All the unions rejected Sonia LeBel’s invitation to participate in the three forums relating to the negotiation of collective agreements for state employees. Nothing new under the sun, some will observe: at the last negotiation, the president of the Conseil du trésor had suffered the same refusal. Except that, this time, the forums — one on health, the other on education and the last on mental health — are “places of negotiation”, to use the expression of the minister , and include tangible proposals aimed at improving the working conditions of union members.
In the education sector, for example, the proposals aim to “refocus the teaching function on pedagogical tasks”, can we read in the document distributed by the Treasury Board. In primary school, we plan to add 4,000 people in full-time equivalent as classroom help, at the rate of 10 to 15 hours per week. This help would essentially be provided by educators from school daycare services who, present at school in the morning and afternoon, have broken schedules. We also seek to support teachers at the start of their careers and to review the assignment process which imposes precarious employment on teachers who are not experienced.
In the health network, the government intends to eliminate compulsory overtime (TSO) and the use of placement agencies. It proposes to increase nurses’ pay for weekend work and introduces the possibility of 12-hour shifts. As regards mental health, it is a matter of revising upwards the salaries of psychologists and involving other job titles.
The CAQ government has reserved 700 million to finance all of these measures. However, we must not delude ourselves: the flexibility demanded by the State to improve the working conditions of employees requires real concessions on the part of the unions. Recognition of the seniority of nurses who leave placement agencies to reintegrate the public network is one of the contentious issues, as is differentiated remuneration.
On the government side, it is argued that the traditional process of negotiations for everything related to working conditions, what is called the sectoral in the jargon of the public sector, is cumbersome with the 58 “tables” of the health networks. and education. The President of the Conseil du trésor would like to conclude three general agreements in principle with all the unions concerned in the three fields of activity. There is a certain logic in this approach: the changes envisaged to reform health or even education affect several job categories at the same time, which does not lend itself to table-by-table negotiations with the many and laborious returns that are needed.
On the union side, it is argued that the framework for negotiations is provided for by law and that it produces results. In an interview with Paul Arcand, the president of the FTQ, Magali Picard, affirmed that negotiations on the three series of proposals can take place at the central tables, that of the common front formed by the CSN, the FTQ, the Centrale des unions du Québec (CSQ) and the Alliance of Professional and Technical Personnel in Health and Social Services (APTS), on the one hand, and that of the Fédération interprofessionnelle de la santé du Québec (FIQ), which represents 90% of nurses. According to the president of the FTQ, the union party is aware of “the urgency to act” and it is open to change, even to differentiated salaries in the health network, she added.
Last Saturday, François Legault intervened on social networks by accusing union leaders of being “in a logic of closure” while the government only seeks to improve the wages and working conditions of union members. He will only have pointed the unions, whose participation in the forums seems irreparably compromised. It must be said that the Prime Minister was addressing the population first and foremost, knowing full well that this beginning of negotiations in the public square is unbearable to the union leaders.
The fact remains that the parties will have to find a way to discuss the government’s proposals which, although they involve several unions at the same time, are nevertheless valid and concrete. The unions maintain that they intend to be inventive. In this regard, they intend to present their own proposals to improve the working conditions of their members. Since the parties seem to share common objectives, the context could, in principle, favor the holding of fruitful negotiations.