Employees Eligibility for Membership in COTAPSAI

(City of Toronto Administrative, Professional

Supervisory Association, Incorporated)

 (City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City Council to be held on October 28, 1998.)

 The Corporate Services Committee recommends the adoption of Recommendations (a) (b) and (c) embodied in the following communication (September 2, 1998) from the President, City of Toronto Administrative, Professional Supervisory Association, Incorporated (COTAPSAI), regarding references made by City staff to employees respecting their eligibility for membership in COTAPSAI:

"It is recommended that City Council:

(a)direct appropriate City staff to amend any and all such references including Recommendation No. (4) of Clause No. 3 of Report No. 7 of The Corporate Services Committee, by striking out the phrase "who are members of COTAPSAI at December 31, 1997";

(b)direct the appropriate City staff to prepare and forward a communication, in consultation with COTAPSAI, outlining the implications of this change to all eligible employees who are not members of COTAPSAI employed by the former City of Toronto; and

(c)financially compensate the Association for that portion of member's dues lost since January 1, 1998, for all eligible non-union employees of the former City of Toronto who were dissuaded but may now wish to become members of COTAPSAI;"; and

reports having requested the Executive Director of Human Resources to submit a report to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on October 1, 1998, respecting Recommendation(c) above.

I am writing to express our deep concerns about misrepresentations being made by City staff to employees eligible for membership in COTAPSAI. These misrepresentations are discouraging eligible administrative, professional and supervisory employees from joining COTAPSAI.

Background:

During the past few months, a number of eligible employees (employed by the former City of Toronto) have expressed interest in joining the Association. Apparently, various human resources staff have advised them that joining COTAPSAI in 1998, would afford them no benefits. The human resources staff have been advising employees that they had to be members of COTAPSAI prior to January1, 1998, to be entitled to the terms and conditions of employment set out in the Consolidated Memorandum of Understanding with the City.

This misrepresentation is echoed in Clause No. 3 of Report No. 7 of The Corporate Services Committee, as adopted by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on June 3, 1998. Recommendation No. (4) of that clause is as follows:

"(4) notwithstanding Recommendation No. (3), the terms and conditions of employment for non-union employees of the former City of Toronto who are members of COTAPSAI at December 31, 1997 will continue until appropriate notice is given respecting any changes or amendments to their terms and conditions of employment".

If you review the Consolidated Memorandum of Understanding between the City and COTAPSAI, you will see that COTAPSAI is a bargaining agent for all employees of the City (subject to specific exceptions). COTAPSAI is a bargaining agent for all employees and not just those who are members of the Association. Therefore, all administrative, professional and supervisory employees are entitled to the terms and conditions of employment set out in the Consolidated Memorandum of Understanding with the City whether or not they are members of the Association. With respect to the misrepresentation in the aforementioned Clause No. 3 of Report No. 7, you will recall that COTAPSAI was not afforded the opportunity to comment on the contents of the report to City Council.

The act of directly or indirectly dissuading any eligible employee from joining COTAPSAI is a fundamental principle that the former City of Toronto and COTAPSAI embodied in its agreement more than 20years ago. Article 1.02(a) of the Consolidated Memorandum of Understanding between The Corporation of the City of Toronto and COTAPSAI reads as follows:

Membership in COTAPSAI

1.02(a) The City will not seek directly or indirectly to dissuade any eligible employee from joining COTAPSAI or holding office in COTAPSAI.

The City's misrepresentation regarding the issue of membership in COTAPSAI has damaged the Association and has negatively affected our ability to attract eligible employees - especially those employees previously employed by the former City of Toronto.

Recommendations:

We consider the City's actions a serious affront to COTAPSAI. We therefore request that the Corporate Services Committee adopt the following recommendations to remedy the situation:

(a)that the Corporate Services Committee direct appropriate City staff to amend any and all such references including Clause No. 3 of Recommendation No. (4) of Report No. 7 of TheCorporate Services Committee, by striking out the phrase "who are members of COTAPSAI at December 31, 1997;

(b)that the Corporate Services Committee direct the appropriate City staff to prepare and forward a communication, in consultation with COTAPSAI, outlining the implications of this change to all eligible employees who are not members of COTAPSAI employed by the former City of Toronto; and

(c)that the Corporate Services Committee financially compensate the Association for that portion of member's dues lost since January 1, 1998 for all eligible non-union employees of the former City of Toronto who were dissuaded, but may now wish to become members of COTAPSAI.

Your attention to this matter is appreciated. On behalf of the Board of Directors, I welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter further at the next Corporate Services Committee meeting.

--------

Mr. David Neil, President, City of Toronto Administrative, Professional Supervisory Association, Incorporated (COTAPSAI), appeared before the Corporate Services Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 29, 1998) from the Executive Director, Human Resources:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to respond to concerns contained in a September 2, 1998 letter to the Corporate Services Committee from COTAPSAI.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the correspondence from COTAPSAI be received.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At a meeting on September 14, 1998, the Corporate Services Committee had before it correspondence from Mr. David Neil, President of COTAPSAI, expressing concerns regarding alleged representations made by City staff whereby those administrative, professional and supervisory employees who are otherwise eligible for membership in COTAPSAI were being discouraged from joining the association. Corporate Services Committee requested that staff report directly to City Council on this matter.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Following the meeting of the Corporate Services Committee on September 14, 1998, staff undertook to investigate the concerns raised by Mr. Neil as set out in his letter to Councillor O'Brien, Chair of the Corporate Services Committee, dated September 2, 1998.

Specifically, Mr. Neil has stated that over the past several months, various Human Resources staff have advised a number of staff who were employed by the former City of Toronto that joining would afford them no benefits.

Mr. Neil has indicated that a strict interpretation of the Council resolution would lead one to believe that only those former employees of the City of Toronto who paid dues to COTAPSAI would receive the benefits of the Consolidated Memorandum of Understanding.

In fact, it was staff's intent, in placing the recommendation of June 3, 1998 before Council, that all eligible employees of the former City of Toronto covered by the Memorandum, as laid out in its "Schedule A", would continue to be covered by the terms of the Memorandum until appropriate notice is given respecting any changes or amendments to their terms and conditions of employment, pursuant to Council's resolution. Notwithstanding any other interpretation, "member" is as defined in Article 1.02 (b) of the Consolidated Memorandum of Understanding. Membership is not defined by whether an individual chooses to pay dues to the Association.

In that respect, Human Resources staff have been following the requirements of the Memorandum and have been extending the benefits of the Memorandum of Understanding to all employees of the former City of Toronto whose position is covered by "Schedule A".

Conclusion:

Mr. Neil has specifically asked for compensation for lost dues. Following an extensive investigation, staff have been unable to find any evidence to support the Association's claims that employees of the former City of Toronto have been discouraged from membership. A letter has been sent to Mr. Neil advising him of our findings.

In order to further assist staff with their inquiries regarding this matter, Mr. Neil has been asked to provide specific particulars in support of the Association's claim.

Once further information has been provided by COTAPSAI, staff will continue their inquiries and report their findings to the Personnel Sub-Committee.

Contact Name:

Brenda Glover,

Executive Director of Human Resources,

397-9802.)