CUPE Watch: 2010

3903 Settles: 3-year deal

2009-04-09T13:45:00.002-04:00

Avoiding an arbitrated settlement, CUPE 3903 has settled with York University for a three-year deal. So it's official: 3903 will be on the sidelines for 2010.

I'll post the full details of the settlement once I find them.

University of Guelph threatens closure, says Sid Ryan

2009-03-25T19:10:00.006-04:00

Sid Ryan:

It seems the University of Guelph is taking a page out of the Chrylser play-book by blackmailing employees and threatening closure if they don't open up collective agreements and give concessions.

Guelph prez Alastair Summerlee responds:

"I haven't made such a threat," Summerlee said yesterday. "I wouldn't make such a threat." ... The [university's] proposed recovery plan [to deal with pension shortfalls] "has a four-year plan associated with it, so none of that sounds to me like a threat to close."

Summerlee continues: "I assume (CUPE) has an agenda and they're trying to move that agenda in a particular way." (In other words, he's calling Ryan a big liar.)

What agenda might CUPE be pushing? Well, Summerlee's "threat" was first reported by OUWCC chair Janice Folk-Dawson. You will remember that Guelph's CUPE 3913 settled for a one-year deal this past December, so they would be gearing up once again to negotiate with the university. Maybe this is an effort to rally the base leading up to 2010 -- but if so, it reminds the public that universities are in some serious financial trouble over their pension deficits.

CUPE's vision of the university: Part 2 of an occasional series

2009-03-11T15:37:00.003-04:00

From a source at York, disturbing news of possible reprisals against professors who spoke out against CUPE 3903's strike action. Background and full details are below. If you ever wondered why I remain anonymous, this is why!

I intended (and still intend) for my "series" on CUPE's vision of the university to discuss more philosophical concerns. However, as long as outrageous stunts like this (and the earlier Israel motion fiasco [1, 2]) continue to happen, I will obligingly post them.

First some background: During the York strike, two letters were signed by York tenure-track professors opposing the 3903 strike. The first letter, signed by around 150 faculty, was addressed to the faculty union leadership, asking them to remain neutral in the dispute. The second letter, signed by around 250 faculty, was addressed to CUPE members, and encouraged them to accept the university's offer.

Earlier, a group called YorkIsUs posted this page, apparently encouraging the anonymous email harassment of the signatories of the first letter. This group, while independent of CUPE, is sufficiently supported and encouraged by CUPE 3903 to have been prominently mentioned on their official strike web site (also with a link from the home page, under "links").

And now we have this. It is a resolution from the York Sociology Graduate Association (YSGA), again not directly affiliated with CUPE. However, it is certainly being circulated by CUPE members: the signature block, which I have removed, indicated that the message was forwarded by a senior 3903 executive. (One can speculate that the 3903 executive was forwarding the message to drum up opposition against it, but this seems unlikely.) Read it in all its ludicrously over-the-top glory:

Forced Ratification Open Letter Signatories
-A few Sociology faculty members signed the open letter that urged students to accept the employers offer during the forced ratification vote.
-[Redacted] put forth a motion to respond to this issue. [Redacted] put forth alternative language to amend the motion.
-After much discussion and debate, the following amended motion was passed, based on an omnibus vote:
YSGA Motion on Sociology Faculty Open Letter Signatories
WHEREAS: During the lead up to the forced ratification vote, a group of faculty members circulated an open letter appealing to CUPE 3903 members to accept the employer's offer,
AND WHEREAS: Some of the signatories to the letter were associated with the Department of Sociology,
AND WHEREAS: The letter was not only a misrepresentation and misinterpretation of the demands for which CUPE 3903 was striking,
AND WHEREAS: The signatories also abused their power as teachers, academic committee members, and supervisors of CUPE 3903 members,
AND WHEREAS: In abusing their power, these signatories undermined the collegiality and respect required for a department and a scholarly discipline to function,
BIRT: The YSGA, comprised of graduate students, CUPE 3903 members, and future faculty members, stand in opposition to this letter and its signatories.
BIFRT: In order to do this, we shall:
1) Issue a formal and public statement indicating that, because of their gross breach of collegiality, we the YSGA no longer recognize those persons affiliated with our department who signed the open letter to be members of our Department or our discipline,
2) Circulate this statement to other department-level GSAs to encourage them to pass similar resolutions in their own departments,
3) Never organize, promote, or attend an event at which these signatories are scheduled to speak or present their work,
4) Never enroll in a course these signatories are instructing or approach them to serve on a committee,
5) Make plain, as a matter of policy, our reasons for doing the above so that all incoming YSGA members will know how to act and the important reasons for doing so.
6) Call upon the Department of Sociology, and the Graduate Program in Sociology, to formally acknowledge the implicit and explicit power relations, authority and standards of collegiality involved in student/faculty relationships, and institute guidelines prohibiting such abuses in the future.
BIFRT: The YSGA will support its members in finding appropriate substitutes should they choose, for reasons outlined in the preamble to this motion, to drop a signatory to the open letter from an already constituted academic committee.

