Bargaining news

Updates
PSAC members representing the Customs and Immigration Union (CIU) gathered in Ottawa from March 24 to 26 for the FB National Bargaining Conference to elect their bargaining team and set priorities that will drive the next round of negotiations for the Border Services (FB) group.
SV bargaining: Team pushes for stronger protections as employer rejects group-specific proposals [2]
Our SV bargaining team met with Treasury Board on March 11-12 to push for stronger job security, improved family leave, and fair compensation for specialized workers.
Since reaching impasse, many members have been asking what this means for bargaining and what comes next. One thing is clear: our work has not stopped. Our PA bargaining team met in caucus March 11–12 to analyze options and prepare for the next phase of negotiations.
The Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board has informed PSAC that it will appoint mediators following the PA and EB bargaining teams declaring impasse last month. Mediation is now scheduled for April 28–30 for the PA group, with dates to be determined for the EB group.
While workforce adjustment and employment transition provisions in federal collective agreements are designed to limit the harm of job cuts for indeterminate employees, term employees face a different — and often more precarious — reality.
After years of review and negotiations, federal public service unions including PSAC have secured meaningful improvements to the National Joint Council (NJC) Travel Directive that better reflect the real costs and realities of work-related travel.
Our EB bargaining team last met with Treasury Board on January 21–22, with the employer refusing to engage on most of our proposals. With the government’s lack of overall mandate at the table and their continued disrespect towards EB members and the entire public service, the EB team has made the decision to declare impasse.
Our PA bargaining team returned to the table with Treasury Board on January 21–22, pressing the employer for responses to some of our key proposals. What we heard was a resounding no on some of the issues that matter most to members.
- ‹ previous [16]
- 2 of 23
- next › [17]