CPR Strike Issues

May 29, 2007

Brothers and Sisters:


Last Friday, May 25th, Fred Green, President and CEO of CP Rail, sent out a letter addressed to his "engineering service managers, supervisors and replacement management employees." This was posted on the CPR.ca website.

The letter is an attempt to boost the obviously seriously sagging morale of these replacement workers and perhaps still the increasing complaints from customers and questions from shareholders. As President and CEO of CPRail, that is Mr. Green's job, just as protecting tracks for the safe passage of trains, is ours.

It is never my intention to deflect attention away from the real issues, so normally I wouldn't respond to such a letter. But, in this case, for the sake of accuracy I believe that some of the statements made, demand comment.

Mr. Green talks about what he calls the company's "metrics". By this he means the company's operating numbers. He talks about volumes, fluidity and slow orders. Basically, he says that everything is working at peak efficiency (if not better).

Fred Green is entitled to his opinions, but anyone directly involved with operations on the ground knows that the reality is very different. You don't have to be an investigative journalist to see what's going on. All you have to do is visit a yard these days to see the delays, backlogs and congestion. Members of both the running trades and the RTC repeatedly tell us that significant train delays exist everywhere. In addition, the existence of delays, backlogs and innumerable slow orders has been repeatedly corroborated by on-site managers (who, for obvious reasons, wish to remain nameless) and by the GBOs.

It is understandable that CPRail would tell their replacement workers, customers and shareholders that everything is going great, but I would remind everyone to keep CPRail's agenda in mind.

Mr. Green talks about the "illegal" activities of picketers. Remember, you have a legal right to picket at both CP properties and at secondary properties. This right has been confirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada.

Mr. Green may believe that the right to picket amounts to nothing more than the right to hold up a placard and to nod politely when someone crosses the picket line. But that's not what the law says. What's going on now is a legal strike and legal picketing. It's not just informational picketing. We have a right to talk to people who wish to cross our lines and to persuade them (legally) not to cross. Furthermore, they have a right to stop and talk to us. The injunction that was issued in Vancouver last week happened not because of any illegal activity on the part of the picketers, but because so many people who didn't want to cross our line stopped to talk to us. Obviously, this created a massive backlog and many problems for CPRail. But that is what happens during a strike, the employer is disrupted.

Mr. Green says that he has heard of "instances of vandalism and other destruction of (our) property." Yes, allegations have been made. But remember, allegations are just that, allegations. They're not proof. I haven't heard of any genuine instances of vandalism and, as far as I know, no one has been charged with any property related offense since the strike started. I don't know of a single criminal charge against a picketer since the strike began. In truth, CPRail supervisor Libbey has told me (and corroborated it in an affidavit) that an instance of vandalism where he suspected picketer involvement, has been investigated and found to have no involvement of picketers.

One comment from Mr. Green's letter that especially bothers me is when he writes:

"The media and general public continue to have selective interest in our situation, driven mostly by the union leader's inflammatory comments about dangerous goods, potential derailments and unqualified employees. These comments are not supported by fact and have been easily abated."

This comment implies that an expression of concern about dangerous goods, potential derailments and unqualified employees performing our work, is wrong.

In spite of Mr. Green's statements, the truth is that the state of the track worries us all. Every maintenance of way employee knows what I'm talking about. None of us wants to see another derailment. Aside from the danger to life and limb, CP Rail carries many dangerous commodities that, if spilled, would cause serious harm. We and our predecessors have been maintaining the company's tracks for more than a century. No one can do it better than us. The current replacement workers, most of whom are office employees, simply do not posses our levels of ability and experience. Hence, our perfectly legitimate and realistic concern for track safety.

Mr. Green also talks about negotiations and how, in effect, the Union is being unreasonable by asking for a 13% wage increase over three years. Mr. Green in effect dismisses our concerns by saying "we will not break the pattern of settlements."

But what Mr. Green fails, or refuses, to acknowledge is that we are the lowest paid unionized employees in the railway. What the company is saying is that if any employee gets a 3% annual increase, then so must every other employee. But if one employee makes $40,000 a year and another makes $80,000 (and they each get a 3% raise) the first employee will get a $1200 raise while the second employee will get a $2400 raise. What kind of equal treatment is that? How is that fair? You can see how, over time, the difference in earnings between the two employees will grow and only get more pronounced. Our position is that the time has come for this kind of earnings drift to stop and for us, all of us, every CP employee, to be treated equally and with the respect we deserve.

Although Mr. Green doesn't mention it, the bargaining issues between the parties involve more than just the "pattern". There are benefit issues, work rule issues, expense issues, seniority issues, heath and safety issues, clothing allowance issues, etc. Some of these issues cut deep and could have a tremendous impact on many of us (for example, a significant expansion of seniority territories for many TP&E employees).

Finally, Mr. Green says "we remain open to any opportunity to engage in meaningful talks with the Teamsters-MWED should such an opportunity present itself."

The Union has already revised its position and made two offers to the company, which have not been responded to with a counter. The company's last offer was made on March 23rd and that continues to be their final position. That is unfortunate because the simple truth is that if the company had responded to the Union's last offer (dated May 8th), we would possibly not be on strike today. By twice refusing to revise their March 23rd position, they left us no choice.

Being careful not to take Mr. Green out of context, I will add that if he is serious when he says "we remain open to any opportunity to engage in meaningful talks" all he has to do is direct his negotiators to counter our May 8th offer. That, in our view, will permit the dialogue to start moving forward again. To avoid any confusion, I will send a message to that effect to the company.

Stay safe, stay strong, stay united,

Bill Brehl
President
TCRC MWED