For junior faculty members, teaching courses, speaking at academic meetings, and serving on committees are key requirements to achieve tenure and obtain promotion. So make no mistake that this is a reprisal, and the movers of the motion are seeking to damage careers for the crime of disagreeing with CUPE.

OUWCC Conference Report 2009

2009-03-06T13:55:00.002-05:00

Here it is. I'll take some time to digest this and write some commentary next week.

CUPE National weighs in

2009-02-25T09:56:00.000-05:00

Paul Moist still hates the watered-down Israel resolution.

Bargaining update, OUWCC conference, Israel motion

2009-02-24T14:01:00.005-05:00

CUPE 4600 at Carleton, after rejecting a strike mandate last month, has nonetheless settled for a contract expiring on August 31, 2010.

OUWCC held their 2009 conference this past weekend in Windsor, Ontario. I'm looking forward to reading any proceedings from this conference, as the we all remember the famous document that came out of their 2008 conference. If you were there, feel free to contact me with any details.

By now we have all heard that CUPE Ontario passed a motion calling on an academic boycott of Israeli universities. I've covered this before, and although I'm still very uncomfortable with any academic boycott, I'm at least happy to see that the motion has been significantly watered down as compared to earlier versions. Torontoist has a brief history of the changes to the motion, so let's do a little before-and-after on CUPE Ontario president Sid Ryan's comments, all emphasis mine:

Before (a since redacted CUPE press release, archived here):

"In response to an appeal from the Palestinian Federation of Unions of University Professors and Employees, we are ready to say Israeli academics should not be on our campuses unless they explicitly condemn the university bombing and the assault on Gaza in general," said Sid Ryan ...

After (CUPE press release, February 23):

[Sid] Ryan noted that CUPE members voted democratically at their 2006 convention to support a campaign of boycotts, divestment and sanctions against the Israeli state for its maltreatment of Palestinians. The campaign was not and is not directed against individual Jews. Ryan decries the deliberate misrepresentation of CUPE's intent in discussing Middle Eastern issues.

Sid Ryan lying? Computer says yes!

I'm still here

2009-02-17T11:38:00.001-05:00

Not much news on the CUPE front these days. I'm working on some longer-form stuff for later. Watch this space.

The week of setbacks

2009-02-03T14:50:00.004-05:00

The 2010 project suffered two major blows this week.

CUPE 3902 unit 1 reached a tentative settlement with the University of Toronto. The complete memorandum of settlement is here, but the following phrase is found on the first page:

The parties herein agree that the term of the collective agreement shall be from May 1, 2008 to April 30, 2011.

There does not appear to be any language in the agreement allowing sympathetic walkouts with other TA unions. So teaching assistants at the University of Toronto are officially on the sidelines for 2010. (Thanks to commenter Nurse 1 for the pointer.)

Meanwhile, as we mentioned previously, CUPE 3903 at York University was ordered back to work. According to the legislation, all outstanding issues -- including contract length -- will be set by an arbitrator. Strictly, this means 3903 could receive a 2-year deal from the arbitrator, but as Doorey notes,

Interest arbitration ... tends to be conservative, as an arbitrator does not usually want to forge novel arrangements that the parties themselves were unable to agree upon. I would be surprised if CUPE wins a 2 year deal ...

We will follow this story closely and report back once the arbitrated contract is set.

OUWCC hanging on for dear life

2009-01-27T10:21:00.003-05:00

In case you just crawled out from under a rock, the Ontario government has introduced legislation to force striking CUPE 3903 back to work. Meanwhile, CUPE is likely to mount a legal challenge to the bill.

