[spider]

Underlying issues

I think the media has done a poor job of reflecting the reality of the situation rather than looking at the larger underlying issues

,

I think the media has helped the average citizen understand that the strikers are a bunch of whiny losers that will do anything including destroying the hopes and ambitions of thousand of students to further their dream of never having to hold a real job. You knew the rules of the game on day one, they did not include tenure or job security nor should they. Job security is no longer a viable goal for you or anyone else in this world, take a look around.

Other than becoming a professor whose goal appears to be never having to teach anything to anyone what use is a PHD to society?

 

[Disparishun]

1. The media coverage for this strike has been horrible. They've made a much larger deal of the discrepancy in wage raises than any other issue, when if this entire thing was over a couple percentage points they easily would have met in the middle and solved this thing months ago. It's all about reducing the number of part-time profs by creating more tenured positions.

That doesn't sound quite right. Just about everyone thinks that there should be more tenure-track professors, so that there can be less contract teachers.

The core of CUPE's proposal, and what is controversial about it, is the idea that contract teachers automagically become tenure-track professors, without any evaluation of their credentials, research record, or any other aspect that is normally part of the standard competition for a tenure-track job.

That seems like a strange way to go about creating more tenure-track positions. I would have thought that, when a tenure-track professor is hired, there would be a competition that takes into account relevant credentials. Replacing that by a back door reward for sticking it out in a contract position seems wrongheaded -- especially when such persons are by definition ones who have been unable to secure a tenure-track position at any university.

What's necessary is longer contracts for part-timers, and more tenureships within the university. What York was offering during these "negotiations" was pathetic in both of these areas.

Both the things you talk about are probably necessary, along with a massive reduction in the number of courses taught by non-tenure-track faculty. But what CUPE was offering solved neither of these problems in a useful manner.

Had CUPE suggested some way of replacing contract teachers with multi-term teaching contracts, or something similar, that might have been more helpful. Heck, some departments even have full-time teaching staff who are not professors, but instead are paid just to teach. That might have worked here.

But instead suggesting that, by virtue of having spent a bunch of years teaching course on contract, one should become a tenure-track professor -- especially, again, when one has been unable to win any competition for becoming a tenure-track professor -- is quite different than that, though.

There's the issue of 2010. All of CUPE's branches throughout the province have coordinated common end dates for their CBAs. If 3903 succeeded at getting a 2 year contract, the province would then find themselves with the most powerful part of the union on board with a potential province-wide strike. York got a lot of pressure from other schools and the province to do whatever it took to make sure this would be a 3 year deal and not a 2 year. The Union has even conceded many points with the hopes of making this CBA a 2 year deal. This is something I'm okay with. I think a province wide strike would be amazing.

Strike now and strike in a year and a half, or whatever, is not going to be a popular formula with very many. If CUPE York agreed with you that a province-wide strike would be "amazing", then it had only to ask to renew its existing agreement until 2010, and strike then. It could join a giant hard-bargaining cartel at that time, rather than seek to preempt it in 2008-2009.

York really hasn't done much of anything throughout the negotiating process. The Union has done more reaching than York has, while York hides behind the "economy" card as their reason for being unable to offer more.

Movement on each side is not at parity unless each side is coming at it from about equal distances away from what is balanced.

If the tenure-track-teacher conversion plan and 2010 strike plan were CUPE's bottom lines, then it is very hard to see each side as coming at it from equal distances away from the balancing point.

Obviously these are just some small things that I wanted to say. I could go in further depth and whatnot, but it's long enough. I think the media has done a poor job of reflecting the reality of the situation rather than looking at the larger underlying issues, and its a shame that it turned out this way, because post-secondary education should have been under the microscope for the last 3 months instead of the media being used as the medium for a PR war.

That's because this is not a policy hearing. It is a strike.

The way to put post-secondary education under the microscope is to undertake thoughtful and detailed proposals and concoct a public affairs strategy for bringing them to the public and to elected officials. Trying to do so under the cover of a labour negotiation is not particularly forthright, and the realization that that is what is taking place is what has most hurt CUPE's coverage, and impaired its support.

