KNOW YOUR CBA - LOU 58

As part of our ongoing series on educating our members about the refinery collective agreement, we aim to help raise awareness and highlight the importance of various provisions negotiated throughout our 83-year history.

In this issue, we look at one segment of Letter of Understanding 58 - Contract work. We will focus on the last paragraph, but the entire excerpt is included for context and reads as follows:

"5. Employment Security - Refinery Maintenance:

The Company and the Union recognize the current situation relative to contract construction and maintenance in the refinery environment for the purpose of turnarounds, capital projects, special projects, emergency situations, environmental or legislative compliance and the variable component of continuous maintenance. These functions have been performed by contractors at the Refinery in the past. In response to the concern that the continuous nature of maintaining the day-to-day operations of the Refinery with Company employees has been eroded, the parties agree:

a) The mix of trades personnel may change within the overall complement;

b) Business circumstances may dictate the closure of the Refinery, which would negate the commitment or partial closure of the Refinery, which could alter the commitment;

c) Productivity in the Company work force must compare favourably to that of the contract work force;

d) Technological change may dictate reduction in trades employment.

In all of the above circumstances, the Company shall discuss with the Union the reasons for any reduction in the trades work force. In such circumstances, the Company agrees to present to the Union, all facts which lead to the Company’s decision. The Union will be given a minimum of three (3) months to respond before any action is taken. This letter should not be construed as restricting the Company from operating an efficient and productive refinery when measured against competitors in the same business."

What does this mean?

Essentially, there was a time when the company was cognizant of the union's concerns about the erosion of maintenance work at the refinery. In turn, the Union was aware that the bargaining unit did not have the capacity to perform the full scope of large-scale projects and that contractors would be required in certain circumstances. Therefore, the parties negotiated the above language to address our mutual concerns and interests. Outlining shared understanding of each other's obligations while, most importantly, providing employment security for bargaining unit employees.

It also means that the company has a steep obligation of diligence to meet before they can reduce the maintenance department complement at any time.

For example, if an Insulator is retiring, the complement would be reduced by one if it is not replaced. This provision in LOU 58 stipulates that if the Company intends to reduce the complement when the Insulator retires but not replace them, they must first engage the Union in meaningful dialogue outlining all the reasons and facts for their decision. Keep in mind (a) allows the Company to replace that retiring insulator with a different tradesperson within the Maintenance Department complement, but the complement must be maintained unless there are valid reasons for a reduction,

Why is this important?

This is a key protection for our maintenance workers. We have seen an erosion in job duties, increased on-site contractors due to lack of manpower, and the backlog of work orders is piling up. There is no evidence to suggest that a reduction in complement is sustainable at this time or in the near future. The workplace is suffering from understaffing as it is. 

The Union will continue to hold the company to its agreed-upon obligations to maintain a viable maintenance department workforce as it is essential to the long-term success of our workplace. 

In Solidarity,

Richard Exner, President

UNIFOR LOCALS HELP TO SUPPORT LABOUR RESEARCH IN SASKATCHEWAN

Across Canada, corporations and wealthy individuals give money to universities by way of endowed chairs, research positions, and grants. It’s their way of “giving back” and getting a foot in the door at these institutions. That’s what makes the Unifor Research Scholar in Labour Relations position so important at the University of Regina.

In 2018-19, Unifor locals 594 and 1-S made a donation to the U of R to help support research dedicated to work and labour. That money went directly to the Faculty of Business Administration, which has a long history of employing academics who focus on the challenges facing workers and unions in our province. From there, scholars in the Faculty have a chance to apply for the position, and the $5,000 in annual research money. I’ve had the privilege of holding this scholar position since its inception. Here’s some of the research that Unifor made possible.

At the outset of the pandemic, funds were used to employ a student research assistant to help assemble a collective of essays (“The Labour of COVID”) as part of a special edition of Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labour that focused on the implications of the pandemic on academic work, student experiences, and collective bargaining. That special edition was

published in the winter of 2022, and is freely available on-line.

That same year I presented a paper, “The boss doesn’t care if you’re tired: The effects of fatigue on performance”, at the Canadian Industrial Relations Association (CIRA) meeting in

Kingston, Ontario. This work is premised on a consultant report I co-authored with Dr. Sandeep Mishra (Guelph University) for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 2038. Our study examined the effects of workplace fatigue on workplace wellness and individual mental health. The Scholar fund was used to pay for conference travel, and in the process promote the U of R and the financial support offered by Unifor.

Unifor’s financial contribution also supported a pilot study of labour market discrimination in Saskatchewan and Ontario before and during the pandemic. Data from that research provided the basis for a larger federal grant, in partnership with scholars at McMaster University, which is ongoing. This money supported good, unionized research assistant jobs, conference travel, and other costs associated with these sort of research initiatives like compensating interview participants and transcription services. I was fortunate enough to showcase the work (and the funding) at conference in Canada and the UK.

Local 594’s financial contributions have also made possible the publication of a number of public reports on labour rights and employment issues facing workers here in Saskatchewan. Our Rights at Work and The Union Advantage: A Comparison of Union and Non-Unionized Wages in Canada and Saskatchewan reports were both published in 2023. These reports use provincial freedom of information data obtained from Employment Standards, and examines incidents of labour law violations, with a specific focus on wage theft. The reports also include a snapshot of human rights issues related to work, as well as documented examples of foreign worker abuses and protections in our province. The Union Advantage publication looks at the ongoing wage and benefit advantages experienced by workers in Saskatchewan. Similar research is now underway with the Parkland Institute in Alberta. Unifor gets credit for helping to financially support the work.

Right now, I’m using Unifor research dollars to support a study on Saskatchewan teachers, tentatively titled “The Making of Militancy”. The research explores the Saskatchewan Teachers Federation’s political activation, and efforts within the union to mobilization members to tackle important workplace issues and matters of public concern like classroom complexity and fair compensation. My hope is that the findings will be of value to the STF, it’s membership, and the public at large.

Thanks to Unifor 594 and 1-S, I’ve been given the privilege to advance research on labour issues that would have not otherwise been possible. And it’s nice to know that unions are helping to make this happen, not just corporations and wealthy donors.

In solidarity,

Dr. Andrew Stevens (Associate Professor)

LAST LAUGH