The text of the bill is here [via Doorey]. It requires that all outstanding issues, including contract length, be put to binding arbitration. Of course, if the arbitrator decides to award a three-year contract, CUPE 3903 would be on the outside for the 2010 festivities.

Now consider this. Of course this is not an official CUPE document and might not be genuine, but the York Strike blog is frequented by CUPE members, who often leak internal union discussions. The letter, from CUPE Ontario president Sid Ryan to CUPE National president Paul Moist, makes it clear that CUPE is considering an injunction to bar the implementation of back-to-work legislation. Most interesting is the following (emphasis mine):

We have no choice but to take all measures to defend free collective bargaining, especially given our coordinated bargaining strategy in this sector and the advanced bargaining in all our sectors.

So if this letter is genuine, it would appear that CUPE Ontario's desperation for the coordinated bargaining strategy is driving their legal strategy.

How likely is it that an injunction would be granted? Doorey says maybe.

Presented without comment

2009-01-23T21:20:00.001-05:00

Jesse Payne wrote
at 7:39pm

PLEASE sign this survey and forward it far and wide!!

Thanks, Jesse
__________________________

____

Please circulate widely

Dear Allies in the university sector of CUPE Ontario.

CUPE 3903's bargaining team is under immense pressure to get a deal as quick as possible and some of the membership is urging them to drop our demand for a 2 year contact that would end in 2010. They are requesting a 3 year contract in its place.

Please visit our petition and urge them to remain strong on the OUWCC's plan for coordinated bargaining in 2010:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/39032/ <http://www.petitiononline.com/39032/>

(Source: "Support CUPE 3903 in Bargaining" Facebook group, wall post)

York strike to continue

2009-01-21T10:11:00.004-05:00

By now you should be aware that CUPE 3903 defeated their forced ratification vote.

It's difficult to imagine what the York administration were thinking in calling this vote, and they can hardly be surprised by the result.

Bargaining Updates

2009-01-20T08:46:00.005-05:00

University of Toronto: The parties have jointly filed for conciliation. The use of a government-appointed conciliator is mandatory before any strike or lock-out action (more info here). Union representatives continue to drum up support for a possible strike, assuring undergraduates that classes would not be suspended.

Carleton University: CUPE 4600, representing teaching assistants and contract instructors at Carleton, recently called a vote for a strike mandate. The mandate was defeated by a narrow margin: 51.6% of members voted "no", amid record turnout. This followed a resolution from the Carleton Academic Student Government (CASG), opposing strike action and calling on CUPE members to vote "no".

Between union defeats at Queen's and Carleton, and a disappointingly low strike mandate at U of T, are the effects of York's bruising ten-week strike being felt throughout the Ontario university sector? Speaking of which ...

York University: The supervised vote (also known as the forced ratification vote) on York's most recent contract offer concludes today, and we should know the results either tonight or tomorrow.

Some interesting possibilities are in play: there are three units in CUPE 3903, and their strategy is to bargain together. If any individual unit votes "yes" tonight, that unit accepts the university's contract offer, and the strike ends for that unit; if any unit votes "no", that unit stays out on strike. As we know, a two-year contract has been a key demand for this union, while the administration's offer is for a three-year deal. In the event of a split vote (with some units voting "yes" and others voting "no"), CUPE negotiators would have to decide between maintaining unity among the three units (by going for a three-year deal for the units still on strike), or continuing with the 2010 project with the remaining units (by going for a two-year deal).

CUPE's vision of the university: Part 1 of an occasional series [UPDATED]

2009-01-13T15:47:00.001-05:00

UPDATE: CUPE National president Paul Moist opposes the OUWCC motion.

(Original post follows ...)

Referring to CUPE's coordinated bargaining strategy, CUPE executive Dan Crow writes (emphasis mine):

This is a struggle the broadest Left should support as one more element in the growing struggles to overturn neoliberalism, and to begin to imagine again what a university might be in a post-neoliberal social order.

If CUPE's goal is to impose a "post-neoliberal" vision on Ontario universities, it is fair to ask what exactly that vision entails. Within the past few weeks, we have had a bracing introduction to that vision, as the OUWCC (the organization within CUPE to support the 2010 initiative) expressed its intention to present the a motion boycotting academic collaboration with Israeli universities* at their next annual meeting in February. The text of this motion is in flux, but we read at the link (emphasis mine):

A resolution could include calling on Ontario universities and university workers to:

Refuse to participate in academic cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli universities, such as participating in conferences in Israel, refereeing or editing articles for Israeli journals, evaluating research proposals for Israeli institutions
Advocate a boycott of Israeli universities, including suspension of all forms of funding and subsidies ...