(None of this is helped by a logo and general bumf that imply revolutionary intent rather than reasonableness, statements to the media that misleadingly represent TA job as full-time ones and that misreport salary by subtracting tuition, and an overemphasis on non-labour-related foreign policy capped by a nutbar CUPE Ontario leader off on a crusade of his own, either. But I don't think these have been the major factors.)

 

[wonderboy416]

The only people worth that kind of money have spent 3+ years in college or university.

I fully agreed with you right up until you said this. $22/hour (full time would be about $40K+/year) is certainly obtainable by those without college or university. Auto mechanics can make this, in a busy place bartenders/waiters can make that, hair stylists can make that, chef's without formal training if they have experience, car salesman etc etc.. I could list hundreds of jobs, not to mention being a small business owner. But if you're good at something, there's opportunity in Canada to make a living, that's what helps make it so great.

But yes, the brain dead assembly line worker (not implying that all functions on the assembly lines are brain dead) or government office worker who takes their sweet time doing anything and calls in sick 20 times a year has no business making that kind of money.

 

[lordmandeep]

My uncle is a truck driver and he drives someone else truck and gets paid over 60k a year.

Not bad imo for only going up to grade 12.


however he drives 12-14 hr a day and cannot take 34 days off a year and sit around on a chair when he feels like it and he does jobs well.

 

[afransen]

It would bring a lot of attention to issues in post-secondary education and we'd probably see some changes that would impact positively on students for years to come. Most of the anger over this issue is rather selfish I think. Sometimes there are bigger things than our own endeavours, and personally I'm willing to go through a strike if it pays off in terms of better funding for students and maybe even some debt relief for the thousands who are in debt from their education.

It should be exceedingly obvious that strikes are never about the public good. They are solely about the benefit of existing members of the union and union leadership.

That said, a province-wide strike won't happen, as there are a number of post-secondary institutions that haven't been 'infected' by CUPE. Perhaps students should, in expectation of a long, angry strike in 2010, boycott CUPE universities.

 

[Disparishun]

Perhaps students should, in expectation of a long, angry strike in 2010, boycott CUPE universities.

Ah, but how would they know which were CUPE universities and which weren't?

 

[afransen]

It's not secret. Waterloo, for instance, is non-unionized.

 

[Hipster Duck]

,
Other than becoming a professor whose goal appears to be never having to teach anything to anyone what use is a PHD to society?

You know I'll just let you figure that one out for yourself.

 

[Whoaccio]

Details of the strike plan:

Curbside garbage collection, city run daycares, community centres and much of city hall will be shut down as early as next week if Toronto's indoor and outdoor workers walk off the job, city officials confirmed Wednesday.

The city's contingency plan, unveiled at a press conference this afternoon, suggests life could become very bumpy for many Torontonians, from parents with children in the city's 57 child care centres to anyone who needs a building permit, parking tag -- even permission to take wedding photos in the city's parks.

A strike deadline of 12:01 a.m. Monday hangs over talks between the city and Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 79, which represents 18,000 indoor workers, and Local 416, representing 6,200 outdoor workers. They include garbage collectors, daycare employees, paramedics and parks and recreation staff.

Should they walk, curbside garbage collection in Toronto, Scarborough, North York and East York, as well as green bin organics and recycling collection, will be cancelled. Residents in apartment buildings and Etobicoke will be spared because, unlike the rest of the city, their garbage collection is performed by private contractors.

As in the 2002 garbage strike, two transfer stations will accept double-bagged residential and commercial garbage 24-hours a day. Residential waste will be accepted free of charge; commercial waste will be subject to a $100-per-tonne tip fee.

