Thursday, November 5th 2009
Strike, solidarity and scabs seem to have flooded my vocabulary in the last week, and while I’m not quite sick of the picket lines, protestors and propaganda – from both sides – it is endlessly tiring to observe lack of support from undergraduate teaching assistants.
I am in short supply of sympathy for a collection of scabs so confused and selfish that they could not support the graduate teaching assistants and research assistants that were generally fighting for undergraduate rights. The majority of concessions that were graduate-specific were met with the university’s final/best offer, yet in a sign of solidarity they decided to strike for the rights of a group that least deserves it. As a result the university has rescinded its graduate concessions, adding to the length and fueling a longer labour dispute.
Perhaps they have never been in a union; perhaps they are part of a privileged group that has decided to ignore how they managed to stumble upon a job that pays well. This group of privileged and pretentious undergraduate scabs is crippling the union that is also fighting for them.
I can understand if you are a graduate research assistant and you’ve spent the summer collecting cell samples and you need to use the samples in the next two weeks. I can understand the few that are finishing up their studies, with possibly months to go in what may have been a nine-year journey. These people have a reason to cross the picket lines and continue to work. A first year psych TA? You have no reason not to join the picket line. You complement a pre-recorded video, and ask cookie-cutter questions; and because of the union before you, you enjoy a healthy wage in doing so. Show some support, show some backbone.
Unfortunately, these selfish TAs will be the Achilles’ heel of many selfless people. The current situation is gloomy and pathetic for CUPE 3906. Their own members have left them hanging out to dry, barely slowing the train of studies, while causing an irritation for students they won’t soon forget. Without the complete support from all of the union members, this strike will not only fail, it will last longer.
What the undergraduate scabs have created is a situation in which the union has no power, and to which the university has responded with less and less in each successive proposal. With minimal TA’s, the university can prop itself up and continue to run, all the while letting the continual itch of annoyance linger. At this rate of communication and mediation, the strike is set for the long haul. The deeper the strike gets, the harder the work-to-rule negotiations (the ones that back pay the striking workers) will be. You’ll get a situation similar to Toronto’s garbage strike, where it almost seemed harder to get the back-to-work terms settled even after the strike itself was settled.
While the strike has a minimal effect on me and many of my peers, I empathize with the union. They have fought for the privileged wages that so many exploit, and it is painful to watch a select, self-interested group impair an organization with such fortitude.
I’m positive that it is no one’s intention to prolong the strike and move into a York University situation, but cornered as they are now, CUPE has no choice but to continue to strike. With no clear end in sight, little power and limited support, neither CUPE nor the university will get the short end of the stick – the students will – and neither Mac or CUPE will be to blame.
Tags: Editorial, McMaster TA Strike, scabs
Hey, Did You Know?
You can be updated automatically when new comments are added using this RSS Feed. If you've never used RSS before, watch this to get started.
Loading ...
It is very narrow minded of you and the union to call those who disagree with them selfish. It borders on hypocritical when you and the union to look down your noses at those who, in their own way (by continuing to work), have made their opinions known.
Why is it so hard for you and the union to accept that free will is more pervasive than the mob mentality and group think you and the union are so eager to embrace?
OK lets talk about selfish.
a TA is a member of CUPE 3906. There is no card to sign, there is no requirement to sign up upon being hired, every TA is a member of CUPE 3906. Every TA is a union member whether they chose to be or not – thats the way it is, thats the way it has always been and thats how it will continue to be. Some TAs disagree with being in a union without signing – however, they have had ample time to inform themselves of this issue, ask questions about their rights and to go through the proper channels via CUPE National to revoke their membership.
How many TAs have done this? 0/2700
So, as a member of this union they earn an incredible wage, have fantastic benefits, legal support, access to a hardship fund, equity support among other monitary and non-monitary benefits.
Nobody will ever argue that these people are underpaid, unless of course they work more hours than they are contracted for – another discussion in itself.
The reason why this job pays so well is because the workers united and formed a union, decades ago. Every 2-3 years the contract was renegotiated and through collective bargaining, and occasional strikes (this is the second TA strike in 30 years at McMaster) it has developed into what it is today. Some would argue that these members OWE it to the union, to continue this tradition of solidarity. Personally, i dont think anyone owes the union anything, I am just putting it out there.
Regarding the “scabs”
There are a number of TAs who are some combination of the following;
a) Dont care about collective union bargaining and just want to work
b) Are in disagreement with CUPE 3906’s key bargaining issues
c) Are in disagreement with unionism in general
d) Dont want to impact the unrelated parties (faculty, undergraduates)
e) Are worried about financial implications of striking
These are all valid things to think, and nobody can say not to think them.
Some of these TAs have decided to continue working despite their union calling a strike. These TAs are the “scabs”. Upon the end of the strike, when a new contract is signed, these “scabs” will also be under the new contract. If the new contract happens to have monitary and non monitary gains, these “scabs” will also get these gains.
Every TA (Assuming none are truely ignorent of this whole situation) who choses to continue working knows that their choice will reduce the chances of the union signing a contract that their bargaining team (who was democratically elected at General Membership Meetings) feels addresses they key concerns of the membership (who were polled in the spring and summer via standard protocol). These “scabs” also know that some of their colleagues, in arguably similar financial situations, have chosen to support their union, lose their pay, picket in the cold rain, increase their workload by 10 hours (TA is 10hr/week, Picket is 20hr/week) in hopes to achieve a better contract for every TA, including those who scab. These TAs also know that by continuing to work they are reducing the pressure of labour disruption which will add to the length of the strike – add to the length of time their colleagues are without pay – add to the length of time the entire McMaster community is affected by pickets – add to the time that some classes/tutorials are disrupted.