Elsewhere we read:

[CUPE] said it will seek to prohibit Israeli academics from speaking, teaching or researching at Ontario universities.

At this point, let me point out that I do not fully support either side in the current Israeli-Gaza conflict; in my opinion, both sides have committed terrible acts. Neither do I think that CUPE should remain silent on political matters -- CUPE has previously enacted resolutions calling for economic sanctions and boycotts against Israel, and I think they are well within their rights to do so.

What concerns me is the attempt to influence speech at universities. For an organization of academics to impose some sort of ideological purity test as a precondition for collaborating or speaking at Ontario universities, is appalling. What's especially alarming here is the attempt by a group of academics to use their collective power to try to force other academics to think in a certain way, and to ban their voices if they do not. Let us be completely clear that forceful protest is fine, and resolutions calling for economic sanctions are fine, but this attempt to stifle speech runs directly counter to the free exchange of ideas that is the foundation of the modern university.

It bears pointing out that Mr. Crow is directly involved in drafting this resolution, so this effort is, quite clearly, part of his "post-neoliberal" vision. You should be asking yourself whether you also support the imposition of ideological conditions on speech. If the answer is "yes", you should have no problem also supporting his drive for coordinated bargaining. Naturally, I take a different view.

*document_id=666. Heh.

"Irresponsible and verging on illegal"

2009-01-13T12:39:00.000-05:00

CUPE 3903 executive Tyler Shipley on the bargaining team representing any interests other than those of the membership (emphasis mine):

... It would be irresponsible (and verging on illegal) for the CUPE 3903 bargaining team to represent any interests besides those of its membership when developing bargaining strategies. [source: Discussion topic: "Response from Tyler regarding stakeholders," York University Anti-Strike Group, Facebook]

This statement was offered as explanation for the following statement, also by Shipley:

Bargaining takes place between CUPE 3903 and the York administration – there is a reason the students aren’t at the table – it’s because they aren’t stakeholders in the actual contract we’re negotiating, so this is not going to dictate how we proceed in bargaining [source]

which in turn was a response to the demand from York Not Hostage for a one-week deadline for negotiations to wrap up.

From the first statement, we have an open acknowledgment that CUPE bargaining teams cannot, and should not, consider the interests of anyone other than their own membership. Considering this in light of CUPE's 2010 plan, it is therefore equally irresponsible for CUPE to claim that their drive for coordinated bargaining has undergraduates' best interests at heart. As Shipley himself notes, any group of people whose interests are not completely aligned with CUPE's will be disregarded by the bargaining team.

York negotiations ongoing

2009-01-06T11:16:00.002-05:00

Ah, good to be back, and good to see the mountain of paper on my desk! But never fear, loyal reader(s), I have my right wing* pundit** eye trained mercilessly on CUPE's activities. (From now on, bearing in mind my schedule, this blog will be updated weekly, unless events warrant.)

Talks are ongoing in the glacial York strike. Those on the outside of the bargaining room are left to pore over leaked bargaining updates, trying to divine the intentions of the bargaining teams. Naturally this blog is most interested in the question of contract length. (I generally consider leaks to the York Strike blog reliable, but please set me straight if I shouldn't.)

Here we read:

Fund Protection: There will be no diminution in the per employee amount in the funds listed below during the term of this collective agreement as a result of an increase in the number of employees in the bargaining unit as at October 1, 2009 and October 1, 2010. The basis on which growth in the number of employees will be measured is the number of employees as of October 1, 2008. For example, if the per employee amount available is $10 based on 100 employees as of October 1, 2008, the fund will be supplemented by $100 in the second year of the Collective Agreement. If the number of employees is 90 as of October 1,2010, no supplement will be required and the fund will be $1000.

So it sounds as though the new collective agreement is to be in place through 2010, implying a three-year deal!

But don't get your hopes up. We read here:

NEW [Letter of Intent 13]
Class Size and Teaching Support
In Recognition of the importance of class size and formats conducive to sound pedagogy, the parties agree, as expeditiously as practicable following the ratification of the 2008-2010 collective agreement ...

which makes it sound like the agreement is for two years.

