If I want to be in the union, so be it. If I don't want to be in the union, so be that too. But regardless of which side of the debate a person happens to fall on, all employees should demand the right to vote on this very important issue. If the primary purpose and philosophy of a union is strength through solidarity, how is that aim served through forced membership?
R
Ryan Meilleur
12 years ago
The push for unionization is either undertaken by employees, in the best interest of employees; or it violates the fundamental principles of the labor movement and should be vehemently opposed. This is a deal that has blocked employee involvement every step of the way, and is more akin to a hostile takeover than organized solidarity. An epic fail.
J
Jay Christensen
12 years ago
This Union Talk is simply a form of Tax for the right to work in paying Union dues. Dues which in my opinion bring No benefits to me as an individual
G
Gary Ruta
12 years ago
I believe we have the individual right to decide if we want to work in a union environment or not, and under the circumstances are morally entitled to a vote on unionization. Any union that conscripts members against their collective will can NOT claim to represent the best interests of those employees, but only the best interests of the union.
G
Gerry Draganiuk
12 years ago
The union claims that membership provides protection against an arbitrary change of the conditions of employment. Yet in demanding IT staff be included in the AUPE, they are imposing just such changes; dues, benefits, red circles? Further, what is the expectation of union members' responsibilities to the union?
R
Rachel Walkington
12 years ago
AUPE is not an adequate representative for all members within IT, as numerous individuals have other professional designations that require different advocacy priorities.
D
David Larsen
12 years ago
Having a voice is important. It is not whether something is favourable or not, although the merits do warrant discussion. IT has not had a choice in a lot of decisions that concern us, let's agree that a choice in this is important. If AUPE does not care about how we feel, then it is harder to see how they are in our best interest.
D
Doug Marleau
12 years ago
No union please.
C
Carol Holod
12 years ago
I agree we should have the opportunity to vote. Thank You to the organizers of this petition for getting this started.
A
Anonymous
12 years ago
I'm curious as to who signed the memorandum of understanding on behalf of AHS without consulting impacted employees. Although I'm unsure as to whether I'm affected personally, I utterly disagree with the concept of bringing in the union and the way in which this is being handled.
J
Jeremy Fidelack
12 years ago
J Feature, the point is that the majority of people believe that their position in the company will be eroded by being forced to join a union. Here are some examples: Paying union dues, Paying for un-needed benefits without an opt-out feature, red-circled vacation days, losing flexible personal days, unfavourable sick bank instead of salary continuity, having job opportunities tied to seniority rather than performance. Also, I wouldn't say that the union negotiated salary increases compared to wage freezes for out of scope is as clear as you state; If out of scope staff is red circled upon entry to the union, then they will not get the wage increases that you claim.
J
Jeremy Fidelack
12 years ago
The question of validity, raised by the person using a pseudonym instead of their real name...
J
Jason Dai
12 years ago
Right now there's a target bill that is trying to put a stop on salary increase for union people (http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/aupe-preparing-to-rally-against-new-labour-bills-1.1565092). So, given the current circumstance, it might not be a good time to get involved with union.
C
Colleen Fernley
12 years ago
As my role was not in scope when I went into, I should at the very least, have a say as to whether I join or not.
L
Linda Hartford
12 years ago
It is my feeling that we are here to serve the patients, to do that well even when it requires the occassional extra few hours, and to be fiscally responsible to both the Province and the tax payer (who are also our clients). If a strike was called, it is the patients who would suffer and our benefit would be nominal at best; it often takes years of work to make up for the lost wages, and by that time one could be on strike again.
I am not entirely opposed to unions (though I see little place for them in our society with the legal protections we benefit from in Canada)but I am opposed to them in a non-profit organization. We are here to serve ... and in the process, we make pretty good wages when compared across the workforce in the province, have good benefits, and an HR department that will do what they can to ensure our work environment is the best it can be.
I am entirely not in favour of being unionized without a majority of employees wanting it. It would not be in the best interest of the employee, AHS, the Province or, most importantly, the patients who we serve.
G
Glenn Harms
12 years ago
Was forced into a union once before. I was red circled for the privilege. My OOS managers have looked after my concerns better than any union did.
J
James Curl
12 years ago
Featured
I have not worked for a union in the past by choice. I would consider it an infringment on my working agreement to change the terms of employment after the fact without giving me an option to vote on it.
