• Can be absent or sick without excuse or mention all but four days per month (two days of city council, one day of community council, one day of committee). Attendance is only accounted for on those four days. 
• Is only accountable for absences in the four situations mentioned above, and can only be removed if they miss a full three months, and do not have the permission of their peers not to be present for longer than three full months. Receives full salary regardless of attendance. 
• Upon defeat or retirement a Councillor is entitled to a ’severance’ equal to one month pay for each year served. 

City Worker – Over a period of a minimum of ten years, they can ‘bank’ the equivalent to three months salary, based on perfect attendance and never taking a sick day. 

City Councillor – Over a period of four years, a Councillor earns four months severance, even if they were defeated by their constituents. After ten years or 2.5 terms, a Councillor is entitled to 10 months salary. 

CUPE 416 and 79 members are far more entitled to receive a payout of 50% of sick benefits they would otherwise have been entitled to than a defeated or retiring member of Council is to ’severance’. Councillor’s position on severance when compared to worker’s sick leave payouts is another example of embarrassing hypocrisy. Councillor’s taking their 2.5% pay increase, and refusing to freeze their own salaries makes it pretty much impossible for them to expect members of CUPE 416 and 79 to make wage concessions. 

These guys do not lead by example, and set such a bad example of leadership it’s unfair to expect workers to be the to not look out for their interests. Our elected leaders show no regard for basic principles of fairness in negotiating with CUPE 416 and 79.

If Councillors get severance, it’s hard to believe workers aren’t entitled to some kind of departure payment of their own. Considering workers earn their departure pay at 9 paid days per year (if they do not use them as sick days) and Councillors earn severance at one month per year (no matter what), the City negotiators should abandon their current position, and back away from the table quietly on this issue.

The real issue is Councillors have not done a good job of setting their own employment conditions, and in failing to do so have made it impossible for them to properly set those of the City’s workers.