CIBC faces overtime lawsuit

[getmail99]

http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/221663


CIBC faces overtime lawsuit

Jun 05, 2007 06:20 PM
Tobi Cohen
Canadian press

In what's being called a potentially precedent-setting case in Canada, a bank teller has taken on one of the country's biggest financial institutions with a class-action lawsuit that alleges CIBC fails to pay overtime to its customer service staff.

Dara Fresco said Tuesday that she's owed some $50,000 for the two-and-a-half to 15 hours a week of additional work she's been required to perform as a teller and personal banker since 1998.

The 34-year-old Toronto woman, who has worked at more than a dozen CIBC branches, points out that's a lot more than her current annual salary of $30,715.

"I've been working for the bank for almost 10 years and I figured enough is enough already. I wanted to get paid for the overtime," Fresco said at a news conference Tuesday, just hours after the lawsuit was filed in Ontario Superior Court.

The $600-million class-action suit is expected to cover an estimated 10,000 current and former non-management, non-unionized CIBC employees across Canada, many of whom are women.

"What is unfair is that my colleagues and I are rarely being paid for the overtime that we are working, and that's just not right," Fresco alleged.

"I decided to seek out legal advice to see, mainly, if this was allowed and to find out what my options were ... because it isn't fair to work and not be paid for your time."

Lawyer Douglas Elliott said such lawsuits are more common in the United States and suggests this one is the "largest unpaid overtime class action in Canadian legal history."

Studies show many employers routinely violate federal labour laws by not paying their staff at least time-and-a-half for working more than eight hours a day or 40 hours a week, Elliot said.

"If successful, it will set an important precedent for those working in other areas where it is a problem."

In a statement issued shortly after the lawsuit was filed, CIBC said it has a "clearly defined" overtime policy that "exceeds legislative requirements."

"CIBC employees are the cornerstone of our strength as a company," the statement reads. "We have comprehensive compensation, benefit and employment programs to ensure we attract, retain and reward our employees and create an environment where they can excel."

The bank said it would review the claim "in detail" before commenting further.

Fresco, who continues to work as head teller at a Toronto CIBC branch, said she expects the road ahead to be rocky but that she felt it was important to come forward.

"This is going to be a very long process and I want to ensure my fellow colleagues and everyone else involved that I'm in it for the long haul," she said, adding she's a good employee and is hopeful there won't be any backlash.

"I have every intention of seeing this through to the end."

The statement of claim alleges CIBC non-management employees are assigned heavy workloads that cannot be completed within standard working hours, and that, at least in Fresco's case, she was told not to claim any of it as overtime.

"The claim alleges this practice is widespread, systemic and that it violates both the class member's individual contracts with the employer as well as federal labour law," Louis Sokolov, a labour lawyer involved in the case, said.

"To date there has been little effort made by the government to enforce this law for the benefit of people like Ms. Fresco."

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

The CIBC has 30 days to file a statement of defence, but could choose to wait until the class-action suit has been certified – which Elliott said could take as a long as a year.

Elliott said there's a team of lawyers across the country working on the case and is urging current and former front line CIBC staff who feel they've been short-changed to come forward.


I know someone who was a teller never paid ot.

[sixer]

Any people work at CIBC? Comments about employer?

[bleeet]

I expect employees at other banks to follow

[sleepyguy]

Gotta wonder what the environment is like in her office right now... either she's the hero and no one talks to her. Good for her standing up though, I know that if our Finance staff ever did this... oh boy... i'm guessing the claim would be like 50K for one year!

[ItemFinder]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.

[MrDisco]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.

congrats. you're well on your way to being management material.

[boyoflondon]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.


wow! just wow!

Shoot yourself right now!

[plucky duck]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.

flamebait much??

I used to work at RBC as a teller and often stayed past closing. I rarely bothered to claim in on my time sheet. I knew I could but I didn't. At the same time, I wasn't told explicitly or encouraged by management to log it. My hours per week and days when I work and what time is all fixed every week. I never do have to log anything in order to get paid, it's a systematic system. If you're late or have to run errands that day you simply make up the hours later, no deductions. OT has to be manually entered. Working at Royal's call centre, we get paid OT on top of regular salary if we stay late or pick up an extra day. I'd say it's more than fair, at least in RBC's case.

[madknife]

I just started working at CIBC in May, on the Retail Market side in Commerce Court.
So far, I have to say that I am very satisfied, from the environment to the atmosphere to the people around me. But then of couse, i'm not a teller and i don't work in a branch.
Personally, I don't have any problem at all with working unpaid overtime -- as long as it does not get ridiculous and before i know it, i'm working 100 hour weeks as i had been a few years ago at Ontario Place...

[HeartbreakerP]

Reason they shouldn't get paid is because they work too slow.

[madknife]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.

