Gs Collective Agreement

By | September 22, 2021

The employer considers that the SV agreement is a successful agreement that does not require major changes. As a result, the employer is presenting a reduced set of proposals that includes modest economic increases and changes to leave plans that are tailored to what was agreed with 34 other groups in the current round of bargaining. The employer argues that a large number of light stations are accessible by car. Approval of such an amendment would represent a financial cost to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and would exceed the provisions of other CAP collective agreements without justification. This proposal represents a cost of more than $48,000 per year and 0.01% of the sv salary base. The joint study was completed in March 2015. During the negotiations, the parties had a very different understanding of the results of the study. This study did not provide the common information base originally planned. Nevertheless, on February 4, 2017, the parties reached a provisional agreement (Annex #8) which resulted in the signing of a collective agreement on June 14, 2017. It is clear from the transaction signed by both parties that the wage adjustments agreed during the negotiations have “resolved the problems identified in the joint study”. The employer believes that there is no evidence to justify granting wage increases to the SV group in excess of the cumulative increases that workers in the 17 CPA groups and 17 separate federal agency groups obtain through a four-year contract. There is no justification to support the significantly higher economic increases envisaged by psac, in addition to market adjustments of between 9% and 39%.

Effective on the day of the signing of the collective agreement to deal with recruitment and retention issues of GL-MAM Froid-HLK technicians and building system technicians or equivalent persons in the Operational Services (SV) group. The negotiator proposes to reduce the weekly working time to 37.5 hours for all workers covered by the SV agreement, without reducing the rights to pay, leave and/or other benefits. Given the high number of outstanding proposals submitted by the bargaining agent, the employer is asking the CASP to target a limited number of proposals that take into account the current collective bargaining landscape and the recent results of negotiations with other federal public service negotiators. The large number of proposals makes it difficult for the parties to identify key priorities and focus their work on them; A more limited number of proposals should significantly improve the likelihood of an agreement. The employer respectfully proposes that the Commission give instructions in this regard and order the parties to return with a reduced number of proposals prior to the publication of the Commission`s report. Secondary research such as this is a common practice in determining remuneration in the marketplace and has often been used by the employer in collective bargaining, arbitration and conciliation. Recently, secondary research was used in a joint wage study with the Electronics (EL) group (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and resulted in an agreement in this round of ongoing negotiations.