Source

Election Results: Convention 2017

Results for UTE National President and Vice-Presidents are as follows:

National President:
Marc Brière

First National Vice-President:
Doug Gaetz

Second National Vice-President:
Adam Jackson

Results for UTE Regional Vice-Presidents and Alternate Regional Vice-Presidents are as follows:

Atlantic Region:
Regional Vice-President: Doug Gaetz
Alternate Regional Vice-president: Brian Oldford
Second Alternate Regional Vice-president: Michelle Neill

Quebec Region:
Regional Vice-President: Jérôme Martel
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Josée Verret

Montreal Region:
Regional Vice-President: Daniel Camara
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Eddy Aristil
Second Alternate Regional Vice-President: Annick Lamoureux

National Capital Region:
Regional Vice-President: Linda Koenders
Alternate Regional Vice-President: David Lanthier

Prairie Region:
Regional Vice-President: Gary Esslinger
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Jeff Sexton

Rocky Mountains Region:
Regional Vice-President: Greg Krokosh
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Chris Beaton

Pacific Region:
Regional Vice-President: Kimberley Koch
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Terry Ruyter

Northern and Eastern Ontario Region:
Regional Vice-President: Cosimo Crupi
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Chris Foucault

Greater Toronto Region:
Regional Vice-President: Ken Bye
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Selby Hewitt

Southwestern Ontario Region:
Regional Vice-President: Jamie vanSydenborgh
Alternate Regional Vice-President: Jennifer MacPherson

Other highlights:

On the final day of convention there were 166 delegates, 25 guests, 2 honorary members, 15 life members and 122 observers for a total of 330 participants. The Finance Resolutions Committee was called up on the referral of resolution 1. The committee accepted the recommendation of changing the dues increase to 0.75 in each of 2018, 2019 and 2020. The resolution was carried.

The By-Laws Resolutions Committee was called up to deal with its non-concurrence resolutions. All of the non-concurrence recommendations were carried.

The Bargaining Resolutions Committee was called up to deal with its non-concurrence resolutions. All of the non-concurrence recommendations were carried.

Two late resolutions were not accepted.

The General Resolutions Committee was called up to deal with its non-concurrence resolutions. Resolution 302’s recommendation of non-concurrence was carried. Resolution 303’s recommendation of non-concurrence was rejected. A move for concurrence was carried and the resolution was accepted. This resolution creates and makes available an awareness and reference guide on compassion fatigue.

Union of Taxation Employees Local 00013 Annual General Meeting

See Below Document for Details

The updated FAQ can be viewed here

Source

Source, French

PSAC legal challenge against Conservative wage rollbacks ends

The Supreme Court of Canada has decided not to hear PSAC’s legal challenge to the previous Conservative government’s budget bill that rolled back negotiated wage increases for federal public service workers.

The union argued that the legislation violated the Charter rights of PSAC members under section 2(d) “freedom of association”.

“We are surprised the Supreme Court has chosen not to hear our case as it is in direct contradiction to a recent ruling on collective bargaining rights,” said PSAC National President Robyn Benson. “Bill C-10 significantly restricted our members’ bargaining rights. Yet, in November 2016, the Court ruled against the British Columbia government for restricting the bargaining rights of provincial teachers.”

The BC government had removed negotiated clauses from the teachers’ collective agreement and passed a law prohibiting the B.C. Teachers’ Federation from negotiating them. The Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that the government’s legislation was unconstitutional because it violated the Charter’s “freedom of association” clause.

PSAC’s legal battle started in 2009

PSAC filed an appeal in the Ontario Superior Court in 2009 after Bill C-10, the Conservatives Expenditure Restraint Act, had been passed. The Act set a maximum for pay increases for four years between 2006 and 2011 and rolled-back any negotiated increases that exceeded the maximum.

The Act affected thousands of PSAC members in several bargaining units, including the Canada Revenue Agency.

In 2014, the Ontario Superior Court ruled the legislation did not breach the Charter. In 2016, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the Superior Court decision. PSAC then applied for leave to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

Fin de la contestation judiciaire de l’AFPC concernant la réduction des salaires

La Cour suprême du Canada a décidé de ne pas entendre la contestation judiciaire de l’AFPC concernant l’ancienne loi d’exécution du budget des conservateurs (loi C-10), qui imposait une réduction des salaires déjà négociés pour les fonctionnaires fédéraux.

Selon le syndicat, la loi violait les droits énoncés au paragraphe 2 d) de la Charte (« liberté d’association »).

« Nous sommes surpris de la décision de la Cour suprême, car elle contredit un jugement récent concernant le droit de négocier collectivement », affirme Robyn Benson, présidente nationale de l’AFPC. « La loi C-10 restreignait grandement les droits de nos membres. Pourtant, en novembre 2016, la Cour a rendu une décision défavorable au gouvernement de Colombie-Britannique pour avoir restreint les droits de négociation des enseignants de la province. »

Le gouvernement de la C.-B. avait supprimé des clauses négociées de la convention collective des enseignants et adopté une loi empêchant toute négociation ultérieure sur certains points par la BC Teachers’ Federation. La Cour suprême a confirmé le jugement d’un tribunal inférieur, qui a conclu à l’inconstitutionnalité de la mesure législative au motif qu’elle violait la liberté d’association garantie par la Charte.

La bataille juridique de l’AFPC commence en 2009

En 2009, l’AFPC avait interjeté appel auprès de la Cour supérieure de l’Ontario après l’adoption de la loi C-10 par les conservateurs (Loi sur le contrôle des dépenses). La loi imposait des augmentations salariales maximum pendant quatre ans entre 2006 et 2011 et réduisait toute augmentation négociée au-delà de celles-ci.

La loi a eu un impact direct sur des milliers de membres, y compris ceux travaillant à l’Agence du revenu du Canada.

En 2014, la Cour supérieure de l’Ontario a statué que la loi ne violait pas la Charte. En 2016, la Cour d’appel de l’Ontario a confirmé cette décision. L’AFPC a ensuite déposé une requête en autorisation d’appel devant la Cour suprême du Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada has decided not to hear PSAC’s legal challenge to the previous Conservative government’s budget bill that rolled back negotiated wage increases for federal public service workers.

The union argued that the legislation violated the Charter rights of PSAC members under section 2(d) “freedom of association”.

“We are surprised the Supreme Court has chosen not to hear our case as it is in direct contradiction to a recent ruling on collective bargaining rights,” said PSAC National President Robyn Benson. “Bill C-10 significantly restricted our members’ bargaining rights. Yet, in November 2016, the Court ruled against the British Columbia government for restricting the bargaining rights of provincial teachers.” The BC government had removed negotiated clauses from the teachers’ collective agreement and passed a law prohibiting the B.C. Teachers’ Federation from negotiating them. The Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that the government’s legislation was unconstitutional because it violated the Charter’s “freedom of association” clause.

PSAC’s legal battle started in 2009

PSAC filed an appeal in the Ontario Superior Court in 2009 after Bill C-10, the Conservatives Expenditure Restraint Act, had been passed. The Act set a maximum for pay increases for four years between 2006 and 2011 and rolled-back any negotiated increases that exceeded the maximum. The Act affected thousands of PSAC members in several bargaining units, including the Canada Revenue Agency.

In 2014, the Ontario Superior Court ruled the legislation did not breach the Charter. In 2016, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the Superior Court decision. PSAC then applied for leave to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

Link

Source

Alert: Collection agency calls on Phoenix payments not legitimate

Source