Another five transfer stations will open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., seven days a week. More residential drop-off locations will be announced if the strike lasts longer than five days

Other services and programs that will be cancelled or closed in the event of a labour disruption:

* All 57 child care centres directly operated by Toronto Children's Services.
* All recreational programming, including camps, classes, clubs and walking tours
* Community and fitness centres, as well as all city operated indoor and outdoor swimming pools, golf courses, wading pools, greenhouses and conservatories.
* All permits in parks, tennis courts, outdoor sports fields and civic squares will be cancelled, as will city programs in community schools
* All scheduled meetings of council, community councils, standing and advisory committees will be cancelled.
* Public access to City Hall, the North York Civic Centre, Metro Hall, York Civic Centre and Scarborough Civic Centre will be restricted to ground floors only, and visitors can expect to have to cross picket lines.
* All city run scheduled events on Nathan Phillips Square, Metro Square and other civic squares will be cancelled.
* Street cleaning and routine repairs on road, sidewalks and bridges will be suspended.
* Routine permits will not be issued, including for building, parking, utility work, film, temporary street closings and wedding photos in parks.
* City-run museums and art galleries will be closed
* Toronto Island ferry service will not run. Alternative arrangements will be made for residents of the islands.

A number of services won't be affected, including Toronto Police, Fire, TTC and the city's homes for the aged. While Toronto EMS will continue to respond to emergency calls, non-emergency and low priority calls may be affected.

Wedding ceremonies will continue during regular business hours at Toronto City Hall, which will also accept new bookings. Only scheduled ceremonies will take place at North York Civic Centre, which won't accept new bookings through the strike. Wedding facilities in Scarborough, East York and York civic centres will be closed.

A handful of arenas and community centres staffed by boards of management will not be affected.

City officials stressed they want a negotiated settlement with the unions.

"We don’t want a strike and don’t believe a strike is necessary,†said City Manager Joe Pennachetti.

After the city briefing, a spokeswoman for the two civic union locals said of the parties “they are continuing to talk and everyone is working hard to try and reach a negotiated settlement.â€

Pat Daley added “we still have an obstacle of concessions on the table by the city that have not been changed at all.†She declined to go into detail about issues on the table, such as changes in sick leave, but said she was “not aware†of any exchange of monetary offers.

City spokesman Kevin Sack said the city is willing to negotiate through the unions’ strike deadline, should the unions agree.

A spokesman for the city’s 4,000 non-union employees, many of whom would carry on key services such as water supply and sewage treatment during a strike, said “morale is not high.â€

Richard Majkot, executive director of the administrative, professional and supervisory association, cited a cost of living pay freeze this year and a one per cent rise in 2010.

“Our members are still professionals,†he said. “They will be there to assist the city.

“The will may not be as strong and they may not be as eager as they normally would be to help the city, but they are going to be there,†said Mr. Majkot.

More General Overview:

Sick leave remains one of the big stumbling blocks in negotiations between Toronto and its unionized workers as a strike deadline looms less than a week away and the city's non-union employees grumble about possible deferred vacations.

Talks with the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79, which represents 18,000 indoor workers, are under a media blackout. But word from Local 416, representing 6,200 outdoor workers, is that “there's very little progress being made – so big are the concessions the city is asking for,†CUPE spokeswoman Pat Daley said. “It looks like they're going to be negotiating right to the deadline.â€

Along with job security and seniority rights, sick-leave benefits continue to trip up both sides at the bargaining table. Workers are now entitled to 18 sick days a year at full salary, which they can accumulate, carry over and cash out at the end of their careers.

Compared with many other Ontario cities, it's a generous plan and virtually unheard of in the private sector.

The payout is calculated at a maximum of half of sick days earned, to no more than six months total, based on years of service. For example, a 25-year employee with six months of accrued sick days would get paid an extra three months at full salary upon retirement.

The city, grappling with what amounts to a multimillion-dollar unfunded liability, has proposed to switch workers to a short-term disability program that offers more sick days but prohibits carryovers, similar to what it imposed on non-unionized staff in 2008.

City spokesman Kevin Sack said he couldn't confirm a dollar figure or the size of the liability. A 2008 report to Mayor David Miller's executive committee cited a $237.8-million liability in sick-leave gratuity for 2009, but that included the Toronto Police Service and the city's agencies, boards and commissions.

