BLPC Meeting Minutes - May 30, 2022

By Laws and Policies Committee Meeting

Monday, May 30, 2022

Delta Hotel, Chaudière Room

 

Present Stéphanie Fréchette (Chair), Tony Goddard (NCR), Mike Chow (BC/Yukon) (virtually), Scott McConaghy (ATL), Luc Denis (QC) (virtually), Fedora Kalenda-Mushiya (Staff Resource)

 

Regrets Jennifer Reay (PRA/NWT)

 

Guests John Purdie (Ontario Regional Director)

Nancy McCune (Observer)

 

Roundtable and Introductions

 

The meeting was delayed due to technical issues and was called to order at around 9:50 am. The Chair opened the meeting with a roundtable and introductions.

 

The Quebec representative advised that he had a day full of meetings and had to leave a little after 10:00 am.

 

Information on BLPC Processes

 

The Chair explained the strategic plan proposed at the previous BLPC meeting held on May 7, 2022, where a new way of assigning files was proposed. Essentially, the BLPC tasked the Staff Resource to create a master list of constituent bodies for each Region. The table will include the following information:

• 7 tabs (Regions and National Groups)
• Whether or not the constituent body has BLs in place
• If applicable, the latest date of ratification (AGM)
• If applicable, the latest date of Board approval
• If not, was the model proposed
• Comments

 

For due diligence, the Staff Resource was tasked to obtain constituent bodies’ data through Membership. The BLPC will work on the framework between now and the next meeting. 

 

Action: All and Fedora

 

1. Approval of the Agenda

 

The following item was added to the agenda 

3 (r) Finance Terms of Reference

 

2. Approval of the Minutes - Deferred

 

The May 7, 2022 minutes will be approved at the next BLPC meeting (September), along with May 30, 2022 minutes.

 

3. Matters Arising from Previous Meeting

 

1. Posting of Approved Constituent Body BL’s 

 

Julie Gagnon followed up with the Translation Team Lead and an approximate timeline was provided. So far, only MAGE and WHRT BL’s are posted on PIPSC website. 

 

2. CP South Vancouver Island Sub-Group (Proposed)

 

There is no update at the moment. The BC Representative has yet to receive BLs and/or minutes from the SG. Further follow-ups will be made. 

Action: M. Chow

 

3. SH DND Québec Sub-Group (Proposed) 

 

This new SG was created in October 2019 and held their AGM on May 4, 2022. The proposed BLs will be reviewed by the QC Representative and the BLPC Chair because they were submitted in French. This will be brought back at the next meeting.

Action: L. Denis / S. Fréchette

 

4. AFS Saskatoon SG (Proposed)

 

There is currently insufficient information to proceed to the review. There is also a lack of information on the SG web page pertaining to the recent activities such as AGM notice, ratification dates etc.

This will be brought back for review at the next meeting. In the meantime, the Acting Prairies Representative will follow up with SG to seek further details.

Action: N. McCune

 

5. AFS Regina Sub-Group (Proposed)

 

There is not enough information to proceed to the review particularly on ratification.  The Acting Prairies Representative will send a reminder to SG to have their BL’s ratified. This will be brought back at the next meeting

 

Action: N. McCune

6. WPEG Group

 

There is no update. The Acting Prairies Representative will follow up with the Group President. 

This item was deferred to the next meeting.

Action: N. McCune

 

(The Quebec Representative left the meeting at 10:21 am.)

 

7. 2019 AGM Resolution 2019 AGM Resolution – Amendment to BL 7 (Rights of Membership) Status Update 

 

Excerpt from BLPC May 7 minutes:

 

“During the 2019 AGM, a resolution to BL 7 (Rights of Membership) was presented. The matter was referred to the BLPC with instructions to bring recommendations back to the 2020 AGM on how to limit contractors in elected offices at PIPSC however there was no update provided at the 2020 and 2021 AGMs on this matter.

