Alison Crawford (CBC) – A poll conducted for the Mounted Police Members’ Legal fund suggests more than half of Canadians believe it is acceptable for the RCMP not to be unionized.
Officers are currently represented by elected members of their staff relations representative program (SRRP), which is funded by the RCMP and does not have the power to negotiate a collective agreement to regulate working conditions. The RCMP is the only major police force in Canada that is not unionized.
And another, previous survey of Mounties, completed last month for the SRRP suggested that 55% of members are satisfied with the services provided by their staff relations representatives.
That said, support for the SRRP depends on where Mounties live. Those in Atlantic Canada overwhelmingly support the current program while many officers in Ontario, Quebec and B.C. favour the idea of a union.
This flurry of polling comes as the clock runs down on an Ontario Superior Court decision, handed down in April 2009. Justice Ian MacDonnell struck down a section of the RCMP Act that prevented members from forming a union on the grounds that it violates officers’ charter rights. He gave the federal government 18 months to change the law and come up with a new structure for the RCMP because, as he said, “determining the appropriate remedy has not been free from difficulty.”
That means Ottawa has until October to figure it out. Efforts to determine what progress has been made have so far been fruitless. On January 21, 2010, CBC News filed an access to information request asking Treasury Board to provide records relating to how the government is responding to last year’s court decision. The initial response asked for a $500 down payment due to an extensive search of approximately 16,500 pages of documents. After whittling down our initial request to something more manageable, Treasury Board responded by saying it needed an additional 200 days to comply.
As for the SRRP, Staff Sergeant Murry Brown, chairman of the Mounted Police Members’ Legal Fund says today’s survey results show Canadians “don’t believe that the RCMP will be improved by the introduction of a union, nor do they see any immediate benefit for their communities.”
Yet in that previous poll of RCMP members, Mounties said what they want is something in between the system they have now and a full-fledged union. They told the pollsters they’d like a modified SRRP with more independence from management to negotiate pay, benefits and transfers, yet still be funded by the government of Canada…which means not paying union dues.
*The survey released today was a random phone survey of the public conducted by Nanos Research between May 29th and June 3rd with a margin of error of ±3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
*The Pollara survey released last month polled 6,147 RCMP officers (28% of membership) between March 17th and April 6th. Poll results are considered accurate ±1.2% 19 times out of 20.
I attended both meetings they had in Surrey, and recall how the show of force was overwhelming, the only problem with that meeting was that the members that kept speaking were all telling the same story but in their own words. If the DSRR of the day had got together prior to the meeting had an agenda going into the hall’s with one or two member representing all 2500 of the members in the hall, the meeting would have showed the force and the government that the members were upset and I believe that things would have changed quickly. When the DSRR told the crowned that they had heard enough, Murray stood there and said “NO LET THEM TALK”. Everyone in the hall got tired of hearing the same thing and slowly left. He took the same stance that the police take when they attend strike situations, let the crowd yell and scream and sooner or later the all leave. The DSRR had the right idea holding the meeting, but had no idea how to get out message across. They could have contracted a lot more out of that assembly than they secure.
On another note from that gathering, we should have let the member from Drug Section who offered to drive the 5 ton truck to Ottawa with our red serge’s “JUST DO IT”.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
17 
1
An important point on promotions of the noisemakers boomer. I would add that several change supporting officers were also transferred, as suddenly the needs of the force changed, and they were in dire need of their services elsewhere in isolated postings.
It is also interesting to note the size of the raise afforded the RCMP shortly after the Surrey “meeting”. The government of the day was intimidated by the show of numbers and disrespect for the Commissioner at the meeting. Somebody in authority figured out the membership was not happy, and maybe the Commissioner was not totally in control like he professed.
Hot debate. What do you think?
12 
10
Should the force be unionized or not brings back memories of the original “Association of 17 Divisions” back in the 70’s.
Like then and still today, the force doesn’t have a union or association that will stand behind members who have been wronged and protect their rights when they have been falsely accused by the public or from upper management.
