CP train crews reject contract extension

Unionized train crews have rejected a one-year contract extension with Canadian Pacific Railway.

Approximately 3,000 CP conductors and train engineers who are part of the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference (TCRC) voted on the deal earlier this week.

The rejection represents a setback to CP’s efforts aimed at mending strained relations with unionized railway employees.

The current TCRC contract that covers train crews is due to expire Dec. 31.

“While disappointed, I have been clear that we are focused on improving our relationship with our (train and engine) employees and that commitment remains unchanged,” said CP president Keith Creel.

“We look forward to working with the union membership to better understand this result and to discuss next steps.”

ADVERTISMENT

In a recent conference call with investors, Creel said he was committed to smoothing over employee relations that had become strained under former CP boss Hunter Harrison.

During his tenure at CP, Harrison reduced employee numbers, reeled in costs and increased railroad efficiency.

However, the moves had a deleterious impact on employee relations.

Creel told investors earlier this year that he was determined to smooth over feathers that had been ruffled and usher in a new era of improved employee relations.

A total of 1,725 ballots were cast in the TCRC ratification vote, including 1,158 votes against and 567 in favour, according to a TCRC document

ADVERTISMENT

In a recent news release, CP said that it has had a successful year on the labour front, negotiating a number of long-term agreements ahead of expiry.

“These agreements centred on a common vision that was in the best interests of the entire CP family, our customers and our shareholders,” the news release stated.

“The one-year proposal to the TCRC-T&E was an early offer and consistent with that approach.”

CP officials were scheduled to meet with the union leaders today to discuss the results of the vote and next steps leading to the renewal of the collective agreement.

“We remain optimistic that we can come to a mutually beneficial agreement with the TCRC–T&E — an agreement that meets the needs of our Canadian conductors and engineers as well as our customers and shareholders,” Creel said.

ADVERTISMENT

Contact brian.cross@producer.com

  • bufford54

    In the end, CP’s and the Teamsters ratification contract will ultimately result in costlier transportation costs to consumers. For CP to claim they want to meet the needs of the consumer, is laughable.

  • Joe Schmoe

    CP Rail wants a one year extension on the current collective agreement because they are waiting for another conservative government to replace Justin Trudeau. When that happens the workers at CP Rail will have no chance at improving their work environment. The employees know this and want to hold this current liberal government’s feet to the fire. The employees are obviously more intelligent than the teamsters union. Let’s see how Justin Trudeau handles a railway strike.

  • Joe Schmoe

    The Canadian government should cleanse CP Rail of all foreign yankee ownership. Keith Creel needs to go back to his own country south of the border. Keith Creel is a human rights and labour rights abuser just like his mentor Hunter Harrison. Keith Creel is not welcome in Canada!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Harold

      Canadians do not have a controlling interest in either CN or CP Rail; our government allowed that to happen long ago. Our Governments of the past were never too concerned with protecting our Canadian interests. Bill Gates for example, is the largest share holder of CN; how do you cleanse that?

  • Harold

    Without government, explain the simplicity a little further, but this time, try not to forget the rules of Law and international Laws which already govern what exists, that also at the same time limits our governments involvement; there are many. What you are saying is very simple but will in fact become more expensive that what Canadians can now afford, not to mention the Law Suit settlements and buyouts along the way. In other words – that ship has already sailed and out too far to reach. That is the penalty for allowing the government a free hand in giving away our Sovereignty and Democracy. As always, it is was done by waving a carrot in the faces of Canadians in the skewed name of progress.

  • Harold

    You cannot Annex what the Courts and the Supreme Court will not allow. The Court does not provide you with a provision that allows or enables you to break the Law. The CWB was another government giveaway of Canadian ownership but is not comparable to CN or CP Rail. How do you propose annexing company shares? Do you think that you can just propose a lawful zero value? Is it possible for me to annex your business just upon my, or any majority’s say so and against your will? As with any business, there is value of the land, value of the building and assets, and value of the gross annual income and combined the figure represents the total value. You likely know all of this so I assume that your comment was intended humor.

    • ed

      The Supreme Court gets over 2000 applications a year and refuses to see most of them, so you can, to a great degree get away, even in a somewhat considered just society, with annexing something and getting away with that crime or ones that are even worse. It happens, and is not always funny. If you were the one that lost your farm over such matters, your livelihood or perhaps the life of one of your friends or relatives or are someone that wrongly spends the majority of their life inside of a penitentiary waiting for a new trial, it truly is not that good. The humor in these types of things, although it is more common than one would think, is not really that funny unless you are not thinking too deeply.

