THE BARGAINING UNITS AT A GLANCE ...

Winnipeg Sun:
Our collective bargaining agreement covering just over 100 workers at the newspaper expired after a five-year term at the end of December. Local 191 CEP, representing the advertising, editorial and mail room sections in the plant, and the Graphic Communications International Union (GCIU), which bargains on behalf of pressmen and pre-press technical employees, have attempted since last autumn to get new contract talks underway Ð without success.
When CEP representatives of one of the three units showed up at the bargaining table with representatives of the other two units present as observers, the company refused to bargain and instead filed charges of bargaining in bad faith against our Local with the Manitoba Labour Board. The tw-day hearing has been completed, and we are awaiting the decision of the Labour Board. Your Union's position is that the company has no right to say who we bring to the bargaining table as part of our committee. The company argues that it does indeed have the right to give time off from their shifts to attend bargaining sessions. There has not been an exchange of proposals and the normal negotiating process appears to have bogged down.

Thunder Bay Chronicle-Journal:
A collective bargaining agreement covering some 140 members of our Local expired last December after three years. Proposals for a new contract were exchanged late last fall, with the company demanding major concessions from the Union, including a five-per-cent wage roll-back in the first year, followed by one-per-cent raises in years two and three respectively. Members of the bargaining unit at that point decided to hold a strike vote, which was taken early in January and resulted in a strong majority of members opting for strike action if this becomes necessary. The company objected to the strike vote, arguing that the Union has no right to hold such a vote while bargaining is still going on. However, labour law in Ontario, Manitoba and British Columbia clearly allows the votes. In the end, a round of bargaining sessions was scheduled for Jan. 7, Jan. 8 and Jan. 9. On the Friday prior to the start of talks, the Union delegation received a call from the publisher of the Chronicle-Journal, informing Local Representative Adolph Setek the talks could not start until mid-morning Tuesday, Jan. 8 because there had been a scheduling mix-up on the part of management. Adolph spent the suddenly free Monday in consultation on various matters with union members. He was informed the following day that bargaining committee members would not be excused from work until one hour before the start of bargaining, then expected for about 11 a.m. No company delegation appeared during the morning of Jan. 8 and Adolph was told there was a further delay because the owner of the newspaper had been delayed on his way to Thunder Bay. When no company delegation had materialized by 2 p.m., Adolph returned to Winnipeg. He was later informed that the companyÕs owner and chief negotiator did not arrive in Thunder Bay until 9:30 p.m. Jan. 8, showing that management never did intend to negotiate on the second day set aside for the talks. Company negotiators showed themselves intransigent when talks finally did get underway weeks later, with essentially unchanged offers now on the table being labelled as final. Unless there is a last-minute break in the negotiating deadlock, Adolph predicts strike action by about the middle of March.

Winnipeg Free Press:
The collective bargaining agreement covering the newspaper's 1,500 carriers expired at the end of last October. After several start-up bargaining sessions, the company asked the Union to agree to set aside further bargaining for a period of time to allow management to adjust to the administration changes involved with the change in ownership of the newspaper, which had recently been sold by Thomson Corp. The Union agreed to the postponement and the company has not yet come back with proposals for new bargaining dates.