(Thread IKs:
ZShakespeare)
|
I know that, at least in one Burnaby municipal union, you are absolutely able to be relieved from you work duties to participate in union duties, and also get your regular pay for it. I would hope that is the standard.
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
ZShakespeare posted:I know that, at least in one Burnaby municipal union, you are absolutely able to be relieved from you work duties to participate in union duties, and also get your regular pay for it. I would hope that is the standard. That is my understanding of it at all of the locals I work with as well. The union books your time off for union activities with the company. That includes meetings as well as the time you take to work with the members (for grievances, etc.). You're remunerated for your time through the union. The stewards, and generally most of the board, aren't working full time on union activities, they still do their normal day-to-day with the company, and they're booked into specific times for union business. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Apr 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 20:58
|
|
|
On that topic, an important reminder for everyone
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 20:59
|
|
|
RC01214 posted:ARACHTION said I can contribute more to BC politics by engaging in union activities, but I am not sure what I can do for my union, especially on how to prevent it from being coopted to lower or freeze wages. Any advice on what to do? If you’re sincere, there is lots to do. If you’re already in a union, that’s great. If you’re not already, you can start attending meetings or volunteer to be the shop steward, health and safety rep etc. Get a lay of the land, see if you like your union leaders or as you said you think they would be easily co-opted or will take concessions at the bargaining table. If you like em, great! If you’re eager and they’re good they’ll probably be happy to have a new person in to take stuff on and even connect you with training to up your skills and knowledge over time. Your local labour council would be a good resource for looking for trainings too as well as plug you into the wider labour movement. If you don’t like em, then the harder work begins. First, find people who agree with you as there are people who rage alone against a lovely union and inevitably burn out within a couple of years. Forming a caucus is key to building power without burning out. Then, there are still plenty of trainings and books you can read to build your skills even if you don’t have institutional support. Labor Notes is an awesome org and had a lot to do with the movement to replace the corrupt and concessionary leadership at United Auto Workers. A great book to start you off is Jane McAlevey “Organizing for Power”. Another is the Rosa Luxembourg Foundation who routinely to this Organizing for Power series of lessons where it’s free if you get ten coworkers to sign up. The thing is building strong unions is actually really straightforward just the knowledge was lost during the red scares when successful organizers got jailed, black listed and replaced by business unionists, who have spent the last several decades accepting concessions and cozying up to management. I know this sounds like a crazy amount of work, and it is. But just start small with what you can handle. But when your work starts to pay off and you start seeing a previously apathetic and splintered workforce talking about wildcat strikes and getting ready to actually do something about it, deciding who you’re going to vote for in a federal election just doesn’t seem as important anymore (I do vote too). Sorry, not trying to make it seem like I have all the answers, I don’t. But I used to feel the way a lot of the nihilistic posters here seem to feel before I started doing this stuff. Maybe it would be better to just start a union organizing thread for people interested.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:01
|
|
|
RC01214 posted:To clarify, I am not certain I can be a job steward and a crown corporation employee at the same time, or is that not an issue? Nobody is born being good at negotiations but they are skills you build over time! It’s cool that you’re considering running  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:03
|
|
|
ZShakespeare posted:I know that, at least in one Burnaby municipal union, you are absolutely able to be relieved from you work duties to participate in union duties, and also get your regular pay for it. I would hope that is the standard. Sounds like union duties here are covered under union billable hours, which are standard pay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:03
|
|
|
ARACHTION posted:I know this sounds like a crazy amount of work, and it is. But just start small with what you can handle. But when your work starts to pay off and you start seeing a previously apathetic and splintered workforce talking about wildcat strikes and getting ready to actually do something about it, deciding who you’re going to vote for in a federal election just doesn’t seem as important anymore (I do vote too). I think it's important to be clear upfront that there is a pretty big time and emotional investment required, because it can catch people off guard if they've not really been involved with their union before. It's not something that everyone has the temperament or ability to do, but if you can, and you wish to, I think it can make a difference for the people you work with. On the flip side, you will find out first hand what a lot of your coworkers are like, and what they think of the union, and it might not always be a great experience.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:05
|
|
|
ARACHTION posted:If you’re sincere, there is lots to do. If you’re already in a union, that’s great. If you’re not already, you can start attending meetings or volunteer to be the shop steward, health and safety rep etc. Get a lay of the land, see if you like your union leaders or as you said you think they would be easily co-opted or will take concessions at the bargaining table. Thank you for this. I’m going to keep it in my back pocket because, while I’m trying to not get excited because there isn’t ink yet, I will be joining a union any day now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:09
