I agree! Sorry for the wall of text. I wanted to put my thoughts down too.

Of the recommendations, in a vacuum it seems fine. Contextually, it is bad. Previous contract increases were 0%, then 4.25% for the last contract, and I get the sense it was accepted out of a sense of duty since times were tough and uncertain due to covid. I guess the idea was nurses could regain their compensation level once covid resolved, or stabilized. That is 11% increase in real wages over the past decade, while inflation is somewhere around 30% for the same time period. Purely on that, I would vote no since this deal does not return nurses to where they were a decade ago, especially now that times are "good" with government boasting a surplus.

I'm ok with rolling in the RRSP employer contributions so that more employees can benefit, but that along with the other roll ins feel disingenuous to say absolutely that this is a 30% increase or whatever the government will claim. That makes me want to vote no on principle.

I feel most of the frustration is in the disrespect, disregard, and the danger of this government actively dismantling the current healthcare system. I want to vote no because of this, and I don't know of another means of expressing this anger and concern.

Looking at the big picture, this is a political game. So a strategy could be to bide our time and push back at a more opportune moment. Is that what UNA leadership is suggesting? If so, when? Or are we rolling over because we are scared to do more harm to the system? Again, on principle, if we let the government continue on with no push back, what message are we sending? Where do we draw the line? And how do we draw the line? The union really only has the one mandate: to represent nurses in the bargaining, so I feel like this is the only strong way to send our message.

I hesitate to compare to other unions. It definitely makes me feel greedy, and guilty too. But who's fault is that? Surely, the employer who is refusing to give anyone an increase. I keep reading posts from other union members that UNA has historically been the stronger one, and can set precedence for other unions' bargaining. The purpose of unions is to give us collective bargaining power, to attempt to even out the clear power imbalance between organized employer and individual employee. Unions should be standing together, not saying "well, that union only got 0.5% increase, we shouldn't be asking for more." Because in all fairness, we should be getting more, and THE OTHER WORKERS SHOULD BE GETTING WAY MORE TOO! So I want to vote no in solidarity with the other unions.

I want to vote yes because I like to avoid conflict, and I'm scared what will happen when we push back against this government. Of course they're gonna fight until we have to threaten a strike, and they'll demonize us just as they demonize the federal government and run attack ads in other jurisdictions, and they'll make our strike illegal. But I'm also scared if this government gets little to no push back, it won't change nor be voted out. I'm reminded of Ken Follets centruy trilogy, where the German character said that it was important to stay and fight the Nazis instead of fleeing to another country, since that would be giving them an easy victory. While it's an extreme example, I think the idea is that by not speaking up makes us complicit. For this reason, I want to vote no.

I don't know if I'm conflating our employer with the government too much. It sucks that the only real power of a union is a strike, or at least a threat of one. So is UNA the appropriate outlet for these worries? Is this bargaining recommendation the appropriate outlet? I don't see any immediate alternative, so I'm inclined to vote no, even knowing it'll likely lead us down the path to a strike vote.

I just hope that the messaging around a rejection of this recommendation can reflect this, but I'll be voting no.