Canadian Railroads > CP Running Trades ratify contract; Improved Rest provision

Announced today,
running trades employees at CP, represented by the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference (TCRC),
ratified a new four year contract with a vote in favour of 64.7%.

TCRC has revealed that employees are now able to book 48 hour rest periods three times per month.
The previous contract allowed for two.
Also, there will be a 9 percent wage increase over the four years.

http://teamstersrail.ca/Teamsters_Ratify.html

http://investor.cpr.ca/news/press-release-details/2018/TCRC-TE-ratify-four-year-agreement-with-CP/default.aspx

Earlier, signals employees, represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
ratified a new three year contract with 78% of employees voting in favour.

http://investor.cpr.ca/news/press-release-details/2018/System-Council-No-11-of-the-IBEW-ratify-three-year-agreement-with-CP/default.aspx

Three 48 hour periods booked in advance is a huge improvement.

I wonder if the extra boards will be expanded to allow adequate staff to fill in?

Posted from Android

At CN we can take an "EO" of up to 48 hrs. (basically just an additional 24 hrs. off on top of the max 24 hrs. rest we can book at the home terminal after a trip), but only AFTER we've worked 1075 miles...BUT...if you arrive home, tie up your ticket and are at, say 1074.9 miles and your monthly mile date resets before your next trip (monthly=3800 mi. for Engr, 4300 for Cndr) for the purposes of taking an EO, you start at 0 again:)
 

Look what it has become.When I hired out in the early 70's railroads were mark off to report paradise.In fact, that was a factor  in deciding to go railroading.I knew when they started the "availabilty policy" it was only going to get worse.And it will get worse some more.Bill Webb

Is it permissible to book the 3 48hr peri0ds consecutively ..... thereby getting 6 days off ?

Bill Miller
Galt, ON

9% over four years is terrible.  With the labor shortage facing Canada, they should have gotten twice that as wages are being forced up do to supply.   It seems to me Canadian Rail Labor is massively underpaid compared to US Labor. 

spider1319 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look what it has become.When I hired out in the
> early 70's railroads were mark off to report
> paradise.In fact, that was a factor  in deciding
> to go railroading.I knew when they started the
> "availabilty policy" it was only going to get
> worse.And it will get worse some more.Bill Webb

And one wonders why railroads can't find employees to work there at many places any more...  A mediocre paying job with horrible working hours/on call all the time and treated like crap by management.

Rivington Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 9% over four years is terrible.  With the labor
> shortage facing Canada, they should have gotten
> twice that as wages are being forced up do to
> supply.   It seems to me Canadian Rail Labor is
> massively underpaid compared to US Labor. 

One big difference in "labor cost" is the employer's share of healthcare costs.  In the US, depending on the state, healthcare costs can approach 50% of salary for some lower salary employees.  A 2015 Canadian study contended that the US medical care cost for a family of four was nearly double the Canadian employer cost for same.  And, that's with substantial co-pays and deductibles on US plans. In NJ, for a 100 person company we paid about $20,000 per employee. The employee paid a scale from about $3,000 to $7,000.

Some of the political nonsense around US health care reform calls for 50 state access, so a NY employer could buy a medical plan from a low cost, low coverage state. Or a MA plan which provides good maternity and mental health coverage might be replaced by a state's plan which offers minimal coverage.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Some of the political nonsense around US health
> care reform calls for 50 state access, so a NY
> employer could buy a medical plan from a low cost,
> low coverage state. Or a MA plan which provides
> good maternity and mental health coverage might be
> replaced by a state's plan which offers minimal
> coverage.

That's why you have a plan with nationally-mandated standards.
Until that happens, the US will remain, in my personal estimation, a third-world country.

 

Will MacKenzie
Dundas, ON