Let the Voice of the People Be Heard
April 30, 2011 7 Comments
We would like to address the editorial that appeared in the Daily Egyptian on Friday April 29th, 2011. The letter was written by Edward Hackett, the former Vice-President of Communications for GA United. Mr. Hackett called GAU – and the other campus unions – actions in filing notices of intent to strike on Thursday “ludicrous” and publically called for a “vote of no confidence in union leadership,” saying that our election process is “very dangerous.”
GAU’s current elected officials for the year of 2010-2011, Jim Podesva (President), Dan Elgin (Vice-President for Membership), and Kristi Brownfield (Secretary/Treasurer), believe that Mr. Hackett’s statement is disingenuous at best, and at worst, a conscious misrepresentation of the facts surrounding Graduate Assistant United’s negotiations with the representatives of the Board of Trustees.
Until this year’s election, Mr. Hackett was indeed Vice-president of Communications for GAU, but in no way was he speaking officially in his editorial. In truth, he held that position in name only; for at least the last nine months, he has been incommunicado, declining to answer phone calls or emails. Mr. Hackett is correct in stating that he participated in negotiations with the administration in the summer of 2010. Sadly, that was the last time he participated with the union in any capacity. His disappearance was his choice alone, and he left the organization with no notice, no warning, and without an explanation, despite repeated attempts by the other officers to include him. Without Mr. Hackett, we have been negotiating since that time. GAU has been, in Mr. Hackett’s words, “Seeking a productive compromise with the university” for over a year now, to no avail, but we continue to work with the Board of Trustees’ representatives to find solutions that help both the university and our constituency. If Mr. Hackett had been an active member of the organization, he would know that negotiations continue.
In regards to Mr. Hackett’s comments about GAU’s potential participation in a strike, there are several things to keep in mind. First, GAU – along with the Association of Civil Service Employees, the Faculty Association, and the Non-Tenure Track Faculty Association – only filed notices of intent to strike. A Notice of Intent to Strike merely serves as official notice that the union reserves the right to strike in the future, but in no way commits the union to that course of action. This does not mean we are going on strike. Each individual union will vote on that choice. You will make that choice – the members. We are not anywhere near a strike vote – or a strike — right now and all of your executive committee and bargaining team members truly hope that a strike does not happen. What we want is to be able to sit down at the bargaining table with a Board of Trustees bargaining team that is willing to compromise, rather than just say no to every proposal or impose terms and conditions, and create a fair, mutually acceptable contract that everyone can be proud of.
So, for GAs, what that means is:
a) Get informed! You need to be in the know about the issues on the table and what the administration wants us to have. You can come to a meeting on Monday May 2nd, at Lawson 141, from 4:45-6:15pm to hear more about the situation with all four unions and why we have come to this point. Our website (http://gaunited.org ) is also a good resource with information on bargaining, including a list of issues still on the table.
b) Get involved! GAU is an all-volunteer organization. None of the officers or activists working on your behalf receives any compensation beyond the satisfaction of helping to create a better SIUC. We always welcome people willing to work with us to achieve that goal of building a quality, fair university. If you don’t like the road GAU seems to be taking, get involved and help us chart a better path!
c) Stand together! This message is very important, today, on the eve of May 1st – May Day. May 1st, 1886 – 125 years ago – workers across the country went on strike for an 8-hour work day. In Chicago, on May 4, the strike led to a bomb being thrown in Haymarket Square, 8 police dying and 8 labor leaders going on trial. Four were executed by the state and the fifth committed suicide in prison. In 1893, Illinois’s governor pardoned the remaining 3 labor leaders and declared the “Haymarket Affair” a travesty. It divided the country – but also brought rise to May Day, an international labor holiday on May 1st.
The Haymarket Affair is one of many such incidents that happened because employees were standing together to have a voice in their workplace. That is what a union does. It is a collection of people who come together to fight for the rights to have a say, to have power, in where they work. That is what GAU is dedicated to – giving you a voice in SIUC.
About kabrownfield
Springing the ‘intent to strike’ notice on all of us is where you lost me. It is ridiculous. Please don’t point to the 2nd item on the email announcing elections. That was just weak. Something so important at least deserved its own email, let alone a solicitation from members as to whether this was a step we needed to take. Sure it is far from calling a strike vote or actually striking, but did your members know that when you announced it? Are you sure they do now? Does the general public?