Most of the problems that the force faces today are as a result of upper management and how they treat the lower ranks. They do have the Div. Rep program however the Div. Rep program has no real standing and management knows that. Don’t be fooled when members in these positions say they will help because we have all seen what they do and say when your on your own. They do exactly what they are told to do to get there next promotion every 2 years they hold the position. When upper management says jump, they still say how high.
Back in the 70’s when the Association of 17 Div. was being started, Ottawa didn’t want a union and to stop the drive for the association they quickly promoted the members heading the campaign, and the rest is history.
History has a way of repeating itself and it always comes back to the old saying, there is the right way, the wrong way and the RCMP way. Good luck guys you’re going to need it if you ever want to be properly represented. I was never big on unions but I still have my old Association of 17 Div card.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
20 
2
The RCMP need to have a democratic vote, right accross the country. There should also be a big debate proving the reasons that there should or shouldn’t be a union. Management has been doing the big Divide and Conquor with the lower ranks of the force. That is why the vote on the union is split almost down the middle. Thats why the main “in-thing” is to promote in the force. Managers are the only ones happy.
For to long management has been mistreating the members of the force and should realize that members have rights as well. Detachment commanders pick and choose their favorites and divide the detachment.
Staffing place their favorites in the desireable postings, dividing the division.
DSRR play favorites to the least problematic members, despite how civil rights are violated, making management happy.
Anybody with any common sense can tell that the force is steadily declining in all areas pertaining to their members, Canadians and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It guaranteed that when the union forms the managers with 25+ years of service will be pulling the pin & retiring. Which is good because times are changing and so should the force. The force is Canadas icon & it can be saved but the force needs to change like everything else.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
23 
2
The poll conducted in respect of the present program was heavily salted in favor of the preferred outcome which was, as noted, the same with improvements and the institution paying for it.
There is something inherently wrong for an advocacy group to be housed, paid, assessed, and given promotions, by management.
Other major police agencies have policies reflecting the wishes of the employees that are unique to each. The RCMP if allowed to form a union or association, it would no doubt have its own flavor and make up. It would be the membership deciding for example, on the criteria for poor performance and its procedures / outcomes, (within the law of course).
You make a valuable point in that certain causes are championed as they would receive favorable reception from the upper echelons. Although some may wish to not pay dues, the old adage applies that you get what you pay for. They have a system that does nothing with the grievance process on behalf of employees, nor the ability to address major issues without the tacit approval of management. No national consistency in assisting everyone.
The present purveyors of the system have done nothing to encourage reasoned debate on behalf of the membership. Truly self serving and inappropriate.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
20 
11
“His staff relations representative, who, in the absence of a real union with stewards and transparent grievance procedures, is supposed to act as an advocate for members with managers, wrote a note to the boss saying: “I’ll try to keep Cal off your back.”
JEFF SALLOT
From Monday’s Globe and Mail Published on Sunday, Apr. 15, 2007 10:03PM EDT
The above information appeared in the Globe and Mail as part of my interview. To be accurate; it was sent to my Staffing Career Manager in Ottawa by the Division Representative at Depot Division. It was sent by e-mail that I obtained by using the Access to Information process.
Perhaps the readers think that in the history of the Div. Rep. Program in the RCMP that I was the only member to be denied open and honest communication by a Div. Rep.
If however there is agreement that other members have been left to twist in the wind; where do they go from here to seek justice inside the RCMP? Perhaps a Union or Association?
I think that the Div. Rep Program could have been effective. In fact I was a Sub-Rep at Depot and ran for the Div. Rep program in Ottawa. I also participated in the fight for “the right” to form a union. Div.Reps were the only game in town so they did what they wanted to do. They picked there causes and pet projects sometimes with the blessing of RCMP management. They ignored or paid lip service to other RCMP member’s cries for help.
RCMP members need to be represented by a fair and competent system. Unions would be no better if they protected RCMP member’s from punishment for unethical, immoral, or criminal behaviour.
Every time history repeats itself in these matters the price of human suffering goes up.
Calvin Lawrence
CGL Consulting
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
18 
7