|
|
|
ARACHTION posted:If you’re sincere, there is lots to do. If you’re already in a union, that’s great. If you’re not already, you can start attending meetings or volunteer to be the shop steward, health and safety rep etc. Get a lay of the land, see if you like your union leaders or as you said you think they would be easily co-opted or will take concessions at the bargaining table. Got the feeling my union is slightly coopted; although we did have a non standard pay raise, it was not enough to cover inflation. I am not experienced enough to tell otherwise. For something more relevant to the thread, as an immigrant, I have noticed too many conservative talking points spreading throughout my community, including anti-immigration rhetoric, anti-affirmative action rhetoric (yes, the hypocrisy astounds me as well) and demands for reinstatement for the death penalty. I suspect this has already cost me friends, and I am stuck with my parents who sometimes parrot some of the rhetoric, especially due to a notorious murder case which prevents any criminal justice reform policies from gaining traction here. Not sure what to do there, although at least I have convinced my parents not to vote Conservative or BC Liberal. Moving out really is not an option here in BC. Apologies in advance for the frequent edits to my posts due to phone posting. Hopefully I have not changed their meaning entirely. RC01214 fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Apr 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:12
|
|
|
To the guy who said white collars don't Unionize? Still true? The only engineering union I know in North America is SPEEA and that's because their management tried to just cancel their health insurance and make them all fast food workers
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:13
|
|
|
They unionize, if they work for the government.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:17
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:They unionize, if they work for the government. That explains why my white collar company is unionized.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:19
|
|
|
B33rChiller posted:On that topic, an important reminder for everyone This is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 21:37
|
|
|
RC01214 posted:That explains why my white collar company is unionized. Jokingly, The only thing white-collar workers hate more than each other is the government.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
The union "captured" the engineers in training and project managers in our company. Boy were they pissed. apatheticman fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Apr 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 22:09
|
|
|
Yes, I agree with above that it’s a huge investment of energy, time and emotion. So I really suggest to bite into only what you can chew at the moment and know what your boundaries around time commitments are before engaging as unions can also get too excited when a new person comes in and ask way too much of them way too soon. There’s no rush in this game!
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 22:20
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:This is why I'll hold my nose and vote Liberal next election. It's futile as gently caress but I can't support the kind of hosed up policies PP wants to ram down our throats while using IDPol and Trudeau grievances as cover. The NDP have zero chance of winning my riding as it's an affluent GTA suburb. So it comes down to a few hundred votes between NDP and Liberal. Super excited to vote for JT next election, electoral reform is right around the corner
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 22:30
|
|
|
ZShakespeare posted:If you truly believe that women’s lives hinge on casting a vote once every four years for either 99% hitler or turbohitler, then there is genuinely no hope. I am not one of these people, however, and I believe that voting is, by far, the least impactful thing you can do to affect political change. Right behind posting about it on dead comedy forums. It's a bit of a sham in the US since presidential candidates campaign on domestic politics but have relatively little impact on them, hardly talk about foreign policy at all but hold tremendous influence there. Regardless Joe Biden isn't going to protect abortion rights in the US anymore than a US president is going to try to get a federal ban passed. In Canada the PM and Parliament have more of a direct impact on both but considering how unpopular abortion restrictions are in Canada it'd be a wild time if they tried to pass something like that here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 23:00
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:It's a bit of a sham in the US since presidential candidates campaign on domestic politics but have relatively little impact on them, hardly talk about foreign policy at all but hold tremendous influence there. Depends on the province. NB would love to do this; NS kind of wants to
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 23:43
|
|
|
Isentropy posted:Depends on the province. NB would love to do this; NS kind of wants to Yeah I mean the provinces can always just do what PEI did which got around the Canada Health Act for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2024 23:53
|
|
|
B33rChiller posted:On that topic, an important reminder for everyone 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 02:11
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:They already did it. Arivia posted:Yeah here’s the government page going over how it all works for Canadians https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/campaigns/child-care.html Frankly I don't think either of these posts address my concerns with this program. While not a parent myself, the experience of the parents in my social circles has entirely been "yeah nothing has changed where we are [Ontario]."