The greatest harm that the Unions can do right now is to seem too radical. By failing to communicate to your constituents and the general public, you risk looking like the stereotypical ‘gimme’ union. Sure unions are under attack, but we can’t afford to be as radical as our adversaries. Unions create change best when they have the support of not only their members but of the general public as well. I don’t see where the current leadership is adequately telling the story of what is going on.
We have tried to reach out and solicit opinions from GAs around the campus. We even held an open forum on April 5th about striking and the right to strike. However, your point of better communicating with our members and the general public is well taken and we are going to do our best to try and keep the those lines open, especially as we head into even murkier waters with the possibility of a strike that none of us want to see happen. What we want is a good contract — filing a notice of intent to strike is one tool we have in our toolbox to try and reach a good contract. Regardless, we still need people to help out, to let us know your opinions, to help us fight for the rights of GAs. You don’t have to have a title to help us run this organization; in fact, some of the best people we have don’t have titles! Come to the meeting on Monday and talk to any of us, please! We want to hear from you.
I have to point to the meeting on April 5th “GA United and the right to strike” I received email notices and there were notices on this website. The topic was discussed on several occasions besides that specific meeting as well. I fully support the idea that as members our input is critical to a functioning union. I however disagree that the leadership is somehow not putting forth enough effort, or doing something in secret. They have committed an enormous amount of time and effort to the negotiations and running of this union. Not only has there been numerous meeting covering this topic, our leadership is always willing to speak to any of us individually or as groups at anytime. The only way for our voices to be heard is to come to the meetings and participate in our democratic institution.
Dear Kent,
My name is William Stodden. I have served the Union on the grievance committee for about 3 years now, and have been with the bargaining team since last fall. I understand your concern here, and let me tell you, I understand it, and sympathize to some degree.
Let me answer you the following way: There are three groups of people represented by this Union. All are grad assistants. In fact the Union represents about 1700 grad assistants here at SIUC. Not all of them bother to pay dues for the services they get from the Union (the contract being the absolute biggest one of those services, but ALL grad assistants, whether they pay dues to the Union or not, get additional services from the Union, like advocacy in grievances, legal representation from the Union, and any pay and benefits increases that the Union has negotiated.) The group who actually pays dues to the Union is less than 15% of the total number of assistants that the Union represents. That fraction of the total bargaining unit carries the weight for the rest of the Assistants who don’t feel it is in their interest to pay dues but we have to represent anyway. And the third group is the fraction of those who pay dues who actually show up and volunteer to do things in the Union. Either sitting on a committee, or serving as a organizer or a steward in a department, or working with the bargaining team on contract negotiation, or filling an office: these are the people who care enough to make time in their busy schedules (we all have the same schedule. Let’s be honest. If we are assistants, we all do the same things. I have a family, I am working on my dissertation. I have less time than a 20 something grad assistant that is taking classes and grading or covering a discussion section, but I still make meetings, I still work grievances, and I still go to negotiation meetings.)
When you ask “[Did] your members know that when you announced it? Are you sure they do now? Does the general public?” and then call the action too radical and ridiculous, let me ask you, where were you when the decision was being made? I see five, maybe six people at meetings when we call them. I see four people making it to bargaining regularly. Of 1700, or of 200, these are the six or so people who give a damn about the process enough to show up. To be completely honest, your comment really reflects a complete lack of knowledge or of understanding about the process. To some degree, that is the fault of the leadership of the Union. We all gotta take our responsibility for not doing the ground work necessary to fully educated 1700 students about what we were doing and get their opinions.
But: It is not ALL our fault, is it. We are like 6 activists. We are the only 6 or 7 who care enough to show up when we are asked. We are the only 6 or 7 who actually make time for the Union, who do for the Union rather than asking the Union to do for us. People who pay dues but don’t participate in any Union building activities, or bargaining or anything else the Union does contribute as well. But let’s be clear here: it is not the Union activists, who supported the call to file a notice of intent to strike who are making the Union look like a stereotypical “gimme” union. It’s the freeriders who take from the Union in the form of job security through a contract, stipend and benefit increases which the Union negotiated on their behalf, advocacy through the grievance procedure, and yet don’t think they owe a cent of their money or a minute of their time to the Union in return who give us the image you are referring to.
