Re: What's up with all the strikes lately?Jun 30th, 2011
You can answer the questions or not... It's your choice.
When you learn why there are tiered services your own questions will be answered all in one big pile.
Yeah... Good one.
Ya really got me there; using a bankrupt nation that espouses the same principles that you support is proof-positive that privatizing CanPost will fail
What failed was your argument that we need to privatize mail because a country in austerity mode hasn't yet.
By comparison, countries like France and Japan are moving away from mail privatization and their citizens widely support these moves.
I'm not sure how 'broken' it is.
Canada Post turns a profit, unlike other national post offices. Mail delivery is regular and decent. Yes, the workers are unionized. Big deal.
In this recent case, when contract negotiations broke down, the union started rotating strikes, which meant that different areas of the country were without mail service for 1 day at a time. (Oddly enough, the whole country is without mail service today, is this a crisis?). In response, management locked out the workers across the country, bringing delivery to a complete halt, which of course was then termed a major crisis (by all of those who also claim that mail service is an anachronism and no longer needed), prompting the government to rush to legislate them back to work.
Are you sure that the above chain of events shows that the post office, as a crown corporation, is 'broken'? In my view, what's broken is the managers who made the hasty decision to lock out the workers. I'm quite sure this was done simply to ensure the back to work legislation got done before Parliament went on summer recess.
Perhaps the mail should be returned to the status of being an "essential service", or put in other terms "the mail must get through".
In terms of the union presence, the problem that I have is that one group has the ability to halt the operations at their discretion AND are protected by law to (unduly) prolong a disruption... This entire issue would not exist if that legislation was altered/repealed.
Belonging to a union is an individual decision; personally, I see more downside to the membership than benefit, but that is a personal opinion. That said, organized labor is not a bad thing, but it's ability to hold ransom the entire society is a big problem.
Caveat: the difference between a strike and lockout makes no difference to the consuming public at large.
Yup... Locked 'em out for no reason whatsoever, just a decision made right out of the blue.
If you paid any attention whatsoever, during the rotating strikes, the mail was still being processed and delivered. The actual impact on Canadians was minute - less, in fact, than today has.
I understand that you are looking for any excuse to blame the union, so feel free to do so. It doesn't change the facts, however, that the rotating strikes gave a one-day delay to mail service in various parts of the country, and at no time did mail service actually stop completely.
not surprising when they charge $20 to send a parcel the size of my thumb! I rather think they make more out of junk mail and ads than they do from parcels. I used to think greyhound was better for parcels (until my son's cell phone got lost)
Spare me please...
The union applied their form of pressure and the management reacted with their form of pressure... You don't like the fact that mgmt had the ability and used it.
What I don't understand is this mentality that you are applying that somehow the union's tactics are somehow without impact on society. All of the excuses in the world don't change the fact that the union took actions to disrupt service that would impact the end user all in an effort to apply pressure to management. Further, there were rumblings that the union was planning on an all out strike because their rotating-strike ploy was having such a minor effect... They ended up getting locked-out before they could effectively strike and shut down the system.
Now, with all this in mind, all the union succeeded in doing was proving that the mail service could potentially be offered on a more limited basis and/or that their service is no where near as important as they believe it to be.
Now you're blaming the union for what they planned to do, but were beaten to the punch by management.
Let's recap: the rotating strikes had minimal effect on Canadians, so the post office had to lock them out.
The rotating strikes had minimal effect on Canadians, so they planned to escalate it to a full strike, so the post office locked them out.
The post office is an anachronistic system that nobody uses, so they had to be legislated back to work.
The post office is an anachronistic system that nobody uses, but must be privatized so we guarantee an efficient system.
Sounds good to me.