13&1/2% or 47%? Depends who you ask…

[The_Foxer]

I have dealt with CRA for the past 18 years or so through my work. In the last 2+ years, I have been unable to get the information I require for my job if I speak to anyone working from home because they cannot access the information I need. How is that being "efficient"

Saves them time anyway

It's fine if you don't meet people at the office or one can easily call for information and receive it in a timely fashion but in my case, my employer doesn't allow files to leave the office (which is perfectly understandable since there is confidential information involved) so I couldn't work from home.

Sure, and some people can't. Some jobs require a human presence. And there's an argument to be made for occasionally meeting with your people and your team etc. And as to the excuse from CRA - that's just them not giving a shit. It's pretty easy to set up some pretty damn secure access methods. They just didn't want to.

There are some people who just won't work well from home and you have to make sure they're accomodated as well. My old boss loved covid becuase everyone was out of the office and he had it all to himself, went in every day because he preferred it. And some people just don't have a remote environment suitable. If you've got kids running around all day or no space or whatever then sure, it doesn't work

But study after study has found that for the majority it's significantly more productive. As in a LOT more productive. And the computer tech is there in spades to make it as secure as it needs to be.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

I have dealt with CRA for the past 18 years or so through my work. In the last 2+ years, I have been unable to get the information I require for my job if I speak to anyone working from home because they cannot access the information I need. How is that being "efficient" after waiting on the phone for 45+ minutes to speak to someone? Oh, just wasted 45 mins. of my time & have to call back to speak to someone who is actually in the office & can give me what I need.

It's fine if you don't meet people at the office or one can easily call for information and receive it in a timely fashion but in my case, my employer doesn't allow files to leave the office (which is perfectly understandable since there is confidential information involved) so I couldn't work from home. It was a pain in the butt to have to call to either verify information or to get additional information & extremely time consuming.

Bottom line is that some people can work from home if it doesn't affect consumers/customers & are lucky. However, If it does affect consumers/customers then ..... bloody work from the office. Just my take.

Not an issue now as I've recently retired, Whew!!

It entirely depends on the job. I can get all the information and access I need through the laptop I use (company provided) and their VPN (running over my WifI network). When I go to work I take the same laptop in and plug in directly to their network. Before the pandemic I only had a desktop in a fixed office space. I could access it remotely but it was never as good as it had limits.

The can't access files excuse sounds like a cop out to me. Either that or they don't have the competence to do it.

 

[pgs]

I have dealt with CRA for the past 18 years or so through my work. In the last 2+ years, I have been unable to get the information I require for my job if I speak to anyone working from home because they cannot access the information I need. How is that being "efficient" after waiting on the phone for 45+ minutes to speak to someone? Oh, just wasted 45 mins. of my time & have to call back to speak to someone who is actually in the office & can give me what I need.

It's fine if you don't meet people at the office or one can easily call for information and receive it in a timely fashion but in my case, my employer doesn't allow files to leave the office (which is perfectly understandable since there is confidential information involved) so I couldn't work from home. It was a pain in the butt to have to call to either verify information or to get additional information & extremely time consuming.

Bottom line is that some people can work from home if it doesn't affect consumers/customers & are lucky. However, If it does affect consumers/customers then ..... bloody work from the office. Just my take.

Not an issue now as I've recently retired, Whew!!

Press one for service in French .

 

[Ron in Regina]

Well, here we are, and they’re on Strike. 155,000 of them. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who joined striking workers on the picket lines Wednesday morning on Parliament Hill, reiterated his stance that his party would play no part in supporting any potential back-to-work legislation.

There’s the Non-Coalition Coalition for you, but you know Jagmeet will slit the throat of his own political career to keep the Liberals in power until his golden parachute comes to fruition in 2025….& yet here’s the headline?:

Conservatives won't commit to working with Liberals on legislating end to strike — National Post

'Justin Trudeau has increased the public service budget by $21 billion ... and he still hasn't been able to solve this problem,' Conservative MP Stephanie Kusie said

apple.news

Canada’s largest federal public workers union walked off the job at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday as negotiations stalled.

The prime minister, meanwhile, wouldn’t comment on whether his government would legislate union members back to work.

“Canadians have a right and deserve to get the services that they need from the federal government,” Trudeau told reporters.

“That’s why we need both management and labour to get back to the bargaining table as soon as possible, and continue to make progress.”