Knowing all these things, and still chosing to work is why they are SELFISH
lets go back and look at the items a-e – and see if they justify scabbing
a) if you dont want to participate or be involved in any way too bad, you are a TA, you are part of the union, you must decide to scab or not scab.
b) The key issues were democratically identified, if nothing else respect democracy
c) Political views on unionism are no reason to hinder the sacrafices of others. If nothing else this provides a chance to experience a strike first hand and educate yourself. It might add to your current thoughts, or change them. Scabbing is not fighting against unionism, its negatively affecting the entire McMaster community
d) This strike is happening, whether anyone likes it or not. The impact to the community will be minimized by having the strike finished ASAP. Scabbing increases the length of a strike. Despite the fact that any idividual TAs 20-30 students wont be affected, the other 20,000 or so will feel the effects of a prolonged strike
e) Every TA got paid on the last Wednesday of October. This pay would normally hold everyone off until the last Wednesday of November. By picketing everyone will be paid 3 weeks of strike pay plus have the oppurtunity to receive $400 Hardship based on salary loss by the scheduled November pay. 3×200 +400 is $1000 – TA pay in a month is between 1100-1200 (after fees, taxes, ect) . We are talking about a temporary loss of $100-$200, until the next week, when they get their next $200 picket cheque
THIS MEANS THAT NOBODY WHO IS PICKETING WILL HAVE ANY LESS MONEY IN THEIR POCKET UNTIL THE LAST WEDNESDAY OF DECEMBER.
Go ahead, be against striking. I dont think its a perfect method of collective pressure – I certainly dont think its a good method in a university where their are tens of thousands of 3rd party people. However, its the way labour relations in Canada is done. If you dont like it, write to you MPP, start a protest group, vote PC in the federal elections. This is not the time to take a stance, scabbing is not the best method to protest, you are hurting your colleagues and the entire McMaster community.
Go to the GMM on Sunday November 8, speak your opinion, ask questions. Get involved, dont sit back and pretend you are taking a moral high ground, or hide behind the anti CUPE shield. Dont be selfish, be informed and participate. This is your union. you have just as much responsibility to make it run democratically as everyone else. Just because you didnt sign up doesnt mean you arent a part of it.
None of these reasons a-e in anyway justify being a scab. This is why they are selfish.
Of source some may find reason f,g,h,i … but they sure arent as common as a-e
Danny V,
I have read your posts on many different forums now, including MacInsiders where you are quite vocal.
There is an ongoing theme that TAs who do not chose to strike are not doing it to be selfish, but to instead take a moral stance against this strike and how it affects the community.
OK, fair enough. I actually dont agree with the logic, but still, lets move on.
I would say however, that you must admit that the idea of working while others sacrafice to make gains for everyone COULD be percieved as selfish – you must atleast see this view. You suggest that these choices are not based on self interest, but instead for the reasons stated above.
Lets prove that its not selfishness and its purely based on the moral highground as you suggest!
I suggest that you and others publicly state that any gains in this new contract, that were gained through striking which you chose not to be involved in will be DONATED TO A CHARITY. Any wage increase, or tuition rebate that a TA who claims not be acting selfishly gains should be voluntarily donated in a public way by them to a needy cause of their choice.
I personally am very skeptical of scabbing TAs actually not being selfish but instead hiding behind this moral shield. By implementing the above suggestion I (along with the others who think like me) would be COMPLETELY DEBUNKED and you would all prove your point
Just let me know and I would be happy to work with you to figure out an accounting mechanism to do this and a way to demonstrate this in a public way.
I totally agree with you Danny V. We’re saving so much money thanks to the free will of these admirable students who compromise the picket lines that we (the university) may never have to end the strike!
“it is painful to watch a select, self-interested group impair an organization with such fortitude.”
Kinda like how CUPE 3096 is impairing ~25,000 students every day from attending their classes on time and without hassle?
Grow up.
So whats your beef?
CUPE 3906 is a union, unions strike to collectively add pressure to their employer.
Is your problem with
a) all unionism in general
b) university sector unions
c) McMaster’s CUPE 3906
It sounds more like its a)
You sure are right, strikes are bad for everyone. But without them do you think things like meternity leave, sick leave, vacation days, protection against racism, employer paid benefits would ever have come to be?
This system isnt perfect, and Im not trying to say unionism is great. I have alot of serious problems with large unions who amass enough power to control a company. I have problems with Canadians only being able to get a MRI between 9-5 M-F, and I have alot of problems with GM facing financial crisis because of rapidly inflating wages – among other cases
I would never however stand inbetween a collective group of workers who are acting in the safest legal way to put pressure on their employer to fight for wage and benefit concerns that they democratically voted to fight until strike for.
Who are you as an individual to determine what this group of people want and need. You sure have the right to be upset and inconvenienced – and voice your opinion, but do you have the right to actively try to stop them or hurt their efforts?
Apologies, CUPE 3906. My bad, wouldn’t want to disrespect those heroes.
I’m a TA and I do not support the strike. If taking a democratic decision to not support the strike leads to my being branded a “scab”, then so be it. To be honest, as a moderate member of the bargaining unit, I find the militancy of the union off-putting and alienating. Hey, it’s not that I don’t want more benefits and fairness in employment, but I have to make a principled stance in opposing the *means* by which those demands are framed.
On the union website, it is claimed that all options have been exhausted before undertaking a strike — but that’s only true if you think being antagonistic is the only way to make one’s voice heard. I wish we had something akin to the Dutch polder model, where there’s a strong culture of consensus-building in labor relations. Granted, in the polder model, decisions are made very slowly, but but the decisions are made, implementation is fast. It has been suggested that this is one of the reasons for the infrequency of strikes in the Netherlands. Over here, there is a culture of distrust between the union and the McMaster which just makes everything so dysfunctional.
The union blames the employer, in particular certain members of the senior administration for this, and I’m sure there is some merit in that position. I have dealt with some of the suits in Gilmour Hall, and they don’t really inspire too much confidence. That said, in my years here, I have never seen the union make any overt gestures to earn trust. In my opinion, unions do need to have the employer’s trust. Like any relationship, it is a two-way street.
Back in the 1980s, a large multinational in the Netherlands was having severe financial difficulties, and the management told the unions that the only way they could survive was to cut costs, and layoffs were the last resort, but would be carried out if necessary. The union leaders decided that in a gesture of solidarity with the employer, their members would work overtime without extra pay, and scale back on all benefit demands, until the company was back on its feet. It was a particularly courageous decision, but because the Dutch consensus culture was so strong, they brought it to bear. After a few rough years of restructuring, the company finally recovered, and bonuses were paid to the workers who made sacrifices to keep the company afloat. If only the union here would extend gestures like that to the administration (regardless of how bad the administration is), I think at the very least it bring about good will toward the union.
