About the Author

Marc Bousquet is an associate professor of cultural studies and writing with new media at Santa Clara University. His book How the University Works: Higher Education and the Low-Wage Nation has just been released by New York University Press with a foreword by Cary Nelson. He serves on the national council of the American Association of University Professors and was the founding editor of Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labor.

About Brainstorm

Brainstorm is The Chronicle Review's team of bloggers on ideas, culture, and the arts.

RSS | Atom

Gina Barreca
Mark Bauerlein
Marc Bousquet
Laurie Fendrich
Dan Greenberg
John L. Jackson Jr.
Stan Katz
Stephen Joel Trachtenberg
Bob Zemsky

Search

Recent Posts

More Contingent Faculty Win Job Security | Comment [4]

The End of 'Minnesota Review'? | Comment [16]

Grad Student Union Launched at U. of Chicago | Comment

Administration's Culture War From Above | Comment [7]

McGill Joins the Bush League | Comment [82]

McGill Joins the Bush League

cross-posted from howtheuniversityworks.com

Now the administration of McGill University seems determined to show its continuing alienation from the Quebec mainstream by hitching up its jeans and defying provincial labor law in a great imitation of George W. Bush’s style of executive bullying.

According to multiple sources, including an official Quebec Labor Department report, and the independent reporting of the Montreal Gazette, McGill administrators have illegally pressured faculty, including vulnerable untenured juniors, to do the work of striking grad employees as scabs.

Additionally, they have fired striking unionized grad employees from various additional-income positions that are not covered by the union contract — including positions as exam graders and summer session instructors. A second story on McGill’s emulation of the Bush mob in the Gazette quotes a grad employee calling these moves “retaliation,” and then rips into the faculty association, which has bleated about the plight of junior faculty forced into scabbing — asking for them to be taken off the tenure clock until they’re done helping the administration to break the spirit of the grad employees:

The McGill Association of University Teachers says it has been “very insistent that everything possible be done to help faculty members who are seriously overburdened by the consequences of the strike.” It has proposed “stopping the tenure clock” for junior faculty unable to complete projects, cancelling committee work and postponing deadlines for annual reports.

But why hasn’t MAUT risen up with a banshee’s wail, if not to decry what smacks of vindictive treatment of striking TA’s who wear multiple hats, then at least to complain bitterly about the extra work that has been dumped on them?

Keep up with the story on AGSEM’s shame campaign on Facebook. And I’ll have updates and individual stories in the coming weeks.

Good show, McGill. It’s nice to know that my fellow Americans residing in gated communities have a place to call home when visiting Canada. Maybe you can give Dick Cheney a visiting professorship in labor relations as well.

Comments

1. I do wonder how much of what is going on illegally at McGill has to do with the language and culture wars in predominantly French-speaking Quebec where English speakers (McGill is an English-speaking university) often resent the laws which the French-speaking majority have had the votes to enact.

   Any idea, MB? I’m very curious. Is McGill seceding from the Quebec union, as it were, on this issue — as Quebec has almost done from Canada itself in two general plebescites? Is there an even larger political dimension to this struggle?

   — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 24, 02:13 PM · #

2. Someone else is probably better qualified to answer that question. Historically, certainly, anglophone arrogance and dominance may have played a role in a conflict such as this one. But the extent to which it’s a factor in this particular event—I personally couldn’t say. Henry James used to write about the international “hotel civilization” of homogeneous bourgeois values—I’d say this is probably an expression of the homogeneous culture of management circulated by globalization from above.

   — Marc Bousquet · Apr 24, 02:20 PM · #

3. Yes, MB, but the reported deliberate flaunting of the labor laws? How/why is the Quebec government tolerating that, if not for fear of more than just a university incident?

   This is “beyond my pay grade”, as the saying goes. But, MB, surely you can get us more info on that from some of your “relatives” and/or colleagues in Quebec! I think it will be well worth the inquiry….

   — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 24, 02:30 PM · #

4. Apologies for the split-comment….

   It is one (horrendous) thing for the government or a governmental enforcement agency to suspend the application of a law or right, and quite another for a university to simply ignore the law — with no intervention from the government at all. Commission vs. omission, as it were.

   Granted, if I recall correctly McGill is actually not a private university, but a public one, and governments aren’t usually good at policing themselves, in general.

   However, I can’t help but wonder what else is simmering behind the scenes because one would think that it would be oh, so easy and oh, so much fun for the French-speaking majority to sock-it to the English Canadians.

   Why the hesitancy to enforce the rule of law?

   And BTW, please remember that our government learned about the modern suspension of habeas corpus from Quebec during the separatist-terrorists’ kidnapping (and murder, I believe) of an English minister in the 60s — when French-speaking Quebec citizens were rounded up anywhere and everywhere and imprisoned with no formal charges at all.

   In fact, South Africa formally modeled its Apartheid on the Canadian treatment of its native Amer-Indian populations.

   History is cruel — and paradoxical. But worth knowing. What’s that saying? “Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it.”

   Looks like we might be having some more “repeating” going on north of the U.S. border right now.

   — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 24, 02:49 PM · #

5. It’s much more complicated than anglophone/francophone in terms of the political scene. There is the sudden rise of the ADQ, a conservative nationalist party, for instance. They eroded the base of the PQ, the pro-social party, known for its separatism, but popular for its large commitment to labor rights, etc. Which, ironically, lifted the fortunes of the Liberals, which are a bit like Clinton Democrats in this context, not the Conservative party, but willing to reform the welfare state, and at any rate in internal provincial politics having curbed the socialist tendencies of the PQ. But now that the Liberals are no longer the only economic conservatives, as it were, it could be that they will eventually lose that role to Action Democratique. Or it could be that the PQ’s ability to mobilize a pro-labor mandate is seriously damaged, because the most recent elections were essentially 1/3 ADQ 1/3 PQ 1/3 Liberal.

   If you parse it on economics, therefore, you have 2/3 for parties not overly keen on labor rights.

   If you parse it on nationalism—which is a vector for the we-are-different mandate of stronger labor rights etc—then 2/3 parties are now nationalist.

   I doubt that answers your question! I’d be interested in other opinions, but suspect that it’s one of those interesting historical moments.

   — Marc Bousquet · Apr 24, 03:01 PM · #

6. Thanks for the additional insights, MB. Very interesting historical moment, indeed! Let us know what else you can find out….

   — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 24, 03:56 PM · #

7. Hi everyone, I am a striking TA at McGill and have been keeping abreast of the issues.

   Info on the strike can be found here:
   http://web.net/~agsem/

   To address a few of the questions posed here. The current strike has little to do with the politics of language in Quebec; in fact there is really no relation. If the argument proposed is that the McGill Administration is fighting its TA union, AGSEM, because the predominantly francophone province is also predominantly pro-Union, then it is also fighting the laws of the Quebec province itself, which strongly protect the right of unions to strike, including anti-scab laws. I don’t think this is what is happening. The issues have a lot more to do with the bureaucrats who run the University, and how they envision it (or don’t envision it).

   Some background: the Administration has been on a campaign for a few years now to fight student autonomy and representation on campus, from forcing referenda on the campus-and-comunity CKUT radio station, undergrad The Daily newspaper, to attempting to shut-down student-run food services, such as the Architecture Cafe (and attempting to centralise all food services under the international conglomerate, Chartwell’s), to disempowering the SSMU undergrad student union (for example, by charging students for access to campus for events), to ignoring the demands of the PGSS grad student union, to banning all rallies and protest on campus. The campus itself has become a security zone, with rent-a-cops on every corner, ready to quash everything from a stray protest sign (or even a bit of protest clothing, as I have discovered) to forcing cyclists to dismount while giving priority to car traffic (all this security is all under the Columbine pretense).

   Quite simply, McGill is on lockdown as a security state.

   As for the further questions, yes, the issue of scabbing, as well as the firing of union members from other university jobs (research assistants, sessionals, invigilators) is now before the courts. The parent union of AGSEM, CSN, has a legal team which is fighting the ‘interpretation’ (i.e. abuse) of the Quebec Labour Code by McGill. But so far, what is most disheartening for me, as a senior PhD student, is the anti-collegial stance of the University and its blatant disregard, if not outright aggression, towards not only union members, but towards all faculty, grad students and undergrads. The strike could have been avoided if the University had negotiated in good faith. The University has not; and so the undergrads suffer. In fact, the University is even preparing for a Fall semester without TAs (no one has yet to explain how science labs will function or large Arts undergrad lectures). The University has forced faculty to scab; this has infuriated many Professors. The University has divided grad students against each other, and so PGSS has supported the strike and condemned the University’s actions. The University Administration truly stands alone in its actions. The question is whether they ultimately have the power to not only beat the strike, but reform the entire project of the University as it stands. If they win, this will not only mean a lost strike, but the clear message that students of all stripes and faculty of all kinds are expendable to the clean functioning of a corporate “university”.

   Sincerely /

   [name withheld]
   aka the AGSEM CHALK FORCE

   *contact me if interested; I’d be willing to go on record and also provide more information and access to other sources.

   — AGSEM Chalk Force · Apr 24, 06:43 PM · #

8. Welcome, striking McGill TA!

   Question: What is the parallel situation for TAs in the University of Quebec system, at UQAM (Montrea), for example? Are they unionized, have they had to struggle in the same manner? What is the relationship of their union (if it exists) to yours?

