Some managers in here are awful.
Quite frankly, they should be fired. They have no idea what they are talking about, and are easily bamboozled. Sometimes they get caught up in stupid schemes that are a waste of money, just like the picket signs say.
Besides that, there are just too bloody many of them.
There, I said it.
And while I’m swinging: George Smith is a cruel freak, by anyone’s estimation.
Which is not to say he isn’t the right person for the right job.
But as it stands, there are few mechanisms to get rid of these people, besides backbiting.
This needs to be fixed.
You should all be nodding along right now.
Now here’s what the good managers in the CBC (you know they exist) are saying:
They would love to hire young, smart, energetic people with great ideas and fresh outlooks, just like the glossy propaganda pamphlet says. They would love to give them bona fide jobs.
If you are smart, they want you. If you are dedicated, they need you. But they have a budget and can only hire so many people. So if the union is protecting some useless wingnut hired in the 80’s, where does that leave the new kid?
And you know they are in here: the unionized duds who can’t work, don’t want to work, or refuse to work. You know exactly who I mean. CMG knows exactly who they are, too.
But these people cannot be fired because it is the union’s job to protect them. They get shuffled around for years. They get dumped into unwitting departments. They complain every day about work until they finally, mercifully, retire.
It doesn’t take a genius to know there is something fugazi about the CMG.
They aren’t being totally honest with their younger members, and I think some of them are starting to figure it out. I mean, I used to be in CMG myself, but it doesn’t mean I ever bought into all that comrade business. I just wanted to work at thwe CBC. I’ve spent toomuch time in Communist countries: that crap makes me uncomfortable.
The CMG knows that when these old guys in the union are removed, or when they retire, the union itself will expire. That’s a fact. They will be left with a lot of people like me who couldn’t give a flip about the union. Or the guild. Or whatever.
I think CMG is afraid of this. They should be.
And in my more cynical moments I think they are more interested in protecting their own asses than they are in getting my generation real jobs.
And really, comrade, none of us ever counted on you to find us jobs anyways.
110 Comments
As another union member, I’ll try to hold you to that.
I’ve given…and given…and given to to this corp…I am done.
No more unclaimed ovetime for this smuck!
Where the heck is Ouimet anyway? Has the plug been pulled??
as managers prepare to debut hnic and last months bills bring some sober reflection to the picket line i can’t help but think that this righteous stance of unionized employees sincerely committed to public broadcasting will accelerate the p b s mentality of the cbc board (virtual senate appointees)…..granted, management can be an oxymoron at a top heavy bureaucracy as most middle managers struggle to stay under the radar, and yes not all employees are equally motivated, but no collective agreement will solve these problems…..middle mangers must dread the prospect of actually having to manage more contract/temps/freelance staff as much as members fear a future of kissing ass to get a contract….lets get beyond the passionately misguided blame game and give a little to take a little…or it won’t be long before a million people watch the leafs on a saturday and management will become even more delusional in their belief that all is progressing smoothly…and two months of bills weigh in
If Profac is doing such a great job then why won’t CBC give the union the full cost benifit analysis?
They still have an in house duplicating in Montreal and the reason they do not outsource is that is to expensive even though sub-contractors pay the workers less. Truth is, at least in Toronto, Most shows/departments use outside companies now anyway.
Before they did not.
Where is the cost benefit in that?
I voted for a the strike mandate out of principle. I was locked out because of it. I am angry at my employer, scared of being out.
I have two small children, No income. But I will be damned if I walk back in that building without a contract that protects future hires and public broadcasting.
I walked out thinking CBC believed in me and I will walk back in trusting in my colleagues.
Once the CBC called for the conciliator, the clock had started.
With the clock ticking, the union needed a strike mandate. If not CBC could have posted conditions (imposed a contract) on August 15th and the CMG would have had no legal recourse.
If you think the Guild would have struck, you don’t know your history.
In more than 50 years at the CBC, the CMG and its forerunner, the CWSG NEVER struck despite getting a strike mandate every time negotiators asked for one. It wasn’t just at the CBC either; there have been no CMG strikes at any unit (CP/BN, Reuter, AFP, TVO, APTN, Vision, SunTV or the now-defunct UPI).
“Unions protect members, that’s what they do. And they protect existing members a hell of a lot more than potential future members”
Thats why so many of us 50-somethings have decided to take a month or so off to ensure that the not yet hired can have a shot at a life like we have had. Please give me a break!
After all many of us are close to retirement (a couple of years; some a few months) and if you believe the CBC have a guaranteed job for life.
Why don’t we just turn our shit-flows-downhill corporation and restructure it as a co-operative corporation?
At least ‘co-operative’ takes some of the inherent antagonism out of these moments.
A two-line pass at DELUSIONAL:
The lockout-strike distinction isn’t significant in and of itself. But it is, if you consider that there might not have been a strike had there not been a lockout. Of course CMG had every intention of taking us out at a more favourable time. But that’s exactly the point of a strike THREAT — you have leverage over the other side. And that’s why I don’t think there would have been a stoppage. Each side would have had too much — AND A ROUGHLY EQUAL AMOUNT — to lose if the strike had been scheduled for a time when the rest of the world (i.e. politicians, members of the Cdn elite and, dare I say, hockey lovers) was paying attention. There would have been a strong incentive to compromise. Not now. Management doesn’t want to lose face (under those visors — Don Cherry, pass us a blog!), the CMG smells blood.
We need a new referee…
Noiseman:
Sheila can take slap shots, wrist shots, even weak backhands. As long as she scores in the end. Someone has to turn the red light on these managers.
To the delusional post:
What is that you say? You WANT to hide your inadequacies? You want the government to keep handing out money that you can`t spend properly. And you also want to ignore CBC`s mandate to provide quality Canadian programming to Canadians.
The manager`s are so brain washed by this 87% Strike MANDATE vote it`s embarassing. IF you can recall, we never gave STRIKE NOTICE… and even if we had, we`re trying to tell you we were NOT happy with your proposed contract. Can you understand that???
Wristshooter: you know and I know, cronyism and nepotism are difficult to prove. I’d be satisfied with a complete overview and reporting on the company. We’ve taken this labour dispute out of the building and on to the streets,so why stop now. If the auditor general wants to take a few shots against the CBC, let her. Slap shots preferably.
Noiseman is right about the abundance of riches for Sheila “Drama Queen” Fraser in the Niagara Institute and ParkerVision files. But also, let her peek into cronyism and nepotism.
I am so tired of this lockout-strike argument. Usually I don’t even bother to correct people anymore. Of course there’d be no lockout without a strike mandate – but there may well never have been a strike either. Voting against a strike mandate after months of negotiations – it’s like saying we don’t give a crap, our negotiators don’t have our support, let me just bend over for ya. You can’t do that if you hope to negotiate a fair settlement – and that’s all we’re after.
This debate will never be won. It will probably go on and on. A fair settlement means both sides give up something. Get over yourselves and settle.
anonymous said:
We didn’t walk off the job, so get your facts straight
Turn your plackard around, and it says “on strike”. The difference between a strike and a lockout is trivial.
