In what can only be interpreted as an ideological move against the union, the Simon Fraser Student Society Board of Directors, led by new president Jeff McCann, broke off mediation and then served their staff with a 72 hour lockout notice. CUPE staff who work for the Simon Fraser Student Society spend their days providing services that help students succeed in their studies and on campus. The staff members run vital programs that support and promote a safe and inclusive campus for the entire SFU community. These services include running the SFSS Women’s Centre that provides much-needed peer support and crisis referrals. Staff members at the SFSS also oversee Out on Campus and the delivery of programs and services for SFU’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered students and their allies.


The SFSS board is claiming that they will be “open” during the lockout… expect the doors are closed and the blinds are down…


The board is also claiming to be available to support SFSS members. This locked-out member/sfss worker doesn’t feel supported by her society.

Click here to show your support for locked-out SFSS workers!

By Joel Blok

This summer five years ago, the Board of Directors of the SFSS suspended its office staff, barring them from entering their offices and sending them home. This past Thursday, a different board issued a lockout notice to its office staff, preventing them from work.

In 2006, the rhetorical justification was fiduciary responsibility to the society. This summer, it’s financial responsibility to the student members.

The arguments will be different, and the current board will undoubtedly do its utmost to disassociate itself from 2006. The outcome has yet to be seen. But the goal, invariably, is the same. The board of directors of the SFSS have unilaterally decided to re-structure the student society, and will exhaustively work to rhetorically cloak their own ideological efforts as being in your best interests.

Here’s the structural reality: the SFSS cannot exist without its staff. None of the many services it offers could be accomplished, none of the important campaigns it mounts could be undertaken, none of the advocacy that it does could occur without the honest and sincere labour of the staff of the student society. So how do you radically alter the direction and orientation of your society, with no transparency, accountability or consultation? You replace your staff.

The important lesson that this board apparently learned from 2006 is to undertake this project under a more “legitimate” (though no less antagonistic) means. As there is no contract in force between the SFSS and its employees, the board can, legally under the labour code, lock its workers out. The last time draconian staff re-structuring was afoot, the board was much less sophisticated, and much clumsier, in its approach. This time, you will hear arguments about how student unions and clubs will not be funded, how the membership is being taken advantage of by the “shamefully” high cost of providing fair employment to SFSS staff. You will of course be told of the “intransigence” and “unreasonableness” of the union, who, as of course you all know, are simply unrealistically greedy individuals exploiting the system, and through it, you. You will be told that, in spite of the board’s best intentions, this is the only way the society can fulfill its “constitutional” duties to its membership, and that the “fiscal reality” of the situation is that either you will lose resources and service, or staff will have to be cut.

All of which carefully distracts from the real imperative of the board in a clever sleight of hand. The question really has nothing to do with the fallacious and reductive “staff vs. students” antagonism that is being presented, but rather with the ability of the board to exercise unchecked executive power over the society.

Anyone who has worked in, for, or with the student society knows categorically the importance of the staff to the organization. Not only does their labour ensure its continued functions, but their expertise and experience, their institutional memory, guarantees that it continues to exist beyond the whims of a one-year-term board. The staff at the SFSS not only actually provides the services that this board will argue they are threatening, but ensures that those services exist in a meaningful way, that students can depend upon them as they undertake their studies, from year to year. Without the SFSS staff none of the services their continued employment is purportedly threatening would exist in the first place. Without the serious responsibility and care they feel towards the students they work for, there’d be no student society to speak of.

The ultimate goal here is not to ensure the “financial viability” of the SFSS; there were plenty of options open to the board both on and off the table before they decided to lockout their employees. The goal is to remove staff from the equation as much as possible so that decisions of the board are increasingly unchecked, to consolidate executive power, and to allow the unfettered re-construction, or more ominously de-construction, of the society as a whole. Like those directors of 2006, this current board is undertaking a project of “staff-restructuring” to re-organize the society as they themselves see fit, without membership input. But don’t worry, this is in your best interest, just trust us.

Article by kevin harding

There’s an almost mythical status to the label that Simon Fraser University used to promote itself in 2005 during its 40th anniversary celebrations: the university was a “radical campus.” The term comes from student activism that used to flood the campus, once called Berkeley North, student activism that established one of the first Womens’ Studies departments in Canada, student activism and sit ins that created a coop daycare, student activism that resulted in SFU being the first university in Canada to elect students to its senate.