   P.S. Don’t forget that south of the border (or north of the border from some parts of Michigan) we’re not as familiar with the acronyms, so please do spell them out at least the first time they’re used.

   As a former member of a TA union myself (way back in the 70s — and our leaders even then were wire-tapped, etc.), I am with you 100%!

   — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 24, 07:27 PM · #

9. Okay, I went to the strike Website listed above and there were no press items from anything French-speaking. (Not smart, dear strikers, in Quebec, for heaven’s sakes.)

   So I went to Le Devoir (thank you automatic translation) and discovered that the principal and vice-chancellor of McGill, Heather Munroe-Blum is the president of the Conference of Rectors and Principals of the Universities of Quebec (CREPUQ). And, surprise, she wants students to pay more for their education, among other things, so that Quebec’s universities will be “competitive”.

   BUT, the faculty at the University of Quebec at Trois Rivieres just ended a strike that had been going on since January. And the concessions required in exchange for the salary raises were to dedicate 13 of the 40 “new” positions bargained for to “clinical” (contingent?) staff who would not be required to have completed a doctorate but would teach two more courses than regular faculty.

   Amazing…. Students should pay more while faculty should be less qualified yet teach more courses…. This does indeed sound familiar….

   I wonder when Mme. Munroe-Blum’s office was last re-decorated?

   — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 24, 08:41 PM · #

10. Chalk Force—yes, I’d agree the issue is the would-be global culture of management. Contact me at my private email pmbousquet (at) gmail dot com to share info confidentially. I’m already in touch with the AGSEM leadership and others.
    Solidarity, M

    — Marc Bousquet · Apr 24, 09:30 PM · #

11. Hi everyone, thanks for the questions. OK, a few acronyms:

    AGSEM – Association of Graduate Students Employed at McGill
    CSN – Confédération des Syndicats Nationaux (parent union of AGSEM)
    PGSS – PostGraduate Student Society (at McGill, all ‘grad’ students are ‘postgrads’)
    SSMU – Student Society of McGill University (undergrad)

    As for Heather Munroe-Blum, she gets $30,000 a year just for housekeeping. She’s one of the top paid University Presidents in Canada. See, for everything BUT TAs (and sessional salaries) McGill compares to the top “G-13” research universities in Canada. As soon as it comes to TAs (and sessionals and invigilators), McGill compares to the regional market (even though it is the only truly international university in Quebec); it also ignores that in Quebec, TAs are primarily an English university phenomenon and thus compares TAs to positions requiring less education in Francophone universities. In reality, being a TA requires at least an undergrad degree, which puts us line with CEGEP (basically lower-college / upper highschool) teachers in Quebec that make upwards of $40-$50 / hr. Even at Concordia University many TAs make $27 / hour. We make $22/ hour, $6 below the national average of the G13s. So it goes. (And no, Montreal is no longer cheap.)

    As for UQAM, yes, the TAs are unionized there. Actually, McGill is the only university in Quebec where faculty and sessionals are NOT unionized. UQAM however has a very different situation financially; it ran itself into the hole. McGill is not in the hole. Yes, it has a 15M deficit it must cut, and they make a lot of fanfare about that. But focusing on short-term deficit reduction, as resisting faculty themselves have pointed out in a recent letter to the Admin, is a short-sighted path that fails to strengthen the University for the future. McGill is far from being in the hole. And its cuts could certainly be shifted to its bloated administration budget. TAs comprise less than 1% of the total operating budget of McGill University.

    But this strike is not really about the money. It’s about a standardized workload contract for all TAs; it’s about sick leave; it’s about caps on discussion group sizes; it’s about TA training — in short it’s about quality of education at McGill, and so far McGill has demonstrated that it does not want to work with AGSEM on these issues. In 2003, McGill told AGSEM that it could not possibly even pay everyone the same wage across departments (at that point, the sciences were paid less). After two weeks of striking, the Admin relented. Now at least we are all paid an equal wage (!!). Today we hear the same story: “we couldn’t possibly even think about addressing X demand….” However in 2008 I believe McGill is seeking to break the Union and set an example for any student or faculty attempt to collectivize, and, moreover, any group that wishes to exert positive change on campus.

    Tonight at the AGSEM General Assembly the overwhelming feeling was one of disappointment in a University from which we are all receiving our degrees — and anger towards its governing elites. Students and faculty make the University, not its bureaucrats, and this was expressed with conviction. We will not let bureaucrats destroy the collegiate.

    — CHALK FORCE, off to zzz.

    — AGSEM Chalk Force · Apr 25, 12:02 AM · #

12. re: questions of english-speakers defying french-system (Civil Code) law:

    Yes, I think there’s something to this. But I would say McGill’s arrogance goes beyond that. McGill is the biggest White Man’s institution in Canada. It has existed as an ally of colonialism, imperialism, and flat-out racism since the 1800s. I believe if McGill were anywhere in Canada, it would be acting in exactly the same way. The difference, however, is that in Quebec – with a long history (since the 60s) of education being for the public good – society tries to restrict the lone-ranger universities. It’s not just on questions of labour, though. The government recently came out with regulations on ancillary fees (vs. tuition fees, which they raised). McGill’s response? “Fuck em” (not a quote, but a reflection of their attitude). They basically told the government that they were not abiding by thse rules, and the good luck trying to stop us!

    — Maxim · Apr 25, 07:18 AM · #

13. Howdie, I am another member of AGSEM who is on strike. Quebec can be considered the hotbed of social movement in North America, consequently, the govt. (and the establishment) has always been adamant to break the movement. McGill’s series of dirty tactics (of defying labor codes) is just another attempt to break any kind of social movement. McGill can afford millions of dollars to go into court, and it is a calculated risk in order to break the union.

    Quebec is now facing a crisis in their education system from lack of public funding. Last semester they successfully raised tuition fee by $500 in the next five years (while this amount seems small in comparison to US tuition, the social and political consequence of such raise in Quebec is huge, it is breaking the hard-fought concept of “free accessible education” in Quebec). In response to this, last semester more than 60 thousands students went on strike for 3 days (some schools went on strike longer).

    After they are done with the students, the admin (and the govt.) is now turning their attacks on the most vurnerable workers in the education system, i.e. part-time teachers (TAs, part-time faculty, sessional instructors, etc). Other than McGill, part-time faculties at Concordia university ware also on strike though they have called off their strike couple days back (They haven’t seen their salary increase for 6 years!).

    So, all in all, there is a crisis of underfunding in our social system (which is tied up to the impeding global economic crisis). This is happening while our govt spent billions of dollar for corporate tax cuts and to bail them out from bankruptcy (with the argument of trickling down economy, but we all know what trickles down the legs of the CEO!).

    What I am saying is simple: if our current socio-economic system couldn’t even provide us with free quality accessible education and better working conditions for educational workers, maybe it is about time for us to do away with it and think of an alternative!

    — AGSEM Militant · Apr 25, 01:30 PM · #

14. Frankly, I don’t see the usefulness of comparing McGill to the Bush Administration. (Disclosure: I deeply deplore what McGill’s doing to its grad students and junior faculty; its hubristic flouting of labour laws churns my stomach and I’m ashamed to call myself a McGill graduate right now.)

    It seems that every time labour laws – or any number of other social-justice laws – are broken by any kind of management, we automatically scream “Bush.” It trivializes the crime-against-humanity that is the current American government as well as the particular situation which is being compared to it in such a smug fashion.

    No, McGill is not part of the “Bush Gang.” Last time I checked, McGill executives weren’t sending funny emails to each other while watching a city and its people drown; McGill hasn’t sent its “insurgent” graduate students into torture chambers; and it certainly hasn’t committed mass-murder on an entire nation. What it has done is what corporate and administrative power always does when its unjust arrangements are defied: and that is to try every which way to sabotage the solidarity between employees standing up for their rights and those who might sympathize and find common cause with them.

    Let’s lose the self-satisfied “They’re mini-Bush!” refrain and actually try to figure out how we might strengthen our negotiating strategies and refine our tactics of resistance to bring labour justice back to campus.

    — rw · Apr 25, 06:29 PM · #

15. Well, RW, you have a point—the “culture of quality” and globalization of the U.S. version of “Japanese management”—especially its spread to government—owes just as much to Clinton-Gore-Blair-Liberal technocrats as to the thuggery of the Bush mob.

    But you’re the one forcing the comparison to extremes.

    Nobody’s comparing McGill to the Bush mob because of Iraq; they’re comparing McGill to the Bush gang because of its outrageous sense of executive license, especially against labor.

    — Marc Bousquet · Apr 25, 09:39 PM · #

16. But RW’s point is that by invoking Bush, as opposed to more general and widespread corporate/administrative tactics, you infuse your argument with much more than is permissible in a legitimate comparison.

    — wr · Apr 25, 10:37 PM · #

17. I am a lecturer at McGill this semester, teaching my own class for barely more $$ than my TA was making. But that is another issue. . . I have been appalled to see the administration’s behavior during the TA strike. We were told we were expected to break the law and perform scab labor, and we were threatened that if we did not do so our pay would be stopped—not proportionally reduced, but cut off. Having seen labor relations at Yale, I am not surprised by administrations who try to crush unions; and this is clearly union busting. But what has been most disheartening has been the reaction of the professors. Their official body (MAUT, McGill Association of University Teachers) has released statements, which are concerned almost exclusively with the burdens this strike has placed on them. I’m afraid that if the TAs here do not receive the active support of the professors they will not be able to win. It is clear that McGill plans to let this go on until the TAs cave in, through the fall semester if necessary (faculty have been told to be prepared to teach in the fall without TAs). Why MAUT will tolerate this, I don’t know. This sort of bullying, lying, and fear-mongering is in violation of every liberal principle necessary to the modern university. But apparently MAUT is OK with that. They profess neutrality, but in this case to be neutral is to sell out the TAs, is to condone the administration’s bullying tactics. I don’t see this ending well, and the faculty will have a great deal of the blame if they do nothing in the face of this threat to the university.

