![](media/image1.png){width="6.354166666666667in"
height="0.6666666666666666in"}

RESPONDING TO CHANGE IN THE WORKPLACE:

INNOVATIONS IN LABOR-MANAGEMENT-GOVERNMENT COOPERATION

**The Amalgamated Transit Union**

**OC Transpo**

**and**

### The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service of Canada

# CANADA

June 25 -- 26, 2001 Mexico City, Mexico

**APEC Symposium: Responding to Change in the Workplace: Innovations in
Labour-Management-Government Cooperation**

**Canada's Case Study: The Amalgamated Transit Union, OC Transpo and the
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service of Canada**

**Introduction**

In the second half of the1990s, OC Transpo ("the Company" or "the
Employer") and the Amalgamated Transit Union ("ATU" or "the Union"),
with the assistance of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
(FMCS), turned an acrimonious and unproductive labour-management
relationship into one characterized by open communication and a
cooperative approach to problem-solving. The parties accomplished this
by undertaking a number of joint initiatives over several years, many of
which were funded and/or facilitated by FMCS. This paper will provide a
brief description of the parties' relationship prior to the start of the
joint approach in 1997. It will then describe the services offered by
FMCS and the specific activities undertaken by the parties in this case.
The paper will conclude with some thoughts on the current relationship
between the parties several years later and the long-term impact of the
initiative.

**OC Transpo and Amalgamated Transit Union**

OC Transpo provides transit service to the City of Ottawa and
surrounding communities. Located in the Province of Ontario, Ottawa is
the Capital of Canada and the seat of the national government. OC
Transpo is owned and administered by the Ottawa-Carleton Regional
Transit Commission, composed of elected representatives from the various
communities served by OC Transpo. The Company operates a fleet of 850
buses, serving a population of approximately 625,000. On a typical
weekday over 275,000 rides are provided. OC Transpo employs about 2300
people, 1900 of whom are represented by Local 279 of the Amalgamated
Transit Union. This bargaining unit, which consists of drivers,
mechanics, dispatchers, cleaning staff and other hourly rated employees,
has existed since it was unionized in 1903. The remaining 400 employees
are comprised of 300 non-union management and office staff and 100
supervisors. The supervisors are represented by the Canadian Union of
Public Employees, which was not involved in the events described herein.

**History of Adversarial Relationship**

The confrontational relationship between the Company and the Union had
existed for longer than any current employee can remember, certainly
three and possibly four decades. In collective bargaining, the ATU would
normally negotiate until a final offer was presented by OC Transpo,
ensure that the offer was rejected by the employees, get a strike vote
and negotiate to a strike deadline. In the previous four sets of
negotiations, normally held every two years, agreements were not reached
until the last day. This resulted in tremendous stress on all employees
and on the riding public. In a region heavily dependent on public
transit, the threat of a work stoppage causes passengers to seek
alternate means of transportation means, such as car pooling, and many
of these riders would be permanently lost to public transit. Ridership
declined after each of these negotiation battles.

Between 1980 and 1995 the parties became even more isolated, litigious,
and aggressive. Much time, effort and resources were spent on complaints
before the Canada Industrial Relations Board[^1], work refusals and
investigations under Health and Safety regulations and grievance
arbitrations. The parties were spending approximately \$40,000 each on
an arbitration and scheduling delays of up to two years were commonplace
because each case normally involved at least seven lawyers, two
representing each party and a three-member arbitration panel. These
unresolved issues were a source of frustration and antagonism which
affected the working relationship between the parties.

During the late 1980's and early 1990's OC Transpo's traditional base of
riders decreased dramatically for several reasons. One factor was
downsizing in the federal government, which pared its Ottawa-based
workforce by 25%. In addition, OC Transpo was not able to take advantage
of the growth in employment experienced in the high technology companies
located near Ottawa such as Nortel Networks, Newbridge and Corel. Most
of this new growth occurred outside the geographic area served by OC
Transpo and the Company lacked the resources to expand into this
territory.

With declining ridership came declining revenues and service cuts. This
downward spiral was hastened in the mid-1990s when the provincial
government ended its financial support of the operating costs of transit
in Ontario. At a result, OC Transpo lost a 20% operating subsidy and a
75% capital expenditure subsidy. Jobs were slashed and the driver
workforce was reduced from 1400 to 1100. Because vacant jobs were not
being filled, no internal advancement occurred for almost a decade.
Morale in the organization from the shop floor up to the senior
executive offices reached an all time low. The organization experienced
a 500% turnover rate in its senior human resource management between
1990 and 1996.

