From: "JD Fleming" <jfleming@sfu.ca>
To: "Brian Green" <brian_green@sfu.ca>
Cc: sfufa-members@sfu.ca, "academic-discussion" <academic-discussion@sfu.ca>
Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2013 1:31:19 PM
Subject: Re: Momentum for SFUFA Unionization?
I suggest that this question is one of prime importance for the future of faculty at SFU, both individually and as a group. I also suggest that it is a very great shame, in this context, that we no longer have an open, unrestricted, and multilateral online forum within which all SFUFA members can communicate with each other. Instead we have "momentum" being "built" by a vanguard--who brought this issue to the fore, in the first place, by establishing a merely formal quorum at an AGM. Frankly, I'm not comfortable with what is happening here. I request
(1) That this message be copied to the sfufa-members list, and/or
(2) That all sfufa members be converted to allowed sfufa-members senders for the duration of this discussion.
In the meantime, for those of you who are on twitter, perhaps we can discuss this issue via the #sfufa hashtag.
JD Fleming
English
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Green" <brian_green@sfu.ca>
To: sfufa-members@sfu.ca
Sent: Thursday, 3 October, 2013 13:14:57
Subject: Momentum for SFUFA Unionization?
The following is sent on behalf of SFUFA President Neil Abramson.
-------------------
Hi Colleagues:
We've had a couple of events this week, a coffee Klatch and a pub night, intended to help members inform themselves about whether SFUFA should unionize. So, now we've had three events, and there is a free lunch at the DAC on next Monday, and a second pub event at Surrey campus on next Wednesday. There is an event Oct 16 at Halpern with speakers speaking in favor of unionization. These will include the presidents of the UVic and UNBC faculty associations where association unions are currently in process of being organized.
It looks like there is some momentum growing amongst us at SFUFA to seriously consider this question of unionization. We had about 8-10 at the first coffee klatch, but 12+ at the one on Tuesday (till a rat scared some people away). We had 15 or 20 at the pub night last night. There are currently 45 signed up for the lunch on Monday. And I have had emails on the subject from about 80 colleagues. That's a lot, and a growing involvement.
I wonder if we are really starting to take this question seriously as well. Initially, most comments were either definitely in favour, or definitely opposed, with the "in favours'' maybe just a little ahead in numbers. But last night, the majority weren't stating their definite pre-existing preference. They were asking what would it mean if we did unionize. And what would be the effect if we didn't. So I think members are really thinking about the question and starting to inform themselves as I had hoped.
One interesting conversation I had last night was about my goal that the administration would give us "interest arbitration" as opposed to the "final offer" arbitration we currently have. You remember that when UBCFA unionized, they gave up the right to strike for interest arbitration and it was this that allowed them to get 2.5% from the arbitrator versus the 2.0% we were awarded.
I reported that I had discussed this question with Andrew Petter and Jon Driver, and others, suggesting that our current, limited arbitration process might be one factor in the discussion of whether we should unionize.
The administration professes to hope we will not unionize, suggesting it would change our relationship. Though it looks like soon we will be the only non-unionized public post-secondary institution in BC, and one of the only university faculty associations in Canada not to have done so, outside of Alberta where it is illegal.
Though truthfully, even if we did unionize our positive relationship with our administration doesn't have to change. There are two union/management paradigms. In the traditional approach both sides confront and play win/lose, zero sun games with each other and this is what our administration and many of our members are worried about.
However, in the Cornell paradigm, union and management cooperate, collaborate, and share information. For example, it isn't necessarily our administration that willfully keeps our salaries down - they are limited by our government, that has tried to cap salary increases. So our administrators are hardly "villains" in these interactions, and there is no reason to presume we cannot work together even if we unionize. If you don't know about the Cornell paradigm, see google.
I actually teach this stuff. Business students are very anti-union and I always tell them if they really want a union it's easy to achieve. Just make sure your employees feel they are being treated worse than the ones in other companies that are unionized - like getting 2.0% versus 2.5%. Canadian Tire has always avoided unionization by offering a bit better than their unionized competition.
Anyway, I hope to see as many of you as can come at our free lunch at the DAC next Monday. I will speak about unionization benefits and liabilities for maybe 10 minutes. And we hope to do a questionnaire to start gauging levels of support.
All the best
Neil Abramson, President
SFUFA
--
James Dougal Fleming
Associate Professor
Department of English
Simon Fraser University
778-782-4713
" Upstairs was a room for travelers. ‘You know, I shall take it for the rest of my life,’ Vasili Ivanovich is reported to have said as soon as he had entered it."
-- Vladimir Nabokov, Cloud, Castle, Lake