 

7. Matters Arising from the Minutes

Item 14.4 - B-8 BY-LAW 7 – RIGHTS OF MEMBERSHIP – Sponsor: NCR Regional Council

Contractors limited to hold elected office - referred to the BLPC

The BLPC was tasked to bring recommendations back to the 2020 AGM on how to limit contractors in elected offices at PIPSC based on the following instructions:

 - Develop a clear definition of contractor

- Seek a legal opinion

- Ensure the Board and AC are implicated

- Report back to the 2020 AGM

 The delegate seeking a status update will be contacting the BLPC Chair directly.

 

The BLPC remains of the view that members’ rights cannot be restricted, as per this proposed BL amendment. The input from PIPSC legal was sought and remains pending.”

 

The BLPC will seek further legal advice and will ask the PIPSC General Legal Counsel to provide an official briefing note outlining the feasibility of this proposal. 

 

During the discussion, further clarification was provided highlighting that this proposal would particularly affect members that are paid as contractors rather than employees (of a bargaining unit),  e.g. retired members. 

 

Action: N. McCune

 

8. Proposed Policy on Gratuity (Policy on Constituent Body Allocations)

 

The Board of Directors (BOD) wanted a policy that would provide a reasonable cap on gratuities as part of hospitality claims.

 

The BOD had concerned that claims had been submitted where gratuities on hospitality amounts were excessive.  There were instances quoted where gratuities were more than 40%. 

The BOD also had concerned that excessive gratuities were not a proper use of Institute funds.  By providing a reasonable limit, potential abuse would be eliminated.  The BOD was aware that it was customary that for groups of six (6) or more, the current practice of some service providers was an 18% gratuity.  Initially there was an opinion than a 20% gratuity would be reasonable.

 

The Policy

 

Gratuity - All constituent bodies and PIPSC members who include a gratuity as part of payment for services rendered shall be limited to a gratuity based upon the amount as determined annually by the Board of Directors (BOD) at their first meeting of the year.   If a member or constituent body provides a gratuity more than the limit as determined by the BOD they shall not be reimbursed for the excess amount unless prior authorization is provided by the BOD.

Maximum gratuity limit of 20% of the tax included amount.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The Finance & BLPC Committees support the proposed policy on gratuity. This will be brought to the June Board’s meeting.

 

Action: S. Fréchette - Fedora - BOD

 

9. Proposed Policy on Use of the Cell Phones (Policy on Board of Directors)

 

The Board of Directors (BOD) actioned a cell phone policy for its Directors and would like to extend the policy to constituent bodies.

 

The BOD provides cell phones or reimbursement of costs associated with PIPSC activities to their Directors.  Past practice has proved that there has not been consistent application of a reimbursement of costs or use of an Institute supplied phone.  The BOD adopted a policy that states: “The BOD establishes a maximum monthly cell phone allowance of the lesser of the cost of the cell phone plan or $85 for 2022.”

 

The BOD had concerns that this policy could allow for duplication of reimbursement of costs by a member from a different source.  There was concern that centralizing the administration of the cost reimbursement would also allow proper monitoring of the use of a constituent body's use of funds.  By placing caps on the allowance, it would prevent abuse of the use of assets.  Finally, restrictions could be put in place to limit the practice of supplying a cell phone in smaller constituent bodies where it may not be warranted.  By structuring a policy consistent across the Institute would ensure an unbiased application.

 

The Policy on the Board of Directors – Paragraph 12 Cell phone

 

A PIPSC Board of Director who uses or is provided with a cell phone plan in performance of their duties shall be provided with a maximum monthly allowance as determined annually by the Board of Directors at their first meeting of the year.  

The allowance will not exceed the amount as determined by the Board unless the excess is authorized by the Board.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The Finance & BLPC Committees do not support extending the policy of the Board to constituent bodies.

 

The BLPC is also of the view that this motion should be limited to the BOD for now for the same reasons described above. However it is suggested that the discussion be kept alive and reconsidered in the future.

 

Action: S. Fréchette - Fedora - BOD

 

10. Proposed Policy on the Use of Internet (Policy on Board of Directors)

 

The Board of Directors (BOD) actioned an internet policy for its Directors and would like to extend the policy to constituent bodies.

