The unusual circumstances this past winter surrounding the negotiations regarding the TR Financial Incentives Plan have created the possibility of some confusion. What follows may help to clarify some of the questions that we have been asked regarding the FIP vote that has been sent to the TR membership.
March 18, 2004
1. Why vote, if the Employer has advised CAPE that it is prepared to improve on their offer?
On February 25, 2004, the two parties signed a tentative agreement, in good faith, that reads as follows:
“Effective April 1, 2004, the provisions here-in which have been the subject of an agreement or signature will be incorporated into the new Memorandum of Agreement.”
“The parties agree that this agreement must be expressly approved by the Treasury Board and must be submitted to a vote of the TR members; the TR Negotiating Committee will respect the decision of the TR members.”
In order to respect the process as outlined in the MOA, it was necessary to immediately begin the consultative process with the TR members, by means of a mail-in vote.
The CAPE Negotiating Committee chose to consult the TR members, in spite of the authority granted to the committee through the CAPE Constitution, because, in their view, the modifications to the FIP proposed by Treasury Board were significant.
The Committee chose the consultative route for two reasons. Firstly, with a return to the table scheduled for the 23rd and 24th of March, it would be impossible to organize another consultative ballot to the membership during the brief period of time between March 24th and April 1st.
Secondly, because the Employer was unable to provide us with any information regarding the improvements to the agreement that they would be proposing, it seemed reasonable to leave at least two options. If it is judged by the committee that improvements proposed by Treasury Board do not significantly change the nature of the signed agreement, they would rely on the vote in order to decide to accept or to reject the marginally improved offer. If the improvements are significant, the committee would not be bound to the vote, which would be, given the circumstances, a vote on an offer which would be very different from the final offer.
It would help to clarify that during the discussions with the Employer, it was clear to the CAPE Negotiating Committee that the offer submitted to the membership by ballot was a final offer with no opportunity for improvement, and the Employer gave no indication that any possibility for improvement existed. The Employer’s subsequent offer to return to the table was therefore a complete surprise.
2. Is it important to vote?
Absolutely. Firstly, the agreement in principle signed by the two parties states that the final offer must be submitted to a vote. Secondly, as previously indicated, the CAPE Negotiating Committee may be required to make a decision regarding marginal improvements to the Employer’s offer, and in this way would abide by the decision communicated by the members through the voting process.
3. So, is this a consultative vote, or a ratification vote?
At the risk of providing a confusing answer, the reality is that the vote is both a consultative vote and a ratification vote. It is consultative, because according to Article 13.7 of the CAPE Constitution, the Negotiating Committee has sole authority to approve a Financial Incentives Plan. It is a ratification vote, because the Negotiating Committee will respect the views expressed by the members in the March 25th ballot count, if there is no significant improvement to the Employer’s offer on the 23rd and 24th of March.
4. Back to the first question: Why vote at all?
It is necessary that you vote, so that the position of the TR members can be represented regarding the offer made by the employer. This offer could be the only offer to be the subject of an MOA regarding the Financial Incentives Plan.
March 18, 2004
1. Why vote, if the Employer has advised CAPE that it is prepared to improve on their offer?
On February 25, 2004, the two parties signed a tentative agreement, in good faith, that reads as follows:
“Effective April 1, 2004, the provisions here-in which have been the subject of an agreement or signature will be incorporated into the new Memorandum of Agreement.”
“The parties agree that this agreement must be expressly approved by the Treasury Board and must be submitted to a vote of the TR members; the TR Negotiating Committee will respect the decision of the TR members.”
In order to respect the process as outlined in the MOA, it was necessary to immediately begin the consultative process with the TR members, by means of a mail-in vote.
The CAPE Negotiating Committee chose to consult the TR members, in spite of the authority granted to the committee through the CAPE Constitution, because, in their view, the modifications to the FIP proposed by Treasury Board were significant.
The Committee chose the consultative route for two reasons. Firstly, with a return to the table scheduled for the 23rd and 24th of March, it would be impossible to organize another consultative ballot to the membership during the brief period of time between March 24th and April 1st.
Secondly, because the Employer was unable to provide us with any information regarding the improvements to the agreement that they would be proposing, it seemed reasonable to leave at least two options. If it is judged by the committee that improvements proposed by Treasury Board do not significantly change the nature of the signed agreement, they would rely on the vote in order to decide to accept or to reject the marginally improved offer. If the improvements are significant, the committee would not be bound to the vote, which would be, given the circumstances, a vote on an offer which would be very different from the final offer.
It would help to clarify that during the discussions with the Employer, it was clear to the CAPE Negotiating Committee that the offer submitted to the membership by ballot was a final offer with no opportunity for improvement, and the Employer gave no indication that any possibility for improvement existed. The Employer’s subsequent offer to return to the table was therefore a complete surprise.
2. Is it important to vote?
Absolutely. Firstly, the agreement in principle signed by the two parties states that the final offer must be submitted to a vote. Secondly, as previously indicated, the CAPE Negotiating Committee may be required to make a decision regarding marginal improvements to the Employer’s offer, and in this way would abide by the decision communicated by the members through the voting process.
3. So, is this a consultative vote, or a ratification vote?
At the risk of providing a confusing answer, the reality is that the vote is both a consultative vote and a ratification vote. It is consultative, because according to Article 13.7 of the CAPE Constitution, the Negotiating Committee has sole authority to approve a Financial Incentives Plan. It is a ratification vote, because the Negotiating Committee will respect the views expressed by the members in the March 25th ballot count, if there is no significant improvement to the Employer’s offer on the 23rd and 24th of March.
4. Back to the first question: Why vote at all?
It is necessary that you vote, so that the position of the TR members can be represented regarding the offer made by the employer. This offer could be the only offer to be the subject of an MOA regarding the Financial Incentives Plan.