From Enraged to Engaged: Connecting Through Collaboration

1. From Enraged to Engaged: Connecting Through Collaboration Winnipeg Transit, Amalgamated Transit Union & Helen Maupin

2. The Winnipeg Transit Story THEN – August 2008 Organizational Structure • Top-down management hierarchy (ratio 1:350 bus operators) • Communication via bulletins and policy directives Organizational Culture • Efficiency driven (policing for compliance) • Blame and mistrust Organizational Leadership • Long-serving within both Union & Management • Entrenched viewpoints and win-lose attitudes • Adversarial problem-solving driven by animosity

3. The Tipping Point ACRISIS • Transit and ATU attempted to ratify a contentious contract (2008) and the membership rebelled. • Strike vote was taken. Management prepared for work shutdown. • To avert a strike, the CAO committed Management to collaborate with the Union “towards achieving positive change by involving employees in meaningful discussion about the changes needed.”

4. Governing Philosophy There are no bad people, only bad systems that frustrate good people from doing good work.

5. Governing Design Objectives Create an organizational culture of Engagement and Collaboration Facilitate a cultural shift from Command and Control to a Participative Workforce Increase productivity through development of a Motivated, Committed Workforce

6. Why a Collaborative Work System? • Innovation (creating) at the speed of light • Unpredictable business climate • Sophisticated, complex, demanding work • Rapid response to meet customers’ needs • Constantly learning new skills Multiple perspectives, knowledge and skills are required to solve these complexities. Hierarchies are designed to “repeat” rather than “create.”

7. Collaborative Culture • Trust and respect in all interactions • Egalitarian attitudes among all ranks • Shared leadership where all members take initiative • Valuing of diverse perspectives • Commitment to the success of all, not just oneself • Valuing of truth and truth telling • Commitment to active learning and continuous improvement of the whole organization • Personal responsibility and accountability

8. Qualitative Benefits of CWSs • Greater commitment among all stakeholders – members/employees, managers and union • A flatter, more flexible structure adapts to changing business conditions • Fewer layers greatly improves vertical and horizontal communication • Staffing costs are reduced

9. Quantitative Benefits of CWSs • Monsanto: 50% productivity increase over 5 years (Chemical Processing, 1990) • Celestica, $3B chip manufacturer: 100% productivity increase without additional labor or equipment; manufacturing cycle time reduced eight-fold; quality improved by a factor of two (Dyck & Halpern, 1999) • Pratt & Whitney, aircraft engine components manufacturer: defects dropped 30%; operating costs fell 20%. (Wall Street Journal, 1996) • MTS: 0 grievances in one year with a cost saving exceeding $1M (Painter & Maupin, 1990)

10. Created Transit/ATU’s CWS • Neutral 3rd party engaged to facilitate the process • Transit/ATU Working Conditions Committee established • 3 Management reps + 3 Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) reps • Focus groups held (over 60 bus operators) • Mistrust & miscommunication identified as key issues • Prioritized direction and actions

11. Create CWS • Transit & ATU WCC expanded • 7 members/employees – selected by 1000+ workforce • 3 management reps + 3 ATU reps • Task groups established along priority themes Employee/Management/Union relations Schedules Health & Safety • Mandate for WCC defined Improve working conditions Improve operating efficiencies Improve customer service

12. Built relationships • Rebuilding trust between management, ATU and bus operators Policy grievance on bus stop announcements resolved by withdrawal of individual disciplinary action Video surveillance camera policy presented to workforce and implemented without resistance Implemented a management/ATU/bus operator pre-grievance issue review process New process to fast track and resolve on-street issues brought forward by bus operators; previously bus operator issues were “filed” and never addressed

13. Built connections Building connections • Improved communication with bus operators Face-to-face Communication Circles with management, ATU and bus operators Transit/ATU WCC bulletin boards E-mail links between task groups and individual bus operators New employee web site – inTransit Dedicated staff role to Transit/ATU communications

14. Built morale Building morale • So You Think You Can Drive? Focus groups revealed low moral, management and ATU were out of touch with the challenges of operating a bus and bullying was the perceived mode of conflict resolution. A regular draw where bus operators win a ½ shift off with pay and choose an Operations Manager or ATU Executive Member to replace them. • Tripartite Collaborative Work System ProcessCommitment to the partnership as the way of doing business • HRMAM Connect Conference – Best Practices

15. Built new collaborative work systems Building new systems • Collaboration with other Transit Divisions Scheduling department and Transit/ATU WCC jointly researched changes for a new rostering and day-off system • Transit Assault Prevention Programdeveloped and provided to 1000+ bus operators • Critical Incident Stress Management Programimplemented with a peer support system

16. Built new collaborative work systems Building new systems • Face-to-face, on-site communication circles • Consultation workshops Engaged in redesign workshops with over 600 bus operators • Shifted the progressive discipline program (Counsel and Guidance) from punishing failure to coaching success Individual circumstances considered over consistency Performance interviews emphasize retraining and motivation Accident adjudication emphasizes skill development

17. NOW (2010 +): Key Indicators of Success • Employee Survey (February 2010) confirmed significant improvements in: • Respect and consideration of supervisors • Receiving credit for a job well done • Understanding the need for work-life balance • Improving working conditions -- safety and technology

18. NOW (2010 +): Key Indicators of Success 2009 Saving: $156,762.00

19. NOW (2010 +): Key Indicators of Success ATU $152,000. Transit* $304,000. $456,000. $156,762. $612,762.* * conservative estimates

20. NOW (2010 +) • New Scheduling and Day off System Designed to address priority issues identified by bus operators Involved over 370 bus operators in consultation workshops Held a Mock Sign-up to preview proposed system • ATU membership vote on new system • 88% Voted NO & 12% Voted YES • WHAT HAPPENED?

21. NOW (2010 +) • Consultation Workshops with bus operators revealed these themes: • Mistrust of management and ATU -- bus operators were not involved in designing their new system Keep working together with bus operators to make needed changes • Proposed change was too big, start small with incremental steps • Too much information; too little information; more communication • Mock sign-up was too confusing • Fear of the unknown • The status quo is fine – you cannot make everyone happy

22. NOW (2010 +) Key Indicators of Success • Organizational Culture Change • Increased investment in employee engagement • Improved responsiveness to employee issues • New leadership style with a focus on training, coaching and skill building • Increased trust between ATU and management • Improved problem-solving when dealing with employee performance issues • Increased decision-making for bus operators • Commitment from ATU, Management and Bus Operators to improve working conditions using CWSs

23. Lessons Learned for 2010 + • Never assume • Create change by thinking outside of the box • Creativity = complexity + diversity • Learn by doing • Learn from disappointments • Believe in the power of 3 • Believe in the process • Believe in the impossible

24. Thank you for participating