Is CUPE on drugs?

The union that represents the some of the employees at the U of S is on strike.  The university has taken the "appalling" stand that pay increments be tied to job performance.  Horror of horrors!  Imagine people getting rewarded for making an effort to pursue excellence in their job!?  Do these guys realize how this looks to the vast majority of us that don’t get every third friday off! 

The union is concerned that unscrupulous managers will be unfair in their evaluations denying people a pay increase they rightfully deserve.  How can anything be any more unfair than giving everyone the same raise all the time?

McKaig said it’s "appalling" the university continues to pursue pay increments tied to job performance, which he called "archaic thinking," "old-school economics" and "seriously flawed."

"It’s frustrating that the university is choosing . . . to stand on a principle that’s keeping the students from their education," McKaig said. "It’s keeping our members from their jobs and their vocational livelihood — keeping the food off the table and the mortgages not paid — standing on principle."

From the SP

  1. #1 by Saskboy on November 28, 2007 - 10:26 am

    How can anything be more unfair?

    How’s an unconditional 33% opposed to a conditional aggregate 17.85%?

  2. #2 by Leighton Tebay on November 28, 2007 - 2:31 pm


    I’m not really comparing contracts between unions at the U of S. 17% does seem reasonable compared to 33%.

    Based on this it sounds like both unions have been smokin the sweet herb.

  3. #3 by Saskboy on November 28, 2007 - 9:55 pm

    Why does ~17% seem reasonable to management’s ~33%?

  4. #4 by Leighton Tebay on November 28, 2007 - 10:30 pm

    17% over 3 years is only what…about 5% each year. That is about 40-60% higher than the national inflation rate. Management takes 10% a year. Both out pace inflation increasing the cost of education yet again. One just is just less than the other.

Comments are closed.