As for this strike, here are my thoughts.
TA positions are a privilege, not a right. At many U.S. universities, TA positions are competitive. In light of this, I find the culture of entitlement with regard to TA benefits on Canadian campuses slightly disturbing.
I grew up with the notion that the world does not owe us a living. A lot of us made the choice to go to graduate school based on the financial package we were offered, and we knew that we were going to be making far less money than if we were holding a permanent job, but we went anyway because it was an opportunity to improve ourselves and for some of us in fields that are more easily monetized, a graduate degree would make us more marketable and would start us off at a higher base salary after graduation. There are those of us with families to support, but we are fully cognizant of the fact that the TA income is meant to support one person only — and that we are responsible for making other arrangements to ensure that our families are taken care of.
Also, TAships are meant to supplement other income sources, not be the sole source of income (I realize this isn’t true in the humanities, but in that case, I would advocate for folks for whom their TAship is the only source of income be treated as separate category, and be accorded more benefits than the rest of us).
It is with that mindset that I’m approaching this issue.
I do not think that all of the union’s demands are unreasonable (some of them, like class caps, are actually quite reasonable, and the university’s offer has failed to address them). I do however find the approach taken by the union in framing its demands to be quite questionable.
Linking tuition to TA salaries for one. A TA has a dual relationship with the university, both as an employee and as a student. Tuition is payment for services provided by the university. Those of us who are international students know and accept the fact that tuition is often subject to inflation, and we plan for it. A TAship is employment offered by the university, often part of a bigger financial package that includes bursaries, scholarships, and external funding. Some students don’t have TAship’s, so they need to look for other funding sources. My question is: since when has it been a right to demand that the two track each other? I can see why you would want to *ask* for it to be so, but it is by no means your *right* to have it so. This is one of the issues I have with the union’s language of entitlement.
I have friends who are nurses who aren’t making close to $38/hr, and their work is assuredly more demanding than that of TA’s. One may say, oh they don’t have to pay tuition. Well, they aren’t getting a graduate degree as part of the deal. A TA-ship isn’t meant to be a career. I realize that my current benefits have been fought for by the union in the past, but there is point where one stops being an exploited TA, and stops threatening strikes to make demands. But the whole raison d’etre of this union seems to be to continually think up new things to ask for and stir up dissent among TAs when there is little or none.
This is not unrelated to the use of combative and close-minded language in the union’s emails and other material. Granted there are some in the union leadership who are more moderate, but I’ve not been impressed by the emails I have been receiving, phrases like “school yard bully tactics” are bandied about. I find it just a tad melodramatic and unprofessional — and it generally puts doubt in my mind about the competence of union leadership. I really have to read between the lines and see past all the histrionics when I get these emails.
A lot of the issues raised by the union aren’t make-or-break issues. I can see why they were raised by certain segments of the TA population because they are directly affected, but to make blanket demands on behalf of all TAs seems to me to be very presumptuous. Furthermore, casting aspersions on TAs who aren’t in support of union’s position to strike based on the those issues is extremely insulting and only serves to engender ill-will toward the union from those who would actually be quite likely to support certain demands were they framed more civilly. The union does not realize how important language is in garnering support from the more moderate segments of the TA population.
Well, there’s my two cents worth. I’m sure many will disagree with me, and I’m willing to listen to those who disagree with me and are wiling to correct me without denigrating me….
As for the strike, I’d like to see it go up for binding arbitration. Both sides will lose, generally the unions lose less. I think that’s fair in this particular situation.
There were alot of things said here – many I agree with, many I dont.
I just want to touch on two things
1) I agree that binding arb. would be great here.
2) Its true that tuition is involved in student affairs, and wages are involved in employee affairs.
The university argues that being a student and being an employee have to be kept separate. They cannot based on moral reasons, consider tuition in this contract.
However,
-If you fail your academic studies, you are fired from being a TA
-less than 20/2700 TAs are not students who pay tuition at McMaster. Therefor one could argue that paying tuition is a condition of TA employment. This can be taken one step further to say that it is a cost of living increase
but whoa! tuition isnt a cost of living, like food, electricity, rent ect.
When people who drive for a living experience an increase in fuel prices, this is a cost of living
When people have to buy equipment for their jobs (boots, coats, tools), this is a cost of living
It is VERY standard for unions to demand cost of living increases in new contracts. This is no different. Infact this has already been implemented (tuition increase rebates) in several other ontario university TA contracts.
Another way to look at it… even if you think these are separate, at what point do you step in and say I dont care if its separate, this is BS
A TA makes ~11k/yr Grad tuition is ~6k/yr
This year tuition went up ~600, the university tabled contract says salary goes up ~100
this means net difference of minus ~500
If it was a net difference of -5000 would you expect people to be OK with it? All im saying is that its great that the university can hide behind this student employee duality argument, but at some point its just taking advantage of people. If nothing else, respect the fact that these TAs think being swindled for $500 this year, and an additional extra $500 next year when tuition goes up again is enough for them to stand up and say enough is enough. I say swindled because university messaging is strongly tellings TAs that the new contract will have them earning more money!
Jeff, you sit here, insulting 1st year psych TA’s, criticizing people for standing up for their beliefs, etc. Its highly insulting. Why should a TA strike if they don’t agree with the strike. As an undergraduate TA, I attend classes which this strike affected. Seeing as that inconvenienced me and bothered me, why would I go and do that to the students I teach.
This is one thing the Union did not consider by striking, they actually alienate some of their membership. Undergrad TA’s can get severely affected when their courses get affected by the Grad TA’s go on strike, and so its not going to get CUPE any sympathy from those people.
