Return to home page
Two rival unions and abused staff members at McGill
A brief summary:
Are
As revealed at the last BOR, the total cost
of
Using the services of
The SEIU claimed in July that
The CRT (
The
winners in the trial are
the lawyers, taking our money, and the CRT, using us to justify its
existence.
and more details below:
---------------------------------------------------------------
The latest court battle between Munaca and SEIU doesn’t raise much interest as the involved parties consistently avoid providing details about their legal confrontation. It seems that they don’t want to expose filthy/dark/questionable facts surrounding this classic power struggle between two rival organizations with manipulative leaders. On the other hand, the members kept in the dark may think differently and may be interested in seeing a truer picture of this mysterious court battle.
Let’s start looking at the cost
of Munaca’s executives hiring an external legal company coordinating their in
fact private war with another union. Nobody knew any details until a
regular BOR meeting of
In the first place, Munaca should have used its internal legal adviser Mr Marco Romani - that would have saved much money. A never discussed rejection of Marco’s service proves that the executives are well aware how low costly his offered legal expertise is for the members. They wanted a really professional service to protect themselves.
This hypocrisy and discriminative policies were obvious but nobody at this BOR meeting tried to express his/her concerns. Instead of questioning the presidents the board members started to discuss nonchalantly a planned family picnic, barbeque and even considering a special party to celebrate Munaca’s court victory.
These new self-elected and hand picked (after the illegal expulsion of others in June) “representatives” feel Munaca’s “party line” very well and never ask difficult questions. They care more about the interest of the administration instead of the members and are even cheaply rewarded for this service (* - see annex at the end). It doesn’t mean that the members cannot demand an answer for a question such as this: “Why did the executives secretly decide to hire the best lawyers for a court hearing never consulted with the members (thru their representatives)?”
The SEIU claimed in July that Munaca and the administration had intimidated the members who considered signing the SEIU cards. The trial revealed many strange evidences and among them a very rude letter signed by a wife of former president. It purpose was to scare the members and our cross-examined president Rucco confirmed the letter’s existence that had “many xxx-words”. It doesn’t matter if these evidences were more or less valid in an opinion of our executives/lawyers trying to protect their paid positions. More important was the fact that the CRT (Quebec Labour Relations Board) approved these claims as sufficient enough (not trivial) to initiate the trial. The only way to stop this costly SEIU’s complaint was to reach an out-of-court settlement. Munaca executives didn’t try to consult the members about finding some alternative solutions for saving our money - even with the BOR.
Munaca
had a chance to propose an open referendum among the members concerning whether
they want to affiliate with the SEIU. Had this proposal been officially
submitted to the CRT even in September (on eve of long trial) it would have
totally defused all the SEIU claims about the frightened members and save
$50,000 (so far). The CRT’s involvements would have been eliminated
immediately. However, the executives with their lawyer and three new unofficial
rulers (including the former president and vice-president – as revealed at the
trial) didn’t want to risk unpredictable results of such ballot
vote. Instead, they lured the members into this senseless and
costly trial. They assumed that the members will become very excited by
passively waiting for the final court’s verdict announcing the winner and
forget about all the questionable games inside a closed Munaca’s house at
The more important point is that
the members are not only ignored by Munaca and the
McGill administration supporting them in many forms (* - see in the annex) but
also by the SEIU as the CRT. The only winners in this flawed/sick trial are from the beginning the lawyers getting
our money in each scenario and the CRT justifying its existence as a
very well financed governmental institution. The manipulated members had been a
priori designated to be losers and pay for this “court circus”.
This unhealthy situation was presented in my last letter to the president of the CRT (Madame Andree St-Georges):
“At stake, however, is seeing a bigger picture in respect to common sense and we need to expose substandard corporate practices (especially in our legal system) that endanger the public. I witnessed two hearings involving my union which acted questionably (Munaca from McGill) that will be soon completed. Its president liberated from regular work for 14 years is doing everything possible to maintain her position. The commissioner prefers to hear only the power hungry union notables and greedy lawyers. Why aren’t they instructed to demand objective surveys or to check opinions of some randomly chosen union members who are willing to testify and de facto forced to finance this expensive trial? Without imposing such requirements by the commissioners it becomes easier for some autocratically acting union executives to impose the cost of hiring a very expensive lawyer (the expenses for him were about $30,000 in the past year - not including two extra hearings this year and the further costs) instead of consulting this issue with the members or their representatives (if they approved a costly court involvement in the first place). It was much simpler/cheaper for the members to order a referendum about the offer from another union. However, in this system the commissioners are victims of endemic self-censorship. They just are dreaming to be noticed by "political pimps" (like former PM Mr. B.M) servicing a small circle of financial spheres that control the governments and decide who is promoted to the superior courts. They don’t want to be noticed as promoters/guards of true democracy. The present social order supports more opportunists by the dictates of corporate priorities and our influenced legal system is now too weak to oppose it. My general remarks are not politically correct, but I don't care because our public service is deeply troubled. As someone said, "Whatever you do, you must maintain the conditions of public service, independence and being alert professionally" and I dedicate these words to you for your deeper reflections.”
It seems that this letter is so far not ignored, but we shouldn’t wait passively for external help. Without manifesting our clear goals nobody will help us.
One of many illegally expelled
representatives said at the
Yes, changing the name from Munaca to another will be for nothing if the already questionably acting/motivated people will stay. In the new house with new elections the most important rule should be respected: the members should vote only for those who had never been in Munaca as partly warranting a higher probability of seeing their transparent motives. This would include also the author of this letter. We don’t need very experienced union specialists, just balanced and logical people. I had a chance to talk with two presidents who run two local units in McGill supervised by the SEIU. They are down to earth personalities respected by their members. What should be the most important for us should be their answer to this question: “After being elected as the president did some notables from the HR/central administration try to invite you for personal meetings?” They said yes, but instead of meeting with them, they talked with the external union’s bosses who advised them not to contact these authorities. In fact this advice represents the deepest elements of human wisdom that we can find in the Bible. It states (***) that poor people should avoid being friendly with the rich as they will most likely take advantage and use/exploit them.
----------------------------------------
Annex:
WE MUST INCREASE OUR SELF-CONFIDENCE AS EMPLOYEES who are almost entirely paid by the taxpayers and not by the administration. Many problems are created by our greedy top administration. By minimizing the staff’s wages, they balance its extravagant salary increases (up to $150,000/year for one person as published in the Gazette). Similarly “killing” McGill’s budget and our chances for decent salary increases is a never-ending leadership disaster. We constantly see Vice-Principals at McGill being replaced- which drains the budget and dilutes responsibilities at top levels with chaotically recruited executives who cause infinite turbulences (http://www.spop.addr.com/townhall.htm). It came to the point that the last year’s disappearances of two top VPs ( J.Robinsson – Communication and A.D. Johnston – Development and Alumni Relation) is treated until now as top secret. It seems that the lately fallen notables were extremely well paid to keep quiet and their rearranged staff members. The problem is that this vicious circle of arrogance similarly attacks some lower ranking organizations within the McGill body that too often meet with our central administration.
In this situation WE MUST IN PARTICULAR INCREASE OUR SELF-CONFIDENCE AND REGAIN FULL CONTROL AS THE UNION MEMBERS who finance their organization.
The majority of Munaca’s problems
have been “genetically rooted” with the administration’s help 14 years
ago. McGill was unhappy to see one group of staff members promoting
a connection with big external unions. They blocked their influence by quickly
supporting another group that presented a picture of Munaca
with a guarantied isolation from big unions. This consistent
isolation and close ties with the administration quickly paralyzed union’s
activism. Presently, a select few people work in Munaca
symbolizing corruption and collaboration with the questionably
motivated/qualified administration. There are more similarities and the
information about two union representatives who quit their functions was
treated as the same top secret as the administration is still scary to announce
about two “purged” VPs. It is quite funny that now only the administration is praising Munaca
for its good work. Not long time ago Head of Human Resources stated: "Your
It seems that in Munaca also the priorities are consistently different and the most important there is protecting their executives. In June 19 over 30% of the members who dared to question Maria’s competence were eliminated with a help of two BOR representatives (technicians) acting secretly. These two and other faithful activists must be fed well and since September the executives are ordering 2-3 big boxes of good quality pizza with soft drinks, even for regular council meetings attended by only a few members there. At other meetings, with the executives, more sophisticated food is ordered. Unfortunately, such good news about these newly established “union’s fiestas” for the majority of meetings are not included in the messages inviting the members to participate. In this situation nobody comes because only free lunches are left as a tool for the executives to lure the members for meetings. On other hand they don’t want the members to be at these questionable meetings. This problem was raised by one honestly acting representative from a MAC council but after it her liberation for attending the BOR meeting was reduced by 50%. Everybody who has critical opinions gets severe reprimands. In another example, those representatives talking positively about the SEIU on June’ BOR had to hear a scary (from a very big guy) Munaca’s lawyer Marco Romani shouting vulgar words and naming them as stupid. This oppressive approach toward those questioning Munaca policies was already tested at the last GAM. The first proposal for an open discussion about the SEIU’s offer was brutally assailed by a big woman using the same naughty expressions as Munaca’s lawyer at the BOR meeting. It is interesting to notice that the woman’s “exposé” was accompanied by the almost immediate coming of the security guards not to remove her, but to assist the union’s meeting to the end. This woman publicly explained her situation as mentally sick, but Munaca executives with their lawyer till now are silent and only spend money to win at the court with the external union. At stake for them is to portray themselves as the victims of a big plot organized by the powerful American union (SEUI) that wants to annihilate their brave and members’ trusted independent structure.
Do the members share this opinion? Do they want to maintain their present independence from the external unions with the help of our administration or vice versa? Yes, the big unions have their own policies and own interests, but we must choose one union that is better equipped/trained to protect our rights and dignity.
The
People are only people and the probability is very high that the union activists will become influenced after prolonged close interactions with those who directly decide about their promotions/salaries/relocations/holidays. That is the main source of Munaca problems from the beginning. It would not be so bad if the University had less greedy and more open-minded administrators. For them Munaca is the best union partner and since the spring “invasion” of the SEIU agents the university is even giving the best auditoriums for free for our meetings with the negotiation committee. At the same time they charge students a lot for smaller rooms with this explanation: “the university could not afford to absorb the costs of letting students use rooms without charging for it” see it in http://media.www.mcgilltribune.com/media/storage/paper234/news/2008/02/05/News/Town-Hall.Addresses.Event.Planning.Issues-3187246.shtml.
We shouldn’t wait for the court’s verdict and demand an independent referendum about Munaca’s fate conducted by an external pool agency as soon as possible.
Slawomir Poplawski