RCMP vs Provincial Police

[Ken7]

That's fine, I had this conversation with a real RCMP member, there is no sense further debating it with you.

Let Google be your friend!!

OK, if that's how you feel. I guess you didn't even bother trying to understand what I was trying to explain to you. I don't think you understand what a Union is, but you obviously aren't going to listen to me.

However, KL3, who is actually a Mountie posted this:

RCMP members do not have a union. They have a Staff Relations Represetative system in place to deal with grievances but it is not a union. The SRR's challenged the RCMP Act on constitutional grounds because the RCMP Act prohibits unionization which, they argued, is contrary to the constitutional right to freedom of association. The Ontario court of Appeal sided with the SRR's and said that the RCMP members can unionize if they want to. The SRR's started the process of querying the members to see if the majority wanted to unionize. But then the RCMP appealed the Ontario decision to the Supreme Court of Canada so everything is in a holding pattern until that decision is rendered.

I bolded and underlined the key part to make it easier for you to see. However, I'm assuming that you're not going to believe him either. I would also suggest that if you Google RCMP Union, you will not find one post saying there is one.

_________________________________________________________


However, KL3, who is actually a Mountie posted this also:

actually don't know a lot about them but I do know that is who is behind the push to unionize and will likely form the union should the RCMP be allowed to unionize.

If you read the information on the page you posted the link to you will see, right in the Mission Statement "We seek to exercise our right to engage in free collective bargaining with our Employer, a right currently enjoyed by all police officers in Canada, except for RCMP members."All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

KL3-Something
Generalissimo Postalot

I hear you and understand what you are saying, although do not agree with you.

You in fact almost quoted the mission statement from the RCMP members association; did you actually read and absorb what their mission is?

I am fully aware of what a union does. My old Association was in fact our union and I was on the executive and therefore went to many Provincial and Canadian Police Association meetings. At these meeting, we learned negotiation skills; we met with other locals (unions) and discussed contractual issues, the purpose of these meeting was all about union issues. There was the eastern group of RCMP members at all the Canadian meetings, and near the end of my career the BC group became a Association and also attended these meeting.

To say all of the RCMP are not union, is correct however there is a small group of them in Ontario and currently in BC who are doing everything a Union would do for their membership or Association. Their management however is tasking them in an effort to stop the whole RCMP membership from jumping on board to become an Association, which is the politically correct term used for a union.


By the way, what Association or Union are you currently represented by?? Private that to me if you don't want it public.

[Fancy]

Wouldn't the police have a union?

This is clearly what the problem is with costs, attitude and accountability.
No more Union Police forces, we want the ability to get rid of dirty cops immediately.

No more union? RCMP don't have a union but you can rest assured that any provincial or municipal police force in Kelowna will probably be part of one.

http://www.cpa-acp.ca/about/membership_dir_e.asp

____________________________________________________

RCMP have no union... hmmm... seems to me you might not be correct. I used to see them at the Canadian Police Association meetings.

There only thing that has changed is agreeing that RCMP have no union. Individuals belonging to an association doesn't a union make.

UltraViolet - sorry, but you may have to come to grips with having the RCMP in Kelowna and unionized to boot.

[Ken7]

Fancy,

Google trade union read it slowly and then look at the mission statement of the BC RCMP Association. I think you might see where I'm going with that. Well, maybe not.

Reality is it just doesn’t matter. You would argue anything...even if you had no knowledge on the topic. I've read your posts.

[Fancy]

Fancy,

Google trade union read it slowly and then look at the mission statement of the BC RCMP Association. I think you might see where I'm going with that. Well, maybe not.

Reality is it just doesn’t matter. You would argue anything...even if you had no knowledge on the topic. I've read your posts.

Obviously not well and I'd say the shoe is on the other foot.

[flamingfingers]

There only thing that has changed is agreeing that RCMP have no union. Individuals belonging to an association doesn't a union make.

Essentially it does. With the possible exception that an "Association" does not pay fees to an entity called a "Union". But they do pay fees and an Association will bargain on the part of their 'members'. An Association is still a collective that bargains for contract terms. See "BC Medical ASSOCIATION" for enlightenment.

[Fancy]

There only thing that has changed is agreeing that RCMP have no union. Individuals belonging to an association doesn't a union make.

Essentially it does. With the possible exception that an "Association" does not pay fees to an entity called a "Union". But they do pay fees and an Association will bargain on the part of their 'members'. An Association is still a collective that bargains for contract terms. See "BC Medical ASSOCIATION" for enlightenment.