CMG members voted in favour for a strike mandate. If you think the lockout would have occurred without the strike mandate, you’re delusional. CBC’s strategy was absolutely on target: get as much of the disruption out of the way as possible before HNIC and the fall launch, to reduce the overall impact on the CBC.
What is that you say? You WANT the CBC to be devalued in the eyes of the public? You WANT the government to reduce the Corp’s funding? And you’re pretty sure this will somehow improve the CBC’s ability to provide you with stable employment?
Yup.
Delusional.
Where the heck is Ouimet anyway??? It’s been over 4 days without a post… has she had the plug pulled?? Where’s Pedro in all of this?? So many questions, too few answers
PF
For the last poster, it’s not a strike. We’ve been locked out by management. If you want to tell someone to fuck off, please direct your anger at CBC Management. We didn’t walk off the job, so get your facts straight before you start telling us to fuck off, please and thank you.
Seriously fuck off with this strike. If you fuck up HNIC after last year’s lack of hockey, you’re toast.
Have the Auditor do that in Toronto first, then in the regional stations. We usually end up with the stuff that Toronto has either already used, or doesn’t want. No slur against Toronto…just the way thing are!
Definitely bring on the Auditor General. I can tell you that tv engineering, technical, and operations have been sorely neglected by being starved for cash at a time when technology has become an order of magnitude more complex.
A simple example: get an inspector to stand in the middle of a control room or the studio floor and point to any single item, and let us demonstrate our tracking of that item. Wanna see red-face city?
To Phillip Blancher,
These posts may be amusing to you
but they’re coming at the expense of thousands of locked out workers.
Workers who have mortgages, car and child-care payments etc. Not sure if you’ve ever been on a picket line, but it is not amusing.
It is demoralizing.
And your lightbulb joke shows how little you know about the CBC reality of 2005. Radio reporters record their own sound and interviews, mix and package it on their own.
As another writer already pointed out, Profac…changes the lightbulbs in our buildings.
Oh come on. It’s not reasonable to make the middle managers give up everything above $350. Yes I’m horrified that they’re making out like bandits (and that some of them are gloating) while we’re suffering but seriously…. many of them are working like dogs and ready to drop from exhaustion. 80-hour weeks are not uncommon. You wouldn’t put in that amount of time for $350. They’re not all evil people…. in my region, the union/managmeent relationship is a good one in many cases.
The focus of our anger should be on the SMC. They are forcing all their people into an untenable situation.
I have a simple idea. Every manager who pretends that they care about us on the line should do the following:
When they get their pay. Take the net earnings and everything above $350 per week should be donated to charity or to the CMG hardship fund.
They should do this for every week this lock-out continues.
They should do this in a public way so that all of us know who they are and that they really are on our side. It will also send a clear msg to management that they are against this lock out.
This way we are all on the same page and knowone is gaining from this mess. If I have to live on $350 per week so should they.
I bet not one selfish little manager will come forward. Not one.
From top to bottom they are all in this for themselves and not for the good of CBC.
The CBC made a mistake forcing us all under one union! When the CEP was locked out last time (2002) they raised all these issues but no one listened. Now that virtually everyone of every stripe is out on the street, issues like the one addressed above (management compensation for doing struck work) are being noticed at the highest levels. I just love this. Turn on those spotlights!
Take that managers!
Full credit to Nancy in PEI (I just cut and pasted it from her blog).
Malpeque MP Wayne Easter is calling on the Martin cabinet to rollback “any financial gain made by managers over and above normal salaries as a result of the lockout” at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
Early in the lockout, the Canadian Media Guild obtained an internal memo outlining the bonuses that managers would receive during the labour dispute.
The compensation package includes:
An additional 15% of an individual’s hourly rate for each hour of “struck work”
$52 per hour for each hour worked beyond eight hours on a regular working day and for all hours on a scheduled day off or statutory holiday
Meal allowances
The Corporation will also pay lump sum amounts ranging from $100 to $700 weekly beyond a 40-hour work week. It says the amount will depend on the number of additional hours of “strike-related duties” an individual performs.
(Source: http://www.cbcontheline.ca/news_0815_scablabour.html)
Wayne Easter says he’d like to see those bonuses given to managers rolled back. He also calls for a change to the process for parliamentary appropriations to crown corporations so that a similar situation — where managers receive bonuses for doing struck work — would not be allowed in the future.
In a letter sent jointly to Heritage minister Liza Frulla and Labour minister Joe Fontana, the Prince Edward Island MP calls on the ministers to bring an immediate resolution to the CBC lockout.
Easter told locked-out employees on the picket line in Charlottetown Monday that he had been in touch a few hours earlier with the Labour Minister’s office. Easter says he was told there was no progress being made at the negotiating table.
“This lack of resolutions at the mediation talks,” he writes to the ministers, ” leads me to believe that at least one of the parties at the table is not really resolved to settling the issue.”
Easter said managers who are making substantial bonuses over the lockout have no incentive to bring about a speedy resolution to the dispute. “The fact that managers are benefiting personally in financial terms every day the lockout is extended is unprincipled…unethical…”
The Prince Edward Island MP also said the CBC, its President and its Board of Directors are, in his view, “in clear violation” of the mandate of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as laid out in the 1991 Broadcasting Act.
Easter concludes that it’s time for Parliament to act “aggressively”.
If the dispute is not resolved this week, before Parliament sits, Easter suggests “ministers ask Parliament to bring in back-to-work legislation and end the lockout.”
The letter to the minister is one of two major lobbying efforts by the Prince Edward Island MP to end the CBC lockout. The Atlantic Liberal caucus, headed by Rodger Cuzner, has also written to CBC president Robert Rabinovitch asking “that every effort be employed to bring an expedient resolution to this dispute.”
The Auditor General has suggested she will target CBC for review in the upcoming months. Perhaps she should study the recent blogs and save her department time and money. Niagara Institute, Parkervision. Are we just scratching the surface?
How many CBC people does it take to change a lightbulb? Mr. Blancher suggests four! In our plant it dosen’t take any CBC people to screw in a lightbulb. That work is contracted out to Profac.
So, again in our plant, if management decided to assign a reporter to cover the event, then the reporter would get the sound, ask the questions, ingest the material to the server him/herself and edit the item. Then, prep the item for air, and play it out him/herself at the appropriate time (depending on the nature of the item). Yes, I admit it would be vetted (gotta try and get some QC in there!), so the total people to cover and run the item is two.
Deadwood is in the eye of the beholder. A person can become said
dehumanized object at the whim of a
new manager or new way of doing things…yesterday’s award winner
is not immune.
All workplaces have those who
pull more weight than others. We once accomodated that peculiar reality. In our stripped-down
workplace they become objects of
our frustration and exhaustion…even when the circumstances that turned them into
frogs were beyond their control.
To the person who posted the “good
news” scenario of locations making
do without managers:
-Have you been called at 4 a.m.
because the snowplough hadn’t arrived?
-or had to deal with backed-up
toilets at the same time you are
doing your journalistic best to
line up a show? (a possible
metaphor there)
-or had to deal with a prickly
staff situation because the nearest
real “manager” is 500 k’s away and
answers voice, e-mails..in a week if you’re lucky? (and then tells
that you might have handled it incorrectly?)
Don’t praise Newfoundland and Labrador’s experience with “managing” small stations unless you’ve been there.
I agree that this kind of discussion needs to be out of
the closet…and not just during this “labor disruption”. The problems within CBC have been festering for so long, and we need
to be brave and insist the place..
be it the Broadcast Centre or
Bum Hole Tickle..needs to be managed properly, creatively, and wisely.
Every single time there is a lockout or strike (which in itself is far too often,) the same criticisms are launched about “deadwood” being protected by the union. The same criticisms are launched against the union negotiators as being bald-headed, over-the-hill attention seekers, just marking their territory. The thing that astonishes me is that every single time their is an open invitation for new people to run for elected office within the union executive, none of the critics take the opportunity to run for a position and express their concerns. So ultimately, the same “bald-headed, over-the-hill attention-seeking” dedicated union members volunteer to fight the battle again.
The french have an expression for this attitude….les grandes penseurs, petites faiseurs.
Translation? You can look it up.
How many CBC people does it take to change a lightbulb? One to screw the bulb in. One to report on the process. One to tape background noise for the introduction to the piece. One to report on the reporting of the process. Two to edit each production, four total. A team of ten to vet the tapes to make sure it meets quality standards and 33 managers to review and question it.
The blogs and rhetoric from the CBC vs Staff THE BEST entertainment to come from the CBC in the last 15 years!
Re: Parkervision and other recent endevours:
According to a CBC engineer I know, they hold planning meetings to assess the new technology to decide what direction to go, what product to buy, etc. Very professional. However, the final determining factor is not reliability, cost, practicality, maintainability, etc….it is how many cbc workers they can get rid of by installing this. I kid you not. He couldn’t believe it himself.
the union should get the membership to log these gaffs in order to embarrass the management into better quality management, the same way that newspapers watch politicians.
Turn the CMG newsletter ‘On the Line’ into a CBC Management FRANK magazine after we settle….
Speaking of spending too much money, how about CBC.ca’s new “EPT” project we keep hearing about? Wasn’t it supposed to be finished many months ago?
It’s a content management system. Like the $299 one running cbcunlocked.ca, only a thousand times the price.
Aren’t there *awesome* free products available these days? Zope?
It seems redundant to email whistleblower@ctv.ca for this kind of stuff. We almost EXPECT it from the Ceeb. :-(
Spend lots of money mindlessly?
Go check out the new Studio 53, the Parkervision studio in Toronto.
In order to do away with the switching position, they went with a hugely integrated/automated system.
This studio was based on a sales brochure, because not much more documentation existed. The studio was rewired a number of times to get it right at huge expense.
In the end? The production staff number remained the same,, only now there’s a maintenance guy sitting in the back nursemaiding it along as well.
It had occurred to me that the union should get the membership to log these gaffs in order to embarrass the management into better quality management, the same way that newspapers watch politicians.
this blog and subsequent comment section has nothing to do with the HBO show, “Deadwood” and I for one am extremely disappointed.
SHAME.
As a recently departed FORMER employee of the CBC, I can definitively say that anybody in CBC management looking at staff and using the word “deadwood” should take a good look in the mirror.
It is the CBC STAFF who actually ‘get the shit to air’… often IN SPITE OF the bad decision making habits of CBC management.
And, by the way… just what is it you guys in management create? Not programming, that’s for damn sure. All you do is decide how to spend the tax money that is given to you every year. Let’s look at THAT for a change.
Anybody remember Razorfish… the US design firm who was put in charge of branding CANADA’S public broadcaster? Let’s see… how much did that cost… Anybody got a figure?
And what about some of the endless fiascos which involve Kids’ CBC… the revolving door leading into the head office is about ready to fall off it’s hinges.
And how about $100,000 dollar websites that never get implemented… and the list goes on.
The track record of CBC management in recent memory is abysmal. This is the third labour disruption in six years.
There is deadwood on staff, for sure. But for God’s sake, management should have the decency to get their own shit together before they start bitching about the staff. Without the staff there’s nothing but an office building full of beureaucrats shifting paper to cover up their own incompetence.
By the way, I left voluntarily. So don’t hang no ‘disgruntled former employee’ sign on my neck.
Actually most of those comments are from this thread, not the one written by CBC Survivor. Look further up the page and you’ll see them.
I cut much of the deadwood comments from Survivor’s post before s/he dumped the post.
________________________
And for those who are waxing poetic about the “process” for getting rid of deadwood in the organization — snap out of it. The process if you can call it that is painfully protracted, awkward, bureaucratic, weighed heavily in Mr/Ms Deadwood’s favour and ultimately pointless.
Whoa!
I’m a manager with a lot of dead wood employees… and I’m doing everything in my power to get rid of them as they are simply “non-performers”. Yes, previous managers turned a blind eye to the problems and now I’m stuck with these deadbeat union low life pieces of shit, I am trying to follow the “agreed upon” processes, but keep facing red tape and cautionary discussions from Human Resources and Industrial Relations. Damn it! I’m trying to do my job as a manager to fire (sorry – discharge, terminate, exterminate, “buy out”, “pay off”, etc) these useless twits, but am advised to follow processes and seek alternative methods and re-energize and re-emphasize and re-integrate…. oh man, I’m sick of it. Why can’t I just throw the dead wood on the fire instead of trying to re-position it into the sunlight and pray for growth? Shouldn’t the employee take responsibility for it’s own growth and prosperity?
What I’™m getting at here is – the problem isn’™t necessarily the ’œemployee’ or ’œmanagement’ ’¦ but maybe the problem lies with HR and the bureaucracy they create in dealing with ’œour issues’.
Re: the union preventing managers from getting rid of dead wood… in my 11 years at the corp, I’ve seen a bunch of dead wood types meet their Waterloo. It is time consuming and somewhat unconfortable to document incompetence and deliver official warnings. But that’s why managers get the big bucks. If they’re too lazy or insecure to hold their own staff accountable then they get what they deserve. Blaming the union is a cop out.
To the manager who has a unit full of deadwood: face facts, you are a bad manager. A good manager inspires and motivates. A good manager will make people want to be involved. Come out of your office. Get to know your people. Since we no longer have a senior management to be loyal to, we’ll be looking for real leadership when this mess is over. You might just find your deadwood that you would so love to turf are your greatest asset. That is, if you can give them something to be proud of.
To the manager who claims to have a department full of deadwood.
I curiously read your post as you went from blaming your employee’™s to blaming the union and then on to HR for your professional inadequacies
When everyone else seems to be the problem, perhaps it is time to reflect inwards.
Judging by your post, you must be a real treat to work for. Maybe enroll yourself in anger management course. Or better still, move on and don’™t let the door hit you on the way out.
I am sure you will be sorely missed.
Bye now!
_________________________
My apologies to Anton, but these discussions are probably remedial, and this may yet evolve a procedure that keeps the management and the employees honest.
