Originally Posted by berrberr

Wow, you're so funny!

I've got people who agree with me, and my points are valid. The union is anti-students in the way that they are acting (and it's my responsibility to represent the views and best interests of said students).

Lets not forget that the union is negotiating in the best interests of the union... remember that if their members get more, then the union gets more in the form of dues. This is all for the union, and student interests are not in the picture, regardless of how they spin it.

If the strike happens and I lose class time, I'll be going to CUPE for my tuition refunds. Also, if I happen to lose my potential to graduate this year (due to lost time), I will be taking legal action against the union.

This is yet another example of unions who are willing to disrupt EVERYONE ELSES LIVES for the benefit of a few.

Originally Posted by dsahota

In the event of a strike/lockout, strike pay is $10 / hour for 20 hours a week. That works out to about $850-900 / month, which is comparable to the pay as a Graduate TAs and likely an increase in total pay for undergraduate TAs, but you do have to put in more hours. For those people who can't picket or would like to request other duties, there's lots of other work that would need to be done such as preparing food for people on the lines, doing research, answering phones, etc.

Picketing or performing alternate duties are always at the discretion of the member, we don't force anyone to picket. We also understand that members have academic duties in their roles as students to attend to on campus and certainly believe they should be able to continue to work in their labs, attend classes, or do their research in the event of a TA strike/lockout. For more elaborate explanations check out our blog post:

http://unit1bargaining.wordp ress.c...t-of-a-strike/

Also, nobody has to do anything. Don't forget about your right to not participate in something you don't support.

Originally Posted by Taunton

Lets not forget that the union is negotiating in the best interests of the union... remember that if their members get more, then the union gets more in the form of dues. This is all for the union, and student interests are not in the picture, regardless of how they spin it.

Actually the opposite is the case in this bargaining round. The union bargaining team has actually proposed something called grant in aid that would reduce the absolute dollar amount received in union dues by about 25%. For about 85% of the unit we're also proposing a wage freeze and a redirection of the money to benefits (which we also don't get dues on).

With the exception of our two very dedicated and hard working staff members, everyone else in CUPE 3906 is a volunteer who was elected from the membership. We're absolutely not out to make money for the union in any way shape or form, our primary goals are to make sure our members get a fair deal and to ensure that downward slide of the quality of education at McMaster is stopped.

While I do sometimes question the reliability of global ranking systems, this year's Times University Rankings were released today and McMaster had one of the largest drops of any university, falling 26 spots from 117 in the world to 143. We received very low scores from our students, and I think that's an indication that students have recognized they're not getting the quality education they should expect at McMaster. The link to the tables is here:
http://www.timeshighereducat ion.co...09-Top200.html

We understand that in the event of a worst-case scenario, there will be an impact on current students. We'd rather avoid that happening, but we also can't just sit back and watch McMaster continue to slide, as that will have negative impacts on thousands and thousands of future students. I certainly hope we're able to reach an agreement at the table that puts in place structures to solve some of these problems.

If you want to help avert a strike, talk to the University Administration about some of the issues you've brought up around quality of education here and try convince them its worth putting the effort into improving education. You'll likely find that a lot of our proposals actually overlap with issues that have been brought up in this thread, but the University Administration needs to not only hear it from CUPE, but also from the students who are here for an education. The University is a community, if we want to improve it, we need to work together to do it.

Originally Posted by dsahota

Actually the opposite is the case in this bargaining round. The union bargaining team has actually proposed something called grant in aid that would reduce the absolute dollar amount received in union dues by about 25%. For about 85% of the unit we're also proposing a wage freeze and a redirection of the money to benefits (which we also don't get dues on).

With the exception of our two very dedicated and hard working staff members, everyone else in CUPE 3906 is a volunteer who was elected from the membership. We're absolutely not out to make money for the union in any way shape or form, our primary goals are to make sure our members get a fair deal and to ensure that downward slide of the quality of education at McMaster is stopped.

While I do sometimes question the reliability of global ranking systems, this year's Times University Rankings were released today and McMaster had one of the largest drops of any university, falling 26 spots from 117 in the world to 143. We received very low scores from our students, and I think that's an indication that students have recognized they're not getting the quality education they should expect at McMaster. The link to the tables is here:
http://www.timeshighereducat ion.co...09-Top200.html

We understand that in the event of a worst-case scenario, there will be an impact on current students. We'd rather avoid that happening, but we also can't just sit back and watch McMaster continue to slide, as that will have negative impacts on thousands and thousands of future students. I certainly hope we're able to reach an agreement at the table that puts in place structures to solve some of these problems.

If you want to help avert a strike, talk to the University Administration about some of the issues you've brought up around quality of education here and try convince them its worth putting the effort into improving education. You'll likely find that a lot of our proposals actually overlap with issues that have been brought up in this thread, but the University Administration needs to not only hear it from CUPE, but also from the students who are here for an education. The University is a community, if we want to improve it, we need to work together to do it.

If you actually care about students, then refuse to go on strike. Refuse to disrupt the lives of the 20,000 students on campus right now.

