The following report was submitted to the December 6, 2022 General Membership Meeting.
Civic Service Union 52 Board of Directors Election 2022 October 24-28.
First, I would like to thank the office staff for their dedication and understanding of what needs to be done,
in order to hold an election. They always communicated with me to discuss what was being posted, or any
communications that were being sent out. Secondly, I would like to thank my assistant returning officer
Leigh Adams, for his assistance plus acting as a sounding board in discussing this election.
This election for Chief Shop Steward was done electronically and was all carried out through the company
Smart Ballot. Out of a possible 141 members who were eligible to cast a vote, only 91 ballots were cast.
This reflects 64.5%, which is higher than most Union elections in the past. Of the 91 members who logged
on there was one who did not cast a vote for either candidate, thus resulting in a spoiled ballot. Of the 90
good ballots, 49 were cast for Patrick Foss and 41 for Jolene Hutseal.
As the RO, this was the first time I have done an election electronically. I was very confident and trusted
Smart Ballot to run the election process for CSU 52. Having said that, there is still a need for the Union to
continue to update its bylaws, so that it reflects the change in procedure. Here are some of my
recommendations.
- The candidate forum, which this year was hosted by (Pat Marshall) of Smart Ballot, went well with
the exception that the whole forum was not recorded. I would like to see that the ARO either
co–facilitates the forum or manages the entire forum. Also, the ARO should be trained on the
procedures of hosting a forum. Either way, no candidate should speak until the session has been
placed into record mode. This way when their campaign video is placed on the Union web, it will
be complete; which did not happen this year.
- In Bylaw 5.01 a (iii) I would like to see the online voting changed to seven (7) calendar days and
still follow the not less than 14 or more than 24 days rule. This would allow voting to take place
over a weekend which gives the membership a greater voting period.
- Bylaw 5.01 a (iv) may only be needed in the event of a paper ballot. If bylaw 5.01 a (iii) is changed
to seven (7) days, I don’t think an Advance Poll will be necessary.
- Bylaw 5.01 (b). The need for an ARO is still valid, but I question the need of Scrutineers. Their
roll needs to be defined for electronic voting. If the Bylaws committee chooses to keep two set of
rules for elections, paper verses electronic, then keep the role for scrutineers.
- Bylaw 5.03 (a) (iv) needs an update and also clarification as to the amount of funding a candidate is
entitled to.
- Bylaw 5.05 Counting Procedure. Because electronic voting is 100% digital there are no physical
ballots to count. As the RO, it needs to be made clear to whoever is in charge of the voting system
that all final counts and documentation be forwarded to the RO first. This failed to happen this
year due to miscommunication with Smart Ballot. All candidates would be notified by the RO
right after receiving the documentation. After the candidates have been notified, then the Union
as a whole will be notified of the successful candidate.
As stated before, these are some recommendations. I believe the Bylaws Committee has some serious work
to do in order to have the Unions Bylaws updated to reflect the changing times.
Kim Woolgar
Returning Officer