Should this take place, it will be one less reason to have these idiotic lock-outs/strikes in the future.
Personally, I thought Survivor was Fred–I was waiting for the PS saying that we shouldn’t socialize with (or give food or drink to) employees on the line.
I too thought Survivor’s post was interesting…sociologically. I also thought it was wrong–way wrong–and not representative of my thoughts or opinion or of practically everyone I work with.
Finally, to touch on a point he/she raised: I’m sure there are some managers who are enjoying this, as I’m sure there are some employees–perhaps independently wealthy ones–who see this either as a big kitchen party or an ideal opportunity to stick it to ‘the man’. I don’t know anyone on any side of the line who feels any of these ways. And I know a lot of people.
Cold is a good word. Survivor appeared fluent in corporate-speak. There was talk of ‘identifying efficiencies’ and reconnecting with the ‘core business’. There was also a complaint about the compensation she/he is receiving for doing struck work – that was a little tough to take. The points about TV and Toronto were pretty on target – but also completely obvious. The fact that this manager just figured out that TV needs some help and that management-employee relations are more strained in large centers – well, it doesn’t really inspire much confidence in the people up-top. Plug-in a little for heaven’s sake – we could use some leaders.
STOP WITH THE DEADWOOD.
Calling people redundant is bad enough, just imagine how dehumanizing deadwood meetings would be.
I’ve been involved in to many layoff, downsizing, redunancy meetings. The person affected is usually personally devestated. The company you’ve been devoted to, has just decided that you are deadwood. Just about everyone who gets chopped, was convinced that their personal contribution is too important to cut, and surely somebody else will be pruned.
Speaking of dehumanizing,(why don’t blogs have spell checkers?), what’s up with ‘survivor’? I was at a neighbourhood party last night, I came home for my sweatshirt. I figured I’d have at least 15 minutes before she became suspicious. I logged in read surivors post, and dashed off. Some of his points were interesting, wrong, but interesting. I was looking forward to reading the comments that were sure to follow.
The one thing I remember most, was survivors very cold tone. There was no joy, anger, passion. All the attributes of a good corporate sociopath. I prefer Ouimet’s rants of rage, frustration, and humour. There’s some honest emotion there. Or at least it’s well written.
Amen to the previous post. I’™m so tried of hearing management whine about their “deadwood” staff. Sure, some employees are unqualified to be doing their jobs, but so are many managers. And a manager with weak leadership and poor decision-making skills is a much more serious problem than one “useless wingnut” employee, since a manager largely dictates the personality of an entire team. In my time at the CBC, I’™ve seen many “young, smart, energetic people with great ideas” hired, only to see them quit a short time later, disillusioned by the incompetence and indifference of the managers. Deal with the deadwood managers first, otherwise nothing is going to change.
It comes as no surprise to me that at least one manager is enjoying their new work. The work is great. I can’t image why anyone would move into the management ranks in the first place.
The only ones I’ve seen do it are usually one or more of the following:
a) trying to avoid pay interruptions (strikes/lockouts) (no real interest in management)
b) can’t keep up their skills in a rapidly changing workplace, along with
c) are deadwood trying to stay one step ahead of being detected
d) are fast-talking, slick, schmooze artists who neglect their responsibilities on their way up the food chain, doing irrepairable damage to the departments they leave behind.
Why doesn’t anyone who is actually suited to administration apply for these jobs? Why do they hire the types listed above? Once they’ve shown they are no use, why doesn’t someone higher up do something before they destroy morale? Help us to do the jobs we love. These types make the job more difficult and the end result is what we are seeing now.
Flush the deadwood from management first, then you’ll have more credibility with the rank and file.
What’s become of CBC Survivor’s post?
For the record, I didn’t remove it. I didn’t even get a chance to read it.
CBC Survivor took it down. I guess he/she has his/her reasons.
CBC Survivor: You told us you were enjoying your new work, you said 87%of us voted to strike….. Why did that post disappear??
Sure there’s deadwood in the workplace – but who put that deadwood there in the first place?
Most of the time managers can’t even spot the deadwood.
Sorry but there’s nothing you can say to make me swallow the management ideal – they are the ones who locked US out…and you’re asking me to trust them, over the CMG? No thanks.
Even if the CMG have done their jobs badly, it’s better to stick with them than hand my future over to a group of people who don’t care about it.
You have a point about deadwood… Corporations (especially Government institutions) are often havens for folks who are just hanging on for the benefits, or retirement… or just because they lack imagination or self motivation… Sometimes people have a lot on their plates in life, and that too can cause distraction away from career. That’s just the way it is. Nothing’s perfect. Or maybe everything is.
From my position within the CBC I’ve had the opportunity to witness firsthand how folks on both sides can drop the ball… BIG TIME. But, I’d have to say that the real big fu%& ups come from management, though. The ones that end up costing the big bucks. The ones that the public doesn’t know about. The incredible indecision, backpedaling, and just plain stupidity is demoralising and, frankly… immoral.
Immoral?
Yes… because of the money that is wasted so routinely, deftly removed from the public purse. THEN we all have to listen to them bellyache about ‘not having enough money’. GIVE ME A BREAK.
You guys in management are’nt fooling me in the least. The place is run on a wing and a prayer. I agree that there is too much deadwood. Gather it all up and we could have one hell of a bonfire. I’ll be the guy with the bag of marshmallows.
–
Hey Mr Mansbridge….How is your golf game?? You must be getting in a few extra rounds.
What’s become of CBC Survivor’s post? Do we just shut conversations down if we don’t like where they’re going?
Hear. Hear. Signed, not quite fifty, but very bald. Hang tough everyone.
…….I was forty six before i wrote my first news story…after 22 years i had to become flexible..i did, since then i have won five journalism awards including one in radio…heaven forbid..over fifty, balding and ready to flex again if they let me inside..but i’m in no hurry..this is the sixth picket line i’ve walked(not all with cbc) now is not the time to give in…now is the time to hold fast…this is the time when the people inside the room need to know we’re behind them…so show it.
To all managers working on the inside during the lockout:
I know you are all putting in long hours, neglecting family and friends.
When it is all said and done and the CMG workers are back on the job, do you really think anyone, (especially senior management) will commend or even remember you for your efforts?
If the people on the picket line are expendable….
Hey…maybe you should get a union?
Don’t expect a raise anytime soon!
Initially I was angered at this troll of a manager, dropping this old chestnut, especially in the middle of negotiations, but I am pleased with some of the responses. “Anton”, feel free to add your comments anytime! Looks like some people (on both sides) need to hear them.
Ouimet, I think it’s unfortunate that you apparently see the world only in black and white terms. Managers come in productive and unproductive flavours as do employees. This also cuts across all age and experience lines. Labelling the union as being the problem is simplistic. It is there to protect but cannot choose who is entitled to its protection. There are employees who have found undeserved sanctuary in the contract but this is not the union’s fault nor is it a fault of the contract. The problem lies with individuals who would rather use the system to their advantage than to apply themselves to the task they were hired to do. This creates a problem for everyone. The question that needs to be asked is, who hired these individuals in the first place? I know that the union only represents, it doesn’t hire.
What about those of us who do our jobs well? The award winners are just as locked out as any so-called “deadwood”.
CBC management treats productive employees with the same contempt as “do-nothings”.
No wonder good people are burnt
out and disgusted.
Careful!
Obviously most of you talking about the deadwood at the CBC see themselves as some of our best workers within the organization, and thank goodness for the 10 of you, to think without you it would all go to hell in handbag.
In my experience the people who spout off are the worst offenders.
Ahh yeah…camera’s…that will help get a deal.
Don’t judge people by what they say, judge them by what they do.
As in your employer locked you out.
Could we please put cameras in all these little negotiating rooms?? I`m TIRED of reading both sides and trying to guess the truth. This way both sides would be accountable. We could all watch and decide for ourselves.
And if you argue that we can`t put cameras in the rooms… tell me why not, what is it you are trying to hide? Aren`t the negotiators supposed to be working for US?
Hmmm’¦
I did not realize the union only represented old guys. The NWI staff may take offense to this comment (well, maybe all but one…sorry Arnold) as might the over 275 contract employees who have gained permanent status over the past two years due to the guilds efforts.
FYI’¦if you like being on contract, then by all means remain that way. There is plenty of flexibility in the current agreement that allows you that option.
The one thing though that I feel I must address is Ouimet’™s comments that allude to some sort of grand conspiracy within the union that suggests the union should ’œfear’ the old white guys leaving because it would be their demise,
Let me enlighten you a little. If the need for a union at the CBC was not there then we would not have one Young, or old I do not expect that will change as long as current management exists. I am tired of management and a handful of employees using the union as a scapegoat when they do not get what they want and behave like spoiled children. I am sure the union must get tired of having to clean up managements mess.
The union is not in a position to pick and choose who it represents. That is the law.
Other than a handful of paid CMG employees, such as Bruce May, who by the way is an ex-CBC employee and a man or great integrity, the union is largely made up of elected and none elected volunteers. There is no personal gain, only sacrifices. Granted some are better than others but in large part they range from young 20 and up and are talented. educated and dedicated employees who believe deeply in the CBC. These are people whose only goal is to better the working conditions of there fellow employees because of a fundamental belief that employees should be treated fairly
You do not have to agree or disagree with the union, but to criticize these individuals with a blanket statement is wrong.
In a perfect world you may never have to go to the union during you career at the CBC.
Solid, bright, hardworking people have too all the time, ask them what it means to have a union.
Better still ask supporter Chris Cuthbert who the Guild is representing in an upcoming arbitration case.
I guess I’m what you’d consider young and I’m contract… but I have to say that I’m appalled by the ageism I’ve read posted here.
Ouimette: “Young, smart and energetic” are all worthy attributes but they don’t necessarily translate into great programming.
The biggest hit the CBC TV hit ever was produced by Mark Starowitz. His number 2 was Gene Allen. Both boys fit the “old and white” descriptor.
The best radio documentaries, in my estimation anyhow, are made by
Karen Wells and Bob Carty (and no they aren’t buddies of mine). Again, old white folk (if hitting 50 makes one old).
Marylou Finlay and Anna Marie, well, sorry girls but your not exactly young…and yet you send CBC radio ratings through the roof. The Current was created by Jamie Purdon and Jennifer McGuire. Not exactly kids.
The point is youth and energy are ought to be a healthy part of the mix, but so should experience, wisdom and a well-honed sense of craft.
In fact, if there is a correlation between age and quality of content at CBC, the evidence seems to suggest, that the older the better.
Funny how the need to hire “hire young, smart, energetic people with great ideas and fresh outlooks” seems to apply only to the rank and file and not senior management. Meanwhile, audience numbers are plummeting and the senior management team displays the kind of cronyism that would make the Chinese government look like a dot com startup.
I say apply the same principle behind contract employees to senior management. At minimum there should be term limits lest we end up with the out-of-touch, underperforming, whites only senior team that we currently have.
I hope the PMO is reading this. If you want a fresh and better CBC, lop off its head, not the limbs.
To the manager who claims to have a department full of deadwood.
I curiously read your post as you went from blaming your employee’™s to blaming the union and then on to HR for your professional inadequacies
When everyone else seems to be the problem, perhaps it is time to reflect inwards.
Judging by your post, you must be a real treat to work for. Maybe enroll yourself in anger management course. Or better still, move on and don’™t let the door hit you on the way out.
I am sure you will be sorely missed.
Bye now!
Exactly…it is because we love our jobs that we bitch, because we know we could do them even better, and therefore better serve the Canadian public if the Corp was managed better, with vision and respect. Creativity needs room to happen….and it is not limited to the artisans….managers can and should be creative too. That is why we complain…maybe we are an imaginative bunch, but we all have a vision of how things could and should be. And many of us are so disappointed. That does not mean we don’t care – it means we care too much.
I LOVE my job. I’m sure many of the people who’ve posted complaints do too. For the most part I love the people I work with, love connecting with the audience, love being allowed into people’s lives to tell their stories. I don’t want to do anything else, ever. It’s tough to watch a place you love experience troubles. Lots of reasons – lack of funding, pulling away from regional coverage, kneeling down before buzz-words learned at Niagara, going after a younger audience by assuming they’re vapid creatures with ADHD, etc.
I think I feel the same way about my job as my mom felt about hers. She loved teaching – especially reaching out to the kids some teachers gave up on. But she complained about it too – the politics and the lack of aupport from the administration. When you love your job you want to point out problems and propose solutions. If you didn’t care you’d just shut up.
I should also point out that as a person who makes a living in radio – there aren’t many other options in this country. In-depth interviews everday, long form documentaries, investigative reporting – no one else does what we do – and even if they did, I really do WANT to be here. But I do think I deserve some respect, so do my colleagues, so do good managers, and so does our audience. I don’t think any of us are getting it right now.
I agree with Anonymous, this is great. Thanks Ouimet.
So since we’re here, here’™s a question I would love to have someone answer.
If you hate your job, why are you still here?
It’™s not like you’™re illiterate, undereducated, desperately poor, or completely without skills. You’™re all employable.
I think you people secretly LIKE your jobs. And I think part of what you like is bashing the place.
And I wish you would stop. I think it’™s unseemly: you’™re middle-class public servants with well-paid, creative jobs. If you think you can get a better deal outside, you should do that. If you can’™t, if the CBC suits you better than Ryerson, CTV, the Globe and Mail, government work, PR, going back to school, you-name-it — then why don’™t you just admit that you like it here? And try to do a good job and make the place better, instead of bitching and moaning about management all the time.
You’re not chained to the place. You’re adults, and you have options.
This is a great rant sheet. A therapist couldn’™t do better.
Thanks Ouimet
“Cutting four management positions probably works out to the same cost saving as cutting 15 guild positions.”
Um, cbc mama, not to be rude, but what planet are you living on? You’ve got the average manager making about 250K, which is fantasyland.