From my experience and what I have observed from my colleagues, i have to admit that the tellers are not the most ingenious and capable people in the world. They are even, from time to time, incapable of performing what they are hired to do in the first place - to provide product and service information and to help for the customer.
However, they are NOT machines and the DO NOT even serve the same purpose as machines. They serve a very important role in the bank and I am more than certain the banks will not function without them - just consider why not everyone, or even a significant portion of our population has switched over to PCF, which provides 100% free banking and better interest rates than any full service banks.
Again, i don't mind working overtime at all, but then I do get paid much more than they do, and I do sit in a nice office and everything... Even if you don't agree with their actions, at least you have to acknowledge that they're better than the TTC workers that go on strike every other day on almost no grounds except for "i think the weather calls for a strike today...". At the very least the lawsuit will not cost you your exam or strangle you somewhere in the city...

[madknife]

it's a systematic system.


lol....

[Corinthein]

This is a joke. There are times in any job where you need to put in extra time in order to get your work done. When you sign the agreement letter which clearly outlines the demands of the job you know what you are getting into. If you don't like it or merely feel the 'above and beyond work' you are doing is unfair then file a complaint with HR or better yet seek another job. HR has a huge presence within banks and investigates these types of complaints fully.
This is just an example of someone whom is bitter after not amounting to anything after 10 years of service and seeks compensation for her lack of competence. Why not sue a major corporation to make up for your shortcomings?

[rfdrfd]

Bill Caroll radio this morning had this topic and a CIBC teller lady called in and 100% agreed. They said they hardly get any lunch breaks because they are with a customer, and can't just turn around and leave them. Then someone else asks them to do something, etc... then lunch hour is over.

She says she has to work at least 1-2 hrs over time every day on average, and the atmosphere is if you say NO, you are gonna be fired soon.


I don't work there, so can't comment. But I imagine lots of these things happen a lot. Companies need to realize it and compensate employees accordingly. There are labor laws in Canada.

[ah_long]

how do i go forward..
the working conditions is horrible..
i need to join them to get my OT pay back

[BelligerentDog]

Some of the comments in this post are truly juvenile. You sound like st780 or whatever the hell his name is. "Railroad workers are lazy and get paid too much!"

[mart242]

What do you expect from people who go on break when there's a line up of 20 people at the bank? Or stay there stamping frigging paperwork while the line-up grows.. :mad:

[Menace]

The tellers should finish the friggin line up first before their break. It's the service job they are in.

What do you expect from people who go on break when there's a line up of 20 people at the bank? Or stay there stamping frigging paperwork while the line-up grows.. :mad:

[raptorsfever]

http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/221663

Studies show many employers routinely violate federal labour laws by not paying their staff at least time-and-a-half for working more than eight hours a day or 40 hours a week, Elliot said.

I thought it was over 44 hours a week?

Overtime Pay
For every hour you work over 44 hours a week, your employer must pay you at least 1½ times your regular rate of pay ("time and a half"). Even if you agree in writing to work more than 48 hours a week, your employer must pay you overtime pay for every hour you work over 44 hours a week.

You can agree with your employer in writing to average the hours you work over periods of two or more weeks to calculate overtime pay. If you sign an agreement, your employer must also get approval from the Ministry of Labour's Director of Employment Standards. If you do not want to have your overtime hours averaged, you do not have to sign an agreement.

These agreements must have an expiry date and cannot be cancelled unless both you and your employer agree.


I got that from Ministry of Labour site. Link (http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/hours/info_hours.html)

[Menace]

You are right. I know about this for years.

I thought it was over 44 hours a week?



I got that from Ministry of Labour site. Link (http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/hours/info_hours.html)

[MrDisco]

Reason they shouldn't get paid is because they work too slow.

What do you expect from people who go on break when there's a line up of 20 people at the bank?

Right. All bank teller and CSRs are just lazy and they have no interest in serving customers. :rolleyes:

This is a joke. There are times in any job where you need to put in extra time in order to get your work done.

Once or twice sure. It should not be something that happens on a regular basis. Ever consider that they may be understaffed?


If you don't like it or merely feel the 'above and beyond work' you are doing is unfair then file a complaint with HR or better yet seek another job. HR has a huge presence within banks and investigates these types of complaints fully.


shocking as it may be, but try reading the full story. The person in question did go to HR who simply bounced the matter back to her manager. And despite what you may think, HR sometimes has very little teeth or political power (and no where does office politics rear its ugly head than in a large corporation).


This is just an example of someone whom is bitter after not amounting to anything after 10 years of service and seeks compensation for her lack of competence. Why not sue a major corporation to make up for your shortcomings?

No this is an example of a major corporation taking advantage of employees and not doing the right thing. If this person was as incompetent as you claim, she would have been let go years ago during their annual review process.

Further:

Overtime work is routine throughout the banking sector, former bank employees say, and demands to work unpaid time are exacerbated if individual bank managers try to keep costs low because their own performance bonuses are based on branch profitability.

David Soulis, a retired Royal Bank of Canada branch manager in Port Hawkesbury, N.S., said many factors lead to frequent requirements for overtime work in banking, including possible discrepancies in cash balances that require after-hours recounts, or unscheduled cash counts for security purposes.