 

The BOD adopted a policy that states: “The BOD establishes a maximum monthly internet limit of the lesser of 50% of the actual cost or $75 for 2022. The BOD in an effort to be consistent would like to extend the policy to constituent bodies.”

 

The considerations for the proposed amendment are similar to the ones of the Policy on Cell Phone Use. Similarly, the BOD had concerns that this policy could allow for duplication of reimbursement of costs by a member from a different source.  There was the same concern that centralizing the administration of the cost reimbursement would also allow proper monitoring of the use of a constituent body's use of funds.  

 

The Policy on the Board of Directors – paragraph 13 Internet

 

“A PIPSC member who uses or is provided with an internet plan in performance of their duties shall be provided with a maximum monthly allowance as determined annually by the Board of Directors at their first meeting on the year.  The policy will apply to members of the Board of Directors.  The total reimbursement from all sources must not exceed the total maximum as determined by the Board.

 

Members must submit a copy of their monthly statement to PIPSC Finance Section for reimbursement in the prescribed form.  Where the cost of the internet is part of a combined plan the member will apportion the cost of the internet using a cost allocation in accordance with the fair market value of grouped items within the plan.

The allowance will not exceed the amount as determined by the Board unless the excess is authorized by the Board.”

 

Motion of the Board as passed in 2022.

 

The BOD establishes a maximum monthly internet limit of the lesser of 50% of the actual cost or $75 for 2022.

 

There were discussions on the process and the admissibility of the policy. While some suggested to not include the amount in the policy and that the preamble be included as instructed by the BOD, others were of the view that the amount ought to be included and the preamble be removed. It was also suggested that the motion be amended to indicate the amount including taxes. 

 

Amended Proposed Policy on the Use of Internet

 

“A PIPSC Board of Directors who uses or is provided with an internet plan in performance of their duties shall be provided with a maximum monthly allowance as determined annually by the Board of Directors at their first meeting on the year.  The policy will apply to members of the Board of Directors.  The total reimbursement from all sources must not exceed the total maximum as determined by the Board.

Members must submit a copy of their monthly statement to PIPSC Finance Section for reimbursement in the prescribed form.  Where the cost of the internet is part of a combined plan the member will apportion the cost of the internet using a cost allocation in accordance with the fair market value of grouped items within the plan.

The allowance will not exceed the amount as determined by the Board unless the excess is authorized by the Board.”

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The Finance & BLPC Committees do not support extending the policy of the Board to constituent bodies.

 

However, the BLPC recommends that the proposed Policy be brought for discussion at the next BOD meeting including BLPC members comments on whether or not the amount should be included in the policy. 

Action: S. Fréchette - Fedora - BOD

 

11. Proposed Appeal Policy (Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation)

 

The Finance Committee has identified a lack of language as it relates to procedure for member appeals under the policy.

 

A member filed an appeal of a denial of claim by the PIPSC Finance Section.  Under the current practice, the Finance Section would present the details of the claim submission and support their determination of denial of amounts.  They would forward information from the appellant of the initial claim.  If a further appeal is made to the Board of Directors, the Finance Section would repeat the same role of presenting information to support their denial.  There are no definable timelines for the process.  The first level of appeal is subject to the next regular scheduled meeting of the Finance Committee.  The final appeal would be subject to the next regular scheduled meeting of the Board and subject to the approved agenda.

 

The current process does not provide for natural justice or a timely arbitration of the appeal for the member’s benefit.  The process does not honor the basic premise that a member should not be financially worse off for performing a role in service of the Institute.  The member is not allowed to make a presentation to the Finance Committee or an opportunity to provide additional supporting documentation.  Timelines for a member to recoup costs are lengthy, hence presenting a potential financial hardship for members.

