Call-back and Standby
June 22, 2004
We came to the bargaining table this time looking for reasonable improvements that recognize the need to balance work and family life. We expected employer to recognize the importance of discussing such issues, given the finding of some of their own studies. Sadly, this was not the case.
What we received from the Employer was a request to amend the collective agreement to provide for less pay under the call-back and standby provisions. Their proposals provided for less pay if more than one call-back occurs in an eight hour period, and where work is carried out at home via telephone or computer connection, for lower minimum call-back pay (one hour rather than three hours) and lower minimum standby pay (one hour rather than four hours).
The reduced minimums are just the beginning. Not only is the Employer seeking to reduce call-back compensation, it wants to reduce the minimum payments if more than one call is received. Under the Employer’s proposal, if you respond to a second call at home within an eight hour period and return to your workplace, you will get paid for the time worked and not the current 3 hour minimum. If you respond to a second call at home and do not return to your workplace, you will get paid for the time of the call instead of the current three hour minimum.
Now we know the employer would like to cut costs, however the point of premiums is first to encourage good planning on the part of managers, and second to sufficiently reward employees where they are required to respond. Cutting the minimum payments will mean increased use of callbacks and standby. In addition, for many of us the work does not stop when the phone is disconnected - we continue to think about the problem after the fact.
This is not a new issue for the Treasury Board. Several cases since the mid-1980s have dealt with the situation. In 1991 two decisions — Redden and Burridge — established that answering a cellphone and solving problems from home via a computer connection qualified as call-backs and should be paid at call-back rates. The adjudicator in the latter case said, "when the grievor responded to a telephone call from his shift supervisor advising of a problem with the system and the grievor then effected repairs to the system by logging-in to the computer supplied to him at home by the employer, he was required to work and should be paid accordingly." Now our employer wants to revisit these decisions and reduce the cost of standby and callbacks just because the technology exists to allow us to work from home.
This issue is not only about the actual time involved, it is also about the fact of being called, it is about reducing the disruption this causes in peoples lives, and about creating a disincentive to management for making less than necessary calls. In short, a question of work - life balance. Treasury Board has brought this issue to arbitration and we will respond in our members’ interests. Finally, we do not think this reflects well on our employer's campaign to create a workplace of choice.
June 22, 2004
We came to the bargaining table this time looking for reasonable improvements that recognize the need to balance work and family life. We expected employer to recognize the importance of discussing such issues, given the finding of some of their own studies. Sadly, this was not the case.
What we received from the Employer was a request to amend the collective agreement to provide for less pay under the call-back and standby provisions. Their proposals provided for less pay if more than one call-back occurs in an eight hour period, and where work is carried out at home via telephone or computer connection, for lower minimum call-back pay (one hour rather than three hours) and lower minimum standby pay (one hour rather than four hours).
The reduced minimums are just the beginning. Not only is the Employer seeking to reduce call-back compensation, it wants to reduce the minimum payments if more than one call is received. Under the Employer’s proposal, if you respond to a second call at home within an eight hour period and return to your workplace, you will get paid for the time worked and not the current 3 hour minimum. If you respond to a second call at home and do not return to your workplace, you will get paid for the time of the call instead of the current three hour minimum.
Now we know the employer would like to cut costs, however the point of premiums is first to encourage good planning on the part of managers, and second to sufficiently reward employees where they are required to respond. Cutting the minimum payments will mean increased use of callbacks and standby. In addition, for many of us the work does not stop when the phone is disconnected - we continue to think about the problem after the fact.
This is not a new issue for the Treasury Board. Several cases since the mid-1980s have dealt with the situation. In 1991 two decisions — Redden and Burridge — established that answering a cellphone and solving problems from home via a computer connection qualified as call-backs and should be paid at call-back rates. The adjudicator in the latter case said, "when the grievor responded to a telephone call from his shift supervisor advising of a problem with the system and the grievor then effected repairs to the system by logging-in to the computer supplied to him at home by the employer, he was required to work and should be paid accordingly." Now our employer wants to revisit these decisions and reduce the cost of standby and callbacks just because the technology exists to allow us to work from home.
This issue is not only about the actual time involved, it is also about the fact of being called, it is about reducing the disruption this causes in peoples lives, and about creating a disincentive to management for making less than necessary calls. In short, a question of work - life balance. Treasury Board has brought this issue to arbitration and we will respond in our members’ interests. Finally, we do not think this reflects well on our employer's campaign to create a workplace of choice.