Ms. Daley said any figure is an “actuarial fantasy†based on an assumption that everyone would be eligible for the maximum and would retire at the same time. She noted employees are not entitled to any other severance upon retirement.

Ms. Daley said Toronto firefighters, police officers and municipal workers in Guelph, Brampton, Oshawa and Cambridge have similar sick leave carry-over-and-cash-out plans.

Still, many large Ontario cities and regional governments have moved to short-term disability programs, including Hamilton, Ottawa, Mississauga, Brampton, and the regions of Halton, York and Peel.

In Oakville, outside and inside workers – also represented by CUPE – are on the short-term disability plan and have no carry-over privileges. It's the same story in Mississauga.

As for the private sector, “it's very uncommon today for any company to have that type of arrangement,†said Michele Bossi of ACS/Buck Consultants, a Toronto-based employee and group benefits consulting firm.

“Sick days aren't meant to build up and build up and build up,†she said, citing the “huge†financial liability such plans pose to companies.

The city and the two locals negotiated through the weekend and yesterday. The workers, including garbage collectors, daycare employees, paramedics, and parks and recreation staff, will be in a legal strike position Monday.

Meanwhile, Toronto's 4,000 non-union employees, who face a wage freeze this year, fired a shot across the bow yesterday in the form of a letter to city manager Joseph Pennachetti from their advocacy group, the City of Toronto Administrative, Professional, Supervisory Association Inc.

The letter cites a contingency planning memo from Mr. Pennachetti to his department heads that raises the prospect of deferred vacations and new job duties for non-union staff in the event of a city strike.

“Many of our members are expressing their feelings that they're not going to be as eager as they normally would to help the city out,†said Richard Majkot, the association's executive director, citing the freeze.

 

[Whoaccio]

Man, unions are so progressive and cool. Nothing says left wing progressiveness like shutting down public day care centers, often operated for lower income residents, when school is out so that the modern day bourgeois can keep job seniority.

If those who identify themselves as left wing had any ideological balls, this kind of blatant extortion of the public by a richer, more politically influential and more secure class would never be tolerated. It boggles the mind. Strait up, I would vote for any mayor that would try to end this garbage. Nothing in this city will ever happen if this class of professional leeches sucks the blood out of every single area of society.

 

[Dilla]

I couldn't agree more, Whoaccio. Are the end of collective agreements for garbage workers and day care workers designed to land when they can do the most damage to the city, or is this just a wonderful coincidence for the union?

And banking sick days? I can't understand why anyone would be rewarded for not taking sick days. they're their so you don't have to worry about being sick, not so you can retire early. That the union feels so entitled to this that they're willing to screw over the entire city says oh so much about the la-la land these people live in.

I too would vote for (almost) anyone who could bring these institutions down to earth.

 

[unimaginative2]

Should they walk, curbside garbage collection in Toronto, Scarborough, North York and East York, as well as green bin organics and recycling collection, will be cancelled. Residents in apartment buildings and Etobicoke will be spared because, unlike the rest of the city, their garbage collection is performed by private contractors.

What about regular York?

 

[tkip]

I have to agree somewhat.....

I belong to a union and I enjoy the benefits of it but.....

I do believe they serve a purpose but like any institution with typical human behaviour, they can become too power hungry and corrupt.
So...... banking sick days? No.....

You either take your sick days as you need them or you lose them and I only have 10 per year so I certainly don't have these lavish amounts of perks these people enjoy. In the end, some perks need to be cut back while perserving basic hourly rates.

 

[cdr108]

You know I'll just let you figure that one out for yourself.

I can't believe she even graduated college ...
love the US system of higher education.

 

[cdr108]

Workers are now entitled to 18 sick days a year at full salary, which they can accumulate, carry over and cash out at the end of their careers.

Man, I really need to change careers and work as a unionized employee.

I was in an car accident many years ago and it resulted in chronic back pain and headaches. I sporatically took no more than 1 sick day per month off because of days when the pain was so unbearable I would have to doped up on Tylenol 3; I was told by my employer anything more than 5 days / YEAR was 'unacceptable'.