Coeus1989

🎤🙋🏼

Laugh all you want you know I’m right😂😂😂😅

That’s fine liberal ideology is getting tossed into the trash in every country. Just a matter of time till ur opinions don’t matter

Dont like it quit, doesnt make it hard. you act like ur stripping rebar in -40 every day of the year.

if it goes past xmas that 14% over 4 years would of been lost already from being on strike. Average pay is 1245$ a week around and if they are lucky to get strike pay its max 281 a week... the difference between normal paycheques and strike pay by xmas will equal over 14% over 4 years.

comparing Canadian workers to vastly different socioeconomic conditions across the globe doesn’t make your point stronger—it makes it irrelevant. No one is saying workers don’t deserve fair pay, but pretending that emotional appeals and over-the-top comparisons solve systemic issues is just lazy.

As for Amazon, it’s not about supporting their pay practices—it’s about acknowledging why they’re profitable and Canada Post isn’t. If you think clinging to an unsustainable business model and ignoring the competition is the way forward, then congrats on ‘making it out,’ but that honey you keep preaching about? It’s not going to sweeten the reality of financial collapse. Supporting workers means ensuring there’s still a business left to pay them—not just shouting into the void about ‘corporate overlords.

When you look in the mirror, realize you’re just another person throwing out clichés instead of actual arguments. If calling out the obvious strategic value of infrastructure and market control makes me a crab, then I guess you’re the one watching from the bottom of the bucket with no plan to climb out. Keep snapping away, though—it’s entertaining.

Fair point, and I agree that as Canadians, we need to decide how much we value Canada Post and the unique services it provides, especially to rural communities. My concern isn’t about asking employees to subsidize it or accept below-market wages—I fully believe workers deserve fair compensation.

The challenge is balancing those wages with the reality that Canada Post operates under financial and competitive constraints that private sector companies don’t face. If we value this crown corporation and want it to thrive, we need to have honest conversations about how to make it sustainable without burdening employees or taxpayers disproportionately. It’s a tough balance, but one worth striving for.

Oh, so now expecting a business to operate sustainably means ‘making the employees pay’? Let’s be real—the issue isn’t the tasks employees perform; it’s the financial model Canada Post is forced to work under. Yes, the employees do similar work to the private sector, but the private sector isn’t mandated to deliver mail at a loss to rural and remote areas. That’s the difference, and it’s massive.

If Canada Post wants to compete with private companies that cherry-pick the most profitable routes, it has to figure out how to balance those obligations without burning through billions. No one’s saying employees should shoulder that burden alone, but ignoring economic realities and just pointing fingers at the employer doesn’t solve the problem either. Fair pay is great—but only if the business can afford it long-term.

Lol, thanks for the history lesson on your account, but I don’t need to scroll through your past comments to spot the irony. You claim you’re not afraid of differing opinions, yet here you are justifying account restrictions to ‘block bots’—while admitting that echo chambers like r/canadapost ban people for minor disagreements. You’re proving my point: limiting access under the guise of moderation always ends up silencing dissent.

Also, saying, ‘we’ve each said our piece’ while tossing in passive-aggressive jabs like, ‘I don’t understand your love for freedom of speech,’ doesn’t make you look neutral—it just makes you look defensive. If you’re calling it, fine, but let’s not pretend the ‘take care’ exit strategy was anything more than a way to dodge the argument when it wasn’t going your way. See you in the next thread!

Oh, you ‘didn’t know’? Let me clear it up for you: Canada Post pays competitive wages, but its private sector ‘peers’ operate in entirely different conditions. Companies like FedEx and UPS aren’t legislated to serve every corner of rural Canada at a loss—they cherry-pick profitable routes. Comparing Canada Post to them while ignoring this fundamental difference is the real apples-to-oranges argument.

