Woah dude!

It "NOT APPROPRIATE" to tell us the reasoning for a recommended 29 per cent pay raise?
That's enough of this crap.

As a taxpayer, I'd love to put a 'stop payment' on their paycheques until they fess up.

I'm with the waif on this. Does Ms. Paish take us all for complete and utter imbeciles? If publishing the detailed tables of an opinion poll could possibly be construed as a breach of confidentiality, how have Ipsos, Decima, Gallup, Mustel et al managed to get away with making a living at it for so long?

Perhaps she's really referring to client confidentiality, however, in which case you'll have to ask those who commissioned the review and paid the contract, Sean.

I'm sorry, though -- that's just the lamest answer.

I heard Sue Paish on CKNW a few weeks ago talking about this. Big Labor has nothing to fear on this topic. According to Paish all of the big labor Unions would not disclose how much their big wig blow hards make. Wonder why ?

If the pay of MLA’s should reflect average working people than the king of average working people Jim Sinclair should disclose what he makes. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Good point, Kevin. What does Sinclair make? What do other prominent labour union executives in BC make, ... Perley excepted of course!

That's one thing that has always irked me about union leaders. They are so quick to jump on government officials or the private sector about their publicly disclosed salaries, but never reveal their own salary.

A public sector union leader should have to disclose their salary. After all it's the taxpayer who is ultimately paying their salary. They should be treated the same as a executive from a publicly traded company or a government official.

Any union member has the right to know what his or her union leaders are being paid. And, unless they are brain dead, it isn't much of a leap to get the facts.

However, unless Kevin Larsen and Giver can show proof of membership in some specific union, then frankly, it's none of their damned business.

Giver, are you going to tell public servants how to spend their salary?

I'm at a lost as to what's the oddest part of your posts; your utter arrogance or your overwhelming ignorance of who owes who an explanation.

A short answer is if you don't pay dues, it ain't your party so go and organize your own protest.

Exactly what on earth are you saying, bleedingheart? A union member can ask what the salaries of the officials of their union are. But this data is not available to the general public. What kind of complete and utter BS is that?

Can a member ask, get an answer, and then publicize this data? Or would that be conduct "detrimental to the good of the order"?

Kevin, Budd, Giver, the day my tax dollars are paying Jim Sinclair's salary, I'll make it my business to ask what we're paying him. Until then, I'll leave that worry to the union folks who are footing that bill.

That's as relevant as demanding that business leaders reveal their compensation -- again, none of our business unless we happen to be stockholders.

This has nothing to do with Big Labour or Big Business and everything to do with good governance, transparency & accountability.

"Giver, are you going to tell public servants how to spend their salary?"

Uh, no and nowhere did I say I wanted to. But I do want to know what we are paying them to do their job.

Why are the "elite" union heads so reluctant to publicly disclose their income?

Who would Jim Sinclair disclose his income to? He doesn't have any individual members so who does he report to? Or can any union member in BC phone up the Fed and get Sinclair's salary.

Could a union member make their leaders salary public without losing their job?

That's as relevant as demanding that business leaders reveal their compensation -- again, none of our business unless we happen to be stockholders.

Excuse me, Dawn, but the salaries of all these people should be public. And now, even in Canada, securities regulators are beginning to demand that the salaries of publicly traded companies top officials be disclosed. The notion that we require transparency and accountability only in government is simply too silly for words.

Budd, you appear to have an extreme bug in your bed about union leadership compensation.

If you are empoyed, I'd recommend you join a union and then go and get the information. If you aren't then how can it be any of your business?

The salaries don't come from public coffers any more than the cost of a pizza comes from public coffers if a public servant buys one for his family with his own money.

Dues paid to a union are private funds regardless if the union represents public or private workers.

That publicly held companies are being pressed to disclose salaries and other perks is to be expected. Those pressing for the information represent the share holders, who ought to know.

But if you don't hold stock in XYZ Corp, why would it be oblidged to give you anything more than the time of day?

If you are not a union member then by demanding disclosure I'd suggest all you are doing is trying to interfere in something that is of none business of yours.

Busy Dudd-y comes to mind as the nicest apt description.

Giver, as I stated above to Budd, you aren't paying union leaders one red cent.

I'm actually amazed at the both of you who tend to post your comment here regularly not knowing even the basics of how unions operate and who they are answerable to.

It says an awful lot about the general ignorance about labour and workplace issues within the general population and once again highlights the needd for a bit of balance in high school business and socials programs where entrepreneurs and business people are treated as the only people who matter.