Generally, reading these bargaining updates, it sounds like the most contentious issues are not being discussed, so the ambiguity may be deliberate.

* In my last five federal votes, I voted for four different parties, including Green and NDP.

** Pundit, n. 1. Initiate: someone who has been admitted to membership in a scholarly field. (Google)

Last 2008 Post

2008-12-15T11:07:00.002-05:00

Seems like everything has gone into the deep freeze for Christmas, including contract negotiations at both York and U of T. So this will be my last post until January, unless events warrant.

If you're waiting for an email reply, I'll try to get caught up ...

A hand overplayed

2008-12-15T10:51:00.004-05:00

Now that the strike at York has gone on long enough that cancellation of the school year has become a worry, you have to think that the appetite for another bruising strike in two years has diminished, not just at York but elsewhere.

Indeed, the York strike has already been cited as one reason why PSAC's unionization drive at Queen's has likely gone down to defeat. Same thing for U of T's relatively small strike mandate, where "the difficult situation at York University" is noted on the union's own web site. We're also hearing that a surprising number of tenure-stream York professors have vocally opposed their union's support of CUPE.

CUPE will have to do some serious damage control, and quickly, if it wants to regain its momentum for the 2010 project -- starting with finding a solution at York.

U of T Strike Vote Outcome (UPDATED 2)

2008-12-10T21:25:00.002-05:00

Still on the short updates. Who knew being a professor actually involves work? Anyway.

CUPE 3902 apparently received a strike mandate. How large was the mandate? They're not saying, so it's fair to assume that the answer is: not very large.

UPDATE: Maybe it's bigger than I thought. They're announcing the official results in the morning at a press conference with Rosario Marchese and a CFS rep. (Thanks for the info, Joey Coleman.)

UPDATE 2: Nope, I was right the first time. 63%. By comparison, York's strike mandate was close to 90%.

U of T talking 2-year contract

2008-12-08T13:44:00.002-05:00

Looks like U of T is willing to give its TA union a 2-year contract.

At U of T, the TA union does not include sessional faculty, so a strike by this unit of the union would not be as disruptive as the strike at York. The sessional faculty are in Unit 3, and their contract expires in 2009.

See you on Monday

2008-12-05T17:50:00.002-05:00

Looking forward to a weekend in front of my laptop, pounding out research.

2010 is bigger than the TA unions

2008-12-05T08:55:00.002-05:00

I'm trying to get some papers out, so my updates are going to be short for the next week or so. I'm working on some longer posts for later on.

Meanwhile, here's a link to CUPE Ontario's university sector coordination page; if you like, this is the home page for the OUWCC, which is leading the 2010 project.

We read:

The Ontario University Workers Coordinating Committee is a voluntary association of CUPE locals totaling more than 20,000 members working in the university sector. This includes security, parking, skilled trades, clerical, administrative, caretaking, teaching, food service, technical, research and library workers.

So 2010 is larger than just the TA unions. However, uptake among non-teaching university employees is far from universal: for example, York's caretaking union just signed a three-year deal, to expire in 2011.

CUPE EXECUTIVES FRIGHTENED OF NERD WITH COMPUTER!!!

2008-12-04T08:41:00.004-05:00

From 3903 Strikes vs. McJobs in the University Teaching Sector by Dan Crow:

Right wing pundits have begun their “CUPE Watch” claiming that the union wants only to disrupt the system in 2010.

Thanks for the shout out, Dan! You raise a lot of interesting points, and I will post a full response when work calms down a bit.

But for now, I'd like to ask you this: you're clearly a senior CUPE executive, so why did you identify yourself in the article as an "activist with CUPE"? Isn't that misleading? And isn't that futher evidence that the 2010 project is primarily driven by CUPE executives, and not by the rank-and-file?

CUPE TA Unions in Ontario: Collective Agreement Expiry Dates (UPDATED)

2008-12-03T09:07:00.001-05:00

How successful has CUPE been in aligning expiry dates of its eleven locals?

Five expire in 2010:

University of Ottawa (CUPE 2626) (source)
Ryerson University (CUPE 3904 unit 3) (source)
Brock University (CUPE 4207) (source)
University of Windsor (CUPE 4580) (source)
McMaster University (CUPE 3906 unit 2 representing contract faculty)
(Note, CUPE 3906 unit 1, representing TAs, has a contract expiring in 2009.)