As to your remark about 1st year psych TA’s, I believe you are uninformed about what exactly goes on in a IntroPsych tutorial and if you really believe we’re sitting here asking cookie-cutter questions maybe you should sit in on a tutorial run by a grad student. 90% of the time iny mexperience, they’re just lecture repetition. Why is the IntroPsych tutorial program rated so highly? Its not because of the powerpoint slides and its not because BSB has the most awesome rooms on campus. It’s probably got a lot to do with what the TA’s do, being the first line of a course of 3200 students.
So, let me get this straight?
You are an undergraduate TA, you applied to be a TA, you applied to be part of the union
Once you were hired you took no steps in revoking your union membership
And now you dont think you have any reason to help the union who is trying to get you a $7/hr raise and better learning and teaching conditions. Also, not only do you think you shouldnt help them by walking the lines, you think you should scab and undermine them.
Thats why the author said you are selfish.
I do agree with you that intro psych TAs are very important and useful. The video lectures and notes leave alot of questions and these TAs are the only chance for students to ask face to face questions.
Helping the union is one thing. Hurting students is another. It came down to the decision between UNION VS STUDENTS. Don’t call us selfish because of our choices. All of us agreed that we would teach, paid or not, because of the students. Not for our own benefit.
You are claiming you are a TA not because of the money (or the experience for your resume) but because you want to teach. Maybe you are a special case, but you can be sure that teaching and experience are the driving factors for MOST undergraduate TAs (scab and not scab).
As for hurting students.
Did you participate in the strike mandate vote, which read something along the lines of do you agree to empower your bargaining team to call a strike in order to a achieve a fair contract?
If you did vote, then great, you participated in democracy. By the way, the majority of people said yes
if you didnt vote then you made a choice. your choice was to null your democratic voice and let others choose for you.
Oh you didnt know about the vote? didnt have time do vote?
It was sent over everyones email, it was held over 6 days in August and September, there were MUSC tables, Student center forums, rallies, outreach to Mac sports teams and other efforts to inform and get people to participate. If you dont feel it was a good enough job then you should walk into the CUPE office and say, “hey, i dont think you did a good enough job informing members of the strike vote, how can I help the next one?” You shouldnt ignore democracy.
And incase you didnt notice there is a strike going on. You scabing wont stop it, it will drag it out longer
Your choice to not get involved earlier and to now scab is hurting students MORE.
If you want to hurt students less then email the Mac Admin and tell them to EVEN SHOW UP AT THE BARGAINING TABLE and get this over with, and dont weaken the labour disruption by continuing to work.
danny V is full of laughs. imagining some angry little engineer man sitting at his computer is lulz
also AJ is, and always will be a, great comedian.
dohoho cupe does what they dont like!!!! -.-
I’d just like to say that, as an undergraduate IntroPsych TA who has decided NOT to strike, it was not an easy decision to make. All of us were asked to weigh the options and, after being COMPLETELY informed, made our decisions.
I examined what was morally right for myself – in this case, supporting my 75+ students, who have almost no other resource other than those “pre-recorded online lectures” – rather than being one extra person to support the Union. Concepts in class are WAY more challenging than online material and I wanted to provide first year students with equal opportunity for the inflated tuition they pay compared to previous years. As for IntroPsych TAs having nothing invested, many of us take a course in Educational Psychology where we are graded on how we teach our tutorials and evaluated on how we can improve. We study effective teaching techniques are and how to get students interested and the course can not run without continuation of tutorials.
Those IntroPsych TAs who decided to strike were supported, encouraged, and applauded by the TAs who made the decision NOT to strike. None of us judged, looked down on, or even influenced other people’s decisions. We all made our own individual decisions and I think that going against CUPE showed more backbone than standing down.
For me, the decision came down to this: CUPE should be hurting the University, not the students. I won’t be part of that.
“For me, the decision came down to this: CUPE should be hurting the University, not the students. I won’t be part of that.”
Awesome,
come up with a new way for labour relations to work in Canada and suggest it to government. Until then, embrace the current legal system which is being implemented here.
Also, you are part of it, whether you like it or not.
Sure, you are acting against CUPE by scabbing. You are showing your protest and standing up for what you beleive is right. Great!
But dont pretend that you standing up at this point and making these choices isnt infact prolonging the strike and prolonging the disruption to McMaster. If you dont want to support the union, and dont want to further hinder the community and truely dont want to be involved, then do what hundreds of other TAs are doing. Dont scab and Dont Picket. Stay home & suck up the loss of pay for a few weeks.
Remember, you already got paid normally until end of November
You can also apply for a 400 union hardship because you lost salary.
If nobody scabs then the university would give the union what they want (the university bargaining team said “this is not about money”) and the strike would FOR SURE be finished before the 5-6wk mark when people who stay home and dont scab/picket would be at a loss of money
I dont care what you chose to do. You can scab if you want. Just know what you are doing and that it is making this WORSE
I’d just like to add that I DID vote. We were all sent e-mails informing us on the issues. We did our homework. It was a pain in the butt.
I don’t care whether it affects students for a week or a year – it affects students. I won’t stop teaching for a single day if it’s for a cause I don’t believe in. I won’t be threatened with legal action or the idea that the strike will be longer if I don’t just conform and agree with your terms.
Respect my decision as we have respected yours.
Im very happy to hear you voted. Its too bad most undergraduate TAs didnt. I know that because i sat at one of the 3 polling stations and i personally dont recal crossing off a single undergraduate member from the list. Glad to hear atleast one of you voted though.
Im sad to hear that it was “a pain in the butt” to inform yourself and democratically vote on issues that relate to the personal finances and quality of education for thousands of people you go to school with.
I am however now confused. A “cause you dont believe in” suggests you dont agree with the democratic voice of the rest of the 2700 members on their key bargaining issues. Are you against the idea of collective bargaining based on democracy? or are you against collective bargaining in general? or are you against democratic collective bargaining that doesnt parallel with your individual (1 / 2700) opinion?
If its not the “cause” and infact the tactic (ie strike) that you dont agree with, then again. Stay home.
I do respect your decision. I have never told anyone not to scab. Its your choice, just know what its consequences are and dont try to dust any of the blame off your shoulders.
I have worked hard to get people to understand and admit that scabbing is prolonging the strike and prolonging the negative effects of labour disruption. People hate to hear it, people hate even more to admit its true, because they want to think they are actinvg in favour of the students, but it just isnt true!