You can negotiate without striking. It might take lots of time, but there are ways around getting a deal done without striking. Striking is an unnecessary and extreme means to get your side heard.

You might be trying to get certain things improved around campus, and that's great. However, striking and potentially interfering with the lives of students to a huge extent is inherently against the best interests of students. We're not all willing to make the sacrifices that you're trying to force us to make.

Finally, don't forget that the public opinion of unions is quite low right now. Historically low in fact. IF you have ANY interest at all in what the public thinks of your organization, then you should seriously consider acting in a more publically acceptable way.

I'm in contact with our local MP. I will be using this as added evidence for the requirement for right-to-work legislation in Canada.

Seems to me that the other union (CAW) I believe managed to settle things, I don't see why the TAs and RAs can't. But threatening a strike isn't going to ease tensions between the two groups. Strikes in the end hurt the people that matter most and always in 99.9% of case the student (This is referring to strikes in educational institutions and schools, not strikes from Ford, etc). Its also too bad that the university cannot just get temporary replacements to replace the TAs and RAs during the strike as it is against the union to hire others for temporary replacement. Students yet again are the victims of the strike, maybe its about time that strike cannot happen in any educational institutions and schools. Strip the union of their power to disrupt and harm students. Plus the economy isn't doing to well, pushing for more benefits and pay is definitely something the university will most likely not comply with. If you don't want your jobs, give them to others that need one. Someone will fill up those shoes quickly.

Can I picket someone who is picketing?

Meaning, if someone is on strike and wants to stop every car that enters the university, do I (and a bunch of my friends, of course - this can't be done by one person) have the right to block them from blocking cars?

Just curious.



PS. Why do TAs strike/threaten to strike so much? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm asking an honest question. There are so many worse jobs with much lower pay that people put up with in order to pay bills and they never strike..

Originally Posted by dsahota

We understand that in the event of a worst-case scenario, there will be an impact on current students. We'd rather avoid that happening, but we also can't just sit back and watch McMaster continue to slide, as that will have negative impacts on thousands and thousands of future students. I certainly hope we're able to reach an agreement at the table that puts in place structures to solve some of these problems.

I kindof wanted to stay out of this thread, but this was a point that piqued my curiosity. This point kindof made me... wonder. Why are we worrying about future students? I mean, obviously no one wants to see McMaster decline in quality, but at the point when that is a big enough issue to have people not choosing McMaster, McMaster will either: improve, fail, or stop the decline and stay at a lower level. I can't see any of these option affecting current students, or affecting the Union.

-----------------------------

Every TA I have talked to does not want to strike. (Which is of course biased by the fact that I know very few graduate TA's, and mainly undergraduate TA's). Are there any figures about the breakdown of:
-Who was eligible to vote in a strike vote?
-What percentage of these people voted?
-What percentage of members are graduate and which percentage are undergraduate?

Originally Posted by Kathy2

PS. Why do TAs strike/threaten to strike so much? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm asking an honest question. There are so many worse jobs with much lower pay that people put up with in order to pay bills and they never strike..

Interesting question. I think it has to do with the nature of the business. Universities never have a ton of free budget space and paying TA's (essentially the grunts of the academic world) is something that the university will want to do as little of as they can.

Fundamentally, I think the problem stems from government. The government doesn't support post-secondary education enough.

Originally Posted by Kathy2

Can I picket someone who is picketing?

Meaning, if someone is on strike and wants to stop every car that enters the university, do I (and a bunch of my friends, of course - this can't be done by one person) have the right to block them from blocking cars?

Just curious.



PS. Why do TAs strike/threaten to strike so much? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm asking an honest question. There are so many worse jobs with much lower pay that people put up with in order to pay bills and they never strike..

You can definitely picket someone who is picketing.
I don't think you would be allowed to block them from blocking cars, but at the same time I don't think that you could get in much trouble for at least trying. I would definitely go with you to do that.

As for why it seems like TAs seem to want to strike more than other occupations, I think it might have to do with them being organized by a large union with a lot of political clout and the funds to pay union members to strike. Smaller unions can't do that, which is why you see many more strikes by members of larger unions (CUPE, CAW, etc). I'm sure there are other underlying reasons.

Originally Posted by A.Marlowe

I kindof wanted to stay out of this thread, but this was a point that piqued my curiosity. This point kindof made me... wonder. Why are we worrying about future students? I mean, obviously no one wants to see McMaster decline in quality, but at the point when that is a big enough issue to have people not choosing McMaster, McMaster will either: improve, fail, or stop the decline and stay at a lower level. I can't see any of these option affecting current students, or affecting the Union.

Thank you! It's in the university's best interest to attract more students who are better. If they're making enough mistakes that the quality of the instiution falls, then it will hit them in the pocketbooks, where it hurts most.

Originally Posted by Kathy2

Can I picket someone who is picketing?

Meaning, if someone is on strike and wants to stop every car that enters the university, do I (and a bunch of my friends, of course - this can't be done by one person) have the right to block them from blocking cars?

Just curious.

After thinking on this for a few minutes, this is what I've got:

We have the fundamental right to assemble. That means there's nothing anyone can do to stop you or anyone else from getting together and picketing.

