My Photo
Name:
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Saturday, September 24, 2005

Ratification

As I mentioned before, my gut feeling tells me that we'll be looking at ratification in a couple of weeks. (Of course, my gut feeling told me this lockout would never happen in the first place...)

So how will ratification work and how long will it take? Robin Rowland posted on the subject a while back:

"Both sides, management and union have to ratify an agreement. There have been cases in Canada where management, not the union, has rejected an agreement that was reached at the negotiating table. Given the sad record of Senior Management at CBC this could be a possiblity in our case."

And here's what one correspondent says on the subject:

"This is a difficult question because this is not a strike. At any point the CBC can unlock the doors. I understand that the CBC will not do this. Once there is a deal, it would have to be printed (maybe translated) in some form. Printing won't take long, but translating could.

Then there must be meetings everywhere to explain the deal and a secret ballot. Let's try to estimate: d-day the contract is done; d-day plus 1 it is ready and on its way to the members. Say day 2-5 for meetings (it could be longer); Day 6 & 7 for the vote; Day 8 and 9 to count. There would have to be a return to work deal as well. For example what shows will be on the different networks (remember this is traditionally season change, patricularly in TV).

In units that don't work 9-5, who works what shift? Remember all the schedulers are also out. Say day 10 & 11 for that.So it could be a while. Of course the CBC could make it go quicker if they accept the bargaining committee's recomendation to accept the deal and open the door. But don't hold your breath for that!"

If anybody else has any thoughts on the matter, I'd love to hear them.

10 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

here's a simpler way. fontana can force us into binding arbitration.
as i recall - that's one of your suggestions workerbee. the minister has ruled out back to work legislation - although sam bulte seems somewhat warm to the idea.
but binding arbritration is different. with that - no vote required, therefore, no reason to delay going back in the building.
both sides will hate it of course - but both sides at least will win some points and have an arbitrator to blame for what they lose. everyone saves face, everyone gets back to work. sounds good to me.

4:03 PM  
Blogger cbcworkerbee said...

Yes, I'm all over that one. What are the odds?

4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

better than they were friday morning before the summons from fontana. point is, the federal gov't has now raised expectations that this thing is getting settled. you don't publicly lament the situation at the cbc, chastise both sides for being unwilling or unable to cut a deal and call the "chiefs" into your office, without an strategy to get this fixed and fixed FAST, especially, when only hours later, you're going to be in question period.
having said that.....this whole thing has surprised me. i didn't actually believe there would be a lockout. once there was, i did't think we'd see week SEVEN!!!!!!!
so i've guessed wrong all along. i'm just hoping the odds are, that i can't be wrong ALL the time.

5:32 PM  
Blogger cbcworkerbee said...

I know the feeling.

7:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From what I understand, binding arbitration is not an option for us (too bad). Which is why the Labour Minister offered a federal mediator. His/her decisions are not binding, but rejecting them would be embarassing. The Guild said yes, the Corporation said no.
So, there are only two options, back to work legislation (which has never been done in a lockout and we don't want) or negotiated settlement. Or perhaps Joe Fontana will twist the CBC's arm on Monday and in a face saving gesture, the Corpse will FINALLY accept a federal mediator.
(this is a "special" mediator aside from the two that are currently working on negotiations).
A heavy hitting federal mediator would have this solved in days. Wonder why the CBC wouldn't accept it 3 weeks ago?

9:46 PM  
Blogger cbcworkerbee said...

Which begs the question: why is binding arbitration not an option for us?

11:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have the same question - why is binding arbitration NOT an option?
the blogger who said it isn't - why not? i suppose a special mediator along with a finger wagging from the minister directed at both sides might accomplish the same thing....whatever works. I don't care what they call him/her - just get the damn thing done.

2:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I will try to find out more specifically. I'm not sure if it's Crown Corporation rules or not. But, I do know for a fact that binding arbitration is not a tool that can be used in this particular situation. Stay tuned. I'll find out by Monday at the latest and post on this string.

11:31 AM  
Anonymous jenkew said...

Anything?

11:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Binding arbitration can happen in at least 2 ways:
1)both sides agree;
2)Parliament passes a law.
There may be other ways.

10:55 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home