The development of acceptable responses for both parties for the employer and the Union could provide assistance to senior service managers who respond to the tweets received by @TTChelps and arise from the fact that the responses they have provided are not contrary to the collective agreement or TTC`s legal obligations. It may also be advantageous for the parties to develop guidelines acceptable to both parties as to when such information should be provided and whether tweeters should simply indicate that, if they wish to file a complaint, they should contact the TTC by telephone or through the TTC website (paragraph 146). The workers argued that conditions had been declining since the ratification of the last collective agreement and that the work ethic within the TTC was still on the path of discontent. Workers acknowledged the lack of good health premiums, arbitrary replacement of crews, lack of safety measures for operators and a number of other complaints compiled by the Union Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 113; Many argued that these would not be fully recognized by management. 1. Has the employer (the Toronto Transit Commission) not protected its employees from the nuisances on his company`s Twitter account (@TTChelps), which are contrary to the Ontario Human Rights Code and the collective agreement? You can call us at 416-393-3030 or go ow.ly/AKsGz, To share your experience (paragraph 26) Collective Agreement: May 8, 2014 – March 30, 2018 Following numerous complaints from Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) employees about abusive tweets on the company`s Twitter account (@TTChelps), the union filed a political complaint requesting the closure of the Twitter account. TTC`s Twitter account @TTChelps was first opened in 2009. The intent behind the Twitter account was to provide TTC users with service updates and information. As part of the Twitter account, TTC employees would react to customers` tweets all day long. The protocol for reacting to customer tweets should be courteous, informative and sensitive if appropriate. After being informed by TTC staff of abusive behaviour on the Twitter account, the union began monitoring the content of tweets sent to @TTChelps.
The union categorized the problematic tweets into nine different categories: the power struggle between management, the commissioners and the union finally ended with the resignation of Rick Ducharme on June 6, 2006. Ducharme had criticized the boards of the TTC board for interfering in labour negotiations, as there were closed meetings between the TTC commissioners and the union that excluded management; Management was the traditional negotiator with the union, not with the board of directors. With respect to all of these categories, the union argued that the reactions to customers` tweets were inappropriate and showed that the employer was on the client`s side before any type of lawsuit. Below are some examples of customer tweets and the TTC`s reaction: Based on tweet defilers in all of the categories mentioned above, the union claimed that the employer had not provided safe and harassment-free employment. As part of this statement, the union requested a number of corrective actions (see item 97), including the closure of the Twitter account @TTChelps. In that case, it was decided that the TTC did not protect its employees from harassment on his company`s Twitter account (@TTChelps), but the arbitrator did not order the account to be closed. Instead, there were recommendations on the type of reaction/action to take following an offensive or embarrassing tweet, as well as the injunction to develop a policy of responses on social networks.