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 03:58
|
|
|
92 new posts while I was at work today? I didn't think y'all could sustain that level of argumentative bullshit without my presence and involvement, but I just want you all to know I'm very proud of you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 04:14
|
|
|
Bleck posted:Frankly I don't think either of these posts address my concerns with this program. While not a parent myself, the experience of the parents in my social circles has entirely been "yeah nothing has changed where we are [Ontario]." I am a parent in Ontario of a 15 and 2 year old, and it has made an incredible difference. Like we’re talking well over a thousand dollars a month between kid 1 and kid 2, and that’s 13 years later… Getting in to daycares is still not very good but once you’re in, it is dramatically cheaper than it was before. Anyone claiming otherwise is out to lunch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 04:15
|
|
|
If I was the kind of person that got salty because I had to pay thousands per month for daycare and now people don't, I'd be mad. But that has to be a life-changing savings for families and I'm glad it's working.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 04:33
|
|
|
I'm not affected by this program but my secondhand anecdote can beat up your lived experience
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 04:54
|
|
|
I'm glad to hear it's working for some people, too. Keyword being some - not all child care centers have chosen to opt into the program, and the ones who have don't necessarily have the space and/or staff to accommodate more kids. I don't know how the program enables the daycares to lower their costs, but it, ostensibly, is not something that all daycare centers have decided is for them. And, again, the success of a program that reduces the costs of child care services has no reasonable bearing on the reality of why child care is so expensive, or even, really, even necessary - I don't consider it a success for the Libs to slightly ease the pain of the economic systems that they otherwise overwhelmingly support, for some people. Also frankly I'm one of many adults I know that's so hosed for money that I gave up on dreams of having kids because I knew I just plain wouldn't be able to afford it, so whenever someone with some cushy job comes in and is like "oh thank god I don't have to pay thousands of dollars a month for daycare for my kids while I'm at my benefits-package job where I count string all day or whatever" it's like, yeah! That's a good thing, it really is! But also, gently caress off, you know? It's hard to see "people were helped" as a victory when you feel deep down that the people that benefited were probably often people who didn't, like... need it...?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 04:56
|
|
|
Bleck posted:Frankly I don't think either of these posts address my concerns with this program. While not a parent myself, the experience of the parents in my social circles has entirely been "yeah nothing has changed where we are [Ontario]." The daycare program has made an immense difference for me and people I work with. If you're in a registered daycare or centre, you're saving nearly $600 per month, per child. I don't understand how anyone could think this is not impactful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 04:57
|
|
|
Vasler posted:I don't understand how anyone could think this is not impactful. Vasler posted:If you're in a registered daycare or centre Gesturing politely but exasperatedly at these two things one after the other and nodding slowly
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 04:59
|
|
|
Bleck posted:Gesturing politely but exasperatedly at these two things one after the other and nodding slowly I don't understand what you want here. We have progress and costs are being lowered, which is what I thought you were asking for. Evidence is provided and then you move goalposts. Things aren't perfect by any means and this was a program that has helped a lot of parents. It isn't enough (because there aren't enough registered daycares) but we're way better off today than five years ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 05:13
|
|
|
I can understand people's frustration with the slow push the Liberals have done (mostly because they're a minority and the NDP has made them actually do things), but they have made a solid difference in lives. We should keep pushing them to do more through voting and organization locally and further. They suck but there is a bit of room to breathe and get them to listen (see recent housing even if it's far too late). I think it's just hard for people to remember under Conservative governments (and honestly quite a few Liberal, especially 90s) all they do is destroy, there is no building. Sometimes it's nice to build a little even within an artificially limited sandbox than watch while it's broken apart and sold for scrap. Just contrast the programs of BC and MB versus SK, AB and ON.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 05:15
|
|
|