    — giotto · Apr 25, 11:02 PM · #

18. On Comment 17:

    Absolutely. The faculty are a major lynchpin of the public relations card. Especially the tenured faculty. (I know that MB thinks labor reform is all done from the bottom up, but strategic alliances with the faculty, chinks in the wall, as it were, have always been essential to student organizing victories.)

    The TAs could develop a “solidarity” wrist-band (a bright solid color) and ask strike sympathizers to wear it. Kind of the “tie a yellow ribbon ‘round the old oak tree” approach. Its appearance on the scene needs to be well orchestrated and announced with a press release.

    If the faculty need to be on campus to teach a course in order to pay their rent, at least the wrist band could be worn. The strike Website could have a kaleidoscope of pictures of sympathizers wearing the wrist bands across Montreal — and the province. The bands can be cheaply made and distributed along with info flyers at malls, etc.

    Ask the TA unions at other Quebec campuses to distribute them to their TAs to wear them, too. Have pictures on the Website of groups of TAs across the province, wearing the wrist band in solidarity. Get the media to cover the multi-campus movement.

    Have a mascot for the strike — I’d suggest Colbert’s eagle who was reportedly last seen in Canada. Contact the show and ask him to wear the armband, too, for “baby Stephen’s sake” ;-).

    (Obviously, the eagle mascot would wear the band on its left claw but tell the show it’s so Colbert can wear it on his only remaining band-free wrist!)

    The only way to win this is to wage the war in the court of public opinion. Winning in the legal system is going to take a long, long time and lots and lots of money. McGill has the funds to appeal forever.

    To settle the strike, the TAs must turn the tide of public opinion. And in Quebec, that means waging the media battle on both linguistic fronts.

    Getting letters to the editor published by sympathizers from other unions, by sympathizers from political parties — in the major papers of both languages. Getting reporters’ attention for each of the media profile tactics employed.

    There isn’t much time; summer is almost here.

    Speak truth to power in the media — to remind those Quebeckers who might be looking the other way (“it’s just those darned English, after all”), that this is just the beginning (“there but for the grace of God, etc.”) — unless they help end it.

    It’s time — time for everyone in the province to choose.

    Good luck!

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 26, 12:15 AM · #

19. As a junior McGill professor, I can say that it is par for the course for our faculty association to be another arm of the administration. In fact, most of the administration is part of the faculty association. Who is going to show up at a MAUT meeting and ask the faculty to cross the administration when their dean is sitting beside them? The main role of MAUT seems to be to keep the salaries rising nicely and to monitor the pension fund. Real concerns, like workloads for junior faculty, access to daycare, conflicts with management, etc., are not things that interest MAUT. The result is that the faculty are financially probably better off than many places with unions, but we have no bargaining power on other issues.

    — McGill prof · Apr 26, 11:53 AM · #

20. Of course, since many/most of the administration in colleges and universities are concurrently faculty members, it is not suprising to read in Comment 20 that the McGill faculty organization will be silent.

    The real question is whether the tenured faculty as individuals will exercise any form of speech in support of the TA strike — like wearing that wrist-band, perhaps, or signing a petition, writing an op-ed, etc.

    If not, then they deserve to teach without TAs in the fall. In fact, that may be “the moment of truth”, as it were: as the faculty are forced to do more work for no more pay, they may just suddenly understand that they can be – and, indeed, are – in the same “bargaininig” position as their TAs.

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 26, 12:34 PM · #

21. IF there are, indeed, no plans for any TAs at McGill in the fall,

    AND the faculty at McGill “are financially probably better off than many places with unions” (Comment 19), and

    GIVEN that the principal and vice-chancellor of McGill is the president of the Conference of Rectors and Principals of the Universities of Quebec (CREPUQ), and

    GIVEN the pressures to cut the public financing of education in Quebec (Comment 13),

    AND taking another cue from the faculty strike at UQTR which settled only days before the McGill TA stirke (Comment 9) — but at the cost of increased teaching loads for a significant percentage of the new faculty hires,

    COULD IT BE that in reality, McGill’s real goal is actually a “speed-up” of the FACULTY?

    Tenured faculty of McGill, “reveillez-vous”! Defend your graduate students or do more work yourselves.

    (Looks like the faculty’s “neutral” deal with the devil may no longer be paying off.)

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 27, 02:30 PM · #

22. #20: Wearing wrist bands is all very well, as is signing petitions, but it seems clear to me such gestures are just that, gestures. The administration has chosen to use an iron fist; it has chosen to face down the union with threats, and to keep the professors in line with fear. Given this abdication of decency, we should probably count on the administration ignoring such gestures. What is needed is for every paper and final exam—every student work that was to be graded by TAs— to be dropped off at the provost’s office, along with grading keys and lists of graduating seniors so that management will know which exams to grade first.
    Could this happen? Perhaps, but only if enough enough tenured professors are willing to accept short term pain (in the form of pay cuts) in exchange for the long term integrity of the university. Obviously we can write off MAUT as a vehicle for collective action on this; how do we get individual professors to do the right thing???

    — giotto · Apr 27, 05:25 PM · #

23. Only when individual professors have the moment of insight to realize that the plight of the graduate TAs is precisely their own plight, once removed — only then will they write the tracts and take public actions. The tide of public opinion must be turned against McGill and the politics/politicians which support it, but the strike profile does not appear to be that high — yet.

    The wrist-band, for example, would be a manner of communicating and consolidating a visible form of public resistance to the exploitation of the academic laborer and the erosion of public education — as a kind of call to political “engagement”.

    The picket line is the vehicle of the poster/placard — a method of communication which pre-dates the modern advertising age. Orchestrating a successful strike when the oppressor is no less than the state requires a more broadly master-minded campaign.

    A version of Comment 22’s scenario of the grade sheets was actually the means of the first teaching assistant strike at Yale in the late 60’s. The “teaching fellows” of philosophy (and perhaps a few other departments) at Yale graded the exams and papers in a timely fashion — but then handed them to their chosen student representative who withheld them from the administation until Yale agreed to institute a more just pay-scale for the TFs.

    Yale’s commencement is a true commencement; senior week is the hiatus between the last semester examinations and the ceremony. That week was the week of the negotiations.

    Managing a strike requires an exquisite sense of timing, an intimate knowledge of the nature of the management and of the solidarity which can be relied upon in the confrontation. The TFs of only a few departments at Yale strategized for the rights of all the TFs at Yale — and won.

    The stakes of the conflict at McGill are much, much higher. Wrist-bands or whatever, the strike committee must devise a broader, more public strategy. Counter-intuitively, the stakes are not local but, in reality, systemic for all of Quebec higher education. Thus, the the real story must somehow be communicated to the public and symbolically mobilized.

    Only the swaying of public opinion will defeat the raw power of McGill and the state. Likely, most tenured McGill professors consider themselves to be faculty entrepreneurs who negotiate their own individual fates with the administration.

    They are in for a rude awakening this fall….

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 27, 07:03 PM · #

24. MB’s most recent post, “Organizing Abraham Lincoln” discusses agit-prop performance theater being used as a TA solidarity outlet in Philly and other cities.

    Now that would get some media coverage, would it not? “Cirque de McGill” or some such mocking title.

    Surely the striking TAs could get a church to lend the space, for example. Bi-lingual production, of course. An advertisement in the major Montreal newspapers; invitations delivered in person to each of the tenured McGill faculty, donations at the door, etc., etc., and so forth.

    As Hamlet put it, “the play’s the thing/ Wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king!”

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 27, 10:02 PM · #

25. In nations where “manager” is a person who hires or fires anyone, the anyones end up wimps, cowed and kow tow ing. Managers, not having real functions in many instances extend their “control” and “influence”—more control and influence = more “managing” there being no reasonable measure of kinds of managing, needs for them, and amounts of them needed. This sloppy amateurism of “managing” is fostered by professors in business schools made stupid by a lifetime of exposure to idiotics—that is, economics. We reap what we, as colleges having business schools generating barbarian bullies, sow.

    — Richard Tabor Greene · Apr 28, 05:01 AM · #

26. Excuse me, what has this to do with George Bush? That he exemplifies typical right wing attitudes toward labor and exhibits executive arrogance? Hey Canucks! Wake up! The Bush Mob isn’t your problem, it’s America’s. Your problem is your own right wing. OMG, you mean Canada has evil people within its beautiful pacifist borders? People who don’t like labor? How can that be? Canada? Deluded about its own image? Anti labor must be imported from evil America. Canada couldn’t have grown this all on their own, afterall aren’t the Canadians saintly people? Gawd, do you not see why Americans think of Canadians as simple minded people?

    — first marci · Apr 28, 11:59 AM · #

27. Thanks, marci, for running the thread into the ground. Comment #15 addresses your concern, should you really care.

    anti-hypocrisy: I just want to clarify that I do not disagree with your points. Especially the point that the stakes here are quite high. The McGill administration has ensured that this is the case, and those of us who oppose the administration’s vision of university governance need to be prepared to respond forcefully.

