Union Run a Muck

This a story of how unions can go to far. Also why is this person not fired? That is the million dollar question ? Who


Privacy breach feared
Private information released by SGI, FedEx worker says
By David Hutton, The StarPhoenix May 23, 2010
•
A Saskatoon FedEx worker is concerned about a privacy breach where the addresses of around 25 local employees were leaked from Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI) to the union trying to organize the global courier servicePhotograph by: ,, ,A Saskatoon FedEx worker is concerned about a privacy breach where the addresses of around 25 local employees were leaked from Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI) to the union trying to organize the global courier service.

"It's concerning," said Tracy Gibson, a FedEx employee for 12 years. "If it's that easy to get the information, it makes you wonder who else can access it."

Last year, the Teamsters Union, a labour group that represents blue-collar and professional workers, launched a full-scale campaign to organize Canadian FedEx employees.

Local FedEx employees were soon being approached by union representatives about joining, but many weren't interested, Gibson said.

Soon after, employees noticed union representatives writing down employee licence plate numbers in the parking lot, Gibson said. They then began receiving mail at home from the union addressed to the owner of the vehicle, which in many cases wasn't the FedEx employee, Gibson said.

Gibson, 37, and five other employees asked SGI to investigate what they suspected was a privacy breach. They were contacted last month by SGI's chief privacy officer with a letter confirming suspicions their personal information was given out inappropriately.

SGI spokesperson Kim Hambleton said the privacy breach was traced to the Ministry of Justice, where it was discovered an employee had given the information to the union.

Privacy breaches are "very infrequent," Hambleton said.

Third-party agencies such as other government ministries or law enforcement have limited access to information in SGI's database, she said. SGI's extensive database includes customer contact information, driver and vehicle information, and driving history. The majority of agencies only have access to customer names and addresses, Hambleton said.

"We're very clear on what that information should only be used for and can only be used for," she said. "Obviously, if someone chooses to abuse it that is, you know, (unfortunate), but we make it extremely clear on what it is to be used for."

Ken Acton, assistant deputy minister with the ministry of Justice, said Friday the employee, who worked in a clerical data-entry position, was suspended without pay and upon return was reassigned to a job with no access to the SGI database.

The information was provided inappropriately to a friend at the union, he said.

"We take this very, very seriously," he said. "It's really unfortunate."

"In this case there was a mistake made," Acton said. "Do I think our system is flawed? No."

The privacy breach "opens up a can of worms," Gibson said, and suggests personal information may not be as secure as people believe. The mechanisms in place in government for keeping information private need to be examined, she said.

"People have to know about this," she said.

While Gibson said her problem was not with the union but the ease of which the information was given out, she does not support efforts to unionize.

"I don't want to be part of a group that is so aggressive," Gibson said. "That just goes beyond pushy."

A local Teamsters representative declined comment and a national spokesperson did not return a Friday interview request.

dhutton@sp.canwest.com

© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix

Question on My Mind. Do you have any answers for me.

1. Why is the Sask Party opening up this kettle of fish now. Hey dudes keeping working with 1st nations do not just do things and just act like you do not care. Read this tell me what you think.

Protest Day At The Legislature
Those angry at government speaking out

Story Tools
ShareThisReported By Sarah Mills
Posted May 18, 2010 - 1:56pm
It is a day of protest at the Legislative has the spring session begins to wrap up. In the final few days those angry at government are intent on making their voices heard.

Front and centre on the grounds here at the Legislature is the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations. They are angered at the potential sale of protected environmental lands.

"Talk to us first, show us a map, where are these lands, maybe our Chiefs are interested in these lands", vice-Chief Lyle Whitefish maintains the government isn't doing enough to consult on issues he says are vitally important to them, "start talking to us, strt a dialogue and of course, the duty to consult."

Alongside them are hundreds of people fighting contruction union changes in bill 80 and healthcare workers without a contract.

2. The second question I have is this ? Read this and tell what you think ? What are you pushing now Stephen Yikes!

PET Trudeau said it best !“The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.”


May 15, 2010
Stephen Harper and religion
There's been a lot of talk this week about the influence of the Christian right on Stephen Harper's government. Primarily, this is the result of Marci McDonald's newly released book, The Armageddon Factor. Exquisitely timed, as Antonia Zerbisias pointed out in the Star this week, this comes on the heels of Harper's decision to ban support for abortion in overseas aids projects and at the same time as the National Prayer Breakfast and the huge March for Life Rally on Parliament Hill.

Paul Wells, in Macleans, has weighed in with some skepticism about McDonald's arguments, saying more or less that she's overstating the whole thing.

Here's what I know. Back before he became prime minister, Harper and I used to talk quite a bit. No surprise. We're contemporaries on the Hill; the same age and (believe it or not) we were of similar views on things like Meech Lake, democratic reform and political cynicism in general. He helped me a lot with my book on the Charlottetown accord and gave me a lot of good advice/insights through the years. I think he's changed, but that's a topic for another day.

In all my conversations with Harper, the subject of religion never came up. Except once. I asked him why he was inserting the God-bless stuff into his speeches when he became the leader of the Canadian Alliance. He said, cryptically: "You'd understand if you had children." Fair enough. We left it at that.

The only other insight I had into Harper and his religion was shortly after he won the 2006 election and a then-new book, the Pilgrimage of Stephen Harper, by Lloyd Mackey, implied that Harper and his wife, Laureen, were deeply religious. She was keen to correct that record and got in touch with me to help do that among the media. She wanted folks to know that Harper was only an occasional church-goer (maybe a half-dozen times a year?) and that she and her alleged Christian-temperance family celebrated the election win with cases of beer. I duly passed the word around.

Does this mean that all this talk of Christian influence is wrong-headed? As mentioned above, I don't claim to have any special understanding of the Harper I see as prime minister and have a hard time connecting the dots from the guy I used to know with the one I see in power. That's not unusual, though. Many folks change when they come to office; some for the worse, some for the better.

What is clear is that he now sees no downside in giving some air time to the Christian right among his supporters. As I noted in the story of the pro-life rally this week, no one is telling these folks to shut the f--- up. They're not being punished, as Diane Ablonczy was last year, for being overly visible with controversial folks. Is that a tactical or theological development? I'd lean toward this being a political calculation by Harper and his advisers; political calculating being the the closest thing I've seen to a religious crusade in this regime. McDonald, as far as I've seen in interviews, seems to be making the same point: whether or not Stephen Harper agrees with the organized Christian right, he's sending some important signals to them in recent weeks. They seem to be happy about that, and so they should be.




Is me or this wrong