He said there are also frequent sales and staff meetings to explain new products or procedures, which must be held outside branch hours so all staff can attend.

"That's all extra time that is outside what the customer sees," he said. "There are a whole lot of other things behind the scenes that take place."

He said during his career he saw some managers who were "gluttons" who wanted to reap the largest possible annual bonuses — and branch profits are usually one factor in earning those bonuses.

"I went through 35 years of it, and I know there were times when management said, 'You can't have any overtime. You can get off an hour early some time or whatever.' But that 'some time' thing never happened."

Mr. Miedema notes that several major employers in the United States — including Wal-Mart, Starbucks, Taco Bell and Radio Shack — have been forced to pay massive retroactive overtime costs to employees.

[madknife]

She says she has to work at least 1-2 hrs over time every day on average, and the atmosphere is if you say NO, you are gonna be fired soon.

I think the flip side of this is that if you detest the environment and the OT so much, why don't you quit and find a new job that suits your needs more? I mean, it's not like you're a single mother working in Tim Hortons trying to support 3 chilren....


Companies need to realize it and compensate employees accordingly. There are labor laws in Canada.

Companies do. some do it differently than others. some just pay you OT and forget about it. some provide you with more opportunites. some, which is where i am, the work is so interesting that i don't mind overtime at all.
of course, my situation may be different than the tellers', and as i have said, they have a right to raise the issue. but i believe it's far from a sweat shop here in a bank.

[raptorsfever]

My cousin works for CIBC. Her manager knows about the overtime hours, but she just turns a blind eye. She even told them that she will be no longer paying for overtime, but two hours later her manager was complaining about the work that's filing up. Go figure. :|

Didn't CIBC announced last week that they've made $800 million in profits? ;)

[goffeebeans]

The tellers should finish the friggin line up first before their break. It's the service job they are in.

Well then your scheduling gets all messed up. People miss their breaks/lunches, so when they do "finish the line" everyone is sent on break, but then a new line forms and now they're well understaffed cause everyone is out.

[madknife]

Didn't CIBC announced last week that they've made $800 million in profits? ;)

judging from you smiley, i trust that you meant it facetiously. But i've seen a lot of threads (including the rant about bank fees) where many think that as long as corporations are making profits, they should decrease fees, increase wages, and basically share the pie with everyone else.

The point that has to be understood is that the corporations exist to make profits -- just like we here on RFD exist to find deals :D -- and never to "provide service" or "satisfy customers" or "save the environment". They have their shareholders to satisfy, so that they can continue to operate and then offer us more products and services. The competitive, and sometimes free, products and services are a means to an end, and never an end in themselves.

To grossly simplify a complex process, if everytime a bank reaps in a profit, they increase wages and lower fees, they'll soon not make any profits, and then no one is going to invest in them, and they'll go out of business, and then we won't have any banks left.

[MrDisco]

I think the flip side of this is that if you detest the environment and the OT so much, why don't you quit and find a new job that suits your needs more?


Because its wrong? That's the exact argument used by companies with poor safety records - if the workers don't like it they can quit.

Maybe she actually enjoys her work and her colleagues and simply wants workers to be compensated fairly.

[madknife]

Well then your scheduling gets all messed up. People miss their breaks/lunches, so when they do "finish the line" everyone is sent on break, but then a new line forms and now they're well understaffed cause everyone is out.

that would be a scheduling issue the branch, or the head office, should deal with. by examining historical patterns, it is possible to create a schedule that will minimize the likelihood of an extra long line-up, and yet allow everyone to get a break somewhere - maynot be at noon, but perhaps all between 11am and 1pm.

[madknife]

Because its wrong? That's the exact argument used by companies with poor safety records - if the workers don't like it they can quit.

Maybe she actually enjoys her work and her colleagues and simply wants workers to be compensated fairly.

if she enjoys her work and her colleagues, then my argument doesn't apply? my premises was that if she hated it all, she should get a new job.

it's a fine balance between finding a well paid job and a well liked job - with the ultimate prize being, of course, you like it and you get paid heaps. but that doesn't always occur.

i like what i do here at cibc, and so i don't mind working overtime, even if i'm not being paid for it. since she's sueing cibc, she clearly deems the work not interesting enough for her to work the overtime. hence my argument, but with the caveat that she is more than entitled to bring the situation to public knowledge and her cause to the court of law.

again, to reiterate: i am by no means arguing that she is a pathetic whiner that deserves to be fired, as can be seen by my first few replies. i am merely trying to steer a middle course and present the facts that i know and the thoughts that i have as a cibc employee

[raptorsfever]

judging from you smiley, i trust that you meant it facetiously. But i've seen a lot of threads (including the rant about bank fees) where many think that as long as corporations are making profits, they should decrease fees, increase wages, and basically share the pie with everyone else.
The point that has to be understood is that the corporations exist to make profits -- just like we here on RFD exist to find deals :D -- and never to "provide service" or "satisfy customers" or "save the environment". They have their shareholders to satisfy, so that they can continue to operate and then offer us more products and services. The competitive, and sometimes free, products and services are a means to an end, and never an end in themselves.
To grossly simplify a complex process, if everytime a bank reaps in a profit, they increase wages and lower fees, they'll soon not make any profits, and then no one is going to invest in them, and they'll go out of business, and then we won't have any banks left.

