Bcit Bcgeu Collective Agreement 2020
The first bargaining meeting for the renewal of the 2010-14 ASL Collective Agreement was held on May 29, 2014 and several more dates are scheduled for June. At the January General Assembly, ASL members ratified the broad outlines of a set of proposals on justice. A summary of the proposals will be re-available after they are submitted to management. Merchant updates are shared on our blog. The process of preparing the latest version of the collective agreement for pressure has been painfully slow. Despite the long period between collective agreements, the employer refused to make most of the requested changes to budget management as part of the proofing process. When the new collective agreement is finally published, it will therefore still contain inconsistent use of terms, ambiguous references and other minor issues that we hoped would be resolved. In March, we proposed that the employer correct only three errors in the collective agreement before the pressure. We have not heard of it. We intend to conclude the pressure of the 2010-14 agreement at the beginning of negotiations for its extension.
In this case, printed copies of the current agreement will be available before the summer. In the meantime, we refer to the 2007/10 collective agreement and the 2010/14 transaction contract. Our staff team advises and advises superiors and management on employee relations, collective agreements, job descriptions, attendance, performance management, staff training and discipline. We also support: in April, BCGEU vocational instructor units in colleges (not at BCIT or The University of Iceland in Vancouver) agreed to the first collective agreement in our sector during this round of negotiations. This agreement is a five-year contract with total salary increases of 5.5%, but no increase until April 2015. Minor adjustments were made to extended health care and there was a slight increase in funding for the, but few other changes were made. The ASL conducted two interviews with its faculty members, without regular teaching contact, on alternatives to the term “non-teacher” used throughout the collective agreement. The change in terminology must allow these members to recognize what they do and not on the basis of what they do not do. Although they have been referred to as “non-teachers” in the collective agreement, teaching is part of their job for many of them, although they do not normally have a regular weekly schedule. The implication that they are a little less than other faculties has also had practical implications. . .