 

As such the Finance & BLPC Committees recommend the policy be amended to include the following including the attached Appendix “B”

 

“Appeals – Should a member disagree with a reimbursement based on the interpretation of this policy, an appeal shall first be addressed to the Finance Committee. Any further appeal would then be to the Board of Directors.  The procedure for the appeal process is as outlined in Appendix B.”

 

The Policy will be brought to the Board in June. 

Action: All

 

12. Proposed Policy on BoD Hospitality

 

The Board of Directors (BOD) and Executive Committee (EC) tasked the BLPC and Finance Committees with updating the amounts and criteria regarding BOD hospitality. Currently the PIPSC President has an annual limit of $40K, previously unlimited.  The Vice- Presidents and Directors have annual limits of $9K.

Currently there is no formal document to reference the criteria for “hospitality” other than the general reference above.

The Board has made a motion that this year, everybody gets half of the amount because we’re coming midway of the fiscal year. 

 

‘From time to time, there may be a benefit to the Institute to extend hospitality to Institute members or to outside parties with whom we work or wish to work. As with any other expenditure, hospitality expenditures must be for the purpose of advancing the Institute’s aims.

At the beginning of each calendar year, the Board will establish the maximum amount of hospitality expenses which will be reimbursed for the positions of President, Vice-Presidents, Regional Directors, and the Advisory Council Director.

Claims for reimbursement of hospitality expenses are submitted to the Finance Section for processing and will indicate the purpose of the expenditure and the names of the persons receiving the hospitality. Hospitality expenses are approved by the President and are subject to review by the Finance Committee.’

 

The Finance & BLPC Committees reviewed the current amounts and were of the opinion that the current amounts were applicable.  Furthermore, they were of the opinion that the limits should be reviewed annually by the BOD.

 

There was no consensus on what items should or not be defined as “hospitality” other than the general provision quoted in the policy above.

 

The Policy will be brought for consideration to BOD in June.

 

Action: All

 

13. Proposed Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation (Travel Outside the Region)

 

This policy intends to address the issue of members living in one Region and reporting to another. There have been instances where a member is listed as a Steward of a particular Region and reports to that Region but lives in a different Region.  The member attends Steward and Regional Council in their particular Region and those costs are being borne by the particular Region.

 

PIPSC Bylaw 4.5 states that “A Member may be allowed to choose to be active in the region in which they reside or in the region in which they work or last worked, if retired. Any additional costs for a Member choosing to be active in a region where they do not reside will be borne by the Member.”  

 

Based on this Bylaw, the member can be a member of a particular Region at the office they previously worked. That said however, the Bylaw clearly states that any additional costs would be borne by the member.  When proposed at the 2015 PIPSC AGM, this bylaw was envisioned as an amendment to provide relief for members who retire and relocate to a different Region.  The intent of the motion was not to address instances of remote reporting.

 

In order to be consistent, at the PIPSC 2015 AGM, Institute Bylaw 11.1.2 was established, which states that “A Member may choose to be active in the regional structures where they reside, work or last worked. No member shall have rights in more than one (1) Region.”

 

Bylaws 4.5 & 11.1.2 allow the member to choose to be active either in the particular or different Region. 

 

The Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation, specifically in Section 2, defines the “Ordinary Workplace” as the location at, or from which a member, when acting as an employee of their normal employer, ordinarily performs the duties of their position and, in the case of a teleworker or an employee whose duties are of an itinerant nature, the employer's premises to which the employee returns to prepare and/or submit reports, etc., and where other administrative matters pertaining to the employee's employment are conducted.”

 

Based on the above, one interpretation may be;

1. that the member is teleworking from a residence in a different Region and their ordinary workplace is a different Region.
2. If the member was required to report to an office and that would be their last office in a particular Region, then their workplace is a particular Region.

 

Bylaw 4.5 is clear whereby a member can be part of a particular Region that they do not currently reside in however that is the choice made by that member. As such, the Institute should not bare any additional costs incurred as a result of that member’s choice.  Currently, the interpretation of the Bylaw and the policy is based on the workplace location – not the place of residence. This will need to be revisited given the current reality around telework. 

