APSFA Declares Open Season on Other Federal Public Service Unions
February 6, 2003 In a presentation and submission made to Treasury Board on December 17, 2002, the Association of Public Service Financial Administrators stated unequivocally that it intends to strive for an incorporation of ES, AS, CR and even EX positions into the FI Group. Such a move could effect up to 1,000 ES positions.
“Not only has APSFA violated the NJC Code of Conduct, they have also demonstrated unmitigated arrogance,” said President Bill Krause.
Immediately upon learning of APSFA’s actions, President Bill Krause contacted Merdon Hosking, President of APSFA, and advised him that;
If you recall, it was not too long ago that you wrote to me and suggested that our two unions affiliate. For our part, we extended to you an invitation to sit with us and create a new federal public service union representing our combined professional memberships. While our two organizations were unable to act upon these matters, we left our discussions with a sense of respect and friendship. It is within this amicable context that (the Association) is both shocked and dismayed by recent actions of APSFA – actions which can only be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to raid our organization.
It has been brought to our attention that you have authorized the preparation and public presentation of documents inimical to the interests of our ES members. We refer you to documents entitled Classification Reform for the Financial Management (FI) Group, and Classification Reform for the Financial Management (FI) Group in the Public Service of Canada. These documents, a report and a slide show, have been circulated to stakeholders and presented to Treasury Board officials, and are currently posted on APSFA’s website.
Both papers are direct assaults on the integrity of the ES group. Both papers argue that some work of the ES community should be transferred to the FI community based upon your perception of what constitutes Financial Management. Your paper, as prepared by professor Paquette, singles out that …”there are up to a thousand economists working in these capacities” and it further has recommended that they should be part of a universal financial management category, “whether classified as EX, FI, AS, ES, CR, or in other groups…” Both papers urge Treasury Board to give the highest priority to initiating classification reform with a review of the FI standard that would ensure the inclusion of many hundreds of ES positions, as well as CR and AS positions, within the FI group.
We could easily make the case in our own classification reform exercise that much of the work of the FI community would be more appropriate if classified within the ES group. Naturally, we appreciate the sensitivity of this matter and would never seek to damage our relationship in proposing that hundreds of FI’s be reclassified to the ES group. Think of the chaos that would ensue if all bargaining agents acted in such a manner…
It is our position that APSFA’s actions are hostile and a violation of the language and intent of the National Joint Council Bargaining Agents Code of Conduct.
It is our position that APSFA’s actions are hostile and a violation of the language and intent of the National Joint Council Bargaining Agents Code of Conduct. We of course hope that it is still possible to undo this damage and reestablish our respectful and collaborative relationship. Towards this objective we are requesting that:
1. You recognize that your actions were inappropriate and inimical to the interest of the ES group and to the group’s bargaining agent,;
2. You apologize for your actions;
3. You withdraw the documents identified above from your website;
4. You send a letter to the stakeholders who received the documents, requesting their return and disavowing any recommendation that would redefine the financial management category so as to transfer members of the ES community into the FI classification; and
5. You commit your organization to an approach to classification reform that does not attack other occupational groups, including the groups represented by our Association.
If you fail to take such actions we will be forced to file a code of conduct complaint against you, with the intent of having full disciplinary measures applied against APSFA.
Association Files Complaint
Upon receiving Krause’s letter, Hosking indicated that APSFA had no intention of altering its course of action. We then filed a Code of Conduct complaint with the NJC, alleging that APSFA violated two sections of the Code of Conduct:
“No Bargaining agent shall approach any employer who is a member of the NJC with the purpose of having the employer make a determination as to whether an employee or class of employees is or is not appropriately included in a bargaining unit previously determined by the PSSRB.”
And;
Should a bargaining agent feel that a number of positions have been improperly classified, it shall notify the certified bargaining agent and provide any available and appropriate documentation in writing.”
“Given the potential of a three year suspension from the National Joint Council, we’re hoping APSFA reconsiders it’s position,” said President Bill Krause.
PSAC’s Reaction
After having been advised by SSEA of APSFA’s actions, Nicole Turmel, President of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, wrote the following to Merdon Hosking:
“It is particularly disturbing to see that you are so open about your intentions, but you are ready to offer advice on how the PSAC might assist you in your endeavour…”
“Should you not immediately drop this current campaign, I will have no choice but to consider this as an attempt to raid our members and would have to take the appropriate action.”
Treasury Board’s Response
Claude Danik, Director of Professional Services has contacted Treasury Board officials, and has been advised that the employer intends to fully respect current bargaining agent affiliations in the process of classification harmonization. Consequently APSFA’s actions will be futile and will have no impact on bargaining agent structure.