Conservative MP Brad Vis told reporters that Canadians expect a certain level of service from the federal government and won’t tolerate prolonged disruptions.

As the Liberals’ minority government relies on a confidence-and-supply agreement with the NDP, introducing back-to-work legislation (which they won’t comment on) would put the government into the precarious position of relying on the Conservatives or Bloc Québécois for any such bill to pass.

Yet the headline in the above news story?

 

[petros]

Well, here we are, and they’re on Strike. 155,000 of them. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who joined striking workers on the picket lines Wednesday morning on Parliament Hill, reiterated his stance that his party would play no part in supporting any potential back-to-work legislation.

There’s the Non-Coalition Coalition for you, but you know Jagmeet will slit the throat of his own political career to keep the Liberals in power until his golden parachute comes to fruition in 2025….& yet here’s the headline?:

Conservatives won't commit to working with Liberals on legislating end to strike — National Post

'Justin Trudeau has increased the public service budget by $21 billion ... and he still hasn't been able to solve this problem,' Conservative MP Stephanie Kusie said

apple.news

Canada’s largest federal public workers union walked off the job at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday as negotiations stalled.

The prime minister, meanwhile, wouldn’t comment on whether his government would legislate union members back to work.

“Canadians have a right and deserve to get the services that they need from the federal government,” Trudeau told reporters.

“That’s why we need both management and labour to get back to the bargaining table as soon as possible, and continue to make progress.”

Conservative MP Brad Vis told reporters that Canadians expect a certain level of service from the federal government and won’t tolerate prolonged disruptions.

As the Liberals’ minority government relies on a confidence-and-supply agreement with the NDP, introducing back-to-work legislation (which they won’t comment on) would put the government into the precarious position of relying on the Conservatives or Bloc Québécois for any such bill to pass.

Yet the headline in the above news story?

If they get the "work from home" shit they want Im getting another Fed job and home will be the beach. Here and in PV.

 

[Taxslave2]

Someone will have to explain how border guards can work from home.

 

[Ron in Regina]

More than 155,000 federal public servants spent a second consecutive day on picket lines across the country Thursday as union leaders and government officials said they continued to hold discussions in an effort to reach an agreement and bring the strike to an end, etc…

The labour leader representing Canada Revenue Agency employees says comments from government department leaders to public servants about their right to keep working during a strike are at odds with Ottawa’s pledge to legislate a ban on replacement workers.

In a new era of hybrid work, an employee could potentially cross a picket line simply by logging in on their home computer, avoiding the cat calls from colleagues that could occur by physically passing through striking colleagues to head into an office.

Union leader accuses government of trying to undermine strike action — The Globe and Mail

Union leaders and government officials say they are continuing to hold discussions in an effort to reach an agreement and bring the strike to an end

apple.news

Marc Brière, who represents unionized workers at the Canada Revenue Agency as national president for the Union of Taxation Employees, said he’s concerned that government officials keep pointing out that workers can continue to receive their full pay if they refuse to join the picket line.

He says it goes against the spirit of the government’s pledge to adopt anti-scab legislation.

“I find this very aggravating coming from employers of the federal government who are looking at establishing anti-scab legislation,” he said. “I don’t think it’s cool. I don’t think it’s appropriate.”

 

[petros]

I can see that they have a crazy idea that AI cant do what they do. Name a CRA job AI cant do.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Someone will have to explain how border guards can work from home.

Well, first we'll have to get you to understand that not all Federal employees are border guards. . . nah, forget it.

 

[Serryah]

I always find it interesting that until there's a strike, people don't give a shit about those going out. Then when it happens, suddenly they care (or don't).

They've been trying to negotiate for 2 years.

Despite how some may think, NO worker wants to strike ever. We just don't. But we don't want to be basically told "Deal with it" when it comes to issues of employment and the other party won't listen.

And Joe Public who is always against a striking Government person has to realize that those same people pay taxes too, the same taxes that pay for their salary. So it's not just on you, dear Joe. It's them too.

Covid changed how we look at work as a society, Covid changed how employees think about their work. If working from home changes nothing to the production of the employee, and actually saves them money, then why the hell not be okay with it? If there's no losses, then why not benefit?

