| To the Editors Brandon Sun The Brandon Sun, in its editorials and news sections, has portrayed the faculty strike at BU as a greedy fight over money. This narrative is false and obscures the true issues surrounding this strike. First, the administration miscalculated in thinking that it could break the union by forcing a strike, and second, the true causes of this strike were non-monetary. In a letter to BUFA, the Queen’s University Faculty Association (QUFA) noted that it faced similar tactics from its employer several months ago, as have other faculty associations. As QUFA pointed out, “university administrations across Canada” are hiring anti-union lawyers to deal with collective bargaining. This is what happened at BU, when the Administration engaged Winnipeg lawyer Grant Mitchell, a member of the anti-union Canadian Labour Watch Association, based in Vancouver. As has happened elsewhere, they then proposed substantive changes to the existing contract, changing research requirements and expectations for promotion and tenure. The BU Administration adopted this strategy, knowing well that such tactics would force faculty to vote in favor of a strike. They then miscalculated in thinking that enough faculty would cross the picket lines to end the strike. Faculty, however, to their credit, have remained united. The QUFA letter also notes that university administrations across the country are moving in lock step, making unfair compensation offers of 0% raises for two years followed by a 2% raise in the third year. Unsurprisingly, with the increase in the cost of living at 3.2 %, university faculties are resisting this. During negotiations moreover, the Administration’s bargaining team repeatedly insisted that the province had imposed wage restrictions on universities. Premier Selinger has recently denied this, stating, “we’ve just given the universities 5, 5 and 5% [annual] increases in operating grants, so why would we direct them to hold salary increases?” BU faculty earn significantly less than university faculty elsewhere, and this materially affects the quality of student education. Another strategy of these anti-union lawyers at Queen’s and other universities has been to stall on negotiations, then to propose sweeping changes to contract language. In BU’s case, the Administration introduced some 80 pages of revisions to the collective agreement, significantly altering criteria and procedures determining appointments, tenure, and progress through the ranks. BUFA’s attempt to settle these issues over the summer was thwarted by repeated “scheduling difficulties” of the administration’s lawyer. While BUFA eventually succeeded in convincing the employer to drop most of these changes, by then the strike vote had been taken. Given the employer’s delaying tactics, and its intransigence since, this strike and its consequences must be laid squarely at the Administration’s doorstep. The
fact that the
Canadian Association of University Teachers and university faculty
associations
across Canada are actively supporting this strike with money as well as
letters
of solidarity demonstrates their awareness of this strategy to break
their
unions. By hiring an anti-union lawyer to implement this strategy at
BU, the
Administration is doing long-term damage to the university, its
students and
its faculty. Get rid of the lawyers and get down to a settlement. |
| |