• Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment (5)
  •  

NS: Government workers saying 'no' to move from Halifax

Published on June 20, 2012
Published on June 20, 2012
Alex Boutilier  RSS Feed
Nova Scotia

Latest News

See All Articles

Metro Halifax

According to the Nova Scotia Government and General Employees Union, 36 out of 71 government employees asked to relocate from Halifax to New Waterford, Shelburne or Truro will not follow their jobs.

Topics :
Nova Scotia Government , General Employees Union , Halifax , Nova Scotia , New Waterford

[HALIFAX, NS] — A large number of bureaucrats asked by the provincial NDP to move out of Halifax have declined the offer.

According to the Nova Scotia Government and General Employees Union, 36 out of 71 government employees asked to relocate from Halifax to New Waterford, Shelburne or Truro will not follow their jobs.

According to the union, only 39 of the 71 employees have made their intentions clear.

“To turn 71 peoples’ lives up in turmoil and to jeopardize the level of service because they want to have jobs in rural Nova Scotia, I don’t think that was a good trade-off,” union president Joan Jessome said.

Darrell Dexter’s NDP government announced earlier this year that employees from the departments of justice, agriculture, and fisheries and aquaculture would have their jobs moved from Halifax to rural areas.

According to government documents, the move was expected to cost between $1.5 million and $2.4 million. The government repeatedly stressed the move was not to save money, but to more effectively deliver services.

Of 23 justice department employees, 22 refused to move from Halifax to New Waterford, according to the union.

Justice Minister Ross Landry said he understands the request may be “traumatic” for some.

“We know that for some people to move it’s a very traumatic situation,” Landry told reporters on Tuesday. “It’s very demanding (on) family structures.”

The deadline for decisions has been extended to July 4. Jessome said she’s “optimistic” the affected employees will be able to find other jobs.

Comments

  • Username
    johnny smoke
    - June 24, 2012 at 13:42:06

    Dear NSGEU member, contrary to your beliefs you or your ilk do not run the government, make policy decisions, run for re election or are master of your own house. You work for me, I employ you to honour and obey the decisions made by elected members. If you do not or cannot full fill your duties other than cashing your pay cheque then do the sensible thing and resign, obviously you are too full of yourself to truly carry out your duties,. Do it today.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    The Dictator
    - June 23, 2012 at 08:37:49

    Yeah NSGEU member as if you actually knew the private sector and actual work. With public sector wages and benefits being twice that of the per capita GDP of this province it is great to know your Union wants its cake and to eat it too. I agree that New Waterford is a little far flung for maintenance enforcement but again if you were in the private sector you would have two options , move to your work or get another vocation. I frankly think much of the inefficiency of government has to do with the interference of union members that use the word Withing when the words should be Within. IF logic was in place in this province we would follow the course of many geopolitical territories and relocate the capital city. A new administrative centre in a Green Field site would lessen congestion and efficiency problems in HRM that cost this province.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    johnny smoke
    - June 21, 2012 at 10:01:42

    Once again we are shown the spectacle of disrespect by the public sector unions in this province. The blame has to go where the blame belongs. We the people of this province elected a government to attend to the business of this province, we did not elect a union or a union head to dictate who, what or where was it their best interests to do or not to do their jobs.. It is well known of the connection between the government and the public service union heads, it is time that the government took control of this situation, failing to do so is a violation of their fiduciary duty and undermines what little credence that they have left among the population at large.

    Submit a comment

  • Username
    JoyG
    - June 20, 2012 at 16:28:06

    The rest of us have to go where our employers need us - why should these people be any different? So their lives will be "uprooted" - wouldn't unemployment be worse? I shed no tears for these government workers with guaranteed pensions. Joan J is wrong as usual - this is one of the best moves this government has made. If it delivers better service to business and taxpayers, then so be it. Government does not exist for the convenience and preferences of its employees.

    Submit a comment

    • Username
      NSGEU Member
      - June 22, 2012 at 08:17:01

      Whenever an employer picks up and moves from any location, they DO NOT force their employees to move. They do offer jobs in the new location, and if workers choose not to move, they generally work with them to try to find other work withing their organization. So why should government be any different? In the case of these department moves, the jobs are there if the employees want to move as well. But, if they don't want to move, these employees will be offered other jobs, where they exist, in other sectors. Just so happens in this case the employer is the province of NS. So, this employer will try to find other jobs for these workers who choose not to move. They are NOT guaranteed another job in another department, but where openings exist, and the employee fits the requirements, they will be offered a position and will not have to go through a job competition for it. Most private sector employers who choose to move a part of their operation will do the same for their employees. So what are you talking about? And while I can't say I am opposed to moving jobs out of Halifax to rural NS, the fact is: many of the jobs moving, for instance to New Waterford in the case of the Maintenance Enforcement Program, they are jobs leaving one rural community--New Glasgow, Amherst--to another. Can you tell me just how this will "deliver better service to business and taxpayers"?

Submit a comment

Submit a comment (we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Bentley's List


Ad Finder

May 25th 2013

View our Newspaper ads
loading...

Click here to read the latest issue!
loading...

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts

Advertising