I totally agree with you. But it should work in to certain extent. Judging by the lawsuit claims, they should be paying the employees overtime if they did work the "claimed" overtime hours. If they're intentionally cheating their employees like what my cousin is experiencing then I think that's just wrong.

[YnD]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.

Idiotcy right here.
I ALWAYS use tellers for banking services unless I'm just withdrawing cash from an ABM. They are more reliable.

Screw CIBC....go with Scotiabank... the "Virgin Mobile" of the banking industry. Free banking account with unlimited TELLER transactions and hot girls to do the banking for you :)

[madknife]

Once or twice sure. It should not be something that happens on a regular basis. Ever consider that they may be understaffed?

very likely. cibc, as you probably know, is not one of the best run banks in canada. it's had more than its share of problems, from the stolen laptops to the fax incident. it is very possible that the branch she worked at is not run properly and led to a disproportionately large number of overtime hours for her.


If this person was as incompetent as you claim, she would have been let go years ago during their annual review process.


i wouldn't take that as granted! there are a large number of incompetent workers everywhere (not to imply that she is one of them)... from SBD, FS and BB who don't know their PM policy, to tellers who can't help their customers to get the right products they want, etc etc. it is extremely to find a replacement for someone and train them in this industry as opposed to tim hortons... so... not everyone is as great as one might hope!

[Corinthein]

shocking as it may be, but try reading the full story. The person in question did go to HR who simply bounced the matter back to her manager. And despite what you may think, HR sometimes has very little teeth or political power (and no where does office politics rear its ugly head than in a large corporation).

No this is an example of a major corporation taking advantage of employees and not doing the right thing. If this person was as incompetent as you claim, she would have been let go years ago during their annual review process.


Well I guess someone needed to play Devils Advocate. However you are correct the politics in large corporations such as banks is an ugly business. Her competency level probably peaked at the teller level hence the reason she was kept on for 10 years. I mean lets face it after that time she should be able to do her job blindfolded. With no goals or prospects to move further up the ladder its relatively easy to maintain that role. If she didn't like it or felt she was being taken advantage of she should have taken a proactive role in bettering her career and/or found a different company....after all she had 10 years

[15-20_God]

Her competency level probably peaked at the teller level hence the reason she was kept on for 10 years. I mean lets face it after that time she should be able to do her job blindfolded. With no goals or prospects to move further up the ladder its relatively easy to maintain that role.

not necessarily, i've known tellers that have refused advancement because they liked their job. it provided a decent income, excellent health and retirement plans, little stress, and flexible work hours which comes in very handy if you have children. not everyone working at the bank aspires to be a ceo, some are simply content making $35,000 with flexible hours.

[kurtblak]

Well I guess someone needed to play Devils Advocate. However you are correct the politics in large corporations such as banks is an ugly business. Her competency level probably peaked at the teller level hence the reason she was kept on for 10 years. I mean lets face it after that time she should be able to do her job blindfolded. With no goals or prospects to move further up the ladder its relatively easy to maintain that role. If she didn't like it or felt she was being taken advantage of she should have taken a proactive role in bettering her career and/or found a different company....after all she had 10 years

Generalize much?

[Lone_Prodigy]

For customer-service jobs, breaks should definitely not be scheduled. Rather, the employee must exercise judgement and take their break at an appropriate time. If the bank has a huge line, the teller should delay their break.

I work in a grocery store, and I don't schedule my breaks. If there is little to do and the store is relatively quiet, I'll take my break. Sometimes I even skip my break if the store is busy. It's part of the variability of the job.

In this case, I guess if you're making a living from your job, some compensation should be given. Since I work at the store part-time, a few bucks won't make or break me.

Of course there are two sides to every story. It will be interesting to hear how CIBC responds.

[madknife]

For customer-service jobs, breaks should definitely not be scheduled. Rather, the employee must exercise judgement and take their break at an appropriate time. If the bank has a huge line, the teller should delay their break.

For washroom breaks, yes, most definitely. However, on a bigger scale, everything should be scheduled -- be it a production line or a service representative. If historically, the branch is dead at noon, but always have a rush of people coming in at 12:30, how would you, as a customer feel, when you go in there and find 15 people in front of you, but all the tellers are off on a 30 min lunch break because they saw the branch dead at from 12:00 to 12:15, and decided it's a good time to take a break? everyone will be waiting much longer because of that lack of proper scheduling.

[ghostryder]

I thought it was over 44 hours a week?



I got that from Ministry of Labour site. Link (http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/hours/info_hours.html)

Banks are Federally regulated not Provincially. Provincial labour regulations don't apply.

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/spila/clli/eslc/hours(e).pdf

[rpeatt]

I thought it was over 44 hours a week?