I also realize we, as employees, will never be valued by our employer. We can "always be replaced" somehow. So they will do their damnest to pay the littlest amount possible because anything else harms THEIR profits. Even Government. Inflation doesn't matter (1.80 for a can of fucking soup, for example), costs of living doesn't matter, so long as a body that's warm is in a seat or walking a floor, that's all that does matter. So expecting any insane raise is never, ever, going to happen. In the end, after this strike, the workers might - MIGHT - get something like 3% per annual, if they're lucky. Anything beyond is impossible and it wouldn't matter if ALL the budget went into Public Service coffers. There would always be an excuse. Likely it'll be 2.5% plus some kind of minimal bonus, or a one time larger bonus. And that won't change a damned thing because by the time they get their 'raise', it resolves nothing thanks to inflation/cost of living going up the entire time.

(In July, we get a 2% plus .25 raise after our last contract negotiation. Sounded okay at the time, now we're less than what we were before when it comes to wages, thanks to the usual. So we negotiated for 2 years, plus went out on strike, for SFA, so while I get why they're striking, it'll lead to nothing in the end.)

 

[55Mercury]

Good luck with that, Serryah.

as I said here: 911 revisited , way back when, TB's common practice is to just let the strike go on. For every week you're out you're giving up close to 2% pay, times say 4 weeks and you've already lost 7% pay so it seems quite futile:

"As much as we'd like to put up a common front, we know there is vocalized
dissension in the ranks. Not too few number those who think striking won't
amount to much more than 'our loss'. Some have made clear that they won't
endure a protracted strike and may be forced to 'cross the line', while
others think the government will legislate us back to work and are maybe
even 'crossing their fingers' that they do. Wouldn't that be just like the
government to NOT legislate us back to work so we'll self-destruct and be
further divided? Well, things don't look too hopeful and, against all
odds, we still feel like we've got to do something, even if it's just
a token sacrifice of pay for a lousy 'token' of a half-percent more respect
over what they're currently offering us. I can only cling to the delusory
prospect that in a flash of ingenuity, someone in Cabinet might determine
what a great boost to local economies throughout our beautiful country a
five percent public sector pay hike would prove to be. Imagine that! I'd
actually be able to 'afford' to order take-out every other week! oh yay."

"There are other issues, with me anyway, like the fact that the bargaining
process is in arrears. In other words, by the time we ratify a contract
it's close to expiring. This is stupid and wrong. It means that near the
end of a contract being ratified the amount of 'back pay' accumulated over a
year or two becomes a bribe, so much so that our underpaid, impoverished
membership, dollar signs lighting up in their eyes upon their determining
the actual figure, will invariably vote 'yes' and settle for less than they
should. Every other union strikes the day their contract expires, but not
us. I can only blame the PSAC for allowing things to slide this far out of
control, though I know it's us, the grass-roots that are too apathetic and
complacent to object strongly enough to shake up the union hierarchy.
Anyway, I want the union to get out of this bargaining in arrears nonsense,
put the offer to us for ratification, and get into advanced negotiations for
the next round so that we can be prepared to strike the day our
contract expires, like a real union, and put an end to the back-pay bribe."
_______________________

are they still doing the back-pay bribe?

when did your last contract expire?

 

[Serryah]

Good luck with that, Serryah.

as I said here: 911 revisited , way back when, TB's common practice is to just let the strike go on. For every week you're out you're giving up close to 2% pay, times say 4 weeks and you've already lost 7% pay so it seems quite futile:

"As much as we'd like to put up a common front, we know there is vocalized
dissension in the ranks. Not too few number those who think striking won't
amount to much more than 'our loss'. Some have made clear that they won't
endure a protracted strike and may be forced to 'cross the line', while
others think the government will legislate us back to work and are maybe
even 'crossing their fingers' that they do. Wouldn't that be just like the
government to NOT legislate us back to work so we'll self-destruct and be
further divided? Well, things don't look too hopeful and, against all
odds, we still feel like we've got to do something, even if it's just
a token sacrifice of pay for a lousy 'token' of a half-percent more respect
over what they're currently offering us. I can only cling to the delusory
prospect that in a flash of ingenuity, someone in Cabinet might determine
what a great boost to local economies throughout our beautiful country a
five percent public sector pay hike would prove to be. Imagine that! I'd
actually be able to 'afford' to order take-out every other week! oh yay."