The 1996 strike was a culmination of many problems and an inability to
reach solutions. Reduced financial support, low morale and declining
ridership combined with a "win/lose" labour relations environment
resulted in a bitter work stoppage of 23 days in the winter of 1996. The
strike was only resolved through intense intervention by senior officers
of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service in the form of a
mediator recommended solution which the parties reluctantly accepted.

**Desire to change**

At the end of the 1996 strike, individuals on both sides of the table
acknowledged that it was not a very effective way to resolve workplace
issues. Although the Union had made some gains in the collective
agreement, there was little satisfaction given that the strike had
contributed to suicides, personal bankruptcies and family breakups. With
a few exceptions all senior managers were fired and the Regional Mayor
was not re-elected. There was no sense of victory for any of those
involved. At the urging of FMCS, the parties agreed to try to improve
their relationship, although none of the individuals involved knew how
this could be accomplished.

**Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service**

The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service[^2], part of the federal
government's Department of Human Resources Development, is responsible
for fostering positive relations between trade unions and employers in
industries which fall under federal jurisdiction in Canada[^3]. FMCS
provides mediators to assist management and labour in the negotiation of
collective agreements. By providing the skills and opportunities
necessary for resolving contentious issues, FMCS works to help parties
settle their differences and build constructive relationships.

In addition to the mediation of collective bargaining disputes, FMCS
offers two programs designed specifically to improve relationships
between employers and unions. Both of these programs, the
**Labour-Management Partnerships Program** and the **Preventive
Mediation Program**, were instrumental in the initiatives undertaken by
ATU and OC Transpo.

> **Labour-Management Partnerships Program**
>
> The Labour-Management Partnerships Program (LMPP) promotes effective
> labour-management relations at the workplace and industry level by
> providing funding assistance to enable labour and management to
> explore new ways of working together. In an era where changes in the
> global economy are redefining the concept of work, more and more
> Canadian workplaces are finding that traditional approaches to
> work-related issues no longer fit their needs. LMPP funding may allow
> them to experiment with new ideas through pilot projects that are
> outside the normal day-to-day operations, and which might not
> otherwise have been undertaken. The Program will fund up to half of
> the cost of a project, to a maximum of \$100,000 per project.
>
> In the ten years since its inception, the LMPP has supported a wide
> range of joint initiatives, including pilot workplace restructuring
> projects, joint research on workplace or industrial relations issues,
> alternate approaches to collective bargaining and dispute resolution,
> as well as joint training and conferences. In many cases, the project
> has provided a solid foundation for workplace change, benefiting both
> sides. Almost invariable, the process leads to a more positive working
> relationship between labour and management.
>
> **Preventive Mediation Program**
>
> The Preventive Mediation Program offers joint training and problem
> solving to federally regulated employers and unions. It is designed to
> provide a forum for parties to focus on their relationships and
> improve their ability to work together to resolve joint problems.
> These programs are offered at the joint request of trade unions and
> employers. All of the Preventive Mediation Programs are delivered by
> mediators with extensive experience in both traditional and newer
> approaches to labour relations. The following two components of the
> Preventive Mediation Program were of particular interest to the ATU
> and OC Transpo:
>
> **Negotiation Skills Workshop**
>
> Many Canadian unions and employers are exploring and experimenting
> with the interest-based or mutual gains approach to matters of common
> concern, including collective bargaining. In this process, parties
> avoid taking firm positions and focus instead on underlying problems
> and concerns. Then, they jointly generate and evaluate options to
> resolve workplace problems. The Negotiation Skills Workshop provides
> an opportunity for representatives of employers and unions to spend
> some time in joint training and discussions about the process of
> negotiation. In a relaxed and informal atmosphere, an overview of
> interest-based negotiation is presented and this is contrasted with
> more traditional styles of bargaining. Participants are given an
> opportunity to experiment with these techniques in exercises and
> negotiation simulations.
>
> **Facilitation**
>
> The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service also provides parties
> with the services of a mediator to act as facilitator to their joint
> process. Whether it is interest-based negotiation, joint research or
> the resolution of a major workplace issue, many joint initiatives will
> have a greater chance of success if assisted by a skilled, neutral
> facilitator. This is particularly true if the process is new or
> innovative or involves a contentious issue.

