Brothers and Sisters,
 
One of the greatest challenges that has faced us on the railway is that of the company hiring contractors to do our work. I am not referring to specialized work that we do not normally or presently do now, I am talking about the work that we are trained for and have been doing for years.  Work that fits within our job description. Work that belongs to us.
 
Whether it is at CP, CN or on any number of shortlines, there will always be managers who, for whatever reason, will try to farm out our work. Their most common alibi is that the full complement of employees are already working in whatever department's work is being contracted out and that the work is 'time sensitive' and our members cannot be spared from their other duties.
 
You and I know that this is rarely the case. And so do they.  With a little better planning and/or some competent organization of the annual work, the lion's share of contracting out could be eliminated. And this would be at great savings for the company. Almost always, it is more cost effective to keep work in-house but regardless, the wage agreement was negotiated through good faith bargaining and should be implemented in the same manner, regardless of cost. 

So then why would they continue to contract out work when it could be done better, less expensively and pursuant to the collective agreement, by utilizing their own employees?
 
Here are a few possible reasons. I'm sure you can think of others. Just remember these are simply possibilities, not accusations directed at any particular person.

•  Contractors are less of an effort for a manager.  A manager does not have to do as much supervision, they do not have to organize manpower, they do not have to do very much planning... if they pay contractors to do that (as well as our work). In other words, it appears that managers would not have to do all the duties that they are paid to do, if they hire contractors.  And we have all seen the work ethic of the average manager. Contractors may be more expensive but they reduce the work a manager has to do (for a price).

• The majority of long service employees who have been around for a few years, like myself, can all name supervisors who have been accused of accepting 'kickbacks'. Many of us have seen people fired for this. A lot of contractors have been friendly with all sorts of gifts; from hats, coats, dinners and christmas bottles to... we have heard... much more elaborate 'tokens of their appreciation'.

• A department (outside of engineering) will hire a contractor to do work on their facility, either because they were too lazy or complacent on the issue of being cost effective or really just don’t understand what they should be doing. 
They didn't check (or didn't care) if they were in violation of our collective agreement.

• There may be times when the nature and timeliness of the work would require additional manpower (or equipment) that was unavailable and could not be made available within the parameters of when the work must be done. This can happen. But though the companies often 'cry wolf' with this excuse after the fact,  we have looked into it and have found that this excuse is only valid on very rare occasions.

You and I may not be supervisors or even have little iron pinky rings, but we can see that something is wrong here. And it seems that we are not the only ones. Recently in a decision for CROA case 3874, Arbitrator Picher stated quite clearly,

“...The Union submits that the Company could, by proper planning, have arranged for the grieving employees to have some involvement in the construction of the bunkhouse. The Arbitrator is compelled to agree. While the evidence does indicate that the grievors were assigned to perform tasks during the period of the renovation to the motel building, it is far from clear that their tasks could not have been rescheduled so as to allow for the employees to perform work which, as noted above, plainly falls within their protected work jurisdiction for the purposes of article 13 of the collective agreement...”

Arbitrator Picher did award compensation, which amounted to thousands of dollars for each of the grievors and hopefully this decision will persuade managers to assign work properly in the future. After all, ethics (as well as law) demand that the company abide by the mutually agreed upon articles of the collective agreement.

However, if the past is any indication of the future, everyone must remain vigilant for contractors on the property. On all properties where we work. And these contactors have to be reported to your Regional Director so that they can be investigated and grieved, if necessary.

Together we can address this issue and protect our work ownership. We're Teamsters and this is our work. These are our jobs that are at risk and we have provisions to protect them. These are our wages that they are taking and giving to a contractor. We have to continue to stand up for what is ours and make damn sure that everyone knows it.

We have only been able win any of these cases because certain members have kept us apprised of where the contractors are, what they are doing and when they are doing it.  Accurate information is the key to success and you are the eyes and ears on the ground, keep them open... for everyone’s sake.

Stay safe, stay strong, stay united.

Bill Brehl
President
TCRCMWED