Each of these now-mythical points that gave SFU the ‘radical campus’ label came from student activism: students petitioned and demonstrated to get the right to be on the senate of the university. Students staged a sit-in in the faculty lounge to start the daycare. Students staged a strike to demand the right to have a say in how the president of the university was chosen. Student activism was the basis of the label of the radical campus, and student activism was found in the campus student union, the Simon Fraser Student Society (SFSS) and the Simon Fraser Public Interest Research Group (SFPIRG).

Sadly, today the SFSS seems to have shoved off the more than 4o-year history it could have once proudly claimed as student activists: the Board of Directors of the SFSS, led in “what can only be interpreted as an ideological move” by president Jeff McCann, internal relations officer Jordan Kohn, treasurer Keenan Midgley, and others issued a lockout notice to its unionised staff members, with staff being locked out effective 2:13pm on Sunday. Late today, a committee of the same board voted to begin the process of terminating the lease of the Simon Fraser Public Interest Research Group (SFPIRG), a student-driven and student-funded group that conducts research and organizing on student selected issues.

These moves are purely ideological, and they’re incredibly disappointing. They show a mindset that opposes unions simply because they exist, and a right-wing reactionary current that seeks to kill off ‘progressive’ organizing no matter how they have to do it. The lockout of the union and the beginnings of the SFPIRG eviction show that the issues at play aren’t purely financial, as the SFSS does not pay outright for the space that SFPIRG occupies, and many of the key players in attacking the workers of the SFSS have been central in attacking SFPIRG in the past.

The lockout of the staff union comes after two years of negotiations on a collective agreement and after the SFSS board broke off mediation with the Labour Relations Board. Right-wing reactionaries claim that the workers of the SFSS are paid too much, or have ridiculous benefits. Neither of which is overly true – staff are paid fairly for the work that they do, and their benefits are below average.

But the argument that comes from many of the right-wing reactionaries is absurd in its hysterics. Staff are paid well! They shouldn’t be paid this much! I used to work for the Simon Fraser Student Society, and while I no longer work there and do not speak for the union or its members, I can tell you it wasn’t a walk in the park. The last project I worked on was the ill-fated K’Naan concert at SFU, where arts director Kyle Acierno was actively involved in bringing K’Naan to perform at SFU, despite not knowing the costs or infrastructure requirements that would go into such an endeavour, resulting in the eventual collapse of the concert, an embarrassing no-show by the star, and an international media story that saw blame bounced around from the star to the students involved. My role, while I took up graduate studies mid-way through the planning process and had no direct input into the processes, was to try and limit the exposure of the student society as much as possible, and prevent as much of a disaster as possible. I was involved in legal discussions, insurance discussions, liaisons with university administrators and RCMP, and on and on and on. When staff have this kind of responsibility in their job requirements, they should be paid well. I, as a staff person, did my best to keep the organisation running smoothly, and I gave a lot of my time and energy to its projects.

But according to the right-wing reactionaries, this is too much. Always paid too much.

It’s a strange argument that surfaces here. Jobs that students apply for and want are too much? How is that possible? I participated in the hiring of three staff over my time at the SFSS, and we had hundreds of applicants for each position. Students want jobs like what the SFSS offers when they graduate. Why are the reactionaries not calling for CEO salaries to be lower? Management salaries to be lower? Politician’s salaries to be lower?

It’s a strange and perverted argument that sees right-wing reactionaries spewing hate against people who work daily to see student events work. A perverted mindset that hates unions because they get better working conditions for their members. A strange view that wants to destroy unions because they help people get paid fairly. A vindictive mindset that wants the SFPIRG shut down because they enable students to work on projects that don’t agree with Stephen Harper’s Conservative mindset.

And it’s infected the radical campus.

It’s time to show solidarity with CUPE 3338, and demand that the SFSS lift its lockout and negotiate fairly with its union, and cease the eviction of SFPIRG.

http://politicsrespun.org/2011/07/a-no-longer-radical-now-reactionary-campus-the-sfss-cupe-lockout/

POMP, PAGEANTRY, AND UNIONS.
Linda McQuaig, Columnist, The Star
Published Monday, July 4, 2011

We surely seem to be living in conservative times — with the NDP trying to distance itself from all things socialist and the public apparently unable to sate its appetite for all things royal.

