A lot riding on Canada Post negotiations, especially for younger workers

July 27, 2016

It was good to see Canada Post abandon its threat to lock out Canada Post workers, members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW). Since then the ongoing negotiations have been conducted behind closed door. Let’s hope Canada Post has also abandoned an unfair and unnecessary concession they are demanding from newly hired workers.

I’m talking about Canada Post’s demand that new hires be enrolled in a defined contribution pension rather than the current defined benefit pension. The latter provides a guaranteed income in retirement. The former is a much less secure savings plan.

Keep in mind, defined benefit pensions are deferred wages that have been earned by workers. These funds are pooled, professionally managed, and invested to provide some income security in retirement.

Far too many Canadians are financially unprepared for retirement. If we don’t take actions, we are going to have a lot of poor seniors. Our federal and provincial governments recognize this. That’s why they are looking to enhance the Canada Pension Plan to improve retirement income security. At the very same time, Canada Post is trying to undermine the retirement income security of its workers.

This is a step in the wrong direction that will impact Canada Post’s younger workers.

This isn’t a lavish, “gold-plated” pension we’re talking about here either. A 65-year old retired letter carrier, with 35 years on the job, collects a pension of about $25,000 a year.

Clearly the mail delivery business has undergone profound changes. But Canada Post has benefited from some of these changes. Yes, Canadians send and receive far fewer letters via Canada Post than they once did. But, as more and more Canadians shop online, Canada Post has become the largest parcel delivery service in the country.

Canada Post has been profitable for the last two decades. It does not need to strip hard fought gains from the next generation of Canada Post workers.

Stephanie Smith

Post new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Comments

It's about affordability and public perception. Federal pensions are very underfunded (at 50% I believe), due to the government not paying enough into the pension plan. In the next 20 years, I think there will be a lot of flux regarding the federal pension system, and many court cases will stem from this flux. There is a strong possibility that pensioners will have to accept pension reductions because the government simply cannot afford to pay its share of the pensions. Defined contributions will at least keep pension somewhat sustained, albeit the risk will be transferred to the pensioners. Continuing on with defined pension plans at the federal government will mean EVERY pensioner will lose in the long run. They will have to eat a pension reduction or the federal government will declare that it cannot pay its pensioners at the same time as paying for current social programs. I would rather have a pension rather than lose some of my pension.

A defined benefit pension is a relevant and appropriate benefit in today's economy? Ridiculous.

Our union has been deleting or minimizing our benefits for years so how is this different?

Thank you

Hi changing the pension plan will have a ptogound effect on tjise workers when they retire. 23'000.00 a year is peanuts well below the poverty level. Canada Post has made profits. I bet you all upper management will receive the old pension plan!

Thank you for standing by us, Sisters and Brothers. An injury to one is an injury to all! CUPW Kitchener Local 560