I can also see things from your point of view
You disagree with union tactics, based on their consequences to the university community
You want to show that you disagree by acting in a way that a) keeps your students in the classroom and b) shows the union they do not have your support
the crappy thing for people like you is that scabbing means contributing to keeping hundreds of other students out of the classroom and held in lines to go to the parking lots!
After rereading my post and thinking about it, i found an error
I actually have told people not to scab. I shouldnt have, but it has happened
“I won’t be threatened with legal action or the idea that the strike will be longer if I don’t just conform and agree with your terms. ”
Nobody threatened legal action.
Questions about it being possible were asked, answers were given in public forums.
The union NEVER said they would persue legal action on any person who continues to work.
Also, these are not MY terms. i am not the union. I am one TA. I am 1/2700 people who make this union. this union is run by students for students. You dont like the way it is, get involved and make it better.
Nobody wants you to conform, just understand and be informed of the consequences of your decisions.
Again, I understand your resistance to accept this, you thought you were helping the students.
If you feel your direct contact with your particular students is more important that you indirect effect on tens of thousands of other community members then thats OK too. Just dont pretend the latter doesnt exist.
Legal action: The CUPE can take away all union rights (understandably), including benefits and voting privileges. It is termed legal action.
In addition, it is a lose-lose situation. I made my decision and I made an informed one, as did many TAs. I don’t need to be told that I’m uninformed or that I’m making the wrong decision just because I’m not making the same decision as you. I am unimpressed with the fact that by teaching, I prolong the strike. This is just another aspect of free-will taken from those within the union. Another means of pressuring people into supporting something they really don’t support.
I weighed pros and cons. Like I said, none of this was an easy decision. And yes, it was a pain in the butt because I have a life too. It’s been a pain in the butt for all of the students who have been stopped in the parking lot. It’s been a pain in the butt for MANY people.
“Legal action: The CUPE can take away all union rights (understandably), including benefits and voting privileges. It is termed legal action.”
Personally, i am not a lawyer and dont know how true this is. But i just want to say that people emailed and asked about this. The union responded to these questions by giving their honest answer. They did not say they would actually persue legal action. So its not a threat, please dont accuse it of being one. If you are concerned about this possibility im sure the union or the university could give you an answer if you email or drop into the right person(s) offices.
“I am unimpressed with the fact that by teaching, I prolong the strike. This is just another aspect of free-will taken from those within the union. Another means of pressuring people into supporting something they really don’t support. ”
I fully agree. This is one of the reasons why I am quite conservative in federal politics. University politics however, i am very socialist. My personal feelings is that a university is not a profit making venture. If cuts need to be made (as suggested by this economic climate) then the employees and the students should be the last to bare this burden. Cut the spending on gardens, redoing the arts quad AGAIN, putting money into MSU which loses money, expanding to burlington ect. Your comment bares the question if TAs should even have a union in the first place… a whole different debate. But the reality is that there is one.
“I weighed pros and cons. Like I said, none of this was an easy decision. And yes, it was a pain in the butt because I have a life too. It’s been a pain in the butt for all of the students who have been stopped in the parking lot. It’s been a pain in the butt for MANY people.”
You are right, its a tough decision, and i am sorry that i assumed you were uninformed. I am glad you took the time to educate yourself. However, many of your peers didnt take the time to read all the documents and think about things.
Everyone has a life, common. Whether or not you chose to redistribute your time away from fun and dedicate it towards things like this is what makes you an adult. We all have studies and research and jobs and social life and family …
‘TA-not a scab’ is super defensive
“I dont care what you chose to do. You can scab if you want. Just know what you are doing and that it is making this WORSE”
That doesn’t make all too much sense.
I respect that the union has things they want to get, etc. But, I think striking action is the wrong way to get it. Striking action clearly isn’t working, the university is not looking like caving and thats partly because of the most unimposing picket I’ve ever seen. And, given that there are 2700 CUPE members, that speaks to the level of support or just interest/general knowledge in this strike.
@Scab-not a TA – You talked about ways a-e that make us selfish. Well, lets consider that by hindering the education of others, hurting their educational experience, etc; you’re being equally selfish. There’s no right or wrong answer here, except for that we should be trying to have this run as quietly as possible etc. the TA’s and RA’s should not be causing a ‘disturbance’ at the university. Bargain, try and get what you feel you are owed, but do it the right way. As you said, a strike is not the best method, so don’t use it.
Also, “It was sent over everyones email” – not mine. Given I’m a CUPE member, I’ve noticed I don’t get the CUPE emails. I’m going to call that a failure. Why should I believe in anything CUPE advertises as democratic if they don’t even send me the information emails. Not that it would have swayed my position, but you know.
Also, if we wanna play the #’s game about selfishness/unselfishness. – You picketers are being unselfish for 2700 CUPE members. Intropsych TA’s are unselfish for 3200 Intropsych students. Winner winner chicken dinner.
I dont see what didnt make sense about what i wrote.. but fair enough. As for being defenseive, yah i kind of am. I dont mind fair informed debate, but misinformed angry people are tough to deal with. And i am not trying to suggest the people on this comment string are the misinformed/angry, I have been spending all week talking to the Mac community about these issues. If my tone is offensive, then i do appologise.
you are right, the lines are weak. hundreds of TAs hate the idea of a picket line. Hundreds of TAs are staying home and not working AND not picketing. However, alot of TAs are also chosing to work. I personally would argue, that this cohort is the less informed.
Please, be fair here. I have never said that the impact of a strike isnt negatively affecting thousands of students. It is, and i really dont like doing it.
Please dont forget that the union bargaining team remained at the table for 7 hours after the university team left after the strike deadline, calling and emailing trying to resume negotiation. Also, please dont forget that the vast majority of money that the union was asking for in the summer has been taken off the table in hopes to bargain and avert a strike. The university has essentially the same offer as early august, and refuses to even go to the table.
But, this is a union. Unions strike. There is legal procedure for this and it was executed.
And as for this comment
“As you said, a strike is not the best method, so don’t use it.”