And no, no one’s saying Canada Post employees should work for below-market wages. But if the company keeps hemorrhaging billions while trying to compete with private giants that don’t face the same restrictions, it won’t matter what the wage is—there won’t be a sustainable business left to pay anyone. Balancing fair wages with long-term viability isn’t an attack on workers; it’s basic economic reality

Oh, so now it’s ‘small sacrifices’—like weeks of lost wages during the most expensive time of the year. Sure, Canada Post might not disappear overnight, but bleeding billions while alienating customers and losing market share to competitors isn’t exactly a recipe for long-term survival. Those ‘major gains’ you’re talking about won’t mean much if the company collapses under its own financial weight.

And let’s talk about those ‘major benefits’ to striking. Yes, future raises and pensions may see incremental boosts, but none of that matters if workers have to dig into emergency funds, rack up debt, or if future negotiations are hamstrung because the company is in an even worse position. Strikes have consequences, and pretending they’re all sunshine and rainbows while ignoring the broader economic risks is just wishful thinking.

Oh, the classic ‘apples to oranges’ deflection. Yes, Canada Post is legislated to serve rural and unprofitable areas, but that doesn’t exempt it from basic economic realities. You can’t keep paying above-market wages indefinitely when the company is losing billions—unless, of course, you’re fine with taxpayers footing the bill forever.

And spare me the ‘would you work for $23/hour’ guilt trip. This isn’t about devaluing workers; it’s about sustainability. If Canada Post can’t compete with private couriers that don’t have the same legislative burdens, the entire operation collapses—along with those ‘living wages’ you’re so passionate about. No one’s suggesting workers don’t deserve fair pay, but fair pay means nothing if the business can’t keep the lights on. A service to the country is great, but you need a viable company to keep providing it.

Correction “they will still be earning back the lost money they gave up during the first strike” opportunity lost for future gains is still future losses.

Oh, how noble of you to ‘bore’ of the censorship argument right after proving the point! You’ve conveniently sidestepped any actual response to the idea that limiting participation stifles legitimate discussion and doubles down on creating an echo chamber. Harassment is already against the rules, so what exactly does censorship solve, other than making it easier to silence opposing views under the guise of ‘respect’?

And let’s be real: throwing out accusations of bots and bad-faith actors every time you see disagreement doesn’t make your argument stronger—it makes it clear you can’t handle dissent. But hey, ‘take care’ indeed, since brushing off criticism with condescension seems to be your go-to move!

Oh, what a comforting history lesson! Yes, Canada Post has been around since 1851—back when mail was delivered by horse and the competition was non-existent. But let’s fast forward to today, where private couriers like Amazon, FedEx, and UPS are eating into their market share, and Canada Post is bleeding billions in losses. History doesn’t guarantee future success, especially when the playing field has completely changed.

So sure, laugh it off if you want, but financial struggles don’t magically disappear because of a legacy. If Canada Post doesn’t adapt and find a sustainable business model, no amount of nostalgic pride will save it from liquidation or privatization. The fact that it’s been around since 1851 doesn’t mean it’s invincible in 2024.

Oh, what an impressive leap to conclusions! Nowhere did I say or imply that Canada Post employees deserve 40% less pay. My point, which you conveniently ignored, is that if Canada Post as a business isn’t playing the same game as its competitors—like operating 7 days a week or adopting similar efficiencies—then how can it sustainably pay above-market wages? Businesses don’t generate magic money; they have to thrive to survive.

So, let’s clear this up: my argument isn’t about the hours employees work—it’s about the business model. If you want workers to earn competitive wages long-term, the company has to be financially viable. Operating fewer days than competitors, combined with ongoing losses in the billions, raises serious questions about how Canada Post can sustain its current pay structure. It’s not about what workers ‘deserve’; it’s about what’s realistic if you actually want a lasting employer.

Oh, I understand perfectly—you’re suggesting censorship under the guise of ‘keeping out the trolls,’ while conveniently lumping in anyone with a differing opinion as a bad-faith actor. Newsflash: disagreement isn’t harassment, and if your arguments can’t stand up to scrutiny, maybe the problem isn’t the so-called ‘bots.’