I got that from Ministry of Labour site. Link (http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/hours/info_hours.html)

All financial institutions fall under federal labour laws, not provincial ones.

[Narci]

Here's an interesting tidbit...did you know TD bank has 2 branches that are unionized? No way in hell would those 2 branches get away with stuff like this.

[Narci]

Well I guess someone needed to play Devils Advocate. However you are correct the politics in large corporations such as banks is an ugly business. Her competency level probably peaked at the teller level hence the reason she was kept on for 10 years. I mean lets face it after that time she should be able to do her job blindfolded. With no goals or prospects to move further up the ladder its relatively easy to maintain that role. If she didn't like it or felt she was being taken advantage of she should have taken a proactive role in bettering her career and/or found a different company....after all she had 10 years

Yup..not really. Some people work a job for the sake of working.

I.e. Husband brings home HUGE income and wide stays home. Wife gets bored and decides to take a job just to busy herself.

Some people are comfortable where they are because money isn't the issue with them. Maybe the person who is suing CIBC is doing it for the principle of the matter and for the rights of other bank tellers she works with?

[chicadam]

All retail focused banks have front line employees working OT. This would be TD and CIBC. I know people that work for those banks and they all work OT without pay. That the nature of the business and working without a union. As long as its not ridiculous hours, this should be expected.

How could a bank teller work 15 hours of OT a week? What warrants the nature of her work to put in that much OT :confused:

If should was suing for principle the money should all go to charity. I highly doubt this is her intent.

[HeartbreakerP]

[QUOTE=MrDisco;5184275]Right. All bank teller and CSRs are just lazy and they have no interest in serving customers. :rolleyes:

As a former Manager of Customer Service at TD, if they are working over time I will call them slow and lazy (except mid month and month end). I've never held my CSR's beyond the amount of scheduled hours they work. What are they doing after hours that require so much over time? Balancing? Why should I pay someone 1 hour of over time when it should only take 15 minutes? That's like paying for incompetence.

However, in all fairness TD cut a lot of man hours from management and the CSR side. But I have always signed the over time sheet when warranted, but not for incompetence but it has never, ever totaled more than 1 hours/week (unless someone called in sick). But 15 hours a week is absurd.

[shumwun]

[QUOTE=MrDisco;5184275]Right. All bank teller and CSRs are just lazy and they have no interest in serving customers. :rolleyes:

As a former Manager of Customer Service at TD, if they are working over time I will call them slow and lazy (except mid month and month end). I've never held my CSR's beyond the amount of scheduled hours they work. What are they doing after hours that require so much over time? Balancing? Why should I pay someone 1 hour of over time when it should only take 15 minutes? That's like paying for incompetence.

However, in all fairness TD cut a lot of man hours from management and the CSR side. But I have always signed the over time sheet when warranted, but not for incompetence but it has never, ever totaled more than 1 hours/week (unless someone called in sick). But 15 hours a week is absurd.


yes, 15 hours/week is absurd... and likely the result of extremely poor management. i blame all unjustifiable overtime to BAD MANAGEMENT!!!



i remember working on average about 6-10 hours of OT every week as CSR, and i am by no means incompetent, slow or lazy.

let's see... i took care of 90% of customers - transactions, information, or access to safety deposit boxes (so-called co-workers lounged in comfy chairs at the back - and i wondered why they only had < 10 transactions a day), signature verifications for cheques, balanced/loaded/emptied/processed deposits from the atm machines, processed night deposit and quick deposit, dealt with coin orders, balanced treasury & coin holds, put away everything in the vault, did filing, handled mail/customer inquiries, did balance certs, handled inter-bank requests for copies or whatever else, and whatever "sundry duties" there happened to be ...

and so-called management didn't manage people/work very well... actually, they didn't manage at all. they didn't care. and unfortunately, i was stupid enough to just do as i'm told... all the above duties. i never questioned it and completed them daily as part of my responsibilities.

but those were days when i was young, naive and gullible. and i guess i put in a lot of hours for volunteer work - i only wish it was for a better cause...

[goffeebeans]

that would be a scheduling issue the branch, or the head office, should deal with. by examining historical patterns, it is possible to create a schedule that will minimize the likelihood of an extra long line-up, and yet allow everyone to get a break somewhere - maynot be at noon, but perhaps all between 11am and 1pm.

Yes, branches/should are already scheduled as you suggested, but there is always deviations of when there might be long line ups. So as I mentioned before, scheduling gets messed up if everyone waits till the line finishes.

[QUOTE=HeartbreakerP;5188290]
yes, 15 hours/week is absurd... and likely the result of extremely poor management. i blame all unjustifiable overtime to BAD MANAGEMENT!!!


Though difference is shes not just a regular teller/csr rep, the lady is the Head Teller (a supervisor) for that branch.

[konfusion666]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.

You have no clue what you're babbling about.

I work for a competitor of CIBC, (so I should be "glad" they're getting hit by a lawsuit, heh) but as someone who works in the I.T./Systems side of things - in fact, the group that develops and implements the ATM infrastructure - I know there are a huge number of things that CSRs do which can't be replaced by ATM machines.