There was a strike mandate vote in August and Septemeber that democratically said the membership was willing to persue bargaining to a strike if needs be. The union asked the members, the members spoke. Please dont pin this on me, or any other individual. Its democracy.
Also, you are right, not EVERYONE did get an email. If you read through the now expired collective agreement you will see there is a section where the university must provide the names, department and mac email address of all the union members to the union. The union actually is missing several hundred of these email adresses. I dont know why, I dont know what actions the university/union have taken to correct this, but it is the case. Since I dont know the efforts from either side to rectify this error, its hard for me to comment on whose “fault” it is. I certainly wouldnt blatently blame the union, or question their democracy though. If you dont beleive me read your old collective agreement, it is available to you.
None of your arguments change the fact that we are continuing to teach because this is what is morally/ethically important to us. Selfishness is based on values in this case. Some people might call you selfish for affecting all University students and professors and those TAs who did not want to strike. Others call it selfish to not support a union which is supposed to be unified and fight for the rights of TAs and RAs. All we ask is respectful understanding of our decision instead of calling us misinformed because we do not agree with you.
If you want some psychology, you’re extremely biased because you’re part of the driving force behind the strike. You feel strongly. And it’s not just you. After being PERSONALLY attacked as an IntroPsych TA, I now am biased towards “scabbing”. I could go into a zillion reasons why none of us are “right” but that’s not the point. The point is a respectful attitude. Not name-calling “scab” or arguing wrong or right or even calling us misinformed.
“None of your arguments change the fact that we are continuing to teach because this is what is morally/ethically important to us”
True: all i ask is not to forget/ignore that this decision negatively impacts the length and effect of the strike.
As for the selfishness:
It seems we are going in circles. I guess my underlying reasoning is that to scab is a personal choice. To follow the unions actions (which totally do affect “innocent” people) is also a personal choice. However, the unions actions, are based on democracy. This suggests that the voting membership share this selfishness among each other, and its not an individual thing. Its a good point you raise, i will put some more thought into it. Come to the GMM on sunday, come up to the mic and talk about it.
As for the word “scab”
Google it, you will find it in online dictionaries. It is a very common word used in labour relations for decades. This is not a McMaster thing, this is not a CUPE thing. It certainly is derogatory though. Please dont blindly take what the university PR people have written as fact. They have suggested that CUPE 3906 is stepping out of line with using this word, when you would be hard pressed to find a union (since the 70s) that did not refer to a scab worker as a scab. However, i will respect your personal feelings that you are offended by me using the word when refering to you or your peers.
So this is what I’m reading over and over again:
“Dont scab and Dont Picket. Stay home & suck up the loss of pay for a few weeks.” Pay….pay, pay, pay. Seriously, we need to get over that topic.
Do you really think, “TA-NOT A SCAB”, that so many IntroPsych TA’s have decided to continue the 108 classes per-week for over 3000 IntroPsych students because we are so bewitched by the monetary reward at the end of the month? Well, the simple answer is “NO”.
Batman, Nicole and myself, are all IntroPsych TA’s who love our classes and make sure our students get all the benefits from this course. Where would the 3000 students be without us, the selfish scabs, with cookie-cutter questions?
1. No tutorials = no opportunity to ask questions about the lecture material, as well as have information presented in a novel way that helps the information ’sink-in’
2. No TA’s = no live chat function during lectures
3. No TA’s = no Learning Lab hours to help students while they watch the lectures, or answer questions at any time
4. No TA’s = no CONSTANT discussion board feedback for the students
5. No TA’s = student entertaining a harmonious relationship with the web modules, in wait for their final exam
My suggestion – ask the students!!!!! Ask my 100+ students, who have thanked me for continuing my work, and for my constant dedication in catering to their needs, be it Monday 1AM or Sunday afternoon!!! Here is one little snippet from a students’ email:
“PS-Thank you very much for crossing the picket line.”
Now you can start providing me with all the union and governmental talk that you can conjure under 5 minutes. I read those comments and they show me that I made the right choice.
I never argued that the TA’s who did join the picket lines are not doing something good.
However, I had a choice – and I know bloody well I made the right one!
I won’t be there on Sunday (I’m working), but you can be sure I will be once again voting to end the strike and accept the University’s terms on Monday. Thanks for listening, that’s all we ask.
So this is what I’m reading over and over again:
“Dont scab and Dont Picket. Stay home & suck up the loss of pay for a few weeks.” Pay….pay, pay, pay. Seriously, we need to get over that topic.
Do you really think, “TA-NOT A SCAB”, that so many IntroPsych TA’s have decided to continue the 108 classes per-week for over 3000 IntroPsych students because we are so bewitched by the monetary reward at the end of the month? Well, the simple answer is “NO”.
Batman, Nicole and myself, are all IntroPsych TA’s who love our classes and make sure our students get all the benefits from this course. Where would the 3000 students be without us, the selfish scabs, with cookie-cutter questions?
1. No tutorials = no opportunity to ask questions about the lecture material, as well as have information presented in a novel way that helps the information ’sink-in’
2. No TA’s = no live chat function during lectures
3. No TA’s = no Learning Lab hours to help students while they watch the lectures, or answer questions at any time
4. No TA’s = no CONSTANT discussion board feedback for the students
5. No TA’s = student entertaining a harmonious relationship with the web modules, in wait for their final exam
My suggestion – ask the students!!!!! Ask my 100+ students, who have thanked me for continuing my work, and for my constant dedication in catering to their needs, be it Monday 1AM or Sunday afternoon!!! Here is one little snippet from a students’ email:
“PS-Thank you very much for crossing the picket line.”
Now you can start providing me with all the union and governmental talk that you can conjure under 5 minutes. I read those comments and they show me that I made the right choice.
I never argued that the TA’s who did join the picket lines are not doing something good.
However, I had a choice – and I know I made the right one!
Dont be so quick to jump on me.
Heres a quote from my previous comments
“I do agree with you that intro psych TAs are very important and useful. The video lectures and notes leave alot of questions and these TAs are the only chance for students to ask face to face questions.”