If you have a problem with the decision taken, why don’t you come out and help us negotiate a better contract. Hell, bring ALL of your friends too. Anyone who thinks like you do, we would LOVE for you to come help us negotiate a fair contract. You think we are being too radical, why don’t you sit in on a bargaining session or two and find out precisely how radical the Administration is being in refusing to grant us even pen changes and clarification language. This has been a LONG, arduous, and entirely unfulfilling process for our Union’s negotiators: I can say as much having only been around for perhaps half of it. If filing an notice of intent to strike gets them to move on their entirely unreasonable position, that is what we should do. If not, perhaps a strike will help change their minds.
I am not writing this email to start a fight with anyone. But for a person who has apparently abstained from the entire process to date (I’m not sure, but I assume so) to write in and call a legitimate bargaining tactic, when contract imposition is on the table, “ridiculous” or “too radical”, and saying we have failed to communicate with our constituents and the general public (when every single thing we do is publicized, both on the email list which you are clearly responding to, as well as in the Daily Egyptian and in the Southern Illinoisan (when THEY choose to print it), you really show that you are entirely out of touch with what the Union is doing. It is somewhat the fault of the leadership, but not entirely: We are after all only a handful of people, and there are only so many hours of the day. Ours are just as full as yours and yet we make time to also serve the Union, participating and learning about the process instead of sitting around and sniping at the leadership for doing things that we neither approve of, nor really even understand.
If you have questions about the action, how about asking them? And if you want to learn what your Union is up against first hand, we have lots of room for you, and every other of the 1700 members of our bargaining unit at the bargaining table. You are fully encourage to meet with any of us, even me, and ask as many questions as you would like, and you are fully encouraged, at any time, to take a more active role in your Union.
Sincerely,
William Stodden
I have to commend that guy. One of the things I don’t understand is why would someone completely dissociate from a group that in the end he is very critical about? There’s obviously something going on in the union if one of its officers wasn’t welcome.
If as the comments suggest on this thread that the GAU is open about everything it does, then it can be knowable everything about what they are doing to the point that one can still be “in touch” with what the union is doing while standing from the sidelines.
And how do we trust a union that self-nominates its own leadership? That seems a little dicey.
To Mr. Stodden,
If so few people pay the union dues, and even fewer actually participate in the processes you describe, should that not be a sign that the union is not necessary wanted or needed by vast majority of SIUC Graduate Assistants.
Tim Felty, SIUC Alum, MS Electrical Engineering.
Mr. Felty
The vast majority of GA’s will never use the GAU grievance procedure. This may be true. But the vast majority of GA’s on our campus (in fact, all of them) have benefited and continue to benefit from the bargaining that GAU has done and continues to do on their behalf, most of them without paying a cent for it. The 15% pay increase that we enjoyed during the previous three years was only granted because GAU bargained it: without a union, you would be getting paid what GA’s were paid in 2007. Maybe some GA’s would be fine with that, but I personally am not. It may be true that most GA’s won’t ever join the union and maybe some refuse to join the Union because their idiotic political Party tells them to ideologically and dogmatically oppose the Union. But the reason few pay dues is: they get everything GAU bargains without having to pay a cent for it. That’s the law in this state.
You may be right: Maybe the Union isn’t needed by the vast majority of the GA’s on a day to day basis. They sure like it on Payday, though. And if you are the one GA (from mechanical engineering, I may add) who, in 2008 was being worked for a semester without being paid at all, even though you were promised pay by your supervisor, and then, when the semester ended, was told “We never made that arrangement.” you are glad to find out that there is a union who will grieve on your behalf. You will be glad to find out that you have the right to complain about it in the first place, and that there is a way to get the matter resolved without destroying your career in the process.
The Union exists: It’s not about what the vast majority of the GA’s need. Every GA benefits, whether he knows it or not, from what the Union is doing. The GA who doesn’t “want the union” is the one who likes to cut his own throat, and the GA who doesn’t think he “needs” the union on this campus is just plain wrong. But at the end of the day, the fact that most don’t pay Union dues is because state law allows them to get something for nothing. It really has zero to do with what he thinks he wants or needs. Any rational person who can get something for nothing will, unless he views it as his responsibility to do something in exchange for the things he gets. In other words, if a person has a moral problem with being a thief, he will pay union dues. But for people who don’t have that moral compromise, I guess taking something for nothing wouldn’t be too much of a problem.
William Stodden