To the manager who has a unit full of deadwood: face facts, you are a bad manager. A good manager inspires and motivates. A good manager will make people want to be involved. Come out of your office. Get to know your people. Since we no longer have a senior management to be loyal to, we’ll be looking for real leadership when this mess is over. You might just find your deadwood that you would so love to turf are your greatest asset. That is, if you can give them something to be proud of.
Ouimet:
If you think the CMG causes CBC trouble by making its weakest and laziest members unfireable, you’ve never seen a teachers union in action.
My father was an elementary school principal and he complained all the time about the lazy and incompetent teachers in the board he and his fellow principals wanted to fire.
He had a mental list of dozens of them, and I’m sure his colleagues did too. Not one of them was ever fired, as far as I can recall.
I, quick frankly, resent your comments.
I have been at the CBC on and off for my entire working life. The CMG negotiated a staff position for contract ‘lifers’ like me last round.
I always dis-liked the union thinking that I would be justly rewarded for hard work. Not so it seems.
I am now a single parent and absolutely dependent on my CBC income. Imagine what happens when your one income is reduced to one third and you still have to pay daycare and your mortgage and keep your child in chocolate milk.
I work my ass off for the CBC – even my supervisors would agree with this – yet I know for a fact management isn’t so keen on my circumstances. Why keep an employee who has to leave to pick up her child (never mind that I often return to work at home).
If it were not for union protection I have not one single doubt that I’d been let go a long time ago.
Is it fair? To me no. Is it my fault? I have done EVERYTHING in my power to stay current and be accomodating. Am I deadwood? I would say not, but a beancounter higher up who doesn’t know me may believe so.
Thanks goodness for the union, because despite having many, many interviews outside of the CBC it appears nobody else wants to hire an educated and trained young mother either.
We do need to eat. Thanks, CMG for your protection.
Maybe they should look to Newfoundland & Labrador.Ten years ago they fired all of the location managers. The locations didn’t collaspe. They thrived without managers. Sure they are occassional problems but the managerless locations have some of the hardest working individules. Most including some of those balding 50 year olds still give a shit and until this latest lockout enjoyed going work.
Ouimette and various anonymouses–there must be more than one CBC.
I’ve worked in radio current affairs for years. I’m an inbetweener-not young, not old.
But I have to say the deadwood doesn’t exist in my department. And there seems little deadwood in the radio system.
Whatever the age, people seem to work their butts off.
In fact, the most protected, deadwood employees I’ve come across during my time at CBC are from the management or executive producer class. When they are “underperforming” (read fucking up)management creates a new, useless job for them. Managers are almost never fired or laid-off–just shuffled off somewhere else.
But, on the contrary, I have seen several really smart, hardworking “workerbees” laid-off.
Hello from Neutron – Now lets do some numbers: how many bad employees…(small percentage over 5500 employees) Hmmmm…..
Now how many bad managers as per the last 3 surveys (last one from Laval not officially out yet)and because we have one manager for every 2.3 employees:BIG PERCENTAGE !
So honestly we have more bad managers than bad employees – the sad part is that unlike these so called bad unionised employees upper management can fire these managers BUT THEY DON’T !
EVERY enterprise has bad people – what counts are the ones who can turn things around to the positive by PROPERLY managing which the CBC does not. (See last week’s article in the Globe & Mail on how managers for generations have been hiring people dumber than them in order to protect their vanity & jobs. I see it every day, every hour.
Here is a related post that was put earlier on another topic here but should be restated concerning this latest post of yours:
*****************
Yes some managers on the inside are folding. Inside sources have informed me that some middle managers are even taking the opportunity to get even with bad deliquent managers. While some out of town small managers are doing struck work at the TBC I hear these middle managers are getting revenge from past mismanaged incidences.
Are you one of those managers – assigned to a bad late nite graveyard shift away from home. Gotta love it when they eat their own ! (ps I do have respect for those managers that have treated employees fairly in the past though, it just that I haven’t seen one in years)
I have to say, being from a region, it must be hell to work at the broadcast centre. I have visited there on courses but have not experienced the culture. If I lived in Toronto, I would get away from what is apparently a cauldron of discontent and misery and find a job somewhere else. It is not so bad in hicks-ville. We are actually a happy lot that need you guys to chill out so we can all get back to work. Get counselling!
ok while we’re on protection subject- let’s peek at management protection projects… take a look at who got made management just prior to the lockout call? in tv and radio anyway, can’t speak for the bean counting department – does cbc management recruit high achievers and success stories from other successful media outlets or broadcast management programs? no they recruit their friends. croneyism is rampant in the newsrooms we all know it- and we know it’s not fair but we’re stuck with it.
You’re right Ouimet, there are too many managers. Ever stopped to read the directory placard outside the plum elevators on the 4th floor? It lists tv managers – and judging by their titles each one is doing about 25% of one job. There seems to be a lot of overlap between the Assistant Deputy Director of this and Regional Director of that. I can only assume radio is the same. Why not look for some “flexibility” from the top down? Cutting four management positions probably works out to the same cost saving as cutting 15 guild positions.
Re: the union preventing managers from getting rid of dead wood… in my 11 years at the corp, I’ve seen a bunch of dead wood types meet their Waterloo. It is time consuming and somewhat unconfortable to document incompetence and deliver official warnings. But that’s why managers get the big bucks. If they’re too lazy or insecure to hold their own staff accountable then they get what they deserve. Blaming the union is a cop out.
Although I have a hard time believing your entire staff is useless, you bring up a good point. Human Resources is a pain in the ass. Let’s point the finger at them for a while
Whoa!
I’m a manager with a lot of dead wood employees… and I’m doing everything in my power to get rid of them as they are simply “non-performers”. Yes, previous managers turned a blind eye to the problems and now I’m stuck with these deadbeat union low life pieces of shit, I am trying to follow the “agreed upon” processes, but keep facing red tape and cautionary discussions from Human Resources and Industrial Relations. Damn it! I’m trying to do my job as a manager to fire (sorry – discharge, terminate, exterminate, “buy out”, “pay off”, etc) these useless twits, but am advised to follow processes and seek alternative methods and re-energize and re-emphasize and re-integrate…. oh man, I’m sick of it. Why can’t I just throw the dead wood on the fire instead of trying to re-position it into the sunlight and pray for growth? Shouldn’t the employee take responsibility for it’s own growth and prosperity?
What I’™m getting at here is – the problem isn’™t necessarily the ’œemployee’ or ’œmanagement’ ’¦ but maybe the problem lies with HR and the bureaucracy they create in dealing with ’œour issues’.
