Breaking News

Defining positions NPF will represent and ongoing efforts to unite with AMPMQ

By NPF-FPN Webmaster | June 19, 2017

“Who’s In and Who’s Out?” One the most important decisions in any certification effort is which positions are included and which are excluded from representation. Employers typically want to minimize the number of positions that are represented to minimize the representative’s bargaining power. Treasury Board has proposed over 1,100 member positions they believe should be … Read more

Bill C-7 Senate approval and NPF Membership Cards

By NPF-FPN Webmaster | June 8, 2017

We are pleased to announce that Bill C-7 has passed the Senate and now awaits the Governor General’s Royal Assent to become law. This legislation will support the establishment of an effective framework for your new RCMP association once we achieve certification. We do have some concerns about the expanded management rights clause and how … Read more

What’s Next?

By NPF-FPN Webmaster | June 7, 2017

Why We Need National Representation

By NPF-FPN Webmaster | June 7, 2017

NPF Application closes – two groups apply to intervene

By NPF-FPN Webmaster | June 2, 2017

As many of you know, the PSLREB closing date was May 26, 2017. That date has passed and we have been notified that two groups have applied for the right to intervene in the NPF application, the Canadian Police Association (CPA) and L’Association des Membres de la Police Montée du Québec (AMPMQ). You can read … Read more

The Search for a new Commissioner and our Lacklustre Pay Package

By NPF-FPN Webmaster | May 22, 2017

As we are all aware, Commissioner Paulson will be retiring on June 30, 2017. As we updated last week, the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, Sheila Fraser and the Auditor General have all called for some major structural and leadership changes within the management of the RCMP (May18 update). As a proactive step, the NPF … Read more

10 thoughts on “Breaking News

  1. Gentlemen:
    I have very serious concerns with the Commissioner’s continued attempts to push forward our last pay negotiation. When the SCC declared our past labour negotiation mechanism unconstitutional, and gave the federal government a deadline to rectify it, a deadline they have ignored with apparent impunity, should that not have nullified any of the “tainted” processes that were pending? At the very least, I would have thought it should at least have scuttled the portion of the pending agreements that would come into effect following the SCC decision.

    I am not a strong believer in coincidence. It is my opinion that the current government is stalling the passage of C-7 in order to forestall the inevitable and meanwhile the Commissioner seems to be taking full advantage of the very obvious vacuum that exits in our representation, one which he helped orchestrate by unilaterally scuttling the SRR Program that essentially robbed the collective membership of any meaningful representation mechanism. I had read your previous posting with regard to seeing the delay in the passage of bill C-7 as a bit of a blessing with mixed feelings.

    My feelings on the matter are no longer mixed. I am of the opinion that damage is being done daily to both individual members and to groups of members, some of it irreversible and irreparable, by senior RCMP management as it runs roughshod over the unrepresented membership. I am hoping that there is some form of pressure that can be brought to bear on the current government to pass C-7 and am looking forward to hearing your thoughts on what can be done. We are on the verge of yet another multi-month parliamentary break, surely I can’t be the only member who has expressed frustration and worry with what is going on and how long this has taken.

    I have had a 26+ year run with the RCMP and never, at any point in that time, have I felt as much mistrust toward senior management as I do currently. I didn’t ever think I would ever miss Commissioner Elliot.

    Respectfully,

    J. Robilliard

  2. Gentlemen:

    I saw the announcement of the pay package earlier in the day. I note that it represents an actual loss of ground of inflation is taken into account. I also noted with appropriate disdain that there was a lack of detail with respect to any sort of implementation date or time frame for when the members can expect to see this big wind fall. I also couldn’t help but notice the Commissioner’s tone when telling us how lucky we were to be getting this generous settlement so shortly after he saw fit to award generous performance bonuses to senior managers. There isn’t even a pretence of empathy or the slightest sign that he is worried about the optics of his actions. The word of the day is unscrupulous. Just one more thing I was hoping you could clarify for me and possibly other members; what is the “market adjustment” and does everyone get this or is it just earmarked for those living in high rent localities like the GTA, Vancouver and the like?

    Any insights you have would be most appreciated.

    Biding my time until June 30th.

    Regards,

    Jamie Robilliard

  3. This new pay package speaks to the preserving of cost of living for those in Fort McMurray, is there going to be any push for similar high cost of living area like the lower mainland BC where the cost of living is even greater?

  4. I was a Shop Steward and Plant representative for the International Woodworkers of America. I was a sub-rep in the SRR Program for several years. I see a key issue, will Treasury Board look at this as a “first” contract or accept the current working pay and benefits as an existing contract.

  5. Well gentlemen it’s been an eventful week. So much accomplished and yet so much more to do and prepare for. Congratulations to those early brave souls who put themselves out there and removed their yellow stripes, they risked reprisal but firmly stood their ground. Kudos should go out to all who quickly joined them as well, to steady the line. At first it looked like management was going to take a hard line and phrases like “Code of Conduct” were being dropped in order to bully the early few into submission. What an about face occurred when, instead of submission, the bully got a thousand- fold show of member unity. Now the tone is contrite from the boss. He seeks our understanding, and tells us that he “gets it” and uses the word “we” alot. Sorry to say that I am not buying this for a second. He can’t manage to even get through his “Act of Contrition” memo before he starts reminding us how fortunate we were that he and Uncle Ralph had our backs, did some heavy lifting, got us a really sweet deal. He “gets it” like Marie Antoinette got it with her “Let them eat cake.” statement. I’ll know that he really “gets it” when he just stops talking.

    In the meantime I will enjoy watching the little odometer on the NPF site merrily clicking away as each new member joins the association and counting down the days to Canada day, not so much because I profess to be any more patriotic than any other Canadian, but because I plan on holding my own “gone party” as it will be the first day of the rest of our collective RCMP careers.

    Keep the faith all and know you have our support. The best defense against a bully has proven to be, once again, to stand up to him.

    J. Robilliard

Leave a comment