    — giotto · Apr 28, 01:52 PM · #

28. The Quebec Labour Board has recently ruled that McGill profs are allowed to mark their own exams. This is NOT scabbing, but once again deliberate misinformation spread by the AGSEM on campus.

    Please visit www.tellyourta.com, run by TAs sick and tired of the union’s belligerent attitude and culture of entitlement.

    — tellyouta · Apr 29, 08:01 AM · #

29. There was no ruling by the Quebec Labour Board that allowed McGill professors to mark their own exams in cases where the work was delegated or contracted out to a teaching assistant (TA). The cases of scabbing are still under review. The McGill administration has yet again released misinformation. The union (AGSEM) has released its own email explaining the situation. Please check out their website (www.agsem.ca) for more information.

    The tellyourta.com website is another fountain of misinformation and misrepresents what is at issue with the strike. For example, AGSEM is not currently asking for a 41% pay increase. I’m afraid that the TAs running this website are those fortunate TAs who come from departments with guaranteed funding packages and who have access to resources (e.g., lab and office space to meet students) that many TAs at McGill don’t. I guess the attitude of, “I’m in a good situation, so it’s not my problem”, is the one shared by these TAs.

    In essence, AGSEM is fighting for improvements to working conditions for TAs. For example, as many TAs work in departments where there is no legally binding contract (i.e., workload form), many TAs end up working significantly more hours than they are actually paid for. TAs are being taking advantage of when this happens. Moreover, even if you make $22/hour, if you’re capped at 180 hours for a semester, you end up only making about $4000, leaving you living under the poverty line (and this doesn’t take into account taxes and working more hours than you’re contracted to do).

    — Striking TA · Apr 29, 08:36 AM · #

30. I also feel that the AGSEM is spreading a lot of misinformation and that (unfortunately) TAs are not aware of the economic reality in Quebec.

    Even though I don’t agree with the way McGill is reacting to the strike (firing sessionals and invigilators), I believe that McGill students and TAs are VERY privileged. McGill has more money than any other universities in Quebec!!!

    If you are curious, you can look at the average wage for TAing in the 3 other universities in Montreal.

    UQAM: http://www.rhu.uqam.ca/index.aspx?id=p484&menuId=p36
    UdM:http://www.faecum.qc.ca/main.cfm?p=01_700&GID=111
    Concordia (in the Arts): http://ahsc.concordia.ca/documents/2008-09TAAllocations-tobeposted.pdf

    — caribou · Apr 29, 09:02 AM · #

31. No no, McGill never fired invigilators or anyone else over the strike.

    The Quebec labour code states that if a union member is on strike, the employer is NOT ALLOWED to have any member of that union work at a different job within the same organization.

    So once the TAs went on strike, McGill was forced to simply not hire them. So they weren’t fired, they were just never hired.

    This is a legal consequence of the Strike, and not some draconian plot by the McGill administration to ruin the lives of its students.

    — hellcat · Apr 29, 10:12 AM · #

32. In response to Hellcat:

    That section of the Quebec Labour Code was implemented to prevent employers from hiring scabs. It was designed to protect union members in allowing them the ability to withhold work (i.e., strike). McGill, in this case, is interpreting the Code in its favour (which I must complement them for, they must have really wonderful lawyers that we’re paying for via our tuition!).

    With respect to the exam invigilators, they were fired! All of them signed a contract and already did 2 hours of paid training before the strike even began. As they were paid for that time, isn’t that evidence that they were hired? Moreover, those invigilators that were fired were only those individuals who are actively on strike (i.e., TAs working during the Winter 2008 semester). Invigilators, even if they are part of the union (e.g., worked as a TA in the Fall 2007 semester), were not let go. As such, it is reasonable to say that McGill is punishing TAs who are exercising their right to strike and that the firings are another pressure tactic by the Adminstration.

    Again, it appears that many people (e.g., caribou, comment #30) still believe that the strike is only about wages. From what I gather at the general assemblies held by AGSEM, the union is prepared to come to terms with the topic of wages with McGill. McGill, however, won’t agree to such important issues as a guaranteed contract for TAs which clearly outlines the duties that TAs perform in a course. This is important, since such a workload form would protect TAs from doing unpaid work at McGill. I have no problem volunteering and helping a professor should more work be required in a course (within reason), but not when it’s not my choice!

    — Striking TA · Apr 29, 11:16 AM · #

33. AGSEM might wish to contact the CWA (Communication Workers of America) who organized the TAs in SUNY (no, not AFT).

    Earlier in the month, I posted the following on MB’s companion HTWU blog:

    Colleagues in SUNY have informed me that Stony Brook has suspended the jobs of over 400 adjuncts, cancelling hundreds of fall courses (registration has just begun, apparently) and instructing the full-time faculty to take up the slack in important courses.

    Budget woes. So what if some students don’t graduate on time because of this, right?

    Of course, adding one course to a two-course per semester teaching load only brings the teaching load up to three-fourths that of a full-time college professor in SUNY.

    And apparently, since research responsibilities are self-directed (for college and university faculty), this won’t even be considered a formal increase in workload for collective bargaining purposes.

    This is only the beginning of chickens coming home to roost from the adjunctification of the university….
    http://howtheuniversityworks.com/wordpress/archives/95

    I do not know the details of which graduate students were affected (e.g. were they only those who were not in the union or who taught courses as “faculty” adjuncts, etc.). But it’s worth trying to find out.

    Putting all of this together:

    There are many similarities between management’s strategies in the direction of the workforce in these examples. The UQTR’s new contract with its speed-up isn’t much different from the de facto speed up at Stony-Brook — and the speed-up which will take place for faculty at McGill in the fall.

    In both cases, management has targeted the lowest on the totem pole and pushed the work upstairs. It would likely take a labor lawyer in Quebec to know whether work that belonged to the faculty which was then contracted-out to TAs cannot be re-allocated to the faculty.

    And, of course, all of this is consistent with the pronouncements on both sides of the border of the need for the students to bear this burden in tuition increases — heaven forfend that management should trim itself!

    Good luck….

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 29, 12:15 PM · #

34. in response to # 31:
    That is not true. Many graduate students had already signed contracts for teaching positions, especially for summer. They were hired to teach their own courses, and not as TAs. They were HIRED, contracts were signed, and now they have been fired. There is no dispute over the facts here.

    The only room for dispute is: how despicable was the administration’s behavior? #32 is correct: the administration is clinging to the letter of the law in order to violate the spirit of the law. It is using a pro-labor provision (which prevents management from hiring scab labor to perform struck work) for expressly anti-labor purposes (punishing workers who went on strike as TAs, by firing them from non-TA, non union jobs…) Legal?? Apparently. Ethical? Not a chance. Thuggish?? You bet.

    — giotto · Apr 29, 07:26 PM · #

35. #30:
    That “economic reality” does not seem to prevent McGill from paying its administrators and faculty according to Canadian standards. Anybody know how much McGill spent on Heather Munroe-Blum’s housekeeping last year? A few years ago it was $30,000. And last time I looked she was receiving some 15,000 for a car allowance. Do the leaders of other Quebec universities get those perks??? Odd that the harsh economic realities don’t apply to those in charge at McGill, isn’t it??
    I’m not arguing against paying good salaries to the best people. Indeed, that is what the strike is about. You are welcome to argue that McGill is doing better financially and academically than other Quebec universities, but that starts to look like a case of low expectations when compared to McGill’s aspirations. If McGill is going to continue aspiring to compete against world-wide top-10 universities, it is going to have to pony up for the TAS who do so much of the teaching. Because those universities are paying their TAs significantly more. Either McGill needs to pay to attract the best, or it doesn’t.
    If it is true of faculty and administrators, why is it not true of graduate students??

    — giotto · Apr 29, 07:48 PM · #

36. giotto: “I’m not arguing against paying good salaries to the best people. Indeed, that is what the strike is about.”

    I’m sorry, but I really don’t think that McGill students are better than those who are studying at UQAM, UdM and Concordia. I studied at UQAM and UdM (undergrad + master). I’m now doing a PhD at McGill and I can only say that students are students. Some are smart and some are not. I think you should back off with your “best people”!

    giotto: “If McGill is going to continue aspiring to compete against world-wide top-10 universities, it is going to have to pony up for the TAS who do so much of the teaching.”

    If you think in terms of education and not in terms of business: university rankings are not a good thing. But as you do relate to those rankings – What are the tuition fees of the other world-wide top-10 universities?

    — caribou · Apr 29, 10:33 PM · #

37. To giotto

    If you look closely to the academic wages in Quebec. Associate professors at McGill earn pretty much the same salaries as their colleages in the other universities located in the province of Quebec.

    http://www.livingin-canada.com/salaries-associate-professors-canada-q.html

    Administrators in ALL universities make too much money and have too much power (e.g. the financial crisis at UQAM due to real estate project).

    — caribou · Apr 29, 11:42 PM · #

38. As I never TA at McGill (I did at UQAM and at UdM), I’m not against the strike. I assume that the union members know what they do. But I can’t help
    to think that TAs are not well informed about the socio-economic reality in Quebec. To compare McGill TAs’ wages with those of UQAM, UdM and Concordia isn’t a ‘‘case of low expectations’‘, I think it’s a fair process. Members should be informed with all the facts.

