This document is a newsletter from an employee union (OPSEU) providing updates to its members at MPAC (Municipal Property Assessment Corporation). It summarizes concerns about nepotism in MPAC's student hiring practices, negative feedback from members and the public about a new uniform vest, and reminds members to follow proper grievance procedures. It also provides contact information for union leadership.

1. ImpacT News for OPSEU members at MPAC
from your leadership team
Volume 12, Issue 2 • June 22, 2012
We’ll get by with ijť Ļ ŋōŨŨŧŋķĶ Ōŧ
a little help… Ĵķ ŏŧŊĽĻŦĹММĞ
from our kids
MPAC’s Friends, Family and
Favorites program is alive and well,
especially within the ranks of the
management “elites.”
This year, 2,500 students applied
for the summer program. 100 have
been hired so far, and the
percentages are exactly what we
would expect.
Of the 100 hired, 47 per cent are
related to MPAC employees. Of this
47 per cent, 60 per cent are family of
bargaining unit members, and 40 per
cent are family or friends of
management. A few have been
identified as the offspring of some
Executive Management Group
members. We checked our numbers,
and even used a few fingers and toes
to do the math. We’re pretty sure this
proportion of student hires is a little
out of whack. added her two children to the payroll
But that’s ok. Our CEO is very in for the summer.
favour of keeping hiring in the Coincidentally, a number of these
family…especially his own child. Even students are also going to be allowed
the #2 in Human Resources has to work from home.
ImpacT • June 22, 2012 • Page 1

2. The survey SAYS!!
We thank the 571 members who Q. Have you received any feedback
completed and returned the vest from the public?
survey. This is a far better rate of The survey says: YES! (84.4%)
return than what management
typically receives on their internal Q. What type of feedback have you
surveys. received?
So…what are the results? The survey says: Negative feedback
(43.3%); Unsure they like the new
Q. Do you like the vest recently image (33.3%).
implemented by your employer as a
pilot project? Q. What do you think of the “one size
The survey says: NO! (93%). fits all” concept for the vest?
The survey says: Does NOT work!
Q. Do you feel the vest represents (71.3%).
MPAC professionally?
The survey says: NO! (95%) But the percentages don’t really tell
the whole tale. The opinions on the
vest (from staff AND the public)
ranged from “cheap-looking” to
“unprofessional” to “embarrassing” to
“ridiculous” to “tacky” to “hideous”.
Almost everyone agreed (including
many members of the public) that
staff wearing them look like Wal Mart
greeters, or, in some opinions,
crossing guards.
We believe these comments sum it
up best: “Had numerous property
owners state they felt it was another
way MPAC was wasting their tax
dollars” and “This is a perfect
example of senior management being
completely out of touch with the front
-line core business.”
Finally, to clear up one question
from the survey, the answer is no…
the vests don’t come with a red stick-
on nose and big yellow shoes.
ImpacT • June 22, 2012 • Page 2

3. Class action doesn’t include MPAC
Some correspondence has come out of a MPAC did not have any such language or
few locals regarding a class action lawsuit guarantees at the time of divestment. The
filed by OPSEU against the Ontario UMC has prepared and sent a letter to
government regarding members who were OPSEU President Smokey Thomas as a
divested to Community Care Access matter of courtesy to these members, but it
Centres and suffered losses in their HOOPP should be noted that MPAC’s divestment
pension plan. situation is different from the
The groups received a lump sum payout aforementioned groups. To read the details
for the fact that they had language in their of the class action, go to: http://
divestment agreements that promised they www.opseu.org/benefit/may-23-
would be compensated if they were short 2012_CCAClawsuitupdate.htm
on pension benefits because of the
divestment.
Follow the chain
This is a reminder to all inform your steward and
members that you must keep them involved at all
follow the proper chain in stages of discussions. MEMBER
order to refer matters to the Your OPSEU staff rep
UMC. should be utilized as a
Local issues must first resource as well, especially
be addressed at the local in cases of grievance
level. The first step is to wording when the Collective
have a discussion about the Agreement has been
Local Steward
issue with your local violated. At this point, it is
steward. The steward the decision and
should hold a meeting with responsibility of the
local management and/or individual to file a grievance Local Management/
the HR Business Partner in if needed. HR Business Partner
your zone about the issue. If the issue does not
If you receive information contravene the Collective
back from the employer, Agreement, but persists as
an issue that needs to
addressed, inform your
local UMC
OPSEU Staff Rep
Representative. Please
use e-mail for all
communications, so
that we have a record
of the discussions and
UMC Rep
review the issue. (After Staff Rep consulted)
ImpacT • June 22, 2012 • Page 3

4. KUDOS KORNER
Size matters consecutive weeks of vacation in light of the
upcoming assessment update.
In one of our larger eastern offices, a new
office is under construction for the new HR
We interrupt this program…
business partner…or at least that’s what
was thought. There’s a certain Director of Speaking of time off from work, rumour
Business Properties – who shall remain has it that a Director and some underling
nameless – that found out this office was managers recently enjoyed a brief vacation
larger than his. Claiming eminent domain, of their own, albeit unpaid and unscheduled.
the Director will move into this office
instead. Ornge ya glad for this link?
Don’t forget OPSEU’s “Orange”
(Not) Thinking ahead
Management Waste Line at http://
Thanks to poor management and poor opseu.org/notices/orngeline/index.htm.
planning of workloads, some Residential/ We’re pretty sure MPAC members might
Farm managers are “advising” that staff will have a story or two to contribute. It’s easy,
not be able to take more than two and totally confidential.
Stay in touch!
To ensure a speedy response to your questions, your leadership team has divided up all MPAC offices in
the province. If you have a question or a comment, please contact the team member responsible for your
office. Contact us by e-mail at work or at home, as follows:
David Lynch, Chair: Bracebridge, London, David Fong: North Bay, Sudbury, Sault Ste. Marie,
Mississauga, Ottawa, Barrie, Brockville, Cornwall, Timmins, Thunder Bay, Kenora, Fort Francis &
Pembroke, Trenton, Bancroft & Kingston Dryden
E-mail: opseu409@yahoo.ca; david.lynch@mpac.ca E-mail: visor243@nt.net; david.fong@mpac.ca
Peter McClenaghan, Vice Chair: St. Catharines, Steve Kovacs: Milner (CCC, CPF, LPU), Owen
Goderich, Chatham, Sarnia, Windsor, Kitchener & Sound, Hamilton & Parry Sound
Brantford E-Mail: stevekovie@hotmail.com;
E-mail: pmcclenaghan2020@yahoo.com ; steve.kovacs@mpac.ca
peter.mcclenaghan@mpac.ca
Everett Kelly: Oshawa, Pickering, Richmond Hill, Mirla Alvarado-Fenn, OPSEU Staff Negotiator
Toronto & Peterborough E-mail: malvarado@opseu.org
E-mail: evkelly@rogers.com; everett.kelly@mpac.ca
OPSEU ImpacT is produced by the Property Assessment Division of the Ontario Public Service
Employees Union and authorized for distribution by Warren (Smokey) Thomas, president.
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
100 Lesmill Road, Toronto, Ontario M3B 3P8 www.opseu.org
ImpacT • June 22, 2012 • Page 4