B
Bruce Wickens
12 years ago
Featured
Bringing AHS IT in-scope will ultimitely increase cost and decrease service levels for the patients of Alberta. AHS IT analysts and engineers have a say in the direction of their careers and the gross majority of positions do not belong in the AUPE GSS barganing unit at the very least.
If I want to be in the union, so be it. If I don't want to be in the union, so be that too. But regardless of which side of the debate a person happens to fall on, all employees should demand the right to vote on this very important issue. If the primary purpose and philosophy of a union is strength through solidarity, how is that aim served through forced membership?
The push for unionization is either undertaken by employees, in the best interest of employees; or it violates the fundamental principles of the labor movement and should be vehemently opposed. This is a deal that has blocked employee involvement every step of the way, and is more akin to a hostile takeover than organized solidarity. An epic fail.
This Union Talk is simply a form of Tax for the right to work in paying Union dues. Dues which in my opinion bring No benefits to me as an individual
I believe we have the individual right to decide if we want to work in a union environment or not, and under the circumstances are morally entitled to a vote on unionization. Any union that conscripts members against their collective will can NOT claim to represent the best interests of those employees, but only the best interests of the union.
The union claims that membership provides protection against an arbitrary change of the conditions of employment. Yet in demanding IT staff be included in the AUPE, they are imposing just such changes; dues, benefits, red circles? Further, what is the expectation of union members' responsibilities to the union?
AUPE is not an adequate representative for all members within IT, as numerous individuals have other professional designations that require different advocacy priorities.
Having a voice is important. It is not whether something is favourable or not, although the merits do warrant discussion. IT has not had a choice in a lot of decisions that concern us, let's agree that a choice in this is important. If AUPE does not care about how we feel, then it is harder to see how they are in our best interest.
No union please.
I agree we should have the opportunity to vote. Thank You to the organizers of this petition for getting this started.
I'm curious as to who signed the memorandum of understanding on behalf of AHS without consulting impacted employees. Although I'm unsure as to whether I'm affected personally, I utterly disagree with the concept of bringing in the union and the way in which this is being handled.
J Feature, the point is that the majority of people believe that their position in the company will be eroded by being forced to join a union. Here are some examples: Paying union dues, Paying for un-needed benefits without an opt-out feature, red-circled vacation days, losing flexible personal days, unfavourable sick bank instead of salary continuity, having job opportunities tied to seniority rather than performance. Also, I wouldn't say that the union negotiated salary increases compared to wage freezes for out of scope is as clear as you state; If out of scope staff is red circled upon entry to the union, then they will not get the wage increases that you claim.
The question of validity, raised by the person using a pseudonym instead of their real name...
Right now there's a target bill that is trying to put a stop on salary increase for union people (http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/aupe-preparing-to-rally-against-new-labour-bills-1.1565092). So, given the current circumstance, it might not be a good time to get involved with union.
As my role was not in scope when I went into, I should at the very least, have a say as to whether I join or not.
It is my feeling that we are here to serve the patients, to do that well even when it requires the occassional extra few hours, and to be fiscally responsible to both the Province and the tax payer (who are also our clients). If a strike was called, it is the patients who would suffer and our benefit would be nominal at best; it often takes years of work to make up for the lost wages, and by that time one could be on strike again. I am not entirely opposed to unions (though I see little place for them in our society with the legal protections we benefit from in Canada)but I am opposed to them in a non-profit organization. We are here to serve ... and in the process, we make pretty good wages when compared across the workforce in the province, have good benefits, and an HR department that will do what they can to ensure our work environment is the best it can be. I am entirely not in favour of being unionized without a majority of employees wanting it. It would not be in the best interest of the employee, AHS, the Province or, most importantly, the patients who we serve.
Was forced into a union once before. I was red circled for the privilege. My OOS managers have looked after my concerns better than any union did.
I have not worked for a union in the past by choice. I would consider it an infringment on my working agreement to change the terms of employment after the fact without giving me an option to vote on it.
Bringing AHS IT in-scope will ultimitely increase cost and decrease service levels for the patients of Alberta. AHS IT analysts and engineers have a say in the direction of their careers and the gross majority of positions do not belong in the AUPE GSS barganing unit at the very least.