About
“Enron, feudal overlords and McGill University’s vulnerable $1 billion
Pension Plan” in a site http://spop.addr.com
A
Russian motto says: "Trust and believe people, but check them." It dates from long ago in a simple, feudal
society controlled by a privileged few. Now, the “trust and believe”
has gone and only the “check them” remains.
We
are checked constantly everyday—especially we in the most developed
countries—and ever more closely. There are files that act as a substitute for
simple trust, and more power has been invested in these files since the latest
hysterical security concerns.
In
the past, the selfish aristocracy was at least God-fearing, and thus their
pestiferous aspects were easier to accept by the vulnerable masses. Today, the
powers at the top believe in something conveniently narrowed, which eliminates
a priori humanistic values, contributing to the greatest number,
proportionately, of suicides known in history. Furthermore, these narrow circles of power at the top, who
are the main beneficiaries of globalization, increasingly want to play a
role similar to that of the old feudal aristocracy. They have long been influenced by their
worship of the “3M trinity”: Money, Manipulation and the
desire to have More of everything. This trinity is now reaching
everyone’s minds, including the poorest, so that the latter are easier to
control, thereby converting the traditionally antagonistic relations between
the ruled and the rulers into the friendlier dynamic of masters and their
followers (more in http://www.spop.addr.com/order.htm).
This explains why
people are unwilling to say, “Trust and believe people”. However, let’s
not give up. Let’s use this beautiful motto in a slightly modified version: “Trust
and believe our feudal lords, leaders and CEOs—but check them.”
This approach
represents an experimental strategy toward
improving the situation at McGill University (Montreal, Canada),
which is plagued by parasitic “developments”.
If we make a modest difference, we can try to reach some other social
groups later. At least let’s give it a
try.
The black
text below refers to specific financial concerns at McGill, but also reveals
some more common elements that could unite the underdogs in other social
groups.
After this main text there
are blocks with the letters (placed chronologically) that have been sent to
people working at McGill (updates about their Pension plan).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Subject: Some concerns
about McGill’s Pension Program
E-mail memos
from VPs or the Principal to all members of the McGill community are supposed
to be reserved for urgent messages. At the end of last month we received a
letter from the Vice-Principal (financial) Mr. Yalovsky concerning McGill’s
pension program. In the letter, he nervously overreacted to the fact that “McGill
University pension plan members have been contacted by salespeople who directly
or indirectly reference the McGill University Pension Plan in their
solicitation”. Canada is a free country and everybody is can express their
opinions or lure others to their more or less murky businesses. Why does he
worry so much that “These salespeople may at times invite members to a
seminar which may be held on campus or arrange for an individual meeting”? He
sounds like the Great North Korean Father who would not allow his people to
listen to foreign news. Are we supposed to regard these “individuals”
with suspicion after Mr. Yalovsky’s letter because they act “without the
endorsement or approval of the University or the Department of Pension
Management”? Can we assume that what worries him more is that we might be
shown the downside to our PAC’s performance? What is really disingenuous is the
given reason for his letter: that some people might think that the “University
… has provided your name to any such organization”.
Let’s look
closer at our Pension Committee, which requires his so desperate protection.
Bear in mind that a few years ago Enron’s bosses would also be very angry about
seminars in their company being organized by their competitors. Excuses about
shareholders’ peace of mind or the protection of their privacy were easy to
anticipate. This comparison should spur us to report publicly any doubts we
might have about our untouchable leaders’ qualifications.
Firstly, note
the statistics about the latest election to the Pension Committee. The site Mr.
Yalovsky recommends, www.mcgill.ca/pensions, just says that in 2003, over 98%
adopted the results of the Voting Procedure Ballot. This gives the false
impression that everything is perfect there and that McGill unanimously
supports the