Three have expired contracts, and have demanded a 2010 expiry date in bargaining:

University of Toronto (CUPE 3902 unit 1), strike vote pending (source)
York University (CUPE 3903), currently on strike (source)
Trent University (CUPE 3908 unit 2), currently in bargaining (source)
Concerning Trent, a commenter wrote: "Unit 2 at Trent is student academic workers (so, undergrad markers, for the most part). Unit 1, which is contract faculty, already has a contract set to expire in 2010."

One has an expired contract, and has expressed support for OUWCC, and recently avoided a strike by settling for a one-year contract, expiring in 2009:

University of Guelph (CUPE 3913) (source)

Can't find bargaining details for the following two universities:

Lakehead University (CUPE 3905): (can't find a copy of the agreement)
Carleton University (CUPE 4600): Contract expired, status of bargaining unclear.

So it would seem that the coordination drive is well underway, and there's no evidence to suggest that any local is not participating. However, with the largest university in the province (U of T) in strike position, and the second largest (York) already on strike, where both are fighting for 2010 expiry, the campaign has entered a critical phase. You can make a case that York and U of T are the firewalls to prevent the plan from succeeding.

He said, she said

2008-12-03T08:39:00.002-05:00

CUPE says:

... we are encouraged that we have resumed fruitful negotiations. We spent the bulk
of today developing responses to the employer's proposals, and going through our outstanding non-financial proposals by reasserting our position on some, while revising and withdrawing others. (emphasis mine; source -- message to union members, posted as a blog comment)

York says:

"I fear our 50,000 students are being held hostage by a union more interested in planning rallies and promoting confrontation with the province than reaching a settlement here at York University that will end this strike and get our students back to class," said [York spokesman Alex] Bilyk. (emphasis mine; source)

So it sounds like contract length is still a sticking point in negotiations.

The Quiet Revolution

2008-12-02T08:16:00.002-05:00

I was all ready to write about 2010 as a stealth issue in the Guelph negotiations, but it turns out that CUPE 3913 settled, preventing a strike.

However, you will notice that CUPE 3913 settled for a one-year deal, so Guelph is still in play for CUPE's 2010 strategy, and these issues may come up again. Further, it is still valuable to examine the role of 2010 in current contract negotiations, such as at the University of Toronto.

From the example of CUPE 3906's negotiations at McMaster, we see that CUPE chooses not to make a public issue of coordinated bargaining, in spite of the high importance attached to it by union executives. In particular, here is CUPE 3906's "bargaining update" to its members, dated April 11; and here is the summary of a solidarity rally held on May 5. From these, we read that the union's main demands concerned benefits, job security, and wages. There is no mention of contract length or coordinated bargaining.

Yet here is (allegedly) a view inside the bargaining room, written by a member of the bargaining team. We read:

... the conciliation officer told us that they did have something for us beyond the 9% over three years they were offering us, but that we'd only see it when we agreed to their 2011 contract. It was a terrible position to be in. In good conscience, we could not abandon the issues upon which the entire mobilization process had been built just to secure a two year contract. At the same time, we knew that only when all 20 000+ university sector workers align their bargaining and strikes in solidarity, and even finally bargain at the same table with the province on key issues, could our relatively small and less strong local have any chance of winning real benefits and pensions, fair wages, and job security.

So it's clear that the union executive was prepared to sacrifice gains in order to secure the contract length they wanted, despite never mentioning it in public as a bargaining issue. But there's more:

The employer moved on wages: 7% in year one, 4% in year two and 3% in year three (the same, in the first two years, as the current 3903 wage proposal, if I'm not mistaken.) The employer said, that's it, accept it or everything is off the table. We said, as we had been for months, that we would not and could not accept a three-year contract ...

Again, despite the moral dilemma from the previous quote, and the secrecy of the issue in public, in the end the union executive was perfectly willing to sacrifice gains for contract length. (It should be noted that, in the end, the union won much of what they wanted: a two-year contract and a higher wage offer.)

Now consider today's situation. To CUPE 3903's credit, they have never been coy about coordinated bargaining. On the other hand, we have a union at Guelph that never mentioned contract length in negotiations, and that ended up settling for a one-year contract, leaving themselves open to participate in coordinated bargaining. We also have a union at the University of Toronto, CUPE 3902, that is expressly bargaining for a two-year contract, but for vague reasons:

It would not be responsible for us to lock our members
into a longer-term contract negotiated in a time of
economic uncertainty as the university would like us to.