Vasler posted:Evidence is provided and then you move goalposts. "What about the child care thing?" "It probably doesn't help very many people." "But it did help some people!" "Yeah, but probably not very many. Definitely not a lot." "But it did help some people! I don't know why you think it didn't!" "Not saying it didn't. Saying it didn't help many." "But it did help some people! Why are you mOvInG tHe GoAlPoStS?" gently caress off with this poo poo. Segue posted:there is a bit of room to get them to listen (see recent housing) breh Bleck fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Apr 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 05:18
|
|
|
Bleck posted:"What about the child care thing?" I don't get why I'm getting this hostile response. I shared a personal experience. My experience doesn't match what people in your circle have experienced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 05:26
|
|
|
Vasler posted:I don't get why I'm getting this hostile response. Because you're choosing to read my posts as argument about whether or not the program has tangibly improved some people's lives, instead of the reality, which is that I'm acknowledging that it likely has, but doubting that it has for very many and derisively suggesting that the few who have perhaps likely not the people who actually need it the most. I'm too jaded by liberal rhetoric to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that it's an actual misunderstanding, so instead I've become irritated at what I assume is another liberal reflexive diminishing of the experiences of most Canadians. Even flakeloaf's post is trying to make light of "anecdotes vs lived experience," but it's in a thread where a bunch of basically strangers are talking about their experiences. It's all anecdotal. The suggestion that one anecdote is somehow more valuable than another is just... it's asinine, I don't know. This stranger on the internet says that the Libs' new Good Program isn't very good, but this stranger on the internet says it is. Hmm! That first guy must be lying, it cannot possibly be that it has had different effects in different areas on different people and that the proliferation of these effects on this timeline is going to directly affect people's perception of the program's success - no, definitely must just be lying or whatever. Ugh. This program was only even brought up because of the (my?) suggestion that the Liberals don't really do much to help women, if anything, and at best actively make things worse for them, which is a thing that the posters responding to me don't seem interested in talking about. Why is lowering daycare costs a win for a political entity that was responsible for the rise in daycare costs, as well as the quiet but consistent destruction of every other related economic and social structure? Why is The Landlord Party to be applauded for making it so parents can afford to pay more money for rent than ever before?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 06:01
|
|
|
Dismissing Bleck's concerns about access seems a lot like the guy who said we don't need universal dental care because vanishingly few people don't have private coverage. The program can be good, while still not really being enough, and it can be broadly accessible without being universally accessible. The people who aren't able to access it may have thoughts on the subject, even if you don't personally know them. It is good to read that it's helping some people though. A friend of mine who is a single parent living in Toronto managed to get a subsidized space in a city run daycare years back and I know it made a world of difference for her. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 12:46 on Apr 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 12:42
|
|
|
I'd be a lot less likely to sound dismissive if I weren't such an asinine moron, I guess. Wealthy people do reliably misunderstand the issues of those with less, and there are a lot of categories of those before you reach the people who are relying on or running "unregistered day cares", and man what a ridiculous scare term that is. The neighbourhoods I grew up in always had at least two or three block moms who watched nearby kids in exchange for gas money or a bit of food, and the number of kids running amok corresponded roughly with the tempo of the welfare cheques. If there had been a Laurentian Tots Lunch & Laugh nearby, they'd have a hell of a problem with broken windows and missing toys, partly cause we'd have wanted them, but mainly because gently caress those rich fucks. I compare it to the home energy renovation grants that started before housing prices went bazoo. Helping the environment is good! Lowering fuel costs is good! Spending money to do that must also be good, and it is, but the people being "helped" never needed it. An $800 break on a $3000 door installation is not a decision-breaking bargain, in the way that just giving that $800 to someone on ODSP would be, and the Liberals painting it as though it were was kinda gross. This seems like more of the same, skipping past people with more desperate needs to give a certain bracket a new hat for their doll. If the purpose of a thing is what it does, we can look what this does and fairly accuse them of trying to extract maximum political benefit from the people most likely to be useful to the corporations that fund them. Block Mom's not dropping $9 on a box of cereal at Loblaws. She'll just get one of her kids to steal it. e: and now here I go being dismissive about just how much that doll needed that hat. For the people whom this program helps, the help is fantastic and those kids are going to do much better than they would have otherwise. It's good that this is happening. It needs to happen about twice as hard to the kids who have a lot less, and it isn't, and that's what's irking me. flakeloaf fucked around with this message at 14:54 on Apr 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 14:35