How can the association bargain on behalf of RCMP members' contracts? And wouldn't that interfere with the SRR?

[goatboy]

If you read the information on the page you posted the link to you will see, right in the Mission Statement "We seek to exercise our right to engage in free collective bargaining with our Employer, a right currently enjoyed by all police officers in Canada, except for RCMP members."All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

I hear you and understand what you are saying, although do not agree with you.

You in fact almost quoted the mission statement from the RCMP members association; did you actually read and absorb what their mission is?

I am fully aware of what a union does. My old Association was in fact our union and I was on the executive and therefore went to many Provincial and Canadian Police Association meetings. At these meeting, we learned negotiation skills; we met with other locals (unions) and discussed contractual issues, the purpose of these meeting was all about union issues. There was the eastern group of RCMP members at all the Canadian meetings, and near the end of my career the BC group became a Association and also attended these meeting.



To say all of the RCMP are not union, is correct however there is a small group of them in Ontario and currently in BC who are doing everything a Union would do for their membership or Association. Their management however is tasking them in an effort to stop the whole RCMP membership from jumping on board to become an Association, which is the politically correct term used for a union.


By the way, what Association or Union are you currently represented by?? Private that to me if you don't want it public.

You mis-read what the Mission statement is. You quote it as:

Mission Statement "We seek to exercise our right to engage in free collective bargaining with our Employer, a right currently enjoyed by all police officers in Canada, except for RCMP members."All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

But you miss the

We SEEK to exercise our right to engage in free collective bargaining with our Employer, a right currently enjoyed by all Police Officers in Canada, EXCEPT for RCMP Members

The Mission statement itself says that the RCMP cannot engage in collective bargaining like all other police forces. Yes, they do have an association that lobbies the federal government for the wants and needs of it's members, however, unlike a Union, they DO NOT negotiate a binding collective agreement with the employer.

You say you hear and understand what I'm saying but don't agree with me, but then also claim:

To say all of the RCMP are not union, is correct

(and add that they are doing everything a Union would do for them). I agree to a point that they are acting like a quasi Union, but that is completely different than actually being a Union. I can act like a cop, but it doesn't make me one.

I'm not in any Union or Association but know what the difference is between the two. (edited to say "Or I thought I did")

[goatboy]

OK, I'll eat a bit of crow here, but still stand by the fact that the RCMP don't have a Union who can negotiate a collective bargaining agreement, therefore are not Unionized.

I found this explanation of the difference between an Association and a Union:

Many professional groups prefer the term "association" to "union", but that's not determinative of their powers. As well, in some cases a professional association may act both as the professional standards and accreditation body, and also as the bargaining agent for its membership.

The question is whether the particular association has been certified by the labour relations board as the bargaining agent for the group of employees. If so, then the association has all the rights available under the relevant labour law, including the right to strike.

[Ken7]

OK, I'll eat a bit of crow here, but still stand by the fact that the RCMP don't have a Union who can negotiate a collective bargaining agreement, therefore are not Unionized.

I found this explanation of the difference between an Association and a Union:

Many professional groups prefer the term "association" to "union", but that's not determinative of their powers. As well, in some cases a professional association may act both as the professional standards and accreditation body, and also as the bargaining agent for its membership.

The question is whether the particular association has been certified by the labour relations board as the bargaining agent for the group of employees. If so, then the association has all the rights available under the relevant labour law, including the right to strike.

________________________________


I did ask Fancy to search Trade Union. When looking at both, they are much the same. As I stated, Association is politically correct as people dislike UNION as does the RCMP. Union went out in the 80's.

how old are you "Goatboy"

[goatboy]

how old are you "Goatboy"

How old do you think I am?

[Fancy]

I'm not going to argue for the sake of arguing. RCMP are not unionized but soon could be (and I wasn't speaking of individual members) - I believe that was the point and since I may have brought up the fact that police here would more than likely be unionized, it would appear it wouldn't matter whether it was city, provincial police or RCMP that end up with the contract.

[Ken7]

how old are you "Goatboy"

How old do you think I am?

I'm not certain, but unlike others I do see you try and research so your not posting for the sake of posting!

Final word as it is off topic, if the Association in BC and Ontario had nothing to do with Union, why wouldn't the Feds want all their members to be in a brotherhood? Kinda adds to the esprit de corps!!

That is why they are trying to crush the two Associations before it become a total union of all members! What I did find entertaining is their own members were not current on it, oh well will have to research the Court Ruling.