I too have long felt that the union was sacrificing younger, inventive, creative and truly flexible staff members (some of whom – shock of shocks – were and are actually happy to be contract, temporary or casual at different times in their careers) in order to protect the least productive, least contributing and least content people in the organization (well, outside of certain managers). And for those who are waxing poetic about the “process” for getting rid of deadwood in the organization — snap out of it. The process if you can call it that is painfully protracted, awkward, bureaucratic, weighed heavily in Mr/Ms Deadwood’s favour and ultimately pointless. That may be why it’s relatively rare. The more common and in many ways more disturbing problem is when layoffs occur and then bumping – or the possibility of bumping – results. Sheer terror as the deadwood threatens to land in positions occupied by younger, smarter, defter people, and the younger, smarter, defter people (some only recently hired as permanent staff) are menaced and intimidated by those with seniority looking for a musical chair to occupy. Then a flurry of panic that results in the deadwood – the moderately senior – and even some of the newbies – being paid off to skip the bumping process and the turmoil that would accompany it, and just leave. It’s sickening, actually. More than once I’ve had freelancer friends come in to do a bit of work, only to marvel at the bitterness, hostility and – it has to be said – laziness of some of the so-called senior unionized staff – people who are otherwise unemployable elsewhere. I understand that when shows are cancelled and when people are redeployed and feel like they’ve been demoted and have to adjust to new working relationships and new technologies, it can be stressful and it can hurt. But. This is not a sheltered workshop, and it is not where someone should need to have their hand held daily because Man Alive or The Beachcombers or The Food Show were cancelled a hundred years ago. Sorry for the rant but, really, enough is enough. If we’re going to take nearly a year and a half to negotiate a collective agreement, it should recognize the reality of our workplace and how the Guild’s mindset has contributed to it.
Jeez. Will you people starting using names or numbers or something. Responding to anonymous is pretty hard when 15 people in the thread are named anonymous. Let’s show some flexibility here.
“Do the heads of the CMG have jobs other than being the heads of the CMG?”
Please tell me you are not a CMG member, nor do you work for HR/IR. The thought that your over 16 and are asking this question is too depressing.
Everyone who gets elected works for CBC. Some positions get a lot more releases than others. The only people that don’t work for CBC are the Union Reps. Dan Oldfield, Bruce May, people like that. The union pays them as professional negotiators to negotiate, enforce and interpet contracts, and a lot of other work as well. Most of the CMG reps did work at CBC at one time, and just kept working on more union stuff till they took a job with the union. But they work for the members of CMG. All the top decision making positions are held by CBC employees who give up evenings, weekends, and are sometimes released from work temporarly to be Union Executives.
If you are a CMG member in Toronto, you can spend part of your picket time taking a UNION 101 course. If you ask nice, or use an alias, managers could probably take it as well.
I was going take on the whole seniority thing, but I’ll save that for another day.
It happened at my first “quasi” management meeting..shortly after the first cuts. The president was there espousing the brave new way of doing things and how well it was working, wasn’t it? And all there nodded, some even genuflected, I think. Then,one 50-ish white balding guy hit his mic
button and told a different story;
one of disillusionment, discouragement,over-work, confusion in his unit.
There was an embarassing silence.
I, enraptured at being in ,if not the inner circle certainly the middle, thought..”gee, hope I quit
before I become THAT cynical”.
Hello…a decade later. I am fifty-
ish, and after “managing” a unit,
have to fight against that same despair. I have been part of hiring for the wrong reasons, part of the “Niagara Experience”, part of the new kool-aid vision every six months or so..part of keeping the “problems” because its too
problematic and messy to deal with them. CBC management will NOT address deadwood because it is too messy and time-consuming.
That is a deep failing…but unless
management comes up with a fair and equitable and humane way of dealing with people it should never have hired in the first place…(and jerked around ever since with the latest and best new way of doing things)it IS CMG’s responsibility
to protect them.
This is no time to be eating our young. Never have I been so proud of belonging to a group that cares so deeply about what we do. And for
that, I thank my brothers and sisters (and I use both terms unabashedly) at the former CEP…for without them, CMG would be..still “dithering”.Our line is strong, and commited and supportive
of each skill represented there…..”stinkin transmitter” techs are drafting Op-Ed pieces,
reporters are talking podcasts and
outputs….and levels.
Management has unwittingly done much to solidify our two unions..
I doubt it even knows what it has wrought.
Out of these ashes we are stronger, united and undoubtably, the heart and soul of CBC…and we have evolved into a force to be reckoned with. Yes, its tough to
pay the mortgage on lock-out pay..
but get over it, go to the hardship
fund, don’t cave now.. mortgaging your soul ain’t worth it.
yeah, well, pretty much all unions have this problem, to greater or lesser extents.
Unions protect members, that’s what they do. And they protect existing members a hell of a lot more than potential future members. So the CMG deserves some credit for not caving on the contract issue.
Ah! So that’™s what it’™s all about! There’™s a few too many CBCers who after a quarter century or so of service are too burned out to be useful to the young dynamos of management, or even to the old dynamos.
Out with the old! Two more years to a pension? Screw you pal! The woods are crawling with young, smart, energetic people with great ideas and fresh outlooks, you bitter old coot’¦.and they want your job.
’¦wait a sec’¦ Hasn’™t management supposedly assured current staffers they’™ll keep their positions’¦ even the grizzled old madmen drooling over their typewriters? It looks like it’™s mainly the young smart etc, hired recently and in the future that will bear the brunt of this new reality. Perhaps management’™s only goal is to save the young smart etc. from mutating into useless wingnuts like the previous generation.
And by the way’¦Talk about wingnuts ’œI’ve spent toomuch time in Communist countries’ ??? Which one’¦ North Korea? Sounds like you’™ve spent too much time at Bob Jones University.
It is true there is a small percentage (it’s really not much anymore, let’s be honest) of deadwood still left at the CBC. However, it is not true that the Guild “protects” them in lieu of bright, young people. There is a process in Canadian Labour law to fire people who are not doing their work. It is never utilized. Middle managers are to blame for this. No one else. Don’t shit on the Guild for doing its job, because you won’t do yours. If there is anyone on your staff who won’t or refuses to work then write them up. Three strikes and you’re out. What I’d really like to know is how can we oust incompetent managers. There’s a lot more deadwood per capita in the management ranks than there is among the real workers.
I’m one of those 50 somethings you talk about. In the past 6 years I have gone back to school to validate the life experiences I have gotten over the last 20+ years at CBC. I came out of it with an honors degree in Computer Sciences. In actuality this is the norm the older workers are working hard to hold their own with people that are often the same age as their children that they are struggling to put through school. We have a lot of things to contribute to the CBC and I would argue that they are far from the lazy bastards that you portray them to be. What they have and what you lack is life experience, they know that the CBC will screw them every chance it gets that’s why they often seem to be angry and bitter. You will be too after you have devoted your adult life working for a company that doesn’t give a damn about the public broadcaster that you believe in and work hard to promote.
You’re trolling, and like a fish to stupid to ignore the bait, I’m rising to get hooked. But that’s me.
” they have a budget and can only hire so many people. So if the union is protecting some useless wingnut hired in the 80’s, where does that leave the new kid?”
Unlike the backbiting procedure for managers, there are very clearly laid out mechanisms for turfing useless wingnuts in our contract. The union will fight you every step of the way, to guarantee that the rights of the indivdual are being protected, but if the wingnut really is useless, he/she will be gone at the end of the procedure.
If you’re honest you should also realise that there are few useless wingnuts left in either CMG or management. The last 20 years of cutbacks has guaranteed that. But there will always be a couple of them that are better at laying paper trails to protect their collective asses than doing their jobs. I believe that management is in a better position to do this, but I’m biased.