One of the reasons why I am so passionate about this is because i think the teaching service that TAs provide is so important. You are confusing me with the author of this article maybe? I took intro psych at Mac .. 7 years ago? .. something like that. I actually had Dick Day teach it in person on a Saturday morning and didnt have the videos, but i do remember the TAs and how they helped me understand rods and cones and blah blah blah. I actually dont remember the content now, but at the time it sure seemed neat.
Do you really think anyone would suggest that if you polled the undergraduate student body they wouldnt prefer to have all the TAs continue working and not strike? Thats not the point here. The whole point of this discussion was the validity of the authors comments that undergraduate TAs who decided to work instead of striking are selfish.
You and your peers ahve certainly stood up for your point that its not based on money, its based on your personal commitment to your students. Still, you are 3 out of hundreds. Infact, I am from the sciences, and I share office and labs with many TAs who are still working, grad and undergrad. You can be sure that I have engaged many of them in conversation about this issue. I have yet to hear a single one say its because of their students and not the money and not about being anti union. Maybe 1st year psych TAs are special? maybe you are a special 3, i dunno. But I am not convinced that this scab labour group in its entirety, or even its majority have the preservation of undergraduate education driving their actions & choices.
Thats a good question though. Write to the Sil, start a poll.
and you write this
“I never argued that the TA’s who did join the picket lines are not doing something good.”
This is your first comment on this page, you never argued ANYTHING hah
“However, I had a choice – and I know I made the right one!”
Nobody wants to take away your choices or free will. Just dont forget, its not without consequence.
Jeff, you suggested that perhaps the undergraduate TAs have never been in a union. I wonder… have you? I was shocked that CUPE 3906 went to strike without first taking the University’s final offer to the full membership for a vote. The mandate of a union leadership is to represent the best interests and desires of its entire membership. Having been elected does not grant the CUPE 3906 executive the freedom to do as it pleases and demand cooperation from its members.
“and you write this
“I never argued that the TA’s who did join the picket lines are not doing something good.”
This is your first comment on this page, you never argued ANYTHING hah”
Seriously? “Hah”? That is one of your conclusions? It really does not matter if I argued it here or not – I did have more intelligent conversations on the matter outside this discussion, and to reiterate, I never said in any of my conversations that “the TA’s who did join the picket lines are not doing something good.”
I also know you provided definitions for what you think a ’scab’ is, and so on…But I would like to point out what I found on many many websites…I really hope the author of the article reads these too.
***A “scab” a derogatory term used to describe a strike breaker. The term is actually an old English insult, and has been in use to describe a despicable person since at least 1590. In the 1700s, someone who refused to join a labor union was called a scab, and by 1806, the word had reached its modern usage. More temperate labor activists and unions use the term “strike breaker” to refer to a scab, but the word is often used in speeches and literature which are designed to fire up the strikers.***
“The term scab is a derogatory term used to refer to people who continue to work when trade unionists go on strike action.”
Just by using derogatory terms to refer to us makes the writing completely unprofessional, and I believe the whole article is -in essence- a very immaturely stated opinion. There should really be a triage for these sort of writings…
“and you write this
“I never argued that the TA’s who did join the picket lines are not doing something good.”
This is your first comment on this page, you never argued ANYTHING hah”
TA-NOT A SCAB,
I must say that I made a conscious effort to ignore the whole “pompous, holier-than-thou” attitude in favor of some of your more substantial arguments… however, I’m a firm believer that the term “hah” has no place within the “intellectual” debate that you have chosen to participate in. I’m sure Irina does not appreciate nor deserve a level of maturity typical of forum trolls lurking within forums for the sole intention of inciting infantile squabbles.
That being said, I’m afraid I don’t have time to compose a post of over 500 words long… It’s time to move on to something more… productive…
I find the original opinion piece to be a rant rather than op ed journalism. Jeff Green insults the intropsych TAs, implying that they are automatons (both in their TA duties and their role in the union) that should be grateful for being part of the union and fall in line with what the union leaders say.
“A first year psych TA? You have no reason not to join the picket line. You complement a pre-recorded video, and ask cookie-cutter questions.” (Jeff Green)
It’s clear that he is not even informed about what the TAs do, or what the Intropsych course resources are. This would seem to be a necessary first step before writing something to be published as journalism.
I think that even “TA-not a Scab” would agree that Jeff Green’s writing is a rant and not journalism.
I personally believe that the TAs who are working currently are the ‘true’ TAs who actually care about their students.
Well, for those who are on strike for higher pay, I just want to ask why you really want to be a TA. It’s not all because of money, is it?
Think about doctors. When you get an interview for med school, you would never say that you want to be a doctor because of money. Getting good money is of course important, but as a doctor, you should care more about your patients.
Same thing for the TAs, it is OK to express your thoughts about your wage, but that should be done in a way that does NOT affect students.
Currently, I can’t even ask questions to my bio TA because of this strike thing.
Also, as you all know, all the assignments and presentations that should have been done in tutorials have all been postponed to later dates.
That means that we all have to do our presentations when we should really be studying for exams. Honestly, I just want to get over with those before I start studying for exams.
Finally, I just want to say this to the TAs who are on strike:
DON’T call the TAs who chose not to go on strike selfish. To me, you guys are more selfish because you don’t care about students at all.
Well, that’s all I’m gonna say.
By the way, if you guys are still going to strike, please cancel (not postpone) all those assignments.
as for the strike mandate, people get fooled into voting yes by the following type of statements:
If you “don’t want to go on strike” a “yes” vote is much wiser. (last sentence on paragraph in following link – but they’re saying that if you give the union permission to call a strike there’s much less chance of it happening…waaaay too misleading)
http://www.cupe3906.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37#Two
also, did you know that if you TA’d say, back in April, but aren’t now, you were allowed to vote on the strike mandate? That is at least what is said here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_PEI4bARWY (at about 1:50 of the video)
To TA-NOT A SCAB
“…suggests you dont agree with the democratic voice of the rest of the 2700 members on their key bargaining issues”
I asked how many of these bargaining surveys were completed on the blog. The only response I got was “a small number”, by someone who spoke as if they knew. A quick poll in my building has me thinking that maybe 10 surveys were completed by people in my department. I would wager similar results in other science and engineering departments.
Yes I know – if those people didn’t fill them out or didn’t participate in the strike mandate vote, it’s their fault. I do agree with you on that. However, moreso for the bargaining surveys, the first questions deal with things like what program you’re in, what level you’re at, etc. They will know how many people from each dept. fill out a survey. If the union exec moves forward and forms a strategy based on that (and dismissing those departments who did not provide much help from the survey), they are going to be knowingly walking down a dangerous road.
When a leader is elected, there may have been a terrible voter turnout. This could end up meaning that 20% of the eligible voters in a country were responsible for this new person being elected. If this leader starts basing decisions on only those that elected them, what kind of reception do you think they’ll get when going around? there’ll be complaints, protests, calls for changing things. Then a choice comes. Changes are made, or they are not. Here, the union exec and bargaining team are standing on their ground – when other people are saying back off. And the response to the apathy is almost always “it’s your fault for not voting.” that does not get received well.
one last comment – i know someone who used to go to union meetings on behalf of their department. they stopped going though when it became clear that the union exec didn’t seem to place much importance on what people in that department thought. they stopped showing any sign of listening and instead it became more of a “go back and tell people in your department this and that.” this is part of the reason there’s apathy until around this time.
for the record, last week i neither picketed nor scabbed. i was holding out for a chance to vote on this offer. and after three petitions (that I know of) to have a ratification vote got submitted, then and only then did the union exec announce that this would occur (making it sound like it was their choice when the petitions themselves and our by-laws dictate it happen).
at this point i intend to accept the offer. i will say this though. anyone voting to reject it must (in my opinion) join the other picketers. if you reject this, you are saying the offer is not good enough. but if you are not on the line, then at the same time you are hurting the strength of those out there, and you are also having others fight for something you believe.
regardless of your thoughts on the matter, everybody – if you know a TA – tell them to vote!!!!!!
Maybe if graduate TAs cared at all about their students and could do a decent job instructing us we would have a lick of sympathy for your almost $40 an hour. We all know many of you are only here because you couldn’t cut it in the real world.
You don’t deserve benefits. You don’t even deserve the $40/hr. You do the same work as undergraduates, and the undergraduates actually CARE. Graduate pay should depend on the performance reviews your students give you, at least less of our tuition would be wasted on you that way.
You are being granted A PRIVILEGE to work while attending grad school. If you are only TAing for the money, quit – you are an embarrassment to the rest of us.
I will scab as long as my students want me to teach and my employer will let me. You can freeze outside and I WILL enjoy the fruits of your labour. I never wanted to be part of the union, I wanted to be a TA – A job I would gladly work at for $12 an hour.
I agree 100% with everything you said.
I would gladly be a TA for minimum wage!
I’d just like to say that the undergrad TA’s who choose to not strike, or “scab” probably feel they are overpaid in the first place and the union is being ridiculous.
I’d like to ask an important question – what kind of crazy, ass-backwards sort of civil disobedience is this? The fact that you’re working with the institution you’re striking against on how to properly strike against it is downright insane. Where are the Molotov cocktails? Where are the riots? Jump in with both feet, you pansies! None of this “holding area” nonsense and friendly banter with drivers. I talked with one striker the other day and when I asked how many people have been “genuinely furious,” he answered, “not many.” Not many! You’re doing it WRONG. I want to see the University have to draft some old-timey strike-busters.
But you might get hit with cars and be injured! Well, if you’re scared of that, CLEARLY you don’t actually care about what you’re standing up for. Since when is a protest supposed to be an overtly pleasant experience?
And just for the record, I am an undergrad who has recently volunteered to tutor classmates of mine. I won’t even be getting paid! All I’ll take home at the end of the day is the satisfaction that I helped someone learn. Doesn’t that sound nice and quaint and almost sickeningly wholesome?
The people who are protesting seem to have this weird sense of entitlement, like their job is some sort of career. Newsflash! You are students working a part-time job! The fact that your part-time job just happens to occur at the same place you go to school has no bearing on anything. The University doesn’t have any obligation to help you offset tuition and other costs – that’s your issue. They’re paying you because you’re doing a job. You’re paying them because you’re a student. These are mutually exclusive. If you still need money, OSAP is waiting with open arms, or you could get a second job like most students.
I don’t think TAs who continue to work are selfish. They may be doing it in order just to get paid, but at least they are helping some 25,000 students not lose a term or a year of education and tuition. I can’t say someone on the picket line here is “selfless”. They aren’t doing anything other than trying to help themselves.
This article may have been convincing if it wasn’t so unnecessarily insulting: “A first year psych TA? You have no reason not to join the picket line. You complement a pre-recorded video, and ask cookie-cutter questions”. There are so many TAs (especially undergrad TAs) who go above and beyond the cookie-cutter questions. To assume that all TAs in a certain course do little work is very ignorant. This entire article is very ignorant. It’s one thing to say your opinion. It’s another to be down right mean.
yo mandy.
you da mandy.
i completelee agreez wid yo rhetoric, but i don’t like yo tone. and i bet you think yo shit don’t stink.
watch out for da military industrial complex! and hold on to yo id. NOT i.d… id. it’s freudian shit, baby mandy.
Sorry if my repsonse came out that way. I didn’t mean to be stuck up or offensive. I just think the author of this article is unaware of how hard some TAs work and it’s not fair to insult them.
no need to explain yoself, mandy pandy.
we juz gotta look out for eachotha. pickin a scab only leavez a scar, naam sayen??? if you whyte, oh black, oh yella, oh tangerine, we all gotza work together, ya huurrd?
tupac wood agree with jeff green, so shood we allz. think about it.
as fo me, i’m a 1st year psych TA. i gotz lotsa free timezzz boiiii.
hold on to that id, mandy. i dig yo rhetoric.
T.A.’s: Your position is unnecessary, students would probably be better off spending those two hours a week doing some ACTUAL studying by themselves.
T.A.’s: You are overpaid. Nuff said.
Strikebreakers: Are you a student? Do you need to get paid? Fucking right you do, go to work, get your money, and ignore these idiots.