[Fancy]

Mounties are taking to the Internet to debate whether the force should unionize and how the decision should be made.

In April 2009 Ontario's Superior Court struck down federal regulations that prevent RCMP members from forming a union. It also gave the government a deadline to change the law.

That deadline passed last October, but the government has introduced the RCMP Labour Relations Modernization Act, bill C-43, which is now slowly making its way through Parliament.

But it hasn't gone over so well with the Mounties' existing Staff Relations Representative Program.

That advocacy group organized a number of town hall meetings across Canada where members reported a number of concerns about the proposed law, including that the legislation was drafted behind closed doors without consulting officers.

It also argues the legislation does not provide a mechanism to allow Mounties to choose how they want to be represented, saying "imposing a union or an undefined Commissioner's Consultative Committee does not equate to a clear choice."

On a website launched this week, the Mounted Police Members Legal Fund alleges Bill C-43, "provides an expansion of the RCMP Commissioner's powers with respect to human resource management and discipline with no corresponding check or balance."

The site also allows visitors to send a letter to their MP or send a colourful e-postcard with the heading "Stand With Us."

On the other side of the issue, Mounties who favour forming an independent association (the SRRP is funded by the RCMP) have formed the Mounted Police Professional Association. On its new website, the group explains that it seeks to exercise "our right to engage in free collective bargaining with our employer" but does not seek or support the right to strike.

Not surprisingly, C-43 does not figure as prominently on the MPPAC web site, where the organization has simply posted a transcript of the bill's second reading in parliament.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside- ... nline.html

I believe the appeal takes place November 21st.

C50475 Court of Appeal - I'm not positive if this is the right document?

[Yvon Dagger]

You hit the spot. I am more for BCPP , but I agree that this would reduce traffic crimes. Just seeing them out there every day . Crime prevention alone is so productive.

The traffic section couldn't possibly maintain the amount of revenue required.

If Kelowna had a Municipal force consisting of 50 members, and 5 of them were on strict 12 hr shifts of traffic duty, they could easily write $25,000 worth of traffic fines a day.

50 cops at $500 a day for salary = $25,000 daily
5 traffic cops writing $5,000 worth of tickets daily
$5,000 traffic fines = average $200 a fine = 25 tickets each member in a 12 hr shift
25 tickets in 12 hrs = 2 per hour

If a traffic cop can't catch 2 good speeders in an hour, then let them catch 3 fairly good ones.
Daily quota of $25,000 will pay for close to 50 officers, using only 5 traffic cops!
The other 45 officers can be doing other things, and quite possibly writing tickets for other things if need be.

A pretty simple business plan to curb anti-law abiding people and provide Municipal policing.

Oh, and next week, a different group will run the radar guns and write tickets, allowing time for officers to go to court if necessary.

Municipal revenue goes directly back to the City.

Muffler/noise fines alone in Rutland will generate big revenue, especially when the Angels ride into town.

It's time for something different, because what we have right now isn't working at all, and Provincial police arent the answer.

Keep the RCMP, and add a Municipal force for effective Community policing and keeping idiots in check.

[KL3-Something]

You hit the spot. I am more for BCPP , but I agree that this would reduce traffic crimes. Just seeing them out there every day . Crime prevention alone is so productive.

The traffic section couldn't possibly maintain the amount of revenue required.

If Kelowna had a Municipal force consisting of 50 members, and 5 of them were on strict 12 hr shifts of traffic duty, they could easily write $25,000 worth of traffic fines a day.

50 cops at $500 a day for salary = $25,000 daily
5 traffic cops writing $5,000 worth of tickets daily
$5,000 traffic fines = average $200 a fine = 25 tickets each member in a 12 hr shift
25 tickets in 12 hrs = 2 per hour

If a traffic cop can't catch 2 good speeders in an hour, then let them catch 3 fairly good ones.
Daily quota of $25,000 will pay for close to 50 officers, using only 5 traffic cops!
The other 45 officers can be doing other things, and quite possibly writing tickets for other things if need be.

A pretty simple business plan to curb anti-law abiding people and provide Municipal policing.

Oh, and next week, a different group will run the radar guns and write tickets, allowing time for officers to go to court if necessary.

Municipal revenue goes directly back to the City.

Muffler/noise fines alone in Rutland will generate big revenue, especially when the Angels ride into town.

It's time for something different, because what we have right now isn't working at all, and Provincial police arent the answer.

Keep the RCMP, and add a Municipal force for effective Community policing and keeping idiots in check.

Would be nice but the math is screwy.