    Je suis solidaire with all the sessionals and invigilators who have lost their jobs.

    — caribou · Apr 30, 12:14 AM · #

39. Quoting #31: “The Quebec labour code states that if a union member is on strike, the employer is NOT ALLOWED to have any member of that union work at a different job within the same organization.”

    Actually, no. This is what Sec. 109.1(c) of the Labour Code, which McGill has cited as the justification for its actions, says:

    “109.1. For the duration of a strike declared in accordance with this Code or a lock-out, every employer is prohibited from … (c) utilizing, in an establishment where a strike or lock-out has been declared, the services of an employee who is a member of the bargaining unit then on strike or locked out”

    However, 109.1(c) does not end there: it continues: “unless (i) an agreement has been reached for that purpose between the parties, to the extent that the agreement so provides, …”

    AGSEM wants its members to continue doing (and getting paid for) their other jobs at McGill. If the administration really cared about obeying the Labour Code, it could easily reach the agreement contemplated in 109.1(c)(i). I think the administration is simply trying to bust the union, using any means necessary, including firings that happen to have a superficially plausible legal cover.

    — Pseudonymous AGSEM Member · Apr 30, 03:51 AM · #

40. We need to remember that the TA strike is not just about wages. An important issue that seems to be overlooked (especially by the Administration and its supporters) is the guaranteed contract/workload form. If it was clear what TAs had to do for a course, and courses were structured in such a way that unpaid work did not occur (but this can only be solved by professors properly structuring courses and the Administration capping class sizes), then one of the fundamental issues about the strike would be addressed. I’m sure everyone will agree that it is not right to have TAs do more work than they are contracted and paid to do.

    One problem about focusing on how McGill is dealing with the strike (i.e., the mechanism of the strike) is that we lose focus on why AGSEM is striking in the first place (i.e., the function of the strike). That McGill is failing to negotiate in good faith is pretty clear. But what’s not clear is why the administration is so adamant at not coming to terms with issues that are not related to wages (e.g., the workload form) that doesn’t involve any increase on spending by McGill?

    — Striking TA · Apr 30, 01:35 PM · #

41. On Comment 40:

    Because negotiating the levels of work on the work-form is the prelude to increases in funding of the TAs in “step-levels”. This is precisely what the Yale philosophy teaching fellows achieved for all the Yale TAs in the late-60s: a definition of workload into levels of I, II, and III, with corresponding increases in compensation for increasing responsibility.

    Better to nip that kind of thinking (and documentation of actual workload) right in the bud, so to speak – don’t you see?

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 30, 03:06 PM · #

42. I’m still trying to understand this issue, so guys, please clarify this for me.

    In response to #32, 34 and 39

    The thing I’ve never understood about the firing argument is why a union on strike would be so upset with the idea that its members are not allowed to work. If any member of a striking union works for the same employer against whom they are striking, then they are by definition scabs!

    Honestly! You should be outraged if the university DID let those union members work!

    “But the jobs they wanted to do were non-union jobs!”
    Maybe, but at they were still for the same employer, and as such anyone attempting to work under those circumstances is attempting something illegal.

    “But the university is being thuggish for in its interpretation of the law”
    I’m a philosopher, not a lawyer, so please, please explain under what circumstances a university has the right to interpret – and then apply – its own idea of provincial law. Because I’m under the impression that the right to interpret the application of the law lies exclusively in the hands of the courts.

    Had McGill “interpreted” the law in a way that benefited SOME of the striking workers, wouldn’t this have brought upon them the wrath of the CSN and other labour organizations, who would have pushed for fines and other serious legal action against the institution?

    And would the TAs on strike then support McGill through the tough times by helping them raise funds to pay the fines?

    Am I missing something here?

    — hellcat · Apr 30, 07:04 PM · #

43. I’m a bit confused by this as well because of the “don’t cross a union’s picket line” practice that, in the U.S., at least, means that a member of a union won’t go to work for an employer where a sister union is on strike.

    The expression down here is “honoring the picket line”. However, unionized employees in public institutions in the States do not always have the legal right to strike at all – a significantly more problematic situation for organizing and bargaining.

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Apr 30, 08:50 PM · #

44. hellcat (#42),

    I believe the intent of 109.1(c) is to prevent employers from breaking a strike by, say, re-creating the same job (call it “Senior Grader” or something instead of “Teaching Assistant”) and filling (some of) those positions with union members.

    But 109.1(c)(i), which McGill keeps leaving out (by accident, I’m sure) when it quotes from 109.1(c), allows for continued employment in other jobs if the parties agree.

    As for “the wrath of the CSN and other labour organizations, who would have pushed for fines and other serious legal action against the institution”: if McGill and AGSEM reached the kind of agreement specified in 109.1(c)(i), then McGill’s actions, in this particular respect, would be entirely legal, wouldn’t they? Maybe CSN would have a beef about AGSEM’s tactics (though choosing to keep your members out of bankruptcy seems pretty reasonable to me), but if so, that should be an internecine union dispute, not something actionable before the Labour Commission. And anyway, I’m not sure whether third parties are even allowed to bring complaints before the Commission.

    — Pseudonymous AGSEM Member · Apr 30, 08:51 PM · #

45. I can imagine the intent of the 109.1©(i) clause to mean that under certain circumstances an employer and striking employee can come to an understanding that a full and complete strike would be too detrimental to the organization.

    For example, if in a manufacturing plant certain machines require constant maintenance or else they can break down or be permanently damaged, then both parties can agree that despite the strike, certain members can work PURELY to maintain these machines.

    After all, the purpose of a strike is to improve working conditions for an organization, not to destroy the organization itself. (in the above hypothetical example of the manufacturing plant, nobody benefits from broken machines once the strike is resolved).

    That being said, what possible reason would McGill have to justify letting some of the union work once they’ve declared a strike?

    Because some union members need some extra cash during the summer? Because some union members would like to work AND participate in a fun protest as shown on YouTube? Because letting some union members work would be the “nice” thing for the university to do? Because most (almost 3/4) of the eligible union voters didn’t show up to cast their ballot the day the strike was decided for everyone, and now they are freaking out?

    I’m not convinced… can somebody please tell me what I’m missing here?

    — hellcat · May 1, 01:44 AM · #

46. Hey Hellcat – some of the TA’s who are also RA’s and do other contract type work on campus….we are international students who are forbidden from seeking work outside the campus ( unless we want to pay extra money we don’t have for a special work permit)

    So it isn’t “extra cash for the summer” – it is what I live on and support my child on as I live in a country that is not mine.

    RA’s are paid out of grant and research money and hired by individual professors – it is NOT the same work that I would do as a Teaching Assistant. Of course, the university is giving a big “Fuck you” to the Professors as well. The pressure to bring in research money…then hamstringing the same people from DOING the research with the people they want ( and who are highly qualified)

    I get to call the Student Accounts today and tell them that I can’t pay them until the strike is resolved. The money I was going to pay was the money I was earning this summer.

    — PhD Gal at McGill · May 1, 08:34 AM · #

47. Interesting — apparently the union in quesiton is not of all graduate assistants but only of those who teach.

    Add to that the fact that there are likely measures in place for granting academic undergraduates academic credit for doing the same work as either grraduate research or teaching assistants, and well — this is going to be one fascinating show to watch….

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · May 1, 11:22 AM · #

48. The thing about the union is that if you are a grad student and you are not hired as a TA…well you aren’t part of the union.

    My RA partner is not part of the union, and therefore is able to keep getting paid for her work. She was not hired as a TA by the Department (which no one is really talking about the incredibly fucked up way TA’s are chosen and hired. As an American, it Blows my mind).

    So – she can still work, and get paid. Since I was a TA for the past 3 academic terms…..I can’t get paid for the RA work.

    So Yes – the admin can wait until the professors HAVE to go to Grad students who are not part of the union for their Research Assistant duties.

    They have also told the Profs that they will most likely be teaching without TA’s in the fall.

    — PhD Gal at McGill · May 1, 01:19 PM · #

49. PhD Gal – I honestly empathize with your plight. But I just can’t bring myself to agree with the way you see the situation.

    Your professor might have chosen you to help them in your capacity as an RA, but its the university that hands out the paychecks, thus making McGill your employer.

    (Now if your professor were independently funded and doing their summer research outside of the institution, using no resources other than their own, AND they decided to hire you to help them, then THEY would be your employer and McGill would have nothing to say on the matter.)

    So if you’re on strike, it is your OBLIGATION to withhold all labour from your employer. The whole point of a strike is an endurance test to see which side can survive the longest without the other’s support. Honestly, I really don’t see how any union member can cheer the strike and then complain that they aren’t working and earning wages. It just doesn’t make any sense to me!

    Finally, it doesn’t seem to me that McGill gave a big “fuck you” to the professors. If the administration had done a Lock-Out against the TAs, I would probably feel differently. But you guys declared the strike, and thus you guys are the ones responsible for the inconvenience done to profs and undergrads.

    — hellcat · May 1, 01:47 PM · #

50. In response to AGSEM Chalk Force (#11)

    Quote: “TAs are primarily an English university phenomenon and thus compares TAs to positions requiring less education in Francophone universities. In reality, being a TA requires at least an undergrad degree, which puts us line with CEGEP (basically lower-college / upper highschool) teachers in Quebec that make upwards of $40-$50 / hr.”