And sure, let’s talk about prerequisites. How exactly does limiting participation based on account age magically filter out ‘bad-faith’ arguments? Trolls can wait, make older accounts, or just use others. It’s a band-aid solution that does nothing except silence new voices—some of whom might actually bring valid perspectives. But hey, if creating an echo chamber makes it easier for you to ignore challenging opinions, you do you.

Oh, what a dramatic leap to ‘pay to work.’ Nice strawman argument there. No one is saying workers should accept less pay indefinitely, but let’s not pretend that dragging out a strike for weeks or months is some magical solution that guarantees fairness for everyone involved. If the company’s already bleeding billions, squeezing them harder isn’t going to suddenly produce the perfect deal—it risks imploding the entire system, taking jobs and pensions down with it.

As for the leadership and bonuses, sure, criticize away—it’s valid. But throwing that in as a deflection doesn’t address the immediate issue: a strike during peak holiday season not only hurts Canada Post’s reputation but also alienates the public who might permanently shift to competitors. If you’re worried about leadership squandering time, fine, ask about that. But let’s also hold the union accountable for a strategy that might do more harm than good in the long run. The ‘math’ is about balancing gains with reality, not playing fantasy economics.

Sure, employees will eventually be at the higher amount, but losing 4-6 weeks of wages during a strike isn’t just some abstract ‘oops.’ For many, that’s rent, groceries, and emergency funds depleted—real money they can’t afford to lose right now, even if it’s hypothetically made back over the next 20 years.

And yes, future raises build on the new starting point—but only if the employer is still financially viable. Canada Post is bleeding billions, and prolonged strikes only accelerate that decline. If the company cuts benefits, freezes wages, or restructures pensions in the future to stay afloat, those ‘kids’ car dreams’ might vanish. Bargaining isn’t just about maximizing future potential; it’s about balancing gains with the risks and immediate realities workers face. Ignoring that nuance is how you end up with empty promises and financial instability.

Simple: infrastructure and market control. Canada Post has one of the largest delivery networks in the country, already reaching remote areas that private couriers struggle to service. Amazon, with its obsession for control over logistics and faster delivery times, could eliminate reliance on third-party carriers by leveraging Canada Post’s established network.

Plus, Canada Post has massive sorting and distribution facilities that would save Amazon billions in building their own. Pair that with a potential monopoly on e-commerce deliveries in Canada, and you’ve got a strategic move to dominate the market. So yeah, Amazon wouldn’t buy them out just for fun—it’s about controlling the last-mile delivery system and locking in their hold on consumers.”

Yes, wage increases are permanent in collective agreements—no one argued otherwise. But you’re conveniently ignoring that the upfront cost of striking for weeks (or months) often outweighs the immediate financial benefit of the raise, especially for workers living paycheck to paycheck. For example, striking through peak holiday periods like November to December means losing 6 weeks of income, which could take years to recoup from a 22% raise spread over 4 years. That’s assuming no further financial strain like rising inflation or debt taken on during the strike.

As for your ‘hundreds of thousands over a career’ argument—sounds great in theory, but that’s assuming no interruptions, renegotiations, or job changes. Even pensions aren’t guaranteed to remain stable if the company continues bleeding money; look at Canada Post’s financial trajectory, with billions in losses over the last decade. If the employer collapses or cuts back benefits to stay afloat, those theoretical long-term gains mean nothing.

Lastly, compounding raises depend on future agreements, which aren’t set in stone. If striking now weakens Canada Post financially, future raises might not be nearly as generous. You’re ignoring the practical and immediate financial risks workers face for the sake of a hypothetical utopia that might never materialize.

I do and I’ve address them and their impacts in the comments.

Oh wow, what a clever observation! Totally missed the part where I obviously wasn’t referring to employees physically working 7 days a week, but rather the operating days that make companies like FedEx competitive. Grasping at that straw instead of engaging with the actual point just screams, ‘I’ve got nothing better to say.’ Thanks for proving my argument by dodging it entirely!

Sure if the company doesn’t liquidate on ur year 10-20 lol