 

It was pointed out that this could have a significant impact on foreign services members (Branch 99) and the NCR Region. 

 

The choice of “Regions” originally arose with retired members, as currently worded, Bylaw 11.1.2 applies to all members and there is no language to address changes between Regions. The current starting point for PIPSC in determining the workplace is as according to the employer and perhaps there should be a declaration from the member as to where they reside (primary and secondary residences). 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The Finance and Bylaw Committees are of the opinion that the policy and Bylaws accurately identify where a member resides and how the bylaws and policy should be applied.  It is the perception of the Committees that it is the administration of the policy and bylaws that need to be enforced.

The Policy will be brought for consideration to BOD in June.

Action: All

 

14. Proposed Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation (Travel Policy on Meals)

 

The Finance Section is inundated with member complaints as it relates to forecasted versus actual drive time as it pertains to the entitlement of a meal allowance when on travel status.  They are requesting a simplified process for the administration of the policy.

 

When a member starts their day while on travel status, the policy, under paragraph8, identifies specific times of departure and arrival as an entitlement to meals.  The Finance Section, through the use of google maps and other application software, determines the time elapsed between the point of departure and arrival.  The process does not take into effect the actual travel time.  When there is a variance between the theoretical and actual drive time, this results in member appeals. The Finance Section acknowledges the limitations of the present procedure and would like  to have a procedure that is “member friendly”, while making a more efficient procedure to administer.

 

The variance between theoretical and actual travel time is a common occurrence.  It is a great source of frustration by members.  It commonly results in an appeal being followed as the Finance Section is limited in their application of the policy. This issue is demanding significant resources from the Finance Section.  The Finance Section is of the opinion that a definable drive time would simplify administration of the policy.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The Finance & BLPC Committee would propose the following amendment to the Policy under paragraph 8 (Meals);

 

On the day of return, members would ordinarily be entitled to breakfast if they return after 8:00 a.m., to lunch if they return after noon and to dinner if they return after 6:00 p.m.

 

On the day of return, members would ordinarily be entitled to breakfast, to lunch if their normal travel time is three (3) hours or longer, and to dinner if their normal travel time is seven (7) hours or longer.  

 

The Policy will be brought for consideration to BOD in June.

Action: All

 

15. CS Group and CS Sub-Groups – Change of Name to “IT” (T. Goddard)

 

The NCR Representative provided the list of CS (IT) Subgroup Bylaws that need their name change approved by the Board. He asked that the Chair of the BLPC present them to the Board along with the revisions for the CS Group bylaws.

• CS IT Annapolis Valley

• CS IT Eastern Quebec
• CS IT Edmonton
• CS IT Fredericton
• CS IT Gatineau
• CS IT Global Affairs Canada
• CS IT Hull
• CS IT London/Essex
• CS IT Mauricie
• CS IT Moncton

• CS IT Montérégie
• CS IT Montréal Metro
• CS IT Ottawa-East
• CS IT Ottawa-Metro
• CS IT Ottawa-West
• CS IT Petawawa-CFB
• CS IT Québec City
• CS IT Quinte
• CS IT Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean-Côte-Nord
• CS IT Saskatoon & Prince Albert
• CS IT Statistics Canada
• CS IT Sudbury/North Bay
• CS IT Toronto
• CS IT Vancouver
• CS IT Vancouver Island
• CS IT Winnipeg & Southern MB

 

Once the name change and revisions are approved by the BOD, the NCR Representative will forward the revised Bylaws to the Staff Resource who will communicate with PIPSC IT department for posting on PIPSC website.

 

Action: S. Fréchette / T. Goddard/ F. Mushiya

 

16. Saguenay Lac-St-Jean et Côte-Nord Branch (Amended)

 

The SLSJCN BLs were ratified on May 10, 2022. The BLs will be brought to the Board for approval in June.

 

Action: S. Fréchette

 

17. BLPC Term of Mandate (All)

 

The BLPC will maintain a current term of 1 year. No further action required.

 

18. Finance and BLPC Terms of Reference 

 

Deferred to allow BLPC members to review FC & BLPC TOR and provide comments by Monday June 6, 2022.

Action: All

 

19. BLPC Schedule of Meetings (All)

 

• May 30, 2022 (at the Delta)
• September 17, 2022 
• October 21-22, 2022  (proposing October 14-15 instead)
• December 2-3, 2022 (in conjunction with the Xmas dinner) – proposing December 9-10

 

The BLPC will confirm their availability for the newly proposed dates. 

 

Action: All

 

20. SH Group (Proposed Amendments) - deferred

 

21. AFS Group (Proposed Amendments – Ratified)  

 

The BLPC reviewed the proposed amendments ratified on October 30, 2021. The BLs will be brought to the Board despite the fact that the Group has suggested further amendments (article 7.3 - Eligibility to Hold Office). The Group will be holding its next AMG on June 7, 2022.

 

The proposed amendments need some editorial changes to reflect a full version of BLs with highlights on addition and deletion as per usual practice. 

 

The BL will be brought to the Board in June.

 

Action: F. Mushiya / S. Fréchette/ J. Gagnon

 

22. CFIA VM Group BLs (Amended) – approved in December 

 

The CFIA VM Group BL amendments were approved by the Board on December 10, 2021. The issue is that these amendments allow a retired member to sit on the executive with no voting rights at executive meetings or at a Group  AGM.

The former BLPC Chair (current Acting Prairies Representative) suggested that the Group President work with the BLPC to come up with some wording to fix these bylaw issues and bring forward any amendments at the Group’s next AGM.

 

In the meantime, the approved BLs shall be translated and posted. 

Action: F. Mushiya

 

23. NRC RO RCO Group (Proposed Amendments) - deferred

 

24. Atlantic Region (Amended) – ratified by region at the ATL regional council

 

The BLPC reviewed and made a small vocabulary change to Article 5.9.1 (New) If a vacancy occurs before the 6th last scheduled meeting of the calendar year (Nov/Dec) the Regional Executive will normally fill the vacancy.

 

The BL will be brought to the Board for approval in June.

Action: All

 

25. Voting Outside of an AGM (Information & Discussion) – deferred 

 

26. Interpretation of BL 10.4.1.1 Alternates 

 

The NCR Representative drafted language around the Interpretation of BL 10.4.1.1.  The BLPC Chair will share the briefing note with the Advisory Council Chair. 

Action: S. Fréchette

 

27. 2022 AGM Process (All)

 

BLPC members have reached out to their respective Regional Directors to voice their interest in attending the AGM as delegates. Some Regional Directors are of the view that the BLCP should cover the cost of its delegates. Alternatively, it was suggested that the BLPC schedule a meeting a day before the AGM. Subsequently, BLPC members would be able to attend as observers.

Three (3) seats remain to be confirmed – BC, QC, and Prairies. The BLPC Chair will continue to consider other options and follow up with other Regional Directors.

Action: S. Fréchette 

 

4. New Business

 

1. Quebec Region Constitution and  Bylaws  

 

The BLPC asked the Staff Resource to follow up on Quebec Region BL’s translation as English and French versions posted on the website are contradictory. 

 

BL Article 5.5.1 in English states:

 

5.5.1 If it is more than halfway into the term of office, the Executive shall fill the position by appointment until the next elections.

 

5.5.2 If it is less than halfway into the term of office, the executive may fill by appointment the vacant position or assume the position’s functions until the next elections.

 

BL Article 5.5.2 In French States: 

 

5.5.1 S’il reste plus que la moitié du mandat, l’exécutif dote le poste par nomination jusqu’à la prochaine élection.

 

5.5.2 S’il reste moins que la moitié de la durée du mandat, l’exécutif peut doter le poste par nomination ou assumer les fonctions liées au poste jusqu’à la prochaine élection.

 

Action: F. Mushiya

 

5. Matter Arising

 

1. Proposed Policy on Purchase of Technical Equipment (Policy on Constituent Body Allocations (The Policy)

 

The BLPC and Finance Committees have been tasked to update the Policy on Constituent Body Allocations to incorporate the June 2021 BOD motion.