Not to mention that CSRs are a great stepping-stone to learn the basics of the industry before moving up to more advanced positions like FSM, commercial accounts, etc.

[Narci]

You have no clue what you're babbling about.

I work for a competitor of CIBC, (so I should be "glad" they're getting hit by a lawsuit, heh) but as someone who works in the I.T./Systems side of things - in fact, the group that develops and implements the ATM infrastructure - there are a huge number of things that CSRs do which can't be replaced by ATM machines.
Not to mention that CSRs are a great stepping-stone to learn the basics of the industry before moving up to more advanced positions like FSM, commercial accounts, etc.

CSR's have thier place in a bank. They all have mostly become sales people. The growth within the bank (one I use to work for) came from front line people who introduce new or existing products that would suit the customer's needs.

[ClubberLang]

mkay to all those out there arguing that the employees should simplty "suck it up":
You clearly place no value on labour law that protects people from exploitative practices on the behalf of their employer. Methinks you should lobby to have existing labour codes reversed and tell me how well your employer treats you as a result :)

[weedb0y]

My cousin works for CIBC. Her manager knows about the overtime hours, but she just turns a blind eye. She even told them that she will be no longer paying for overtime, but two hours later her manager was complaining about the work that's filing up. Go figure. :|

Didn't CIBC announced last week that they've made $800 million in profits? ;)


Banks are a sales organizations and managers get their pay cuts when their bank expenses are over a certain limit.

[raptorsfever]

Banks are a sales organizations and managers get their pay cuts when their bank expenses are over a certain limit.

What is that suppose to mean? Luckily, I work for a reputable company that knows how to compensate their employees when it's deserved. Simply turning a blind eye and refusing to compensate the employees for doing overtime hours should be punishable. I hope the CIBC employees will get what they deserve.

For those people that thinks CIBC employees should just tolerate the wrongful actions, please take some time to review the labour laws. My HR professor once told me that if we're not going to fight for our rights, we will lose them. Labour laws are there to protect the employees who might feel violated.

I'm so glad that I know about my rights, so I won't feel vulnerable when things like that happen to me. I applaud the CIBC employees for standing up for what's right. I hope everyone will do the same when it happens to them. "If you're not going to stand up for yourself, who will?"

[weedb0y]

What is that suppose to mean? Luckily, I work for a reputable company that knows how to compensate their employees when it's deserved. Simply turning a blind eye and refusing to compensate the employees for doing overtime hours should be punishable. I hope the CIBC employees will get what they deserve.

For those people that thinks CIBC employees should just tolerate the wrongful actions, please take some time to review the labour laws. My HR professor once told me that if we're not going to fight for our rights, we will lose them. Labour laws are there to protect the employees who might feel violated.

I'm so glad that I know about my rights, so I won't feel vulnerable when things like that happen to me. I applaud the CIBC employees for standing up for what's right. I hope everyone will do the same when it happens to them. "If you're not going to stand up for yourself, who will?"


What it means that banks need to restructure their pay structures to ensure that this does not happen. If manager is getting hit for 'extra costs', then ofcourse, instead of increasing efficicency, he will instead go for the most obvious. I know one of my jobs had a structure like that and it rarely ever favoured the long-term goal of an organization but did work for them in the short-term.

[raptorsfever]

What it means that banks need to restructure their pay structures to ensure that this does not happen. If manager is getting hit for 'extra costs', then ofcourse, instead of increasing efficicency, he will instead go for the most obvious. I know one of my jobs had a structure like that and it rarely ever favoured the long-term goal of an organization but did work for them in the short-term.

I expect far better from CIBC. After all, they're a huge corporation that should know all of the legal ethics in business. Oh well.. hopefully, CIBC will structure their system better if that is really the case about managers getting hit for extra costs.

For the person that brought up that CIBC have shareholders to impress. Errr umm.. Do you think the shareholders will be happy to know that CIBC is being sued for this? ;) I hate to be the manager of the branch in question right now. He is walking in a very thin ice and I believe his days in CIBC is numbered.

[gordholio]

Get a real job. Tellers aren't needed anymore when there is an AUTOMATED teller machine. This is just sour grapes, because these people don't have the proper education to do something more useful with their lives.

Pretty soon, your "real" job will be done by a machine.
They you'll have to get a "real" job - whatever that is. :twisted:

[batman321123]

I think the flip side of this is that if you detest the environment and the OT so much, why don't you quit and find a new job that suits your needs more? I mean, it's not like you're a single mother working in Tim Hortons trying to support 3 chilren....


Umm I don't know... maybe cause they're required by the law to pay for OT work? If someone doesn't like the job they're doing, they should quit. But if someone doesn't like it because of something being done by their employer that contravenes the law, that employee shouldn't have to quit -- the employer should start obeying the law.

[chicadam]

I expect far better from CIBC. After all, they're a huge corporation that should know all of the legal ethics in business. Oh well.. hopefully, CIBC will structure their system better if that is really the case about managers getting hit for extra costs.