      • Harold

        You cannot Annex if you cannot move forward in Court. Your illustration of 2000 unheard applications are irrelevant. If the Court would not have heard Harper, the CWB would still exist as it was: untouched, and Harper would still be standing in line. What crime are you speaking of? You are making blanket statements and Identifying nothing specific. People are in jail for violations of many different elements in Law; they are not there because each broke the same law whereby you can blanket them. The ones getting away with crime are only those who remain at large or are at large because the victim didn’t know their Rights.

        • ed

          That crime didn’t actually go to court, at all. It only got run thru parliament by his now disgraced henchmen. Farmers are sometimes not aware of their rights, but like other victums, that does not exonerate those of those crimes. They may have unknowingly stolen billions of dollars off the prairies annually and into the forseeable future, but their pure stupidity and the systems ineffectiveness in helping the victums still does not make that kind of thing right. It does not make it particularly acceptable, it merely makes it possible.

          • Harold

            Harper did in fact go to the Supreme Court and his first claim was rejected. He made adjustments to the CWB and Board members (the farmers were made unaware- non disclosure) and with those adjustments (check the records and the telling board shift) he returned to the Supreme Court where the Government sale of the CWB was accepted.The Sale of the CWB was done by a Court order allowing him and his government the power to do it. (no stake holder challenge) Because you don’t know this, it does not mean that it didn’t happen. Not “at all” you say? It happened twice. Not knowing this has led you to a dialogue of your own fiction. All of the evidence is in place and only remains hidden to those who fail to look. Court Records are a public domain.
            No one in Parliament has the power to break the law unless they repeal the law first and that Law becomes no law. That means that they can never break the law and that they are tried in Court as well. Yes, the government went to Court. (Harper) No; the sale was not an act of parliament or a “run thru”. The Constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court and the Courts decision allowed the Government the power to sell the CWB. I am of the opinion that Harper created in his second attempt a – no stakeholder challenge – to enable the government to sell the CWB. If there is no stakeholder challenge – the sale is permitted. If there was not a stakeholder challenge, then what can be said about the CWB Board members who represented the farmers? (the stakeholders) Did they sell them out? Did you notice the prior Board member shift and downsize?
            Secondly, the Supreme Court is the highest APPEALS Court where their decisions (opinion) are made final. They hear the cases that have already been heard and decided by the lower Courts of APPEAL. When you say that there are 2000 applications, they are NOT applications of cases that have not already been Tried and judged, they are LAST APPEAL applications of those unsatisfied with a judgement and want the final word. At times the final word of the Supreme Court matches the opinion of the Lower Court of appeal and that Case is not re-tried and it is rejected by the Supreme Court. Again, the 2000 that you made reference to are irrelevant; the 2000 in the mean time are bound by the opinion of the lower Courts of appeal. The Lower Courts handle Crime and the Supreme Court of appeal handles Constitutional challenges. Crime is Totally understood by the lower Superior Courts so your reference to crime is mismatched.
            Again, you are a victim of your own fiction. When you want to give me a “lesson”, at least have a general knowledge of the subject matter. I believe that Harper did commit a fraud but that case has not been gathered yet and given to the Court to be tried; my belief is not yet proven – so my belief is only the strength of my mistrust. Often times people take their mistrust and create around it a fantasy of Law and crime. The evidence of fraud is held up buy the ones who were involved and are sworn to secrecy; a carefully crafted fraud. There is no appeal to fraud that the Supreme Court will hear; no one has a Canadian constitutional excuse to commit an act of fraud.
            Unbelievably, this has all been OK just as long as Farmers continue to sell their grain.
            G3 façade – now there are three governments: two (51%) which are foreign. Am I making this last statement up? perhaps so.

          • ed

            Yes indeed! Almost none of your babble is true. It does sounds good and wisdomous however. Not even your spelling is correct. You have a very limited knowledge of our court system here in Canada and may have never sat in on cases within the walls of the Supreme Court or studied extensively the procedures by which they adhere. Do not feel bad however, as you are not very different than Steven Harper himself in that regard. He did have a long track record of getting his ass handed back to him inside that building. The Supreme Court prevailed his attacks on them,…..Mr. Harpers time in office did not and his political career was very limited…..Thankfully!

  • Harold

    And this will all happen because of a Rail labour dispute? You are not lacking in your imaginations, and that is for certain.

    • ed

      Thanks!

  • old grouchy

    Hmmmmmmmmmm – – – salaries well north of $110k a year and the poor peoples are needing raises – – – aw shucks don’t it suck to make such piss ant wages!