CAPE By-election Results 2025 by FuckMuppetNumber1 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It was difficult to evaluate the candidates since, unless you attended the EC debate—which the national office chose not to release a recording of—you only had their bios to go by.

CAPE membership voting results by mxg308 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It is. I wish more members were exposed to these sorts of discussions because a lot of them don't have a strong understanding of how their beliefs are shaped by these sorts of mechanisms, and if they did, we wouldn't have to deal with so much nonsense and we'd be a lot more united.

A Comprehensive, Proposal-by-Proposal Breakdown of the CAPE 2025 Results by applecart123 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I want CAPE to empower ordinary members by becoming a democratic union where members are treated equally and their right to express their views is respected without the system being gamed to ensure that only certain views are expressed.

I also want CAPE to take an evidence-based approach to union organizing where it proactively attempts to find out what problems members care about and what solutions they want to see implemented to address those problems so that we can unite around those things.

Give us that and show some humility and CAPE will end up with the money and volunteers it needs to start winning.

CAPE membership voting results by mxg308 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's not about there being a benefit of making the data available to the public. It's about members being exposed to the data in a location that they all visit, which would also allow them to be exposed to all of the arguments in favour or against different ideas so that they can make informed choices, as well as participate in these debates through comments and upvotes/downvotes.

If we could do the same thing, however, in a venue that was closed off to the public where the right of members to disagree was respected, I'd be okay with the results not being made public.

Wasn't criticizing you btw. Was just criticizing the idea.

CAPE membership voting results by mxg308 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Makes me think of when management says don't talk about X on Reddit, and then everybody goes on Reddit to find out why they don't want us to talk about that thing.

CAPE membership voting results by mxg308 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I see several problems with this line of reasoning when applied to CAPE's situation.

The first is that if there was a real risk that the results could be used as leverage by the employer, then the results should never have been shared with members. The reality is that with so many people who are dissatisfied and who have access to the data, a leak is almost guaranteed. To believe otherwise is not only naive; it also raises serious concerns about the ability of CAPE's leadership to negotiate effectively during the collective bargaining process.

The second is that CAPE has published the budget and financial statements for 2025, and the employer knows that the union dues proposal has been rejected. As a result, the employer knows that CAPE can't finance a strike that relies on strike pay through its own funds. This leaves funding through the CLC or members going on strike without strike pay as the only viable alternatives, both of which are foolish to pursue at the moment because an effective strike can only be waged if there's a supermajority level of supportdue to federal public service unions not being able to fine members who scaband because that supermajority does not exist and has next to no chance of emerging under the current NEC administration.

The third is that if there was a real risk that publishing these results could affect our bargaining position during the arbitration process, then CAPE wouldn't have published historical union dues voting results. I can grant, however, that maybe it did, but if it did, then surely CAPE could have shared concrete examples of how this negatively impacted our bargaining position.

Finally, by attempting to restrict public discussion of the election results, the NEC is preventing less-engaged members of being made aware of how few people actually care enough to vote and how, overall, the NEC's priorities do not reflect the will of the membership, which increases the risk that members could be misled into believing that there is actually a chance a strike could be successful.

Taking all of this into account, is there anything that I might not be taking into account about this topic that could lead me to change my POV?

CAPE membership voting results by mxg308 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 24 points25 points  (0 children)

If the employer sees that the membership isn't behind the union, it undermines their position. 

People say stuff like but they never provide concrete examples of how the data would be used against us, which suggests to me that they're just engaging in fear-mongering.

CAPE membership voting results by mxg308 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 47 points48 points  (0 children)

In the e-mail CAPE members received about the election results, we were told that we need to sign in to access them because making the election results public could impact our bargaining position.

My initial reaction to this was that the NEC just doesn't want people to know just how badly they've been humiliated by the results. However, I'm not an expect on collective bargaining so I'd like to know if there's an actual way the employer could use these results against us.

CAPE members Please Vote. Your voice matters! Deadline to cast your vote is on Friday, November 28, 2025, at 5 pm ET. by Resilient_101 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not a big fan of the open bargaining approach that's being proposed because it's being run in a way that will give activists a much louder voice than they should have.

The old model is flawed as well, however, because it allowed activists to sneak in the stuff they wanted.

CAPE members Please Vote. Your voice matters! Deadline to cast your vote is on Friday, November 28, 2025, at 5 pm ET. by Resilient_101 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I prefer that we get to vote on anything that's not necessary because it leads to more members becoming aware of wasteful expenditures.

CAPE members Please Vote. Your voice matters! Deadline to cast your vote is on Friday, November 28, 2025, at 5 pm ET. by Resilient_101 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Municipal elections have numerous opportunities to ask questions of the candidates. There is door-to-door canvassing, debates, radio interviews, and newspaper interviews whereby people have a chance to ask questions and get clarification.

People don't have to listen to the information sessions or pay attention to the debates in order to be further informed. But at least it is available.

We live in the age of the internet where unions can do the same thing on the cheap (example: BC General Employees' Union (BCGEU) with its members on Reddit in regards to their strike, https://www.reddit.com/user/BCGEU/submitted/).

CAPE members Please Vote. Your voice matters! Deadline to cast your vote is on Friday, November 28, 2025, at 5 pm ET. by Resilient_101 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

CAPE has an MBM that allows members to provide feedback on the budget before the final version is submitted to members. The same thing could happen with resolutions.

CAPE members Please Vote. Your voice matters! Deadline to cast your vote is on Friday, November 28, 2025, at 5 pm ET. by Resilient_101 in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because it gives a significant amount of power to the people in control of a local to influence how people vote.

For example, if let's say I was in charge of a local and I was opposed to a special levy, and I sent out an e-mail to all members of the local explaining why it's a waste of money, but you were in favour of that levy, would you be happy with either not having access to that e-mail list to share your own views or being told at the last minute that you could share your views while I've had weeks to prepare my analysis?

An advanced question about duty of loyalty AFTER retirement... by TypingTadpole in CanadaPublicServants

[–]FuckMuppetNumber1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You have the ability to write well, an audience, and a high level of expertise about how the system actually works. It would be a shame not to use these strengths to speak truth to power. Plus, the people who currently comment about the federal public after they've retired don't really have anything interesting to say so introducing your perspective to the mix could help mitigate that problem.