"There are other issues, with me anyway, like the fact that the bargaining
process is in arrears. In other words, by the time we ratify a contract
it's close to expiring. This is stupid and wrong. It means that near the
end of a contract being ratified the amount of 'back pay' accumulated over a
year or two becomes a bribe, so much so that our underpaid, impoverished
membership, dollar signs lighting up in their eyes upon their determining
the actual figure, will invariably vote 'yes' and settle for less than they
should. Every other union strikes the day their contract expires, but not
us. I can only blame the PSAC for allowing things to slide this far out of
control, though I know it's us, the grass-roots that are too apathetic and
complacent to object strongly enough to shake up the union hierarchy.
Anyway, I want the union to get out of this bargaining in arrears nonsense,
put the offer to us for ratification, and get into advanced negotiations for
the next round so that we can be prepared to strike the day our
contract expires, like a real union, and put an end to the back-pay bribe."
_______________________

are they still doing the back-pay bribe?

when did your last contract expire?

We went out on Strike 2021 in late fall/early winter, so already people were not happy due to weather being colder during the strike.

We did get Retro, which of course has now dinged most of us this year for our taxes.

We weren't out that long, but by the end of everything, what we agreed to wasn't enough as it was, then a few months later, increases across the board for everything made it seem like we shouldn't have even bothered.

 

[Dixie Cup]

I think unions are a waste of time. Individuals need to approach their employer to ask for wage demands and if they're worth it, the employer will negotiate the amount of increase. However, unions decide what EVERYONE gets for a raise, whether they're worth it or not. That's what I have an issue with - many are deadbeats (as I just encountered earlier this week). God forbid they actually do their jobs. Now I want to emphasize, not everyone is like the one I met earlier; it's just that she wouldn't be eligible for any raise if she treats all people like she did me; in fact, I'd fire her! But hey, that's just me.

 

[pgs]

Well, here we are, and they’re on Strike. 155,000 of them. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who joined striking workers on the picket lines Wednesday morning on Parliament Hill, reiterated his stance that his party would play no part in supporting any potential back-to-work legislation.

There’s the Non-Coalition Coalition for you, but you know Jagmeet will slit the throat of his own political career to keep the Liberals in power until his golden parachute comes to fruition in 2025….& yet here’s the headline?:

Conservatives won't commit to working with Liberals on legislating end to strike — National Post

'Justin Trudeau has increased the public service budget by $21 billion ... and he still hasn't been able to solve this problem,' Conservative MP Stephanie Kusie said

apple.news

Canada’s largest federal public workers union walked off the job at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday as negotiations stalled.

The prime minister, meanwhile, wouldn’t comment on whether his government would legislate union members back to work.

“Canadians have a right and deserve to get the services that they need from the federal government,” Trudeau told reporters.

“That’s why we need both management and labour to get back to the bargaining table as soon as possible, and continue to make progress.”

Conservative MP Brad Vis told reporters that Canadians expect a certain level of service from the federal government and won’t tolerate prolonged disruptions.

As the Liberals’ minority government relies on a confidence-and-supply agreement with the NDP, introducing back-to-work legislation (which they won’t comment on) would put the government into the precarious position of relying on the Conservatives or Bloc Québécois for any such bill to pass.

Yet the headline in the above news story?

Negotiations stalled yet Trudeau claims they are making progress .
I also have to wonder just exactly what is this level of service MP Vis speaks of .

 

[55Mercury]

I think unions are a waste of time. Individuals need to approach their employer to ask for wage demands and if they're worth it, the employer will negotiate the amount of increase. However, unions decide what EVERYONE gets for a raise, whether they're worth it or not. That's what I have an issue with - many are deadbeats (as I just encountered earlier this week). God forbid they actually do their jobs. Now I want to emphasize, not everyone is like the one I met earlier; it's just that she wouldn't be eligible for any raise if she treats all people like she did me; in fact, I'd fire her! But hey, that's just me.

I'm chuckling here because for the most part I gotta agree with you. Sure I attended meetings and even was a steward for a number of years. Why? Because basically union dues are a form of tax and if you don't get involved in it then it's literally taxation without representation. And since our work unit didn't have a steward I threw my hat in the ring. My bid met opposition from the local of the day because I had attended some meetings in the past where I voiced a dismissal of another member's complaint and motion that we should dissociate ourselves from other unions like CUPE and CUPW because they had in their ranks card-carrying communists. because we worked for DND and well the cold war was still a thing back then. But I said look if the communists ever come to power here then it would be done democratically, and frankly I don't see having to join the communist party to get a job (as was believed was the case in the USSR) any different than having to join the union to get a job (which was a condition of the PSAC to be gubmint employed). Of course they looked at me all dumbfounded-like. And later opposed my becoming a steward, but since no one else in the work unit wanted it (ah the apathy) they really couldn't stop me.

