Hey everyone. I got some time to do the latest update to the board software, but it meant that all the old modifications and styles wouldn't work anymore. So, here you have the newest iteration of LabourTalk. Please let me know by Private Message if you run into any issues with the new styling. Some new features on the board are:

  • Latest HTML5 Responsive Styling - You can now see a new, more modern styling on the board. Along with this, you can resize the browser to see the board change with it. The board is now functional on all sizes of screens, including your cell phone, table and desktop/laptop.
  • Post Sharing - Although you could previously, the new layout means the sharing icons are more visible on the lower right hand corner of each post. Click your favourite social media outlet to share the desired post with them.
  • Multiple Themes - Previously there was only one theme in an attempt to lower the workload when modifications were put in place. Fortunately, the new modification system is much simpler to implement and we now have multiple colour options for you to enjoy. You can change these from your User Control Panel under the Board Settings heading.
  • Announcements - Announcements can now be posted here (where you're seeing this one) and, in most cases, can be dismissed. To dismiss them, please click the "X" in the top right corner of this box.
  • Collapsing Categories - Categories, such as News & Announcements or Welcome (below), can be collapsed to clear up some of the clutter. This state should be maintained as long as you're logged in.

We hope you like the changes!

Gov't agencies... Labour Boards specifically

For posting of generic news and event surrounding Labour Issues in Canada
User avatar
NC
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 3:43 pm
Location: Vancouver

Gov't agencies... Labour Boards specifically

Postby NC » Fri May 02, 2008 9:59 am

I am doing some research into membership and what that means and I found this wording in Manitoba.

So, hypothetically you are some guy trying to figure out if you have enough cards to form a union, or are some of them "stale dated". You need to show that more than half of the employees support you, so must be "members in Good Standing" or have applied for membership within a certain period. Being dutiful and effective look into the legislation and you find this:
a "member in good standing" is one who:

(a) at the date of the filing of the Application for Certification has joined or signed an application for membership in the trade union; and

(b) within the period from the first day of the third month preceding the calendar month in which the Application for Certification is made to the date of the Application for Certification has paid, on his own behalf, to the trade union at least $2.00 in union dues.
So, if your cert application is made on January 1, 2008 what is the oldest Membership card you can have in the pile?


Find - Desiderata - read it

green1
Veteran Poster
Veteran Poster
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta
Contact:

Postby green1 » Mon May 05, 2008 11:45 am

within the period from the first day of the third month preceding the calendar month in which the Application for Certification is made to the date of the Application for Certification has paid, on his own behalf, to the trade union at least $2.00 in union dues.
well, according to that, for january 1, the first day of the third month preceeding would be october 1 of the previous year.



User avatar
NC
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 3:43 pm
Location: Vancouver

Postby NC » Mon May 05, 2008 12:45 pm

I concur... which suggests that if the union were to file for Cert on Jan 31 the stale date is still Oct 1?

Do this not strike you as a pretty stupid way to manage such legislation? I mane, say 90 days, or 120 days.


Find - Desiderata - read it

green1
Veteran Poster
Veteran Poster
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta
Contact:

Postby green1 » Mon May 05, 2008 1:01 pm

it's a stupid way to write it, but that's the way it is...



alec
Advanced Poster
Advanced Poster
Posts: 878
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:47 pm
Location: Ottawa/Calgary/Kelowna

Postby alec » Mon May 05, 2008 5:34 pm

I am sure when they wrote it they wanted to make sure that the process was not too easy to implement. After all if they made it easy then every time a union robbed, cheated and lied, the membership might try to decertify.

And that, my friends, is not good for business.


TWwho?

JJ
Rookie Poster
Rookie Poster
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:45 pm
Location: Oshawa, ON

Postby JJ » Wed May 21, 2008 10:31 am

legislative language is always working to plug holes. the idea is to avoid any ambiguity, so there is no question of what it says. I expect that the writers had thought to address the issue with "3 months" or "90 days" given the variance in the length of months.

I don' tk now if i have ever seen this before, it certainly is oddly worded. neat find.



User avatar
NC
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 3:43 pm
Location: Vancouver

Postby NC » Thu May 22, 2008 12:33 pm

Plug ambiguity?!?? Common people are supposed to be able to manage this process??

Lawyers...


Find - Desiderata - read it


Return to “National - Canadian Labour Issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests