Margin of Error = +/- 4.4%.
Mayor Sullivan's Leadership
- 30% Unhelpful
- 20% Non-Existent
- 11% Destructive
- 21% Fair
- 6% Strong
Who Do You Support?
- 23% City
- 27% Union
- 45% Neither
- 38% City
- 30% Union
- 14% Both
- 61% Garbage
- 17% Community Centres
- 10% Libraries
- 5% Pools
- 2% Business Permits
- 66% East Side
- 55% West Side
Overall
- 67% Yes
- 23% No
- 59% Yes
- 31% No
- 74% Yes
- 18% No
12 comments:
Unfortunately for the Union, the damage to Sullivan has been done, and it really doesn't hurt him further to drag the strike out longer. He might as well hold on till he gets some concession he can trumphet to HIS supporters. CUPE's blatant politicization of the strike will reverberate with voters and probably polarize the electorate. I think CUPE might be disappointed by what they will have wrought. Heightened politization of city services will harden political differences for the long term, and while CUPE may have injured Sullivan politically, NPA will not be gone forever even if they lose the next election. Plus with a 5 year deal, the next Vancouver council isn't going to negotiate the next contract anyway.
Could anonymous define "politicization"?
Could anonymous define "politicization"?
CUPE has tried to bring a political dimension into the strike negotiations. They carry placards that say, 'sam's strike'. CUPE contributes money to NPA political opponents. Both of these actions are inappropriate because which ever person is elected he/she has to negotiate with City workers at contract time and not just politicians that CUPE approves of. CUPE should concentrate on the issues and not the personalities.
Again isn't the NPA website making this political?
SO would it then be inappropriate for developers who may need council decisions on zoning etc, to contribute to political parties or to the campaign of individual politicians? Lets not forget the Federal Liberal sponsorship scandal where our tax money was contributed through the back door to the Liberals.
They carry placards that say, 'sam's strike'.
CUPE leadership and the vast majority of the rank and file believe, if not for Sam Sullivan, there would have been no strike in the City of Vancouver. As there wasn't in most of the other GVRD municipalities....
It's an opinion, and in a democracy it's allowed to be expressed.
CUPE contributes money to NPA political opponents.
As has been pointed out in our country, and most countries in the democratic world political donations are not restricted to individuals. Unions, business interests and endless plethora of interest groups contribute money to those political parties whom they feel will advance their interest. It's how the system works.
Unless you are trying to suggest what CUPE has done is illegal you don't really have much of an ethical argument. That said, you might also want to reacquaint yourself with the recent past:
...[W]hen asked whether the Canadian Union of Public Employees would be endorsing either civic party [COPE or VISION] through funding, British Columbia president Barry O'Neil said, "No."
And in the 2005 election:
CUPE's donation of $72,000 in 2005 to Vision equates to a whopping 5% total of campaign donations.
CUPE is saying its Sam Sullivan's fault, but the City is offering the same deal that North Van and Richmond got, so how is it Sam's fault now? Its funny to hear how CUPE points the finger at the collective bargaining strategy of the Lower Mainland municipalities all the while taking advantage of their own National negotiation and research capabilities; after all its not the VANCOUVER Union of Public Employees is it?
I've got no problem with CUPE being political, but now that its an ugly personality driven politics some people are confused that good faith issue based negotiation can't take place. Well, you reap what you sow. There were plenty of opportunities where CUPE could have de-escalated the personal vitriol directed at the mayor, but they thought it was a winning issue to leverage a better deal.
CUPE could have made the negotiations about city service quality and fairness (they should have started hitting on Library worker parity issues MUCH earlier). Instead they turned it into a pissing match and it seems like things have picked up from the last civic strike. Unfortunately CUPE members are now letting their wage increase be eaten away by CUPE leadership thats unable to declare victory and return to work.
CUPE is saying its Sam Sullivan's fault, but the City is offering the same deal that North Van and Richmond got
I'll have more to say on this when I get home tonight, but suffice it to say how can something be "identical" to two different things?
CUPE is saying its Sam Sullivan's fault, but the City is offering the same deal that North Van and Richmond got, so how is it Sam's fault now?
Well you blew your own argument right there with this statement and it shows you're NOT quite up to date on the issue - the City has NOT offered the same deal to Vancouver, despite what the media keeps parroting, so don't keep parroting this "myth" yourself. Do some research (like the media refers to negotiations as "ongoing" - when the library union for example, gave a counter offer THREE
WEEKS ago and has yet to hear from the employer! How do you have the balls to compare this to other regional settlements. Not even close, pal!
Well if I don't have the facts maybe you can lay them out for us? My broader point stands. Both the employer and CUPE know exactly the financial terms of the next deal and IDENTICAL to North Van and Richmond it'll involve a 17.5 % wage increase. Now, some other non-monetary issues are obviously not the same, but are those really worth striking for 8 weeks over? How long before the wage increase is just eaten up by CUPE leadership unwilling to compromise? How do the Vancouver locals feel about Richmond and North Van locals already being paid while they stay on strike for... for what exactly? For a guarantee that once the City hires you, you can never be fired? never laid off, never asked to change, to do a job better, to take a decrease in wage? I know the world is a scary place, but staying on strike won't make it safer.
Both the employer and CUPE know exactly the financial terms of the next deal and IDENTICAL to North Van and Richmond it'll involve a 17.5 % wage increase.
Cupe15 has been offered this. My own local, which tabled a proposal on August 17th, hasn't heard from their employer since.
So we, Cupe391, have not been offered 17.5%.
Now, some other non-monetary issues are obviously not the same, but are those really worth striking for 8 weeks over?
In my opinion, yes.
How do the Vancouver locals feel about Richmond and North Van locals already being paid while they stay on strike for...
They feel that their brothers and sisters in Richmond and North Vancouver are lucky to work for an employer who treat their workers as partners and not as enemies.
For a guarantee that once the City hires you, you can never be fired?
This is false. It has never been the union's position that workers can't be laid off - only that workers who lose their jobs due to contracting out of services should be retrained.
I know the world is a scary place, but staying on strike won't make it safer.
I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make here? Do you think being on strike isn't "scary"? I've lost my income. My spouse, who also works for the City, has too. We have a child.
I don't think you thought your comment through.
Do you really think that your local is going to settle for less than a 17.5% wage increase? Don't you think the City's silence on your proposal has something to do with negotiating with the other CUPE locals? Is there ONE issue that CUPE has compromised on in these negotiations? They've got the money, they've got the term, but they don't want the city to get any of its desired changes: and yet its CUPE which claims the City doesn't want to negotiate.
Post a Comment