July 1998Surprised? Municipal
delivery to cost more than our FBA
By Bob Eaton,
MCSS MERC chair
For years, your MCSS MERC team has said that spiralling caseloads are severely
impacting the Income Maintenance Officer's ability to provide quality service. A recent
report by the Provincial Auditor substantiated this.
Now we are told that the government's “Social Assistance Transformation” plan
will cut caseloads to 33 per cent of former levels.
In essence, the government now says that municipal service delivery agents will be able
to hire three times the number of caseworkers as the provincial system. Caseloads will be
as low as 115 to 1 under municipal delivery, while under the provincially administered
Family Benefits, caseloads were upwards of 400 to 1.
The average cost per case will now skyrocket from approximately $300 per case per year
to more than $1,300. The 90,000 sole support, foster care cases will grow, carrying an
administrative price tag of an extra $90 million per year.
Where will the extra money come from? Taxpayers. Why wasn't caseload size addressed
under the former FBA? Good question.
Clearly, the downloading of family benefits delivery to municipalities won't really
save taxpayers' money, putting the lie to the Tory agenda.
While Janet Ecker preens on a province-wide pre-election media blitz, her ministry
languishes.
A revolving door of consultants and human resources directors have been left in
command.
“You get a real sense that they don't know what they're doing over there,”
said OPSEU President Leah Casselman. “In a downsizing of this size (800 jobs), you
need to have a plan that works for everyone.”
As the year-end deadline looms, MCSS has failed to induce many municipalities to take
provincial social workers and clerical staff under welfare/workfare downloading
legislation. And some of the deals trample workers' rights.
On May 12, the ministry agreed to pay Peel Region $6,500 for any permanent job offer to
provincial employees to fill 49 vacancies with the region. But the deal also stipulates
that Peel refuse permanent jobs to provincial workers who received severance pay under the
OPSEU contract.
“I'm betting that won't stand up in court,” she said.
Developmental Services:
MCSS won't divulge stats on comparative costs of care
By Linda McDowell
Developmental Services Division
In April, 1997, your OPSEU MERC team requested the employer reveal per diem rates for
Schedule 1 facilities for Developmental Services, Schedule 2 facilities and transfer
payment agencies, so that we could compare the costs of the three types of care.
At the MERC meeting in August, 1997, the ministry requested a more detailed request and
that it be made in writing. OPSEU gave the ministry a detailed request in writing and also
asked that the Associations for Community Living be included.
There was a lengthy discussion on how costs in the different facilities were paid:
costs for medication, doctors, dentists etc. The union asked that these be broken down and
included in the report.
Month after month, OPSEU asked for this report at each MERC meeting and asked why it
was taking so long to get it. Finally, last February, management came up with a report
that did not break down the costs as requested, making it very difficult, if not
impossible, to compare the costs in the various systems.
On April 1, Midwestern Regional Centre closed its doors. AOC Edgar is continuing to
place its clients at the projected times to be closed by March 1999 or sooner.
Prince Edward Heights has 55 residents that the ministry cannot place until the outcome
of the reasonable efforts grievance is finally decided. The employer has tried several
tactics to get around this award, but so far, Mr. Kaplan's award has been upheld. There
are still three dates set for hearing - July 7, 8 and 16. This may throw off the
ministry's target date.
The remaining three facilities continue to place the clients that they have made
placement plans for, but can't make new plans for anyone else because of the Kaplan award.
How would you feel going to the moon in a rocket built by the lowest bidder?
That's what Janet Ecker and her ministry gurus tell us must happen. OPSEU
representatives met with the Minister May 26 to discover that she has learned the fine art
of the “broken record.” After months of saying that the seven directly-operated
facilities for young offenders were to be privatized to save taxpayers money, our offer to
negotiate savings was turned down cold. All Ecker could say is that “alternative
service delivery” is the direction of the ministry.