Certainly it’s easy to get the impression from the media that Canadians, content with their capitalist bounty, are primarily focused on the activities and outfits of the Royal Family.

So perhaps it’s out-of-sync with the times to suggest that we’re actually in the middle of a class war, and that it’s been heating up lately.

Click here for more.


GOOD JOBS AREN’T IN THE PLAN
THE TORONTO STAR: Published On Sat Jun 18 2011
John Cartwright

The CEOs have decided. The value of young people is lower than the value of people from my generation. You don’t deserve the same salary, even if you are better educated. You don’t deserve the same vacation time or health benefits. And you certainly don’t deserve to have the same kind of secure retirement. It’s just not in the business plan.

Click here for more.

Join us at the pub at SFU Surrey for free thin-crust pizza, cheap beverages, and lots of good times!

When: July, 13th, 4:30-8:00pm

Where: SFU Surrey: Central City Brewing Co.

Who: All TSSU members, grads students and allies are welcome!

Hello TSSU Members:
It’s time to leap into the summer semester!

Hop on over to the General Membership Meetings this term and help make our union strong:

May 31st: 12:30-2:30 in MBC 2294 (Burnaby Campus)
June 28th: 4:30-6:30 Harbor Centre room 1520
July 25th: 12:30-2:30 in MBC 2294 (Burnaby Campus)

Free and delicious food will be available at all of our meetings!
See you there!

News
TSSU unhappy with contract negotiations

By David Proctor
The Peak

The union that represents SFU’s TAs, sessional instructors, and other teaching support employees is going public with its frustration with the current round of contract negotiations, claiming that the university administration is refusing to engage in substantive bargaining.

The Teaching Support Staff Union’s most recent contract expired on March 30, 2010, and while negotiations started the following summer, they grounded to a halt this past March when the TSSU took a break from the bargaining table to consult with its membership.

The problem, according to TSSU chief steward, Joel Blok, is that “from our perspective, we haven’t had any substantive engagement or response from the university.”

Specifically, Blok reports that while the TSSU has made a number of proposals to address issues raised by its membership and change the language in the contract, university negotiators have responded to all of the proposals by saying that the university does not agree that a problem exists and that it will not agree to the changes. The sole exception, according to Blok, was a change to the name of a position.

University administration did not comment on the accusations; representatives from the university’s human resources and media relations offices declined The Peak’s requests for an interview, explaining that the university does not discuss contract negotiations away from the bargaining table.

By contrast, Blok suggested that the TSSU is making their complaints public in order to put pressure on the administration. “We absolutely want to bargain,” he said. “We want to have a contract, as well. In terms of getting them to the table, to some extent that’s a decision that they’re going to have to make.”

“They’re not acknowledging that there is a significant problem that needs to be changed,” he added. “I think it’ll be a matter of demonstrating to the administration and to the university community that there actually are some issues, there are ways of making things better here . . . The more that we can make that apparent to folks, if the administration is paying attention, hopefully we can get back to the table to address these issues.”

Since the university’s bargaining team is negotiating a public-sector contract, they are bound by the terms of the provincial government’s Public Sector Employers Council negotiating mandate, which specifies that employers must negotiate two-year contracts that include no net increases in compensation costs. Although wage increases are allowed under this mandate, they must be balanced with cost reductions in other compensation areas such as benefits.

Blok asserted that many of the changes that the university has rejected have nothing to do with compensation, however, the examples of proposing that SFU graduate students be given priority when the university is hiring TAs, and of taking measures to improve job security for sessional instructors.

On the possibility of taking job action, Blok stated that “it’s always there in the background. At the end of the day, nobody wants to have a strike . . . [it will] be a matter of what kind of response we get from the administration around things and what kind of response we get from the membership about things. At this point, there hasn’t been much conversation around that, but it’s always there in the air whenever bargaining happens.”

“One of the things that we want the university to engage in and discuss, is that we do a lot of the teaching here,” Blok concluded. “We want to see them actually value that teaching.”


Join us for Bike to Work Week from May 30th to June 5th!
Bike to Work Week is a program of the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition.
You can sign up and log your commutes here

And don’t forget to join our TSSU bike team!

Go to the page “team setup” and join the organization “ teaching support staff union” and team “Union Thugs”. All tssu bikers will receive a free tssu t-shirt (stop by the May general meeting or our office to pick it up).

© 2012 Teaching Support Staff Union Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha