INFULENTIAL MEMBER

Welcome to our newest semi-annual article series, "The Influential Member". Here we will feature prominent and important members from 594's eighty-year history of representing the members at the Co-op Refinery. This will highlight an array of individuals who were long-serving, dedicated executive officers who contributed endless time and energy to this local and its community as a whole. We want to honour past members' contributions and raise awareness among younger generations and the public about our history and the people who made 594 the strong local it is today. This series will dip into our historical members still familiar today and further back to the starting point of this great Union.





Kevin Bittman

Co-op Refinery:

May 1997 (Process Relief Pool) -June 2020 (Master Operator in Section 2).

Unifor Local 594:

Shop Steward: 1998-2005

Process VP: 2005-2007

President: 2007-2020

Kevin Bittman was a hardworking Process Operator in Section 2 at the Co-op Refinery. Kevin began his career in the Process Relief Pool in 1997 and worked up to be a Master Operator, working in Section 2 for the duration of his employment. He was a good mentor to new employees and his insight and knowledge helped people work safely. Following the Poly explosion in 2013 Kevin committed a year and a half to be a liaison with the rebuild.

When Kevin began his career at the Co-op Refinery he knew very little about unions. Kevin describes his driving point to learn more about unions in general, his union and what they do: " I thought that if there was going to be a group of people making decisions on my behalf about my workplace, why would I not want to be involved in those discussions? Once I got involved, I realized I was the Union, and the members were the ones who decided where we went, not the Executive. I also realized 594 differed significantly from most locals or unions in the country."

By 1998 Kevin had become a Shop Steward for the Process Relief Pool, followed by Section 2 Shop Steward; he remained in a steward role until 2005. In 2005 Kevin was elected to the Executive as Process VP, at the following election in 2007 Kevin became President. Kevin sat as President of Unifor 594 (formerly CEP 594 until 2013) from 2005 until 2020 when he resigned from his Process Operator position at the Co-op Refinery following the seven-month lockout.

Kevin felt it was his duty to Local 594 to contribute in a way that would maintain the integrity built by the past Executive members. Local 594 has a long history of being a strong and united union local with a membership that believes in their executive to lead in the right direction. Kevin truly valued the team he had to work with because everyone understood the goal and did an excellent job ensuring our members were represented.

The local executive engaged members at every step, they valued and empowered the people to decide where they wanted to see their Local go to ensure they felt like they were part of a family and something more than just a union. "A Local Union is way bigger than one person and I had the privilege to have really good and smart people on the Team. From the Executive to the Stewards we really were, in my opinion, a really close and well-functioning group."

Kevin believed that Local 594 was and is different from other Locals and that the engagement of the members is what makes us unique. The fact that people know we do not spend a cent without the membership voting is a great financial responsibility. It is also important to highlight that nobody does their union job full-time; each member of the Executive has a full-time job in the plant, and the personal investment is there for everyone involved.

Kevin described what made him the proudest of his time with the Local, of course, this being our time during the lockout; "I would have to say the Solidarity we maintained during a 7-month Lockout was the proudest moment for the Executive. We worked hard to ensure we were ready, and I feel it is the only reason we still have a Local 594. The work was way more than the 7 months and really was a product of 3 years of hard work. We worked hard to put together teams that we thought we were going to need during a dispute. The UCP Team, the Comms Team, Utilities Team and many more. If there was a need we had the team to address it. The members are well-informed every step of the way. We had a comms and messaging strategy and we ensured the people had the tools they needed to succeed."

Before the lockout, Kevin would say that 594 did not have a lot of community involvement. The Lockout experience was an excellent reminder that we work in this community and must ensure we give back at every opportunity. Local 594 members are a highly paid group and have the ability to give back to the less fortunate in our community.

Kevin's time working at the Co-op Refinery was better because of Local 594. "Local 594 is my family and I will cherish what we built together. The people are what make organizations good and 594 takes this to another level. The Local has been doing good work for decades. They have managed to set themselves up for any challenge that may be put in front of them. From owning their building to the strike fund, the Local has managed to situate themselves better than most and that goes to our rich history."

Kevin Bittman was a pivotal contributor to the success and strength of our local in the last two decades. He led with knowledge, courage and the drive to make a group of workers at a small prairie refinery shine bright for all refinery locals across Canada to look up to.

Although Kevin is no longer working at the Co-op Refinery or on our Local Executive, he will always be in the background rooting for 594 to stay grounded, strong and united. Kevin is now working with Unifor as a National Representative helping several locals with their bargaining processes.

A favourite quote from Kevin:

"We may not always agree with each other, but as long as we can understand where each other is coming from, we are in a good spot."

CSS CORNER

The grievance train keeps chugging along a few months in with Contracting Out issues at the wheel. With sixteen grievances filed thus far in 2024, thirteen have to do with the Contracting Out of bargaining unit work of our Maintenance Department. Until the principle systematic issues are resolved the number of grievances filed to protect bargaining unit work has no prospect of downturn.

But that's not what we want to write about this month. The one bonus of the CSS position is sifting through stacks and stacks of case law and every once in a while you come across a complete gem of a case. We wanted to share a few of the most interesting/humorous ones with you.

BC Brinks Employee Terminated After Suspected Robbery Involvement 

The Grievor's employment was terminated for failure to cooperate with the employer's investigation into a robbery of one of its bank clients and his alleged involvement. In this case, it was actually the employer who filed the grievance seeking repayment of $463,220 which was the amount lost in the robbery! The Arbitrator accepted circumstantial and hearsay evidence including compelling evidence of photographs of the bank's keys and alarm codes on his phone which were seized during an RCMP search warrant. All the evidence was sufficiently clear, convincing and cogent to satisfy the balance of probabilities test and his claims that he did not take the photos were not believable. The Grievor was entirely not credible. The Arbitrator ruled with the Employer and ordered the Grievor to pay back the nearly half-million dollars plus interest!

Read the full case: https://canlii.ca/t/jzwp2 or the CBC article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/christmas-heist-brinks-robbery-1.6680655 

CN Train Conductors Require Microwaves

Multiple train conductors from the Canadian National Railway (CN) filed grievances because they were required to operate locomotives that were not properly equipped with microwave ovens as stipulated in their collective agreement. While the cooking provision language is strong in the CN agreement, the wrinkle in this contract interpretation case came when CN entered into a Co-Production Agreement with the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP). The locomotives which lacked microwaves were CP-owned. The arbitrator dismissed the grievances because the CN collective agreement provisions applied only to trains powered by CN locomotives. 

Tugboat Captain's 60-Day Suspension Overturned for Swerving at Replacement Worker

The Union grieved the employer's (Seaspan) imposition of a 60-day suspension and return-to-work conditions on the Grievor that included questions by psychometric testing. The suspension stemmed from an incident when the Grievor captained his tugboat at an unsafe speed and distance toward another tugboat that was operated by "Shield", a company that assisted Seaspan during a recent labour dispute. The employer argued malicious intent and that the Grievor ought to have known that his wake would rock the Shield tugboat. The Grievor believed he passed at a safe distance and speed, but apologized if anyone was hurt. The Arbitrator ruled the Grievor provided a credible explanation that he operated under an honest but mistaken belief that his course and speed were acceptable and that he acted out of carelessness, not revenge. The Grievor was a long-service employee with a clean discipline record and was immediately apologetic. The Arbitrator reduced the 60-day suspension to 1 day and awarded the Grievor $5000 for the unjustified privacy intrusion by psychometric testing.

Read the full case here: https://canlii.ca/t/k357x 

Middle Finger Leads to a Broken Nose, Termination and Reinstatement

Two Teamster employees got into a physical altercation at a Coca-Cola warehouse in BC after the co-worker gave the Grievor the middle finger and said derogatory terms. During the altercation, the Grievor punched the co-worker breaking his nose. The co-worker had two years of service but was immediately apologetic and accepted responsibility during the investigation and was given a two-week suspension for his actions. The Grievor meanwhile was a thirty-year employee, but was not remorseful, took no accountability and was not accurate in his account of the incident and the employer terminated him. The Union grieved the termination arguing that the principle of equality of discipline came into play, that both employees were aggressors and that the punch was a momentary flare-up that was provoked. The Arbitrator found that the Grievor genuinely understood that he was wrong and therefore reinstated the terminated employee, the termination was instead substituted with a 20-day suspension. 

Read the full case here: https://canlii.ca/t/k2pq1