So I guess my point is that even if someone is in a union, because it's a condition of employment, it doesn't always follow that they are staunchly pro-union.

Yeah, there were lots we'd happily let go if given our druthers.

 

[55Mercury]

Negotiations stalled yet Trudeau claims they are making progress .
I also have to wonder just exactly what is this level of service MP Vis speaks of .

Probably one of the most important services would be to make sure the Goose shits on schedule. If those cheques don't get out a bad situation just got worse.

 

[pgs]

I'm chuckling here because for the most part I gotta agree with you. Sure I attended meetings and even was a steward for a number of years. Why? Because basically union dues are a form of tax and if you don't get involved in it then it's literally taxation without representation. And since our work unit didn't have a steward I threw my hat in the ring. My bid met opposition from the local of the day because I had attended some meetings in the past where I voiced a dismissal of another member's complaint and motion that we should dissociate ourselves from other unions like CUPE and CUPW because they had in their ranks card-carrying communists. because we worked for DND and well the cold war was still a thing back then. But I said look if the communists ever come to power here then it would be done democratically, and frankly I don't see having to join the communist party to get a job (as was believed was the case in the USSR) any different than having to join the union to get a job (which was a condition of the PSAC to be gubmint employed). Of course they looked at me all dumbfounded-like. And later opposed my becoming a steward, but since no one else in the work unit wanted it (ah the apathy) they really couldn't stop me.

So I guess my point is that even if someone is in a union, because it's a condition of employment, it doesn't always follow that they are staunchly pro-union.

Yeah, there were lots we'd happily let go if given our druthers.

Yup back in the day we voted down the union reps suggestion ( order ) that our local donate x number of dollars to the communist party . Of course they just stacked the next meeting with drunken chugs and got the motion passed . And worse the union rep wrote off the pre meeting beers on his expenses .

 

[Taxslave2]

Well, first we'll have to get you to understand that not all Federal employees are border guards. . . nah, forget it.

The demand is for all their union employees. And they want it enshrined in law. So, presumably coast guard people as well.

 

[Taxslave2]

I can see that they have a crazy idea that AI cant do what they do. Name a CRA job AI cant do.

Give a refund.

 

[Taxslave2]

I always find it interesting that until there's a strike, people don't give a shit about those going out. Then when it happens, suddenly they care (or don't).

They've been trying to negotiate for 2 years.

Despite how some may think, NO worker wants to strike ever. We just don't. But we don't want to be basically told "Deal with it" when it comes to issues of employment and the other party won't listen.

And Joe Public who is always against a striking Government person has to realize that those same people pay taxes too, the same taxes that pay for their salary. So it's not just on you, dear Joe. It's them too.

Covid changed how we look at work as a society, Covid changed how employees think about their work. If working from home changes nothing to the production of the employee, and actually saves them money, then why the hell not be okay with it? If there's no losses, then why not benefit?

I also realize we, as employees, will never be valued by our employer. We can "always be replaced" somehow. So they will do their damnest to pay the littlest amount possible because anything else harms THEIR profits. Even Government. Inflation doesn't matter (1.80 for a can of fucking soup, for example), costs of living doesn't matter, so long as a body that's warm is in a seat or walking a floor, that's all that does matter. So expecting any insane raise is never, ever, going to happen. In the end, after this strike, the workers might - MIGHT - get something like 3% per annual, if they're lucky. Anything beyond is impossible and it wouldn't matter if ALL the budget went into Public Service coffers. There would always be an excuse. Likely it'll be 2.5% plus some kind of minimal bonus, or a one time larger bonus. And that won't change a damned thing because by the time they get their 'raise', it resolves nothing thanks to inflation/cost of living going up the entire time.

(In July, we get a 2% plus .25 raise after our last contract negotiation. Sounded okay at the time, now we're less than what we were before when it comes to wages, thanks to the usual. So we negotiated for 2 years, plus went out on strike, for SFA, so while I get why they're striking, it'll lead to nothing in the end.)

Until services can be obtained elsewhere, no government employee should be allowed to strike. They are either essential workers,or redundant. The sad fact that gov employees already make 10% more than equivalent private sector workers makes it worse.