**Joint Undertakings of Research and Study:**

The first step that OC Transpo and the ATU took to improve their
relationship was the formation of a joint steering committee in 1997
with a mandate to establish a stable labour relations environment to
enable the parties to undertake cooperative ventures to improve the
relationship and the workplace. The committee, which included senior
labour relations staff members from both parties, had a very flexible
structure in order to enable it to accomplish its purpose. Joint
training and activities resulted in the identification of more
cooperative practices and were subsequently adopted as immediate
priorities.

With funding from FMCS' Labour-Management Partnerships Program, the
committee undertook a number of joint research and study tours and
projects, including the following:

-   **Since the parties identified a problem with the current
    arbitration costs and its lengthy process, the committee decided to
    learn more about other arbitration programs; the committee conducted
    the following visits**:

-   to the Canadian Railway Office of Arbitration in Montreal to
    understand the expedited process used by the Canadian railways and
    railway unions to resolve grievances in an efficient and cost
    effective manner;

-   to Canadian Airlines in Vancouver to view their expedited
    arbitration process used by the Canadian and International
    Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers to resolve workplace
    disputes quickly;

-   attended a seminar conducted by British Columbia Industrial
    Relations Board to learn about the expedited arbitration system used
    in the Province of British Columbia

-   **Since the parties identified a problem with scheduling of
    shifts,** **the committee conducted the following visits**:

-   to Air Canada in Montreal to learn more about and view its
    computerized pilot scheduling program;

-   to Seattle Transit to view their staff scheduling practices,

-   to the Canadian Airlines Crew Scheduling Deparment and the Canadian
    Autoworkers Union to learn about a computerized crew scheduling
    system that is able to accommodate individual employees' concerns

-   **Since the committee identified a problem of low morale by its
    workers caused by poor relations between its employees and
    management, the parties conducted the following visits**:

-   to Oakland Transit, which had success in changing a highly
    confrontational relationship between the employer and its union into
    a relationship which fostered a cooperative approach.

-   in addition, LMPP hired outside consultants to conduct an
    organizational review, which conducted a survey of all OC Transpo
    employees and held seven employee conferences.

The joint research and study visits were a turning point for the parties
for several reasons. First, by traveling and spending time together, the
individuals on both sides of the divide had an opportunity to get to
know each other in a relaxed setting; an unfreezing of traditional
barriers and distrust was the result. In addition, the visits
demonstrated to the parties that it was possible to work cooperatively
on issues that were very important at their own workplace, such as staff
scheduling and dispute resolution. As well, the case of Oakland Transit
showed the parties that a very similar employer and union had overcome
adversarial relations and forged a collaborative partnership which
enabled them to resolve issues without the constant confrontation
experienced in the past by ATU and OC Transpo.

**Cooperative Ventures and Initiatives/ Results and Outcomes**

Building upon the strength of the learnings and changing attitudes that
resulted from the joint research, and with the facilitation assistance
of FMCS, the parties successfully developed the following initiatives:

1.  A policy on Workplace Accommodation for Disabled Employees providing
    greater job security for all employees and recognizing the rights of
    the disabled in a seniority-based promotions system. This was
    accomplished by a joint team of forty people, including union
    officials, senior managers and support staff, at a two-day retreat.
    As this was the first real test of the cooperative approach, the
    parties deliberately invited everyone who might be a stakeholder.
    The resulting group was perhaps larger than ideal, but it was
    important to include a broad range of people in the process. On the
    first day, a specialist provided an overview to all participants on
    their obligations under the [Canadian Human Rights Act]{.underline},
    the legislation which protects federally-regulated employees from
    discriminatory treatment. On the second day of the retreat, the
    parties used an interest-based approach, exploring interests and
    generating options, to develop the policy.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2.  An expedited arbitration process to improve a traditional grievance
    resolution process which was extremely slow and expensive. The new
    process replaces an arbitration board with a single arbitrator,
    requires that cases be presented by practitioners instead of
    lawyers, involves a single day hearing and results in a two or three
    page decision which is rendered within seven days of the hearing.
    The parties also undertook joint training in presenting cases at
    expedited arbitration which gave them a common understanding of the
    process and a solid foundation to begin using their new system. The
    parties have estimated that the new process will reduce the cost of
    arbitrations by up to ninety percent and reduce the time required to
    complete the arbitration of a grievance from two years to two
    months.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
3.  An agreement to switch from a manual to a computerized scheduling
    system similar to that used in the airline industry. The parties
    anticipate that the new process will dramatically reduce the six to
    nine weeks previously required, four times a year, to set the work
    schedule.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
4.  An ongoing cooperative approach to problems in the work site which
    has resulted in a number of joint working committees, such as the
    following:

-   Operator Empowerment Committee - a group composed of operators,
    supervisors and superintendents which developed a Driver's Handbook
    to outline the responsibilities of the operators, the expectations
    of the Employer in delivering its service to customers and the
    support drivers can expect from the Employer;

-   Maintenance Working Group - a joint team which developed a process
    for improving maintenance and reducing the contracting out of some
    maintenance tasks;

-   Communications - a team which examined and improved internal
    communications at the workplace;

-   Route Scheduling - a permanent committee to identify and correct
    suboptimal bus routes; and

-   Community Marketing - a very successful program to use drivers to
    market the transit service to target communities. The parties
    believe that this program is one reason ridership numbers are on the
    rise after many years of decline.

    **The 1999 Round of Collective Bargaining**

    Although the parties experienced success with joint initiatives in
    1997 and 1998, they felt that the real test of their relationship
    was whether or not it could sustain a process like interest-based
    negotiations for the 1999 round of collective bargaining. On the
    advice of FMCS, the Manager of Human Resources for OC Transpo and
    the President of the ATU attended a two day program on negotiation
    at Harvard University. This training convinced these two individuals
    that the interest-based approach was the best way to resolve their
    collective agreement. They then had to get buy-in from other group
    members.

    A joint Negotiation Skills Workshop was put on for the parties by
    FMCS at a location an hour from Ottawa, which required participants
    to stay on-site. The program took three days with general staff
    invited for two days and the negotiation teams staying the extra day
    to complete a comprehensive collective bargaining simulation. The
    training was extremely successful and had a huge impact on the
    relationship. Senior managers, bus drivers, supervisors, and
    mechanics all shared the same training, food, accommodations and
    socialized together in the evenings. Managers and line employees
    were able to share and discuss their visions for the future of the
    company and many were surprised to learn that they were not
    dissimilar.

    It is worth mentioning that the individuals who had been to Harvard
    found the training given by FMCS to be more effective than that at
    Harvard. This was because the FMCS training involved a group with
    common interests, one work site and a shared commitment to improve
    the relationship. In addition, the exercises were more practical in
    this session than those used at Harvard. A few months later, the
    program was run again because the interest was so high at the
    workplace that many other employees wanted the opportunity to learn
    about interest-based negotiation. This group of about 60 was trained
    in-house using the FMCS program; these employees gladly gave up a
    weekend to attend because they were excited by the prospect of
    genuine involvement in a collaborative relationship.

    The negotiations began in earnest in March of 1999 with facilitation
    assistance provided by FMCS, and the contract was ratified by both
    parties in early July, 1999. Although many people believe that the
    interest-based approach is much slower than traditional
    negotiations, for the ATU and OC Transpo, it was actually faster
    than the long, drawn-out talks of the past. In the past, collective
    bargaining would normally last for 10 or 12 months, with the parties
    meeting on approximately 40 separate occasions. The 1999 round was
    completed in less than four months, with the parties meeting about
    15 times.

    During the negotiations themselves, the lessons taught in the
    training programs were invaluable. Individuals from both sides
    would, from time to time, inadvertently revert to the traditional
    attitude of "us versus them". This was quickly brought under control
    by group members with the help of the facilitator. Since they were
    prepared by training to identify the tendency to revert back to
    adversarial positioning, the parties were able to help each other
    stay on track towards a more cooperative negotiating style. Having
    had advance warning in the training that this would happen was
    helpful to the parties.

    Another valuable lesson was that respect was paramount for success.
    For the process to work, the input of every individual at the table
    must be treated as valuable and important. The effort to better
    understand group member's views cannot be interrupted by insults,
    rudeness or even negative attitudes. If a solution was abandoned, it
    had to be because it did not meet the criteria set by the whole
    group. Group members found it necessary to constantly remind
    themselves not to get embroiled in discussions about past history
    and to resist the temptation to assign blame for mistakes of the
    past. The unofficial three P's were: polite, positive and
    professional.

    Responsibility is the real key to the interest-based process because
    all of the players around the table, not simply the chief
    spokespersons, are responsible for its success. By empowering the
    parties, they are forced to take ownership and vest themselves in
    the success of the process. This motivates everyone to come up with
    options and discuss them fully. There is no hiding behind the team
    and positions. Some members of the ATU and OC Transpo teams found
    this very difficult. It is a benefit of the IBN process that these
    individuals were forced to contribute or become isolated by their
    own inactivity. Another benefit of this process is an enhanced
    understanding of the organization by all its participants.