 

The BOD had concerns regarding acceptable limits of member funds relating to the purchase of technical equipment by a constituent body.  There were no limits in place and some constituent bodies were making large purchases

 

The BOD actioned a review of the Policy by both committees with recommendations due at their June meeting.  The Finance Committee had concerns that static amounts were referenced and that the policy would be better served if the reference were “to an amount as determined by the Board on an annual basis.”  

 

The Finance & BLPC Committees recommend that the Policy on Constituent Body allocations be amended to read.

 

Paragraph 9 Tracking of Institute Assets

 

Notwithstanding the prior provision of asset purchases, a maximum annual limit should be established for the purchase of laptops or tablets. That amount would include a limit as determined for the purchase hardware and amount as determined for the software, if any.  Each constituent body would be entitled to a maximum of three (3) laptops or tablets for the President, the Treasurer, and the Secretary respectively.  Each entitled constituent body member would have to choose between a laptop and a tablet as policies would not allow them to purchase both.  Any additional device would require a motion to be approved at the constituent body’s AGM.  Tracking of these assets would be managed by the IT section of the Institute, in collaboration with the Finance Section.

 

Annual limits for the purchase of a constituent body purchase of equipment for a laptop or tablet and software pursuant to the Policy on Constituent Body Allocations ¶9 shall be determined annually by the Board of Directors at their first meeting of the calendar year.

 

The Policy will be brought for consideration to BOD in June.

Action: All

 

2. Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation (Travel Policy) 

 

The Finance Committee identified a lack of language as it relates to members being granted an extended stay in relation to travel when attending a union event that may be impacted by the cancellation of that event.

 

A member was granted permission for extended travel outside of the Policy in conjunction with a scheduled meeting.  The member had already traveled to their destination.  The meeting was subsequently cancelled.  There was ambiguity on how to administer the policy and what costs should be reimbursed.

 

Travel status is defined as to what it pertains to, but it does not reference a time frame, refer paragraph 2.  The Policy has provisions allowing members to travel the day prior or after a meeting, refer paragraph 7.  Members are routinely granted extended stays.   Where additional costs are incurred such as cancellation fees, a member may be responsible for those costs, refer paragraph 8.  The member is required to change the travel but further references that if the costs were attributable to member negligence, then those costs may be recoverable, refer paragraph 11. This provision does not address instances where the member was not negligent.  There has been discussion regarding member assumption of risk when traveling in advance or extended stays in relation to union activities and the need to possibly incorporate language pursuant to this into the Policy.  There were further discussions with the employer regarding consistent language with limits to traveling in advance. 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The Finance Committees recommend the Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation should be amended as follows;

 

Paragraph 2 Definitions

Travel status occurs when a member is traveling away from their workplace on authorized Institute business, including local travel.  Travel status is defined as beginning the first scheduled day of the authorized event and ending the last scheduled day of the event.  Where under the travel policy the member is entitled to the day prior to or subsequent to the event, then travel status is expanded to include those days notwithstanding any prior reference.

 

Paragraph 4 Travel arrangements

Travel in advance of an authorized event is not allowed under the policy.  Where a member travels in advance of an authorized event that is considered personal travel.  Any additional travel costs associated with travel in advance are the responsibility of the member and they are not entitled to any reimbursements under the policy for the prior days.  

 

When a member extends their stay beyond the last day of travel status, they must obtain authorization in advance by the Institute.  The additional days shall be considered personal travel.  Any additional travel costs associated with the extended stay are the responsibility of the member and they are not entitled to any reimbursements under the policy for the subsequent days.

 

The proposed policy will be brought for consideration to the Board in June. Action: All

 

3. Proposed Policy on Virtual Meetings Per Diem (Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation)

 

The Board of Directors (BOD) has tasked the Bylaw and Finance Committees with proposing policy wording to provide compensation to virtual attendees of a PIPSC event

 

During the pandemic, the use of virtual and hybrid meetings has become the norm of the Institute.  Members have raised concern that when attending virtually and potentially for extended periods, there is no provision that would allow a meal claim.  The BOD wishes to rectify that gap in policy to address member concerns.

