not by the mile, it'd be a big pay cut to real wages for running trades.
On the glass-is-half-full side, though, there's always going to be those who will forgive even your worst transgressions - black face, serial adultery, firing & demoting strong female colleagues, multiple failed businesses - and see you as doing no wrong, too. Two sides, same coin
Why would the companies want to pay by the hour? It seems to me that paying by the mile is better for the company. Genuine question.
Say a guy gets his work done in 8 hours and the mileage pay is 400 bucks. Now he goes home because his job is done for the day. If the railroad converts to hourly they'll set the hourly rate to 40 an hour so it'll take the same guys 10 hours to make the same amount of money. Therein lies the issue, the railroad is trying to essentially sneak in a pay cut to the collective while undoing a lot of the previous bargaining work done over the past 100 years. Wall St and American execs are just doing what they do to every Canadian (and American) company they get their hands on, squeeze out all the juice, wait for a bailout and move to the next industry to fuck over.
But he won’t be home: he will be in a bunkhouse 400 miles from home. Getting paid hourly, because he is away from home.
You are incorrect. A lot of time they're at home waiting for a call. You are not paid being on call. That said, they could be waiting in a hotel for a call to head back home.
Clearly more people’s lives depend critically on rail workers than pilots.
Nice strawman lol. Also, rail workers do seem to be more critical to the economy than pilots, as evidenced by the government basically denying them their right to strike twice in the past 15 years haha. Airline employees were not denied the same right.
Status quo. That's what the union and workers want. Status quo.
Fair enough, well put.
Do you think the SCC is going to strike down existing Canadian Federal Law? Nope.
I spent a fair amount of time - measured in periods of weeks over three decades - operating out of field locations in a variety of not-always-nice weather conditions including such temperatures, living in floorless accommodations with walls that flapped around, often packing up and moving once or twice daily in weather warm or cold, wet or dry.
My understanding is the minister has ordered it referred to the IRB along with recommendations, but the IRB will decide and act independently. Up til now it was the employers locking the employees out; there was no strike. Likely this is the union serving notice of strike to preserve some of its rights as the matter goes forward through the board and potentially faces some fast subsequent court action. Likely the board will order them back, and the unions will seek judicial review of the decision. In order to avail themselves of Charter protections for collective bargaining, they need the administrative decision to actually step on that. An employer lockout being ended doesn’t give the union an administrative decision they can seek review on under Charter protection grounds. If they serve notice to strike and the board orders something that forces them back to work in that light, they have a charter argument on judicial review and appeal.
Dropping the loaded gun on the table.in front of the employer and the government, "I wish you would".