    One area where the parties felt they could have had a better result
    was in communicating with constituents. During the IBN process,
    rumours were rampant and the negotiators were not able to deal
    effectively with this problem. The positive attitude and working
    relationship which had developed among the negotiators and some
    others did not permeate the workplace; there were many individuals
    who did not understand or agree with the stance taken by the Union
    in working jointly with the Employer.

    As a result, when the union presented the tentative agreement to its
    members and allowed a week for discussion, in contrast to the 48
    hours of past votes, there were a number of people who worked to get
    the agreement rejected. The agreement was ratified in the end, but
    by a smaller majority that the Union and Employer would have liked.
    In retrospect, the parties felt that they should have spent more
    time examining the tentative agreement for possible areas of
    misunderstanding and negative reaction in order to better plan the
    ratification process.

    **A Workplace Tragedy**

    The whole cooperative process withstood a terrible tragedy in April
    of 1999 when a former employee entered the workplace and shot and
    killed four employees and then himself. Had some changes in attitude
    not taken place before this event, the parties believe the work site
    would have become totally dysfunctional and a work stoppage would
    have occurred. Instead, all levels of employees and the union worked
    together to ensure the service levels were met while dealing with
    the pain of the event. A lot of care was required for those affected
    and, over a three week period, 1000 employees received trauma
    counselling. Due to the ability of the Union, Employer and employees
    to work cooperatively during this tragedy, many individuals received
    the help they needed. This spirit of unison worked to prevent the
    chasm between the parties from spreading and provided the
    possibility for rebuilding this relationship.

    **Conclusion**

    Even in the most contentious labour management relationships, where
    the labour relations environment has been poisonous for many years,
    a reversal can take place if both parties are committed to change.
    By developing a work site based on cooperative practices, the
    parties can build trust, improve morale and increase productivity.
    The joint workplace initiative undertaken by the ATU and OC Transpo
    has been very successful by all measures. As a result, the 1999
    collective agreement was the first agreement in three decades to be
    ratified by the employees without first rejecting an offer and
    taking a strike vote. There was no bitter public debate, no deriding
    of each other by the parties and no disruption of the workforce. For
    the first time in years, managers and operations staff felt they had
    input into their agreement.

    Since July of 1999 OC Transpo has had sustained ridership growth of
    7 % per year, the first such increase in over a decade. To
    accommodate this growth the Employer continues to hire new operators
    at an accelerated rate.

## Lessons Learned

-   Do not wait until the relationship hits rock bottom - if a
    relationship is experiencing problems, a proactive plan to improve
    labour relations should be introduced earlier rather than later;

-   Solutions developed in partnership are higher quality solutions than
    those either party could develop on its own;

-   Invest in human resources - it requires time, effort, patience and
    resources to build trust and change attitudes in order to improve a
    rocky relationship;

-   The money spent on joint initiatives, while significant, is a paltry
    sum compared to the cost of work stoppages and other industrial
    relations disputes;

-   Expect setbacks - there will be roadblocks, frustrations and
    failures along the way but these are not a signal that the overall
    initiative should be abandoned;

-   Build many bridges between the parties and do it quickly - the more
    links and open communication channels between the parties, such as
    working groups or joint committees, the greater the likelihood of
    success when one bridge fails;

-   Place responsibility for the success of interest-based negotiation
    on everyone - the attitudes must permeate the organization - one or
    two people cannot carry the entire load; and

-   When introducing changes to the workplace using processes like
    interest-based negotiation, do not make sweeping changes at too fast
    a pace as there is a risk of moving too quickly for both party's
    constituents.

[^1]: The Canada Industrial Relations Board is an independent,
    representational, quasi-judicial tribunal responsible for the
    interpretation and administration of the legislation governing
    industrial relations in industries falling under federal
    jurisdiction in Canada. Its activities include certifying trade
    unions and investigating and adjudicating complaints of unfair
    labour practice. For more information, visit the Board's website at:
    www.cirb-ccri.gc.ca

[^2]: More information is available on the Federal Mediation and
    Conciliation Service's website at:
    www.labour-travail.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/eng/fmcs.cfm

[^3]: Federal jurisdiction includes organizations engaged in
    interprovincial or international transportation (air, rail, road,
    shipping and pipelines), broadcasting, telecommunications, banking,
    longshoring and grain handling, uranium mining, crown corporations
    and organizations operating in the northern territories.