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:The neighbourhoods I grew up in always had at least two or three block moms who watched nearby kids in exchange for gas money or a bit of food, and the number of kids running amok corresponded roughly with the tempo of the welfare cheques. My mother was one of those in the late 80s, early 90s, and her mother was one in the 50s. You make a good point about programs that are actually rebates, because they only work if you already have the money in hand to afford the thing to begin with, just like tax rebates only help if you have taxable income. They do help a lot of people, and yet they way they're structured ensures that the people they don't help are already in dire straits. flakeloaf posted:For the people whom this program helps, the help is fantastic and those kids are going to do much better than they would have otherwise. It's good that this is happening. It needs to happen about twice as hard to the kids who have a lot less, and it isn't, and that's what's irking me. This is something I think about occasionally, the difference that having access to opportunities and resources has on development can't be overstated, but also having a home life that isn't awful because the parents aren't constantly stressed out over basic material needs. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Apr 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 14:45
|
|
|
PEI rolled out province-wide $10/day daycare on Jan 1st. It covers 90% of kids in daycare here. That's a hell of a lot (ok, it's PEI, but still) of families who are significantly benefitting from the program. This isn't a rich-vs-poor issue - most people here are on the poor end of the spectrum - it's a program that benefits people who need it most: working parents with young children. Complaining that it only benefits people who can afford to have kids sounds a lot like complaining about taxes paying for public transit that you never use. The societal benefits far outweigh the costs (or indeed outweighs any worries about a rich family getting cheaper daycare), the whole point is partially to relieve some financial burden from prospective and/or current parents. Obviously the complete lack of spaces is the equally-important other side of the coin which also needs to be properly addressed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 16:07
|
|
|
mik posted:PEI rolled out province-wide $10/day daycare on Jan 1st. It covers 90% of kids in daycare here. So what, like, nine kids?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 16:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
mik posted:PEI rolled out province-wide $10/day daycare on Jan 1st. It covers 90% of kids in daycare here. That's a hell of a lot (ok, it's PEI, but still) of families who are significantly benefitting from the program. This isn't a rich-vs-poor issue - most people here are on the poor end of the spectrum - it's a program that benefits people who need it most: working parents with young children. Complaining that it only benefits people who can afford to have kids sounds a lot like complaining about taxes paying for public transit that you never use. The societal benefits far outweigh the costs (or indeed outweighs any worries about a rich family getting cheaper daycare), the whole point is partially to relieve some financial burden from prospective and/or current parents. PEI is a leader in child care generally, among all the provinces and relative to its child population actually has a pretty good coverage rate for spaces (obviously still not enough cause waitlists are massive, but it is so much worse in almost literally every other province). Manitoba, surprisingly, also is way ahead of other provinces in bringing in affordable care while also building out their supply to actually make spaces available. This shouldn't be a surprise to anybody, but the provinces that are really sucking poo poo at actually getting to $10 and building supply are Ontario and Alberta. Ontario also has some of the lowest (in absolute terms) rates of pay for ECE workers, so poo poo isn't going to get much better in this stupid province any time soon but also on access, the cheap spaces are hard to get no matter where you live and often require more resources to monitor multiple waitlists, take time off of work to attend meet and greets, rely on networks etc. that the rich or at least non-poor have in much more ready supply than the working class, so the $10 a day spaces do tend to go to people who could probably afford to pay more and not to the working poor for whom access to child care actually means they might get to go back to work instead of staying home because it's cheaper to by unemployed and care for a kid than pay $50 a day for unlicensed care MNIMWA fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Apr 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2024 16:56
|
|