    You are TOTALLY wrong! TAs in Francophone universities are ALSO graduate students!!!! Those who are not only make paper work such as photocopies, and, of course, they earn less money than graduate students because they don’t do the same job! CEGEP teachers don’t have hourly wage AND they have MORE responsabilities than TAs (they prepare their courses, they give courses, they grade, they have departemental meetings, they work on the educational programs, etc.).

    You SHOULD STOP being arrogant with your brothers and sisters who are doing the SAME JOB as YOU DO in other Quebec universities.

    You want Quebec tuitions fees, you want to be protected by the Quebec Labor code, but YOU DON’T WANT to compare yourself with people of your community. Wow, I’m not impressed! By ignoring the other universities, the AGSEM is acting just like you.

    As a PhD candidate at McGill and as a French-Canadian, I CANNOT tolerate this kind of attitude ANYMORE!!!

    — caribou · May 1, 02:05 PM · #

51. To honor their own picket line, striking TAs shouldn’t work for McGill as invigilators or sessionals. Being willing to do so would result in being inconsistent with the whole idea of a strike. How can you fight against an employer and work for him at the same time?

    If striking members are not willing to respect their own picket line, it might become difficult for them to convince profs and non-unionized workers (e.g. graders) to respect it.

    — caribou · May 1, 03:14 PM · #

52. Thanks hellcat ( I do believe you empathize).

    As an “older” PhD candidate at McGill, I have a somewhat different view of the strike in general. When I was in the States working for a State agency making public policy I was part of the Union there. I was ALSO management at another point in my career in education – so I was doing the negotiation as to wages and benefits.

    My personal policy was always transparency. I showed my employees the entire budget. We talked about why their pay could only go up so much ( and in the US, a huge chunk of my expense was health care, which ranged at about 38% of each positions salary).

    That, in my opinion, is NOT the case at McGill. There is certainly a sense of “We’ll just hold out until they can’t take it anymore” from the Administration. Do they treat the professors much better? Not in my opinion.

    There is a HUGE push to bring in research grant monies ( more so than the publish part of the job). In fact, I think most professors would tell you that they spend alot of time writing research grants to insure their own positions. So the argument that the money the professors bring in “belongs” to the university falls a little askew on my ears. It is the professors who are writing the proposals. It is their research. Do they not get to choose who they want as their research team?

    The issue is less about wages and much more about respect as educators – respect as vital parts of university quality of life and key parts of many undergraduates university experiences. I, in fact, write one of my “students” references for her semester abroad program. As I have been her TA in 2 or 3 courses, she felt I was able to speak to her growth over a semester as a student. I thought that was a very telling moment.

    We are also students. It offends me to see the Administration decide that All students are not worth speaking to in any authentic manner. There is no transparency. There is only some perverted game of “Turn the students against their TA’s and the TA’s against the professors and The professors against their students.”

    And the Administration get to eat lunch at the Faculty Club and feel no pain whatsoever.

    — PhD Gal at McGill · May 1, 03:20 PM · #

53. Great, so now we’re only asking for a 27% pay raise, not 41%. My apologies, I’ll update tellyourta.com.
    I’m still surprised you actually expect to be taken seriously, though. Come on, 27% ?? Honestly…

    — tellyouta · May 1, 04:53 PM · #

54. In response to Comment #49 (Hellcat):
    McGill has given a big “fuck you” to the professors. For example, McGill has stated that if professors do not do the work that has been delegated and/or contracted specifically to TAs (e.g., the job of marking work in courses), then their entire salary would be stopped immediately. AGSEM may have called the strike, but it is the McGill Administration that is forcing faculty to do the work that has been contracted out to TAs. As regular faculty are not management (e.g., most are not the Chair of a department, nor are they a Dean, Provost, etc.), then doing the work contracted to TAs would be scabbing (these cases are still under review). As such, McGill has forced faculty to potentially break the labour code on paid of getting no pay themselves. That’s pretty harsh, isn’t it?

    In response to Comment #50 (Caribou):
    AGSEM would gladly compare themselves to the rest of the Quebec academic community (e.g., TAs and grad students at UQAM, U de M, Concordia), if only the McGill Administration would do so as well. Unfortunately, the McGill Administration always touts itself as one of the best of the G13 (Anglophone universities, e.g. U of T, UBC), and aims to pay their staff (e.g., President Munroe-Blum, faculty) along the lines of other G13 universities. Therefore, McGill has a double standard when it comes to paying employees at McGill: high-end staff/faculty = G13 payscale; TAs and everyone else = Quebec market. If the McGill Administration would be fair and equitable for all of its employees in this regard, then there probably wouldn’t be a problem (e.g., AGSEM would have no case about comparing itself with TAs outside of Quebec).

    In response to Comment #51 (Caribou):
    I totally agree with you here. It has been a major strategic error on the part of TAs and AGSEM to continue work, in whatever capacity, for McGill. What would have been a better strategy, is to have had all TAs stop working completely in order to shut McGill down as much as possible. For example, if the TAs who were invigilators were to have quit, and if the rest of the invigilators would have walked out in solidarity (e.g., many invigilators are grad students/TAs themselves at some point or another, not just currently), this would have been a stronger action against McGill. Moreover, the strike probably would have been resolved much faster. Sadly, it is more probable that it would rain actual cats and dogs, than it is to get a unified front at McGill.

    In response to Comment #53 (tellyourta):
    You should update your website to include the demand by AGSEM for a guaranteed contract/workload form. I find it peculiar that you have failed to add that to the list of demands on the website, especially since it is one of the key demands of AGSEM. This is a reasonable demand, is it not? If you disagree with this demand by AGSEM, I guess you must like or tolerate being taken advantage of, and working more than you’re actually getting paid for. I commend you for your altruistic nature and your spirit for volunteering.

    — Striking TA · May 1, 06:10 PM · #

55. Hey Striking TA,

    Your argument doesn’t make sense. McGill TAs don’t want to compare themselves with other TAs in Quebec because McGill administration make a lot of money. Do cashiers in Wal-Mart stores should make more money than cashiers in regular stores because the Wal-Mart owners own the world? Workers are paid for the job they do, not in relation to their boss wage.

    Fair enough if you want complain against McGill administration. Administrators in public services make too much money. I guess it’s a way to compete with the wages in private businesses.

    University rankings are a new form of colonialism. They favor Anglophone universities that, once again, have more money. You know, people are getting educated in other languages.

    Most of tax payers in Quebec are Francophones which mean that McGill is mostly finance by Francophones. AGSEM doesn’t offer any information about the strike in French AND strikers don’t care about TAs in other Quebec universities. Come on. You’ll certainly won’t win the public opinion this way. You only care about your own belly.

    If I follow your rhetoric, the TAs strike at McGill is an elitist strike.

    Of course, there is no need for McGill students to get out of the ghetto McGill and mix with the masses in Quebec who pay for your education.

    — caribou · May 2, 08:48 AM · #

56. The average pay for an associate prof at McGill is $99,700. The average pay for an associate prof at l’Université Laval in Québec city is $98,500. Do you see a significant difference?

    — caribou · May 2, 08:58 AM · #

57. Salut Caribou,

    I’m not arguing for McGill TAs to be paid like those outside of Quebec. I understand that Quebec taxpayers are footing the bill for McGill, and I’m thankful, so I acknowledge that we shouldn’t compare ourselves to places like U of T. What I wanted to point out was that AGSEM is just showing the double standard that exists at McGill, where as McGill considers itself an international university and one of the best in Canada, it pays some (not all) in its Administration G13 rates, but the rest gets Quebec market.

    But if you’ve read my posts, I’m not arguing for an exorbitant wage increase for TAs. I’ve been arguing for better working conditions for TAs, such as a guaranteed contract/workload form which clearly outlines what TAs are supposed to do (and not supposed to do), in order to prevent TAs from being overworked. In many science courses, TAs work the full 180 hours and then some, so it is understandable to want protection from being forced to work more than you are supposed to (especially when you have your own dissertation research to do). Moreover, the demand for an official and formal sick leave protocol is appropriate as well. For example, if a science TA running a laboratory is sick that day or has an emergency (e.g., child has to go to the hospital), he/she can’t just call in sick or absent, but must find a replacement themselves, sometimes at the last minute. Sometimes you find someone, sometimes you don’t. And if you don’t find someone, but still need to miss the lab, your pay is docked, you face disciplinary action, and you run the risk of not being hired again the next semester (i.e., you can get blacklisted).

    Moreover, included in their strike demands, AGSEM is fighting to have the ability to file grievances in both French and English, so this is at least some evidence that AGSEM does care about its Francophone members (not enough, but it’s a start). Unfortunately, some of our fellow TAs do think that such a demand is useless (e.g., see comments from TAs from tellyourta.com). English isn’t my first language, so I am sympathetic and can empathize when it feels that the strike seems elitist, and overlooks Francophones.

    For my part, I’m not concerned about wages per se, but I am concerned about protecting what we have at the moment (e.g., workload form; preventing departments from “clawing back” any increase in the TA wage by decreasing other funding to students).

    By the way, I’ve never lived in the McGill ghetto. Too many loud and partying undergrads. Moreover, with my level of funding, I couldn’t afford to even if I wanted to!

    — Striking TA · May 2, 10:24 AM · #

58. Salut Striking TA,
    I guess we get along then!
    Thanks for your message.

    — caribou · May 2, 11:44 AM · #

59. AGSEM still doesn’t get it that it lives in a bi-lingual province and is financed primarily by francophones? The campaign is still primarily monolingual – and not just any “monolingual”: the language that isn’t supposed to be the one and only on all the official posters and signs in Quebec.

