CBC management has responded to a Canadian Media Guild statement accusing the Corporation of leaving too many people in “temporary” positions, when they should have been hired as permanent staff.
The CBC, no surprise, denies the charge. Further, it says the CMG “abandoned several months of good faith problem-solving discussions where substantial information was shared in favour of commencing this arbitration.”
The CBC-CMG collective agreement negotiated in 2005 after a prolonged and bitter lockout, gives the CBC greater flexibility in being able to hire contract and temporary employees and freelancers.
- Restrictions regarding who, what, where, when, why, and how CBC engaged contract employees were eliminated. The only restriction on the use of contract employees was a numeric cap: 9.5% plus 80 positions of the permanent workforce (or about 11.5%).
- For temporary employees, the reasons for which CBC can engage temporary employees were expanded. There is no numeric restriction for temps, rather there are reasons that must be followed in order to engage temporary employees.
The CBC says the Guild insists that temporary staff can only be used for backfill and special events or projects. CBC management says the reasons it can hire temps are much broader than that.
The Corporation says the use of temporary employees (engaged in excess of thirteen weeks) is at a historical low at CBC. In 1994, it was 11% of its permanent workforce. Today, the CBC says it is at about 6%. Further, it says use of short term temporary employees is pretty much the same as it was before the 2005 collective agreement was negotiated.
|
Comments below | See also: Labour/CBC Unions, Temporary Workers |
| Email this | Posted at 12:28 pm (12 Feb 2008) |
‘Broader’ … well that leaves a lot of, um, breadth. Why won’t CBC specify when *it* thinks it’s OK to hire temps? Stephen Satchel’s message doesn’t specify. This whole dispute comes down to CMG wanting clarity for staff, and CBC doing everything possible to avoid clarifying, lest it have to commit to what it says. They like their wiggle room, them corporate types.
I’m not sure who the actual author of this piece is but whoever it is, is obviously unfamiliar with the facts.
First of all the suggestion that CMG "abandoned" talks in favour of arbitration is simply untrue. Many months ago the Guild and the CBC left pending a grievance in an attempt to negotiate a resolution of the issues around the abuse of temporary employees. At the time the Guild and the CBC also agreed with an end date at which time an arbitration would begin. CBC is certainly familiar with end dates, that date has arrived and as agreed the matter has gone to a third party. It should also be noted the Guild has provided the Corporation will pages and pages of information demonstrating what it believes are violations of the Collective Agreement.
On another point we obviously reject the notion that CBC gained "expanded rights" to hire temporary employees. The language in our view is clear, sets out the limitations and it is the basis of our grievance.
The issue of the engagement of contract employees and the number of temporary employees hired for more than 13 weeks is a red herring. Most of the hundreds of temporary employees are hired for periods of less than 13 weeks but often find themselves working for months if not years. Not only are they being improperly and unfairly hired, at the same time they are frequently being denied benefits and other rights.
Finally, if the Corporation honestly believes everything it is doing in regards to the engagement of temporary employees is consistent with the Collective Agreement is should have no difficulty is having the matter considered by an unbiased third party.
Dan Oldfield
Senior Staff Representative
Canadian Media Guild
Dan: Thanks for weighing in. Always good to see the players pop up on the blog, and I’m glad you added some more background.
You’re right; I should have attributed the term "expanded rights" to the CBC. (Actually, it was my understanding that the 2005 collective agreement did indeed expand their ability to hire temp employees, and this was something that the CMG was to bring up in the next round of negotiations.)
However beyond that, I think if you read the story again, you’ll find that I simply quoted from a CBC statement, just as I quoted from your statement in a story earlier.
Who abandoned whom? I have no idea. I can only report what each side claims. The CBC has given me editorial independence on this blog and has not once asked to review any posting in advance here, told me what story to write, nor asked me to kill a story.
Don’t shoot the messenger, Dan!
<small>In the interests of full disclosure, I was a contract employee for six years as a CBC Radio host and west-coast producer for DNTO. I am currently a freelancer. I have never sought nor held a salaried position at CBC.</small>