Background
The WCSOA press release issued, March 28, 2011, includes the following statement:
“As part of the LRB hearing on exclusions, the corporation submitted sworn statements which included generalizations regarding BCF Ship's officers – who ensure safety onboard - that were both negative, and misleading, engineers are saying.”
The sworn statements are Will Says submitted to arbitrator Vince Ready, upon which he based his decision to allow BCF to implement exclusions
Some of these are posted on this page for people who want more and specific information.
Also, the following is a further articulation of why engineers are raising awareness of the dangers of exclusions and calling for a halt to their implementation, as well as for a meeting with BC Ferries to “to consult with them to discuss and resolve any problems that management identifies in relation to union membership.”
Background:
Past LRB chair, Paul Weiler, stressed: “One of the fundamental reasons to belong to a union is to receive the protection of the collective against the abuse of the employer.”
This is at the heart of BCF senior engineers’ current, pressing issue, which is primarily and fundamentally about safety. They are warning that removal of the protection of their union (BCFMWU) will greatly constrain their ability to voice concerns and to report to governing and regulatory authorities.
Binding arbitration by Vince Ready had ended the 2003 fleet-wide strike which resulted from management demands for wage concessions, changes to work hours and contracting out. The issue of exclusions of selected employee positions from membership in the BCFMU wasn’t resolved and deferred.
Late last year, at the request of BCF, Ready announced he would hold hearings on exclusions, asking for the “production of ‘Will Say’ witness statements to be produced and exchanged in order to define the basic evidence of the parties.”
Engineers are saying sworn statements submitted by the corporation are negative, and misleading and calling for a halt to the implementation of exclusion - enabled by Ready’s decision – which is now in appeal process, currently in the hands of the LRB.
For example: corporation statements that indicate that ships officers must be prevented from discussing safety and regulatory issues with their governing authorities. See paragraph 38(i) of BCF Vice President of Engineering Mark Collins Will Say (September 9, 2010).
The safety of the public is the primary concern and responsibility for BCF engineers, and it is both necessary and a regulatory requirement that senior ships officers not withhold information and be able to discuss such matters freely and unfettered
The corporation makes unsubstantiated allegations that, “issues involving the safe and effective operation of the vessel may go unreported to management.” In fact the opposite is often true.
There are many instances where safety questions have been brought to management by ships officers and ignored by the corporation. For example, in June, 2002, a committee of senior ships officers published the Tired Iron Report, (BCFMWU) expressing concern that a lack of resources was being provided to ensure the safety of the aging BC Ferry fleet.
The findings were first denied by BCF management, which threatened discipline and legal action against the authors who thankfully had the protection of the Union. Less than two years later, an extensive program of vessel replacement and upgrading was initiated
The corporation claims that ships officers can only provide leadership if excluded from collective representation. Please see paragraph 36 of the Collins Will Say.
Again, too often, the opposite is true. There is a long list of BCF employees who have been fired or disciplined for not being team players, or passively resisting company directives.
It is clear to engineers, based on BCF actions and sworn statements of managers (Will Says), that the corporation wants ships officers to be excluded from collective representation, to be controlled and constrained. Engineers fear this may impact public safety. Please see: Mark Collins (paragraph 4); Wayne Ralph (paragraph 56), Paul Radford (paragraph 24) Mark Nemeth (paragraph 17) George Capacci. (paragraph. 12) in Will Says submitted to the Ready exclusion/inclusion arbitration, Sept 9, 2010.
With very few exceptions, no one in head office can operate any BC ferry. Yet David Hahn and senior management - who are not qualified nor recognized to operate vessels - want to manage ferries from shore.
In contrast, engineers officers are highly skilled and certified employees with vast experience at sea who work in a very technical environment, under numerous regulations and systems, all implemented for passenger safety and protection of the environment.
Virtually all safety systems and regulations are based on a relationship with senior ships officers, who are directly and personally responsible by law to all the authorities for the safety of the vessels, passengers, and protection of the environment.
BC Ferries shore management wants to take control of this relationship.
The corporation doesn’t maintain that is a conflict of interest, but that there “is a potential for conflict.” Please see: Rationale for Exclusions (paragraph 25 BCF); Final Arguments re. Exclusion Arbitration.
In reality, there is no conflict, potential or otherwise; BC Ferries and the public have always had the full trust and support of the ships’ officers.
Engineers want to work with BC Ferries to resolve any issues or problems regarding the safe and efficient operation of BCF vessels and to achieve the goals of the company, unclouded by management labour relations objectives.
The current implementation plan, which is now being unilaterally imposed, is clearly divisive, does not seriously explore more beneficial alternatives to problem solving and overrides the professional responsibilities of ships’ officers.
The Sailsafe initiative is an example of how the employees - especially ships officers - and the company can work together to make positive improvements to identified issues.
Engineers are saying that exclusions – in stark contrast -will not work as well or as safely as BC’s long-standing integrated ferry system.
----------------------------------------------------
Will Says
|