OPSEU engaged in months of campaigning to save 500 jobs that care for 400 of the most
troubled young offenders: Info pickets, leaflet blitzes, lobbying MPPs, a brief to Ecker,
town forums, petitions, media and a lot of support from the NDP's Peter Kormos. Youth
crime will be an election issue.
Overview from the MERC Chair:
by Bob Eaton,
MERC Chair
Your MERC team believes in reasonable negotiations. We have solutions. We have
proposals. The Ministry has one goal: to get out of business. Please support us as we
fight for our membership, our clients and our communities.
Here's how the union/management positions stacked up on our major issues:
Social Assistance:
OPSEU position: For the sake of program integrity and in the spirit of effective human
resources practice, do not proceed with Social Assistance surplusing until ODSP is fully
operational.
Employer response: Surplusing will occur as sites are transferred.
OPSEU position: The Ministry is bound by Appendix 9 and Art. 20 provisions of the
Collective Agreement for the transfer of work to municipalities.
Employer response: The Peel Region Deal is representative of the Ministry's best
efforts regarding Reasonable Efforts. Pay will be approximately 85 per cent of Ministry
level. Benefits will not be included. Members will have to go through a pre-screening
process, an interview and if successful, complete a six-month period of probation.
Seniority will not be respected.
OPSEU position: Consider innovative methods to transfer staff and files during the
social assistance transformation.
Employer response: The ministry is negotiating with the new service delivery agents
with no union input. In Peel, MCSS has offered the delivery agent $6,500 per employee to
exit. In essence, MCSS is buying short-term jobs to avoid paying our members the
appropriate package.
Young Offenders:
OPSEU position: Discuss the Ministry's decision to privatize the seven DOE secure
custody and treatment facilities. We are committed to finding fiscal savings.
Employer response: No. This is not about quality services or costs, it's about getting
out of direct service.
Systems Officers:
OPSEU position: Consider training opportunities to use existing Systems Officers for
ministry needs. Employer response: Ministry is hiring consultants (including eight systems
specialists for four years) at $8 million, dictated by market demand.
ODSP/VRS:
OPSEU position: VRS counsellors should have an integral role in the new ODSP program.
With appropriate interventions, members of the disabled community can become productive
members of the workforce.
Employer response: Due to the OPSEU policy grievance, we are not participating in
further discussion.
Developmental Services Facilities:
OPSEU position: Reconsider closure and downsizing plans for facilities. Our clients
consider these places as home. Their special needs require skilled, professional service.
Employer response: Placement in community agencies will proceed.
By Peter Dirks,
VRS Division Chair
With the proclamation of the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP), the province
abandoned its Vocational Rehabilitation Services (VRS) program.
Surplus notices to VRS counsellors and clerical staff will go out in September, as ODSP
is scheduled for implementation this fall.
The ODSP is designed to save money by cutting staff. It will employ fewer counsellors
and clerical staff: only a handful will be offered jobs. Managers have told their VRS
staff that they will have to re-apply for jobs in the new program, and these jobs will
mean lower pay.
OPSEU filed a “failure to make reasonable efforts” grievance with respect to
transfer of VRS work. Arbitration on the grievance is pending.
Meanwhile, the employer says it will continue to privatize home and vehicle
modifications.
The employer wants VRS counsellors to help facilitate the change to ODSP.
Why should we? The employer has done little for us. The ministry has not negotiated
possible redeployment opportunities that might exist in the Ministry of Health, OSAP,
attorney-general, etc. The employer has not asked the community colleges and universities
about the transfer of VRS counsellors to similar employment in the education sector. The
employer has not addressed the development of any human resources plans for VRS
counsellor.
The employer has used the filing of the grievance as an excuse for not answering
questions about VRS and the new employment support program.
OPSEU will continue to fight for VRS staff, and work towards the goal of job retention
and creating job opportunities in the ODSP.
The new employment support program lacks vision. The ministry must use the professional
skills of VRS counsellors to assist persons with disabilities develop their skills and
succeed in the workplace.
Share your thoughts and join our fight!
Contact Peter Dirks. your OPSEU MERC representative and VRS Divisional Chair. |