And not because you want to coordinate bargaining with your fellow CUPE locals?

Coordinated bargaining is a public issue, with implications for all university stakeholders; for this reason, it is not acceptable for union executives to hide the issue in the bargaining room. CUPE 3913 and 3902 need to come clean about their relationship with the coordinated bargaining issue.

See you on Monday.

2008-11-28T13:55:00.002-05:00

I'm taking the weekend off. On Monday I'll be writing about the situation at Guelph.

Pressure, Strikes, and Coordinated Bargaining

2008-11-28T09:24:00.005-05:00

(Promoting this from the comments)

Will there be a provincial strike in 2010? I'm referring here to CUPE's own planning document on coordinated bargaining:

The intent of coordinated bargaining is to negotiate directly with the province:

Page 1, "What are the most important gains we can achieve through coordination? Greater political clout ... a way to win provincial funding and better accountability ..."

Page 4, comments by Sid Ryan: "A CUPE school board bargaining team is currently in central talks with the Ontario government on major issues of concern for school board workers. 'It shows it can be done,' he said. 'And it all started when the Ontario government saw that at least 60 collective agreements in the sector were going to expire on the same date.'"

A provincial strike is part of the plan:

Page 5: "Implementation: All local unions in a strike position at the same time by negotiating the same expiry date"

Appendix C, Page 1: "Top 3 Priorities ... Plan: Coordinated Strike Position ... File no boards on common date" (A "no-board" is one of the last steps towards a legal strike date.)

Further, the province has already stated that they are unwilling to negotiate directly with the union:

Union officials have argued for a provincewide bargaining process similar to the one used with school boards, but the minister responsible for colleges and universities said that isn't going to happen. "I respect the autonomy of the institutions when it comes to our universities," said John Milloy. [CP]

So it is disingenuous to say that coordinated bargaining is only a pressure tactic: it is a pressure tactic because there is the threat of a strike behind it. CUPE has already explicitly planned for a coordinated strike, and "pressure" of some sort will be needed to force the province to the table. If CUPE gets its way, a strike at most Ontario universities is not only possible, it is likely.

Correction: McMaster

2008-11-28T09:11:00.003-05:00

McMaster's TA union, CUPE 3906 Unit 1, has a collective agreement which expires in 2009. (source)

However, CUPE 3906 Unit 2, which represents McMaster's contract faculty members, recently negotiated a collective agreement to expire in 2010, and the contract length was an issue in bargaining.

I'm currently looking at the details of bargaining at Mac to compare them with the current situation at Guelph. I'll post something about that in a couple of days.

Isn't that interesting ...

2008-11-27T09:06:00.001-05:00

The TA union at the University of Western Ontario, PSAC 610 (not a CUPE union), has a collective agreement that also expires in 2010.

"The province shouldn't hesitate to intervene"

2008-11-27T09:03:00.003-05:00

... to end the York strike, says this morning's Toronto Star. A case can be made for the government to intervene now, so that they don't have to intervene two years from now.

Does the CUPE rank and file support the 2010 project?

2008-11-26T10:44:00.005-05:00

Unions are (largely) democratic organizations. As such, the rank-and-file membership are important in both setting and prioritizing the union's goals.

There is evidence that rank-and-file union members do not consider coordinated bargaining to be an important issue. It's rare to see a pro-union commenter on any of the strike discussion boards pushing the 2010 issue; more often, these commenters are discussing wages, benefits, and job security. Here are two examples, but there are many others.

Which makes this post very interesting. It's by "Jesse Payne", who identifies himself as a CUPE staff member, and was posted to the main "Support CUPE 3903" Facebook group, among other places. In the opening paragraph, he says:

I've been very lucky to take part in some interesting discussions with members on picket lines, in pubs and after GMMs about the many groundbreaking CUPE 3903 proposals, and about whether staying firm on the two-year contract and coordinated bargaining is necessary, beneficial or detrimental to struggle for fair wages, indexation, job security and employment equity.

The remainder of the post is a pep talk about staying strong and not giving up the fight. However, two things caught my interest: first, that the two-year contract is a matter of discussion among rank-and-filers; and second, that a CUPE staff member felt concerned enough about the members' resolve to write a fairly long motivational speech, and post it wherever they might read it.

