No4 – March 2024
Getting more respect will require that we speak up,
declares the Delegates’ Assembly!
Following the negotiation session that took place in mid-February, we wondered whether the contradictions stemming from the MSSS representatives’ narrative were unintentional or, otherwise, a sign of bad faith. At the March 12 session, the MSSS continued to focus merely on one aspect of our dual status, that of learner, further demonstrating their complete lack of understanding of the scope of postgraduate status.
Treating us as if we were still medical students who should actually feel fortunate for getting a salary, that is simply too much! How did the MSSS react after our actuaries delivered a presentation at the Negotiating Table, showing how far we have strayed from SNPs, clinical nurses, respiratory therapists and orderlies hourly wages? Quite simply, that we should not be comparing ourselves to these groups, given even orderlies, unlike us, have actually completed their training. The latter speaks volumes as to how our role is being perceived.
Yet this doesn’t seem to be discouraging them from making it harder than ever to grant us vacation leaves as per the terms of our agreement, which actually goes to show that our status of learner is only brought back to the forefront as they see fit…
Below is a summary of the state of negotiations after 16 months
Main MSSS setback requests:
- Require members make vacation leave requests between 90 and 60 days in advance (explanations provided in support of this request did not hold water, but this would essentially be preventing us from planning any trips abroad);
- Ability to refuse vacation leaves for a “valid reason” rather than for serious disruptions to medical care delivery (members’ requests for vacations are already being denied, and we can’t imagine the result were it to become easier to deny vacation leave requests);
- Ability to refuse conference leave requests for a “valid reason”; (this constant harping on a “valid reason” for refusals without ever being able to substantiate what exactly justifies these requests);
- Adding constraints and delays with regard to releases for attending study sessions;
- Limiting the possibility of being exempted from weekend call duties when they are scheduled around vacation days;
- Ability to oppose the appointment of a CR/ACR for a “valid reason”;
- Etc.
Main requests denied by the MSSS:
- No concrete plans to alleviate the burden of call duties, most notably denying our request for a rest day (as with post calls) after seven consecutive days of work (as is the case with the majority of health care workers);
- Refusal of our request for a comparative appraisal of salaries of resident doctors against other jobs within the health care sector (according, particularly, to respective responsibilities, educational qualifications and workload), and for which such steps have already been undertaken;
- Refusal to release members from the Sunday on-call team where a change occurs in the setting for a rotation starting on Monday, and where said member is required to travel over 240 km;
- Refusal to provide “full hot” meals for night call duties;
- Etc.
Main issues yet to be addressed due to the MSSS’s inertia in moving forward with negotiations:
- Review the reimbursement scales for travel, accommodation and living expenses for rotations outside the home region (including an increase in the accommodation allowance, reinstatement of the right to reimbursements for UFMG members in intermediate regions, and an increase in the kilometric allowance);
- Increase in salaries and premiums (taking into account salaries for comparable positions, past and future inflation, etc.) and adding salary progression scales for R6s, R7s and R8s;
- Reimbursement of work tools;
- Etc.
Here’s what the FMRQ’s Delegates’ Assembly has to say
We reported the above to our delegates last weekend and like you, probably, the members of the Assembly were shocked by the situation and concluded that the only way to change the dynamics of these negotiations while gaining more respect from MSSS representatives was for members to make their voices heard and for them to express their dissatisfaction.
The Delegates’ Assembly thus voted unanimously (by secret ballot) for the following proposal:
“That the FMRQ take all necessary measures to ensure that all members are well informed about the course of our negotiations;
That the FMRQ enable the implementation of all means of mobilization and pressure tactics (excluding strikes) necessary in order to support the work of the negotiating committee;
That the FMRQ initiate a consultation process with its members to obtain strike mandates to be exercised as required and at the appropriate opportunity;
That funds from the FMRQ’s reserve fund be used to support negotiations.”
Delegates subsequently attended workshops on Saturday afternoon to discuss how best to operationalize its mandate in support of the negotiations.
You will be receiving further information over the coming weeks, namely via the FMRQ mobile app, so that together we can make our voices heard, while ensuring we get recognition for the work we do as well as significant improvements in our working conditions.
Your negotiating committee | 