 

The intent of the Policy was to “ensure no member suffers financial loss due to their participation”, refer paragraph 1.  The Policy has been applied in the past to reimburse costs incurred while on “travel status” as defined in paragraph 2.  The Policy was not constructed anticipating the impacts of the pandemic and the increased normalcy of virtual attendance.

 

Concerns by members of the Board related to virtual attendees having incurred no additional costs.  While not currently allowed, some constituent bodies have provided for members who attend virtually either by a gift card or a meal allowance.  There was discussion regarding a reduced amount, daily limits, length of qualifying period, types of meetings and additional compensation by constituent bodies.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

The Finance Committee does not support a policy to provide a meal per diem for virtual attendees of PIPSC events

 

Some members of the BLPC were of the view that virtual meetings for union business should still be treated as regular meetings for union activities. Others argued that there could be broader implications with the Policy such as the types and length of meetings. The Finance Committee does not recommend the policy however the Chair of the Finance Committee could reconsider this if some of the meeting criteria are identified.

 

The following members were in favour of the Policy:

 

T. Goddard – in favour 

S. McConaghy – in favour 

M. Chow – in favour 

N. McCune – Abstain – (would be in favour if there were tighter language)

J. Purdie – not against however some considerations around language have to be given especially because of existing practices (swag bags already provided in lieu of per diem; gift certificates, etc.)

 

The BLPC is of the view that the Policy on Virtual Per Diem should be added to Policy on Financial Support for Member Participation - (BOD - 26Jul19).

 

The NCR Representative was tasked to work on language to incorporate criteria such as limiting the length of meeting to four (4) hours; types of meetings, not using the Policy in conjunction with other compensation forms/rewards, etc. 

 

The NCR Representative will forward a similar Advisory Council motion to the Chair of Finance Committee. The Policy will be brought back to the BLPC for consideration.  

 

Action: T. Goddard / J. Purdie

 

 

6. Parked Items
   1. OSFI Group (Amended) (pending input from Group)
   2. JCC-RT Group (Proposed) (parked since August 2015) 
   3. Senate Clerks Group (Amended)
   4. House of Commons Group (Amended)
   5. RE Central Vancouver Island Sub-Group (Amended) (D. Jones)
   6. NR DND Louis St-Laurent Sub-Group (Amended) (N. McCune)
   7. NR DND NCR Sub-Group (Proposed)
   8. RE Library & Archives Sub-Group (Amended) (A. Goddard)
   9. CS Gatineau Sub-Group (Proposed) (pending 2016 AGM) (A. Goddard)  NCR Representative asked that the item be removed
   10. AFS Saguenay Sub-Group (S. Fréchette)
   11. AFS IOTSO Sub-Group (Proposed Amendments) (AGM in 2020)
   12. AFS Calgary & Red Deer Sub-Group (Amended) (AGM in 2020) – N. McCune will follow up and if no update provided will be removed
   13. SP Vancouver Sub-Group (Amended) (AGM in 2020)
   14. Vancouver Branch (Amended) (Ratified?) (D. Jones) 
   15. Haut Richelieu Branch (S. Fréchette)
   16. CSC Montréal and Rive-Nord Branch (S. Fréchette) (Date of AGM TBC)
   17. Hamilton CRA Branch – CRA Branch Issues – no further action required – The Ontario Regional Director asked that the item be removed

 

7. Prairies Representative

 

The BLPC Chair will follow up with the Prairies Regional Director to see if the appointed Prairies Representative will be available in the fall. In the meantime, the Acting Prairies Representative, N. McCune will follow up on related action items until further notice.

Action: S. Fréchette

 

8. Adjournment and Next Meeting

 

The meeting was adjourned at 6pm. The next meeting proposed date of September 17, 2022 will be confirmed via email.