I would be very interested to hear from CUPE rank-and-file members to hear what they think. Contact me at cupewatch2010@gmail.com -- all tips are anonymous unless you specify otherwise. Or leave an anonymous comment.

The Progressive Conservatives smell an issue

2008-11-25T18:07:00.002-05:00

I'm against back-to-work legislation for one of the same reasons I'm against coordinated bargaining: both would erode university autonomy from the government. However, the Ontario PCs seem to be making hay out of 2010: (link)

Liberal Inaction Will Lead To Province-Wide Disaster

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 25, 2008

PC M.P.P. urges government to protect students from union clouds on the horizon

Queen’s Park Peter Shurman, M.P.P. (Thornhill) urged the McGuinty government to stand up for York U. students now, so that all Ontario students are protected from union strikes in 2010.
Queen’s Park Peter Shurman, M.P.P. (Thornhill) urged the McGuinty government to stand up for York U. students now, so that all Ontario students are protected from union strikes in 2010.

“We’re in day 20 of the York U strike. All courses have now been adversely affected and students are increasingly worried about their graduate school applications, graduation plans and employment opportunities. Meanwhile the McGuinty government refuses to recognize the severity of the situation and is instead talking about the ‘excellent labour relations’ we supposedly have in this province. Well these so called ‘excellent labour relations’ are holding students hostage,” Shurman said following Tuesday’s Question Period.

Shurman warned that with the majority of CUPE contracts at Ontario’s universities expiring in 2010, with five more, including York University, currently in negotiations with the same deadline in mind, the potential for a province-wide university shut down in two years is a dark cloud looming on the horizon.

“The McGuinty Liberals buried their heads in the sand on this strike and they have buried their heads in the sand about the potential for province-wide university shut-downs in 2010. They are doing nothing to get students back into their lecture halls now, they are doing nothing to secure a fair and level collective bargaining field and despite their assurances to the contrary, nothing to protect the autonomy of our post-secondary institutions.”

-30-

For more information please contact:
Monika Bujalska, Executive Assistant
Office of Peter Shurman, M.P.P.-Thornhill
Tel.: (416) 325-2505
E-mail: peter.shurman@pc.ola.org

CUPE's actions are worth your attention

2008-11-24T11:15:00.000-05:00

Coordinated bargaining is not an abstract issue between a union and its employer. It could have a profound impact on universities in Ontario, and all university community members -- faculty, staff, administrators, and especially students -- should be paying attention.

This blog maintains a position of cautious opposition to CUPE's efforts: cautious, because postsecondary education is underfunded, and needs greater attention from government; but opposition, because CUPE's unilateral and heavy-handed actions are likely to cause far more damage than improvement.

My views on coordinated bargaining will be expanded in future posts.

University of Toronto enters the fray (Guelph too?)

2008-11-24T09:27:00.000-05:00

A strike vote has been called by CUPE 3902, representing TAs at the University of Toronto. A two-year contract -- expiring in 2010 -- is one of the union's key demands.

CUPE 3913, the TA union at Guelph, will be in a legal strike position around the 1st of December. It's not clear if the length of the contract is a key demand.

We Have Video

2008-11-24T09:24:00.000-05:00

Here's the famous video in which a McMaster union executive discusses coordinated bargaining in 2010 (starting around the 1:45 mark). As this gentleman explains, McMaster recently settled with their union for a two-year contract (at the union's insistence), which will expire in 2010.

The story so far

2008-11-24T09:10:00.000-05:00

Is the York University TA strike part of something bigger? It might be: according to their own internal planning documents, CUPE is trying to synchronize the end dates of all its locals at Ontario universities, with the goal of forcing the Provincial government to the bargaining table to secure a new deal for universities. At York, a two-year deal is a key union demand, on which the administration has counter-offered a three-year deal.

Joey Coleman, one of the "on campus" bloggers for Macleans, suggests that the two-year deal is the real sticking point in negotiations.

TA Locals in Ontario

2008-11-24T09:05:00.002-05:00

Here's a list of Ontario universities and their TA locals.

CUPE (Canadian Union of Public Employees) locals:

2626 – Ottawa
3902 – Toronto
3903 – York
3904 – Ryerson
3905 – Lakehead
3906 – McMaster
3908 – Trent
3913 – Guelph
4207 – Brock
4580 – Windsor
4600 – Carleton

PSAC (Public Service Alliance of Canada) locals:

610 – Western
PSAC is in the middle of a unionization drive at Queen's