“I used to be in CMG myself, but it doesn’t mean I ever bought into all that comrade business”
Are you sure you were in CMG? I’m from NABET/CEP, and I’ve noticed the whole brother,sister,steward thing makes CMG people uncomfortable.
“The CMG knows that when these old guys in the union are removed, or when they retire, the union itself will expire.”
You’re right, and CBC will be expiring right behind. You need old guys, middle age hot shots, and energetic young kids. It’s the central point in this argument we’re having. We think that you need more people on staff. Before I was 25, I was thrilled to take on any contract, but when I’d earned my chops, I went looking for a stable staff position. I’m dying to train my replacement. But it takes at least 2 years to learn to do radio SFX. It’s not like doing Foley, there are no schools, and if you’re on a yearly contract, you’ll want to learn something a lot less arcane. Mine is a rather extreme example, but most of the jobs at CBC are pretty specialised. Who else is doing long form Radio Documentaries? We’ve just about destroyed our comedy development, but there are still a few experienced comedy producers waiting to train new talent. Sorry for being radio heavy, but that’s what I know best, and I know that the CHUM group isn’t about to invest in the years of experience it take to produce a year of Ideas programs.
“none of us ever counted on you to find us jobs anyways”
You’ve got a strange idea of the function of the union. The union does not possess any super powers. We normally can’t force CBC to change their policy. That’s what we’re trying to do now, and as you can tell it’s very hard to do. Our main function is to educate and protect our members rights. We try to negotiate a contract that’s fair to both the Corporation, and the employee. In a healthy enviroment the union and the employer work together to create an enviroment that is productive, and enjoyable.
I was here almost 20 years before my first strike, then I got slammed 3 times in a row. CMG went for over 50 years without ever having a strike or lock-out. The union hasn’t changed that much, but upper management, and more importantly our budget has. Our budget has changed our focus. Instead of focusing on good programming we seem to be more concerned with selling or renting everything possible, and commiting to the shortest possible employment commitments. That doesnt’ read well, but I never claimed to be a writer.
I’m tired, I’m going to make a cup of tea, see what wild responces have sprung up while I wrote this lengthy exercise in futility, and then go to bed.
agree, I have seen lots of “dead wood” around the CBC over the years, people who don’t seem to be able to adapt to new technology–or just plain don’t work. We all have.
But isn’t the role of management to retrain, reassign and generally help their workers to remain up-to-date with current technology?
And if people are reluctant to take advantage of those opportunities, then shouldn’t management show them the door (fairly and equitably)?
How many times have managers failed to do their job: keep accurate records of problem employees..and if they fail to change through established, proper (but, albeit, sometimes painful) channels, simply ignore the problem and hope it goes away?
Problem or ineffective employees are either shunted off to “special projects” (NWI, People’s History) and given a desk with nothing to do. Managers often shuffle the problem onto someone else. Workers around these “problems” resent having to pick up the slack. And they still keep getting paid, draining precious dollars and exacerbating those “funding shortages” you talk about.
You can’t blame unions for that. Their job is to protect the rights of its members. They are there to make sure that people are treated fairly.
However, BOTH sides sign contracts. BOTH sides put it in writing and AGREE on how to discipline or ultimately fire people. Many managers simply aren’t living up to their end of the bargain.
Before management asks for more “flexibility”, it should prove they responsible enough to stick to the existing contract—which, until now, I don’t think they have.
What makes me furious, is that current senior management has locked out 5500 people, that vast majority of whom are hard-working, creative and willing to change with the times.
And now senior management is asking for more “flexibility” so it can fire new hires at will—while the dead wood piles up.
Punishing all us, because of a few, is insane.
Do your job. And let the rest of us in to do ours.
“The CMG knows that when these old guys in the union are removed, or when they retire, the union itself will expire. That’s a fact. They will be left with a lot of people like me who couldn’t give a flip about the union. Or the guild. Or whatever.”
It’s no longer true that young people don’t care about the union; I know, because I’m one of them.
I have a permanent job. And I’ve worked alongside people who didn’t pull their weight.
But those people are extremely rare these days.
Far more common among my colleagues are the young women who are working for 4 or 5 years on temporary contracts; for whom “flexibility” involves getting a phone call at 7:30am, finding child care, and arriving for work in radio or TV news, or on any number of current affairs programs on any given day.
I’m not surprised that a manager would try to convince locked out workers that their union doesn’t have their best interests at heart.
I am surprised that you haven’t heard by now that senior management has actually breathed new life into the CMG.
Union leaders literally couldn’t have inspired the same unity on their own.
Yes, let the apathy of the younger employees kill off the union. Wont matter for a few years, but after they have been pushed around for awhile, they’™ll start thinking like those fat, balding, 50 year olds.
none of this is new. yes we have too many managers – certainly too many that accomplish precisely nothing.
yes, we have deadwood employees that not only do nothing – but put an extra burden on people who are already working flat out.
but you see, the 2 are connected.
many of the bad employees, were created by bad management.
further, most of the bad employees, remain because of weak management.
do unions protect employees -good and bad? sure. but are there processes in place to get rid of the bad ones? you bet. managers simply don’t do it. they’re too weak, too unmotivated or not really into the “management” part of being a manager. and so the problem remains and festers and “managers” complain and the employees grumble. lets not pretend we aren’t ALL complicit in
this problem.
Lets call a spade a spade.
“If you don’t like the union, get out. Then see how well you do.”
Can’t be much worse. I been walking round in cicles for 30 days.
You fools for buying into this managment drivel. If you don’t like the union, get out. Then see how well you do.
I am a twenty-something. I been around the CBC several years, several contracts, and a damn lot of years as a casual.
Yup, the old guys do retire. However, their positions are not posted. No one is actually hired to replace them. Instead, we keep bringing on casuals in their place. Casuals who are ostensibly CMG, but really, who could give a crap either way.
“There’s lots of work kid, but no jobs.”
You know damn well what you’re doing used to be a job. And everyone else likes to tell you how it used to be a job. And well, it’s… it’s better than being on the street, right?
Sometimes I feel like the walls are closing in. And I’m addicted to CBC and its money like a crack momma is to her crack.
Someone pass me the pipe.
“the effort these people are making behalf of their colleagues at the CBC.”
I’m sick of being represented by people who doesn’t know me or give a shit about me. They just care about themselves and their own jobs.
Disgusting. Looking and writing off a group of people you don’t even know based on a prejudice about appearances. Not only is your recount inaccurate but it fails to recognize the effort these people are making behalf of their colleagues at the CBC. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I knew we were in trouble at a meeting before the strike vote: a head table of 50-something fat, balding white men and a bitter 50-ish woman.
That said, that may not be as bad as 12 senior managers – only two with any kind of experience making TV, radio or web programming – explaining why the lockout had to happen.
Time to blow it up and start over.
Do the heads of the CMG have jobs other than being the heads of the CMG?
I have hated every blog you have written up till now, but you finally have raised some interesting points for discussion. I’m not in total agreement, but we may be able to share a seat on the same bus.