    Wow, nothing like identifying with the elitism of your management/colonial oppressor. Another heritage of the Hegelian dialectic, eh?

    In the age of the Internet and the facility of Web publishing, the francophone TAs of McGill can’t manage to force their leadership into bi-lingualism, even when it is manifestly in their best interest?

    Sad but true: In the end, workers get the unions they deserve….

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · May 2, 12:24 PM · #

60. I have just a few comments from what I hope is a fair assessment of the situation:

    1) TAs may indeed be educators, but there is not a competitive international labour market for TAs in the same way that there is for professors. TAs at McGill are given their jobs as a form of financial aid, not as a career opportunity. To treat TAing as a career that deserves the same respect as professorships or CÉGEP instructorships (or even to assume that such part-time work should provide a living wage) is a fallacy.

    2) TAships are contracted for a specific number of hours at an hourly rate, but the reality is that it is a fixed payment for performing a specific job outlined by the department. No one complains about TA overpayment when they work efficiently and don’t use up all their hours. Many industries work this way. While it is unreasonable to expect the workload form, which is essentially written by the TA without supervision (oh, let’s say these essays took 10 hours to mark) to be regarded as binding, the expected duties should be delineated in an official contract.

    3) The last TA pay-raise in 2003 was estimated to cost the University $1,000,000 over four years. It was smaller than the one currently proposed. Indeed, it is precisely by limiting long-term spending commitments like pay raises that McGill will have to curb its deficit.

    4) The average tuition Quebec students pay yearly is $1,862, while the average tuition Ontario students pay is $4,923. Despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary, McGill comes out rather well in this comparison: assuming two 180hr TAships per year, the Ontario student /must earn/ $8.50 more per hour just to cover the tuition differential. The argument is made that many McGill students are already paying differential fees for being international or out-of-province students, but they cannot expect Quebec to give them a free ride after having collected no taxes on their behalf (especially since most McGill grads do not stay in Quebec).

    It is wonderful that Quebec wants to make higher education accessible by keeping costs down (as opposed to being very generous with need-based aid), but if tuition is to be low, the government must pick up the slack, which it routinely fails to do, and it is for this reason the universities find themselves in financial straits, whatever Ms. Munroe-Blum’s decorating budget might be. (See, if interested, April 24th’s Globe and Mail: “Quebec’s Low Tuition a Double-Edged Sword,” by Konrad Yakabuski).

    5) It is unfortunate that striking TAs were “fired” from other jobs at the university, but it was AGSEM’s duty to inform them of this possibility /before/ the strike vote, rather than naively claiming that such an action was illegal. Assuming they or their parent union’s army of lawyers read the Labour Code, they should have been prepared for such an eventuality, taken steps to insure an agreement pursuant to 109.1 © (i) and disclosed its success or failure to its membership, many of whom would have voted differently knowing then what they know now.

    6) It should be stressed that junior faculty are not the only ones being “forced” to do their marking (aka act responsibly in the interest of their students). Graduate student instructors have seen their own TAs (who at the same time are their classmates and friends) walk out to enjoy AGSEM-sponsored barbecues at the picket line, while they are left with hundreds of papers and exams to mark while dealing with their own academic work. Their friends and classmates are legally barred from helping them.

    7) As for the sick leave demands, graduate students tend to know best which of their peers would be capable of replacing them, but if the answer is as simple as giving the department co-ordinator a phone list, then so be it!

    8) AGSEM neglects to mention that a part of their bargaining platform includes more office space and extra money (provided in the form of contracted TAships) for their executive board. I cannot remember this being mentioned at all in the strike meeting, or in subsequent correspondence from the union. I would love to have someone explain this to me.

    To sum up, there is a lot of propaganda flying here from /both sides/, and it seems that even reporters with the Gazette like Peggy Curran are uncritically taking AGSEM’s version of events as truth without really examining the issues at stake (see yesterday’s “TA Strike Leaves Trail of Bad Blood at McGill”). We would all do well to remember that both sides have an agenda.

    — McGill Grad Student · May 4, 05:07 AM · #

61. McGill Grad Student, I feel you have many valid points in the above statement.

    However, I do take issue with this piece:

    “TAs at McGill are given their jobs as a form of financial aid, not as a career opportunity. To treat TAing as a career that deserves the same respect as professorships or CÉGEP instructor ships (or even to assume that such part-time work should provide a living wage) is a fallacy.”

    I can not speak for ALL PhD grad students. I further realize that I can not speak for all TA’s. This being said, I DO view my time as a TA as an important and developmental step in my career as an academic. I am most likely “different” than many TA’s, having had both my B.S. and M.Ed. AND more than 15 years teaching and policy experience before coming back to do my PhD. My profession is teaching. The contacts within my department ARE a career opportunity. The world of academia is small enough to know that it often is WHO you know that will lead to your next job.

    Furthermore, if McGill just gave me “Financial Aid”, it would be a hell of a lot less work than I do/have done as a TA.

    It is important to understand that all TA’s are not treated equally.

    In the classes in Education in which I TA – I routinely have 80 undergrads in METHODS classes. It is a Professor…and Me. My hours are “kept” between 100 and 80 for each of those sections – not even the 180 I have seen talked about in some discussions. I am often TA’ing for 160 undergrad students for 180 hours a Term.

    A friend of mine in the computer sciences section said “What are you complaining about? The TA’s in My Department all talk about how little work they have to do…” At which point I laid out my workload in the form of students, prep time and contact hours. These hours and workload are very different than his workload.

    Finally, I have worked for some professors who are wonderful, fair people. They did not take advantage of me in the least, but treated me as a partner and peer. I would happily TA for them again, and we have remained friends and colleagues. That being said, however, I had a nightmare of a professor this year. This person felt no compunction about asking me to go way above and beyond my alloted hours, even calling me on weekends or after hours – asking me to come in during break times to have all day meetings with them. Aside from being an utterly incompetent professor, this individual routinely had me grade ALL exams, quizzes and projects.

    So – do I have as much education and experience as CEGEP or McGill lecturers/instructors? That and a bunch more. Do I view my TA’ships as a career opportunity – getting my name out to people in my Department, networking? Absolutely.

    Have I had an experience by which I know that TA’s need to have some protection from unethical ( and in my subjective opinion – lazy) professors?

    Yep.

    And off the record? I finished all grading given to me before the strike for the professor who treated me fairly. I told her that if I had received it before the strike…then it was my responsibility to finish it. I was not looking to screw her or my students. Then again – I am an adult who takes my career seriously.

    Perhaps that is the larger issue. The way TA’s are selected and hired should be perhaps on Merit and Qualifications rather than who is in the priority hiring pool. Perhaps when the TA ships become coveted in this way, students will have no more tales about TA’s “skipping” out to BBQ’s.

    — PhD Gal at McGill · May 4, 04:27 PM · #

62. Much has been covered in this thread, but a few things need to be clarified. I’m writing as a tenured professor at McGill.

    —MAUT is, as far as I can tell, actually an obstacle to progressive faculty coming together to assess the situation and do anything collectively. It is a classic company union. Meanwhile, because of McGill’s decentralized structure, it is very difficult for sympathetic or progressive faculty to find one another beyond the people we already know in related fields to our own. Clearly, this is something we need to fix, but it does help explain the lack of spontaneous support by even progressive faculty.

    That said, several departments have sent letters to the provost protesting the administration’s strikebreaking tactics, and in at least one case, the department chair got a very angry phone call back from the provost.

    —Yes, the university’s official position is that they are just following the law in firing research assistants and course lecturers scheduled for the summer, but their actions are selective. Course lecturers for spring 2008 who were teaching assistants in the prior 12 months have continued to be paid and are expected to turn in their grades on time; course lecturers scheduled to teach in the summer who were teaching assistants in the prior 12 months were fired. Similarly, the university is now refusing to pay students for work they completed before the strike in non-unionized positions.

    If that weren’t enough, the official line from the administration is that they are simply following Quebec labor code and there is nothing political in what they are doing. But several people close to the upper admin have said to me more quietly that they are “pleased to see the hard line tactics working.”

    —The current attempt to go over the heads of AGSEM leadership to negotiate directly with the membership is also a failure to bargain in good faith, especially since the administration is not fully disclosing the terms their own offer. Among the details not mentioned is a new workload form that each TA would have to sign, effectively giving up his or her right to strike.

    My own expanded grading load aside, as a prof, watching the whole thing is frustrating, and to know that it is essentially batting practice for what the administration hopes to do to the clerical union (clericals have also been working for a long time without a contract) is all the more troubling.

    — Tenured McGill Prof · May 4, 04:59 PM · #

63. Ah yes, I am reminded of that famous saying by Martin Niemoeller during the Nazi period of Germany (here paraphrased for the strike):

    When they came for the TAs, I did not care; I wasn’t a TA.
    When they came for the clerical workers, I didn’t care; I’m not a clerical worker.
    When they came for the faculty, I was a faculty member but…
    There was no one left to care.

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · May 4, 06:13 PM · #

64. Striking TA – I’m not entirely sure how you can claim that McGill “forced” professors to do their own grading, or that this work was “contracted” to TAs, or, most importantly, that “the case is under review” when on Apr 24th the labour commission ruled in favour of McGill’s interpretation.

    Here’s the link:

    www.mcgill.ca/channels/announcements/item/?item_id=100227

    So in other words, by ruling in favour of McGill, it is understood that:
    1) Grading is an academic duty of professors, AND something they are allowed to delegate to TAs, BUT whose ultimate responsibility and accountability lies with the profs.
    2) As such, grading is not an exclusive duty of TAs, but TAs have the right to an hourly wage so long as they assist their professor.
    3) So the case is NOT under review. Your leader AND your lawyer both agreed with McGill’s administration. It’s been settled!

    PhD Gal – You should never confuse a “career opportunity” with a “career”. Simply because being a TA is a great networking opportunity and a chance to gain experience does not mean that you can treat this job the same way as a professorship!

    I mean, I honestly feel that THIS is at the heart of this entire strike: the pride of the TA leadership glorifying their 3-year temporary job rather than being humble enough to recognize what it truly is: a stepping stone to something better!

    Anti-hypocrisy Advocate – Your comparison of McGill to Nazi Germany is beyond low, beyond appalling, and beyond despicable.

    And while we’re on the topic of despicable characterizations, I would like to offer my compliments to the makers of the AGSEM strike “documentary”. I especially liked that part where you play the theme of the Godfather immediately after showing footage of Provost Masi. Well done, guys. I’m sure that little bout of racism made you feel very proud.

    — hellcat · May 4, 08:51 PM · #

65. Interns and residents in hospitals are students who “practice” medicine, yet their labor is compensated. However, the medical profession didn’t find it problematic to expect upwards of 80 hours a week of work from them until formal studies revealed (surprise) that productivity was affected and medical errors increased.

    The exploitation of teaching assistants would seem to be analogous. However, the assessments of productivity and errors don’t seem to matter much — perhaps because the number of deaths is reportedly lower, even if a mind is a terrible thing to waste.

    — Anti-hypocrisy advocate · May 4, 09:16 PM · #

66. I’ve been reading the comments on this post with interest, and I think that some context might be in order. The issue of TA pay is inextricably linked to the larger issue of graduate student funding, of which TAships are considered a component by McGill University and the amount of which varies greatly among its faculties.

    According to an internal report on graduate student funding that was presented to the Post-Graduate Student Society by the then-Acting Dean of Graduate Studies, the average amount of annual funding received by grads in the Faculty of Arts (i.e., the social sciences and the humanities) is $5,000. This figure includes internal and external grants, research assistantships, and paid academic employment such as teaching assistantships, and it doesn’t even come close to the guaranteed funding packages that are common in the Faculties of Science and Engineering. Significantly, TAs in the Faculty of Arts make up close to half of the total number of unionized TAs at McGill, and, along with their colleagues from other underfunded faculties such as Education, Social Work, and individual departments such as Nursing, they broadly support the strike.

    Still more context: TAs at McGill do not receive tuition fee waivers as many of their American counterparts do, nor are they exempted from the ancillary fees that are charged by the university, which, because they are not subject to government regulation, are the highest in the province of Quebec. Further, McGill does not have a part-time option for graduate studies, which prevents these students from taking on full-time employment to fund their studies (although some do so regardless); at the same time, the university has imposed stricter limits on the time that graduate students may take to complete their degrees, which has disproportionately impacted those in the humanities and social sciences.

    So, to spell it out, a graduate student in the Faculty of Arts receives, on average, $5,000 in funding per year, of which teaching assistantships constitute a central part, and from which they must pay out a total of $2847.06 in tuition and ancillary fees (and far more in the case of out-of-province and international students). That leaves the student with $2152.94 with which to pay for her yearly living and research expenses. Continuing, these graduate students make up almost half of unionized TAs at McGill and they are restricted from taking full-time employment or additional time to complete their degrees. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why these students would be willing to strike for higher wages and better working conditions—they need these things in order to continue their education and have no better option.

    It also doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the most effective way to weaken support for graduate student unions is not through intimidation tactics or mass firings, which will only serve to galvanize their members, but simply by providing them with the resources they need. Then again, maybe it does take a rocket scientist, or at least a humanities Ph.D.

    — Exasperated McGill grad · May 5, 12:54 AM · #

67. In response to Comment #60 (McGill Grad Student):
    To quote:
    “While it is unreasonable to expect the workload form, which is essentially written by the TA without supervision (oh, let’s say these essays took 10 hours to mark) to be regarded as binding, the expected duties should be delineated in an official contract.”
    This is NOT the case in all courses. For example, in science courses with laboratories, the contract is written up by the course administrator, NOT the TA. TAs do not write up saying, “I did such and such for a specific amount of time, now pay me.” The duties and hours are drafted in an agreement, and both parties sign. AGSEM is fighting to have such official contracts for all TAs.

    In response to Comment #64 (Hellcat):
    Honestly, did you even take the time to go over AGSEM’s assessment of the situation? AGSEM also issued a statement explaining the situation by the Commission. Please don’t tell me that all you’ve read is McGill’s biased account of the ruling (but granted, all sides will be biased). For example, the ruling by the CRT does not sustain McGill’s interpretation regarding anti-scab legislation. In no way does it allow instructors, teaching staff, or graders to perform the duties (including grading, entering final grades, etc) that would normally have been performed by a TA (especially if there was a signed contract). McGill’s posting on their website is vague, to say the least.

    Next, if you value what you do and give it your all, of course you will be “proud” of your efforts as a TA and educator. What we do is sometimes small, but never a simple matter. For example, your future doctor, lawyer, and Prime Minister sometimes gets almost 100% of their one-on-one teaching and evaluation from a TA in some courses (I can attest to this, since I’ve been a TA in such a course). And to say that our “temporary job” is nothing but “a stepping stone to something better” is pretty weak, since isn’t every job like that? Whether you do something for a day or for a lifetime, isn’t it reasonable to take pride in what you do and expect to be treated fairly (e.g., not asked to do more work than you are contracted to do)?

    I believe that one BIG stumbling block in getting people to meet half way on what it means to be a TA at McGill (irrespective of the different levels of funding between faculties) is that there is no clear, unifying notion of what a TA is. Moreover, although natural, it seems that many base what it means to be a TA based on their own particular TA situation.

    For example, there are TA positions where a TA sits in with a professor (either a lab or conference), and assists the professor in teaching on that day (and that is all they do). Then there are TA positions where a person does marking (e.g., papers and midterms) and facilitates the occasional conference or tutorial (e.g., every other week). In these positions, some TAs will have less work and finish all of their work before fulfilling all of their hours (but yet still get paid the full 180 hours). Finally, there are positions, such as a lab demonstrator, who has to prep each week for a lab, teach a 3-4 hour laboratory, mark that week’s assignments, and then hold office hours to meet with students. In such a situation, TAs work the full 180 hrs.

    As such, I believe Comment #41 (Anti-hypocrisy advocate) is the way to go: “a definition of workload into levels of I, II, and III, with corresponding increases in compensation for increasing responsibility”, as seen with Yale TAs from the ’60s.

    — Striking TA · May 5, 10:41 AM · #

68. Striking TA – Well, my information comes from the provisional order handed to the university by the labour relations commission on the 22nd of April.

    Unlike what you stated in post #29, as well as what is stated on the AGSEM’s website, the issue is not under review. The order clearly states the issue has been settled: the labour board agreed with McGill. Your objections at this point boil down to “we don’t like the fact the labour commission ruled against us, so we’re going to continue to blame McGill anyway.”

    — hellcat · May 5, 06:35 PM · #

69. PhD gal at McGill: I think you misunderstood me on two points. One, by calling a TAship “financial aid” I meant it in the sense of “work study,” not free money. McGill needs this work done, and it has a bunch of qualified students sitting around to do it, but as hellcat mentions, this can not be confused with a real career, even if it provides valuable professional training.

    Secondly, the barbecue in reference had nothing to do with TAs not valuing their jobs, but rather the strike (though I agree that the system for allocating TAships and instructorships if seriously flawed and not at all merit-based, probably because the university regards it as aid).

    Tenured McGill Prof: The situation for lecturers for the winter term and those for the summer term was different from the university’s standpoint. They could not /fire/ the WT instructors because that is clearly a breach of “business as usual.” Their argument was that they /did not hire/ union members for new casual or contracted work. I have heard rumours to the effect that other employment has actually been terminated, but it’s difficult to ascertain if these are true.

    Exasperated McGill Grad: The funding situation is indeed difficult for many of us. I myself did not get much funding this year. But this is just the issue: TAships are part of a larger funding issue, and McGill uses TAships to create financial packages. Ultimately the departments should be trying to fund the students they want to keep as well as they can, both with grants and TAships.

    In this sense, a TA strike is only going to improve the funding situation for a portion of grad students (those who are randomly awarded TAships each term), and it is probably not going to increase the overall funding that grad students receive. The money has to come from somewhere, right?

    An undergrad professor gave me what I still regard as extremely good advice when it came to contemplating grad school: If a school isn’t willing to make it financially viable to attend, you probably shouldn’t be there.

    If nothing else, McGill will notice when all the best applicants turn down their offers of admission to go to the much-vaunted and lucre-lined U of T.

    Striking TA: I completely agree with the idea of having supervisors clearly delineate expectations on the contract. But there is still no way to ascertain how many hours are really worked.

    — McGill Grad Student · May 5, 10:03 PM · #

70. For those interested, the Labour Relations Commission provisional order is available he