February 6, 2003 In a presentation and submission made to Treasury Board on December 17, 2002, the Association of Public Service Financial Administrators stated unequivocally that it intends to strive for an incorporation of ES, AS, CR and even EX positions into the FI Group. Such a move could effect up to 1,000 ES positions.
“Not only has APSFA violated the NJC Code of Conduct, they have also demonstrated unmitigated arrogance,” said President Bill Krause.
Immediately upon learning of APSFA’s actions, President Bill Krause contacted Merdon Hosking, President of APSFA, and advised him that;
If you recall, it was not too long ago that you wrote to me and suggested that our two unions affiliate. For our part, we extended to you an invitation to sit with us and create a new federal public service union representing our combined professional memberships. While our two organizations were unable to act upon these matters, we left our discussions with a sense of respect and friendship. It is within this amicable context that (the Association) is both shocked and dismayed by recent actions of APSFA – actions which can only be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to raid our organization.
It has been brought to our attention that you have authorized the preparation and public presentation of documents inimical to the interests of our ES members. We refer you to documents entitled Classification Reform for the Financial Management (FI) Group, and Classification Reform for the Financial Management (FI) Group in the Public Service of Canada. These documents, a report and a slide show, have been circulated to stakeholders and presented to Treasury Board officials, and are currently posted on APSFA’s website.
Both papers are direct assaults on the integrity of the ES group. Both papers argue that some work of the ES community should be transferred to the FI community based upon your perception of what constitutes Financial Management. Your paper, as prepared by professor Paquette, singles out that …”there are up to a thousand economists working in these capacities” and it further has recommended that they should be part of a universal financial management category, “whether classified as EX, FI, AS, ES, CR, or in other groups…” Both papers urge Treasury Board to give the highest priority to initiating classification reform with a review of the FI standard that would ensure the inclusion of many hundreds of ES positions, as well as CR and AS positions, within the FI group.
We could easily make the case in our own classification reform exercise that much of the work of the FI community would be more appropriate if classified within the ES group. Naturally, we appreciate the sensitivity of this matter and would never seek to damage our relationship in proposing that hundreds of FI’s be reclassified to the ES group. Think of the chaos that would ensue if all bargaining agents acted in such a manner…
It is our position that APSFA’s actions are hostile and a violation of the language and intent of the National Joint Council Bargaining Agents Code of Conduct.
It is our position that APSFA’s actions are hostile and a violation of the language and intent of the National Joint Council Bargaining Agents Code of Conduct. We of course hope that it is still possible to undo this damage and reestablish our respectful and collaborative relationship. Towards this objective we are requesting that:
1. You recognize that your actions were inappropriate and inimical to the interest of the ES group and to the group’s bargaining agent,;
2. You apologize for your actions;
3. You withdraw the documents identified above from your website;
4. You send a letter to the stakeholders who received the documents, requesting their return and disavowing any recommendation that would redefine the financial management category so as to transfer members of the ES community into the FI classification; and
5. You commit your organization to an approach to classification reform that does not attack other occupational groups, including the groups represented by our Association.
If you fail to take such actions we will be forced to file a code of conduct complaint against you, with the intent of having full disciplinary measures applied against APSFA.
Association Files Complaint
Upon receiving Krause’s letter, Hosking indicated that APSFA had no intention of altering its course of action. We then filed a Code of Conduct complaint with the NJC, alleging that APSFA violated two sections of the Code of Conduct:
“No Bargaining agent shall approach any employer who is a member of the NJC with the purpose of having the employer make a determination as to whether an employee or class of employees is or is not appropriately included in a bargaining unit previously determined by the PSSRB.”
And;
Should a bargaining agent feel that a number of positions have been improperly classified, it shall notify the certified bargaining agent and provide any available and appropriate documentation in writing.”
“Given the potential of a three year suspension from the National Joint Council, we’re hoping APSFA reconsiders it’s position,” said President Bill Krause.
PSAC’s Reaction
After having been advised by SSEA of APSFA’s actions, Nicole Turmel, President of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, wrote the following to Merdon Hosking:
“It is particularly disturbing to see that you are so open about your intentions, but you are ready to offer advice on how the PSAC might assist you in your endeavour…”
“Should you not immediately drop this current campaign, I will have no choice but to consider this as an attempt to raid our members and would have to take the appropriate action.”
Treasury Board’s Response
Claude Danik, Director of Professional Services has contacted Treasury Board officials, and has been advised that the employer intends to fully respect current bargaining agent affiliations in the process of classification harmonization. Consequently APSFA’s actions will be futile and will have no impact on bargaining agent structure.