For the person that brought up that CIBC have shareholders to impress. Errr umm.. Do you think the shareholders will be happy to know that CIBC is being sued for this? ;) I hate to be the manager of the branch in question right now. He is walking in a very thin ice and I believe his days in CIBC is numbered.

Everyone here has already decided that CIBC is wrong and this person is right. Since everyone is so keen on laws we should wait for both sides to present their case no?

Lets look at it from this angle....
I feel something is not quite right here for a Teller to have that much overtime. As everyone has mentioned they now have quotas or goals that has to be met. These goals are tied to bonus and potential compensation. If you decide you want to exceed these set goals you will have to put in more time. Everyone has the option of doing the minimum and getting by, thats the beauty of working harder. You expect a bigger bonus and eventually move up and get better compensation for what you do. I don't think CIBC would fire her because he did the bare minimum.

[raptorsfever]

Everyone here has already decided that CIBC is wrong and this person is right. Since everyone is so keen on laws we should wait for both sides to present their case no?

Lets look at it from this angle....
I feel something is not quite right here for a Teller to have that much overtime. As everyone has mentioned they now have quotas or goals that has to be met. These goals are tied to bonus and potential compensation. If you decide you want to exceed these set goals you will have to put in more time. Everyone has the option of doing the minimum and getting by, thats the beauty of working harder. You expect a bigger bonus and eventually move up and get better compensation for what you do. I don't think CIBC would fire her because he did the bare minimum.

Which person are you talking about that won't get fired? I'm not sure if we're in the same page here. FYI, I was referring to the manager getting fired for the wrong judgment in regards to OT compensation. I didn't say anything about the employee getting fired for standing up for her right. I say give compensation when it's due. There's no reason for CIBC depriving their employees for what they deserve. Anyone would want to get compensated if they deserve it. CIBC can't even compensate for OT hours, what makes us think that she's receiving bigger bonuses? Sorry to say this, but I don't think she'll be suing right now if she's indeed receiving the potential bonuses.

[shumwun]

Everyone here has already decided that CIBC is wrong and this person is right. Since everyone is so keen on laws we should wait for both sides to present their case no?

Lets look at it from this angle....
I feel something is not quite right here for a Teller to have that much overtime. As everyone has mentioned they now have quotas or goals that has to be met. These goals are tied to bonus and potential compensation. If you decide you want to exceed these set goals you will have to put in more time. Everyone has the option of doing the minimum and getting by, thats the beauty of working harder. You expect a bigger bonus and eventually move up and get better compensation for what you do. I don't think CIBC would fire her because he did the bare minimum.



hmm... i never thought about the quotas. so for those who don't work smart or efficiently enough during the day will have to do some volunteer work to make up for it and therefore need not be paid for "optional" duties. (reminds me of the accounting world...gotta work fast and smart and hard... and if you're lacking in one or more of those departments, you work exponentially more !)

as MrDisco pointed out... paying for incompetence is ridiculous. (although in this case, we don't really know what's going on...)

in any case, i hope CIBC gets hit hard.

[ItemFinder]

Idiotcy right here.
I ALWAYS use tellers for banking services unless I'm just withdrawing cash from an ABM. They are more reliable.

Screw CIBC....go with Scotiabank... the "Virgin Mobile" of the banking industry. Free banking account with unlimited TELLER transactions and hot girls to do the banking for you :)

This is the real idiotic statement. You do realise that all the major banks are exactly the same in the products and services they offer? They all offer accounts with unlimited transactions. Hot girls would simply be branch-specific. Nothing makes BNS better than CIBC.

[shumwun]

This is the real idiotic statement. You do realise that all the major banks are exactly the same in the products and services they offer? They all offer accounts with unlimited transactions. Hot girls would simply be branch-specific. Nothing makes BNS better than CIBC.


haha... well, BNS offers the SCENE card.... so you can earn points to redeem free movie tickets and popcorn!!!

so really, what we want to know is which bank has the most agreeable dress code... (and also hires the hot girls). and umm... what your favourite colour is...(so you don't go to the hello kitty bank with the pink debit card) and which place offers free coffee while you wait! :razz:

[Geese_Howard]

My brother was a FSM for 4 weeks @ cibc before going to another bank, he and many people in the banking industry unanimously agree that CIBC is the worst bank to work for.

[chicadam]

Which person are you talking about that won't get fired? I'm not sure if we're in the same page here. FYI, I was referring to the manager getting fired for the wrong judgment in regards to OT compensation. I didn't say anything about the employee getting fired for standing up for her right. I say give compensation when it's due. There's no reason for CIBC depriving their employees for what they deserve. Anyone would want to get compensated if they deserve it. CIBC can't even compensate for OT hours, what makes us think that she's receiving bigger bonuses? Sorry to say this, but I don't think she'll be suing right now if she's indeed receiving the potential bonuses.

My typo... I don't think CIBC would fire her because she did the bare minimum.