As for stopping the union from blocking cars (which they do for a predetermined amount of time, usually 5 minutes), it would mean removing their right to demonstrate peacefully, which you cannot legally do.

Therefore, I don't believe you can legally stop them from blocking traffic.

Originally Posted by dsahota

In the event of a strike/lockout, strike pay is $10 / hour for 20 hours a week.

Err... how do I join the strike team... this is more than I make at my job...

--

THIS POST ANSWERS WHY THERE IS AN IMPENDING STRIKE!

And umm. Now, I'm an economics major so I get a little skeptical whenever I see matters of Unions fighting for wages because I am of the (perhaps incorrect) assumption that every Union has an alterior motive.

For example, when I see that CUPE is fighting so that Undergraduate TAs are making the same amount of money as Graduate TAs, this sets of warning bells in my head for the following reasons:

1. People in Grad school are inherently more educated than those who are not. The simple fact that they are in Grad School proves that they had good Undergraduate grades and successfully wrote a thesis.
2. People who are more educated generally are entitled to greater compensation than one less educated, simply due to their perceived greater grasp of subject matter.
3. Unionism exists on the tenets of longevity. If you have worked longer, you deserve more money.

So WHY is CUPE fighting for equity in Undergrad TA wages?

OH I KNOW!

Because right now, Undergrad TAs are paid less, and for that reason, the school tends to hire a lot of Undergrad TAs, while a lot of Grad TAs do not get as many TA positions. CUPE, being very much in love with Grads, and not so much with Undergrads, want the wages to be normalized so that there is no economic benefit to taking Undergrad TAs over Grad TAs. And since they will cost the school the same amount, why would anyone in their right mind choose to hire an Undergrad over a Grad Student?

This issue doesn't affect me because I don't plan on being a TA while in my Undergrad simply because I don't want to be part of the despicable Union that was responsible for the strike that crippled York, the strike that crippled Toronto, and has a bigot for a President.

Those of you in Undergrad, you need to understand this issue. If wages are normalized, you will have a HELL of a time trying to get TA positions. In this day and ago, those positions are crucial for getting into Grad school and Professional schools and these CUPE utilitarians don't particularly care for that.

Originally Posted by deadpool

Err... how do I join the strike team... this is more than I make at my job...

-- why would anyone in their right mind choose to hire an Undergrad over a Grad Student?

Probably because that undergrad may actually be able to teach; rather than just get good marks and successfully graduate.

--

Other than that; good post and interesting arguments.

Because right now, Undergrad TAs are paid less, and for that reason, the school tends to hire a lot of Undergrad TAs, while a lot of Grad TAs do not get as many TA positions. CUPE, being very much in love with Grads, and not so much with Undergrads, want the wages to be normalized so that there is no economic benefit to taking Undergrad TAs over Grad TAs. And since they will cost the school the same amount, why would anyone in their right mind choose to hire an Undergrad over a Grad Student?

This issue doesn't affect me because I don't plan on being a TA while in my Undergrad simply because I don't want to be part of the despicable Union that was responsible for the strike that crippled York, the strike that crippled Toronto, and has a bigot for a President.

Those of you in Undergrad, you need to understand this issue. If wages are normalized, you will have a HELL of a time trying to get TA positions. In this day and ago, those positions are crucial for getting into Grad school and Professional schools and these CUPE utilitarians don't particularly care for that.

At the moment undergraduate TAs account for about 20% of the hours worked in the bargaining unit and graduate TAs for the other 80%. In some disciplines (engineering for example), undergraduate TAs are used primarily for courses where experience with a specific software set or some other tool is required.

One of the big things CUPE 3906 is fighting for is an open application process where undergraduate and graduate students can apply for positions and be chosen based on qualifications. Given that many undergraduate TAs are chosen because of their specific experience, they would still be chosen for all of those courses regardless of the wage rate. Also, undergraduate TAs would still cost significantly less even if the University Administration agreed to our initial proposal.

I previously worked as an undergraduate TA at a University (SFU) where the graduate and undergraduate wages only differed by about 8%. Undergraduates who were qualified still had no problem accessing TA positions because there was an application process and TAs were chosen based on qualification. Its a system that makes sense and a system that works.

On the specific issue of undergraduate TA wages, we're not trying to bring the undergraduates up the same level, rather we don't think a undergraduate TA should only be paid half the rate of a graduate TA, especially since they may be doing identical work. In an ideal world, there might be a model where pay was related to experience, but the University Administration has put in place a model where there are just 2 pay levels and the only difference between the levels is whether you have an undergraduate degree or not. We don't think that difference should be almost a factor of 2 when the difference in experience between a 4th year undergraduate TA and a 1st year master's student could be quite minimal.

Undergraduate TAs are a very important part of education here at McMaster, we certainly want that to continue.

Originally Posted by deadpool

This issue doesn't affect me because I don't plan on being a TA while in my Undergrad simply because I don't want to be part of the despicable Union that was responsible for the strike that crippled York, the strike that crippled Toronto, and has a bigot for a President.

That's actually the same reason I decided not to go into teaching. Obviously not the sole reason, but it was one of the biggest factors.