Again we are just speculating how the managers reacted to her overtime. As with most companies, overtime has to be authorized before given the compensation. This is to adjust workload between staff and to control cost. If her overtime was approved/signed then why would she not be paid for it? She could of been potentially bullied into working those hours so this is something that the courts will work out. If you haven't figured this out, this would have to be proven.

OT is a direct cost to the department, bonus on the other hand is based on the performance of the bank, department, and person. These funds are not necessarily from just one area but is redistributed yearly or semi-yearly or quarterly to where its most deserving.

We don't know what triggered her to sue, maybe she did not meet her quota even with all that hard work and now wants to be compensated for that work. I do not know, but there are many arguments for her as well as for CIBC. I am by no means saying CIBC is right but facts that are published does not swing in her favor. 15h of OT a week for a teller, not a CSR manager. 10 years as a teller going through several CIBC branches.

[chicadam]

My brother was a FSM for 4 weeks @ cibc before going to another bank, he and many people in the banking industry unanimously agree that CIBC is the worst bank to work for.

Maybe so but this issue is not specific to CIBC. The only place I would see this as a non-issue is the government and thats because they don't need to make any money.

Many employees from other banks have call the lawyer representing this women and asked for his representation as well.

[madknife]

For the person that brought up that CIBC have shareholders to impress. Errr umm.. Do you think the shareholders will be happy to know that CIBC is being sued for this? ;) I hate to be the manager of the branch in question right now. He is walking in a very thin ice and I believe his days in CIBC is numbered.

i assume you were referring to me?

I completely agree with you on this point. In the end, it is ALWAYS the shareholders, NOT the corporation and its officers, that get hurt by class action lawsuits. no matter how much the firm shells out to settle, the ceo still gets his trillion dollar paycheck...

I would hazard to guess that you took my comment a bit out of context. I was addressing those that believe that no corporation should turn in a profit, and that everytime they do, they need to increase wages and decrease fees so that the profit disappear. I never meant to put shareholders against employees, or any other type of stakeholder - including the society and our environment. I merely wanted to address a common misconception of what corporations are for, and what roles the employees and shareholders play, respectively.

[madknife]

Umm I don't know... maybe cause they're required by the law to pay for OT work? If someone doesn't like the job they're doing, they should quit. But if someone doesn't like it because of something being done by their employer that contravenes the law, that employee shouldn't have to quit -- the employer should start obeying the law.

Agreed.
I appologize for not putting the entire perspective in context, but I was presenting "the flipside" to another extreme view, which i quoted in that post. I also went forward to clarify my point in a later post. But i still appologize for stating this as a matter of fact.

[madknife]

hmm... i never thought about the quotas. so for those who don't work smart or efficiently enough during the day will have to do some volunteer work to make up for it and therefore need not be paid for "optional" duties. (reminds me of the accounting world...gotta work fast and smart and hard... and if you're lacking in one or more of those departments, you work exponentially more !)

as MrDisco pointed out... paying for incompetence is ridiculous. (although in this case, we don't really know what's going on...)

in any case, i hope CIBC gets hit hard.

Humph... your reasoning and your conclusion seem a bit contradictory... if you believe that she shouldn't be paid OT if it were indeed her inefficiency that caused the OT, why do you still want CIBC to be hit hard...? :confused:

I hope that was a mere personal remark because of your previous unsatisfactory experience with CIBC...

[madknife]

Here is an exerpt from our HR message.

This week, you may have seen media reports about CIBC’s overtime policy and how it applies to our front-line retail staff. You may have questions, so I would like to address the facts regarding this issue.
Creating an environment where our employees can excel is very important. To foster this environment, we have comprehensive compensation, benefit, and employment programs and policies in place to ensure we attract, retain, and reward our employees. I encourage you to review our programs and policies, which are available on MY.HR@CIBC.

Our overtime policy is clearly defined, exceeds legislative requirements in Canada and is easily accessible. It contains a clear process to resolve any questions or concerns an employee may have about overtime. It also contains a provision about obtaining authorization before overtime is worked. Authorization is required to effectively run our business, to ensure employees are not working excessive hours, and to ensure that managers understand the workload of their employees. To be clear, under our policy, where overtime is requested or required by CIBC, overtime is paid.

If you have any questions, please speak with your manager or any member of your leadership team. Alternatively, you can also contact me, your Human Resources Consultant, Employee Relations Consultant, or HR Employee Relations at 1-888-558-3727.

Jacqueline C. Moss
Executive Vice-President
Human Resources

[Narci]

HAHAHA that excerpt is a slap in the face to the front line employees.

It's not the employees fault..it's the managers. The manager needs to sign off on OT and administer policies.

If the managers didn't administer this policy...you can't fault the employee.

[Lone_Prodigy]

The bigger the lawsuit, the smaller the public support.

[ItemFinder]

Pretty soon, your "real" job will be done by a machine.
They you'll have to get a "real" job - whatever that is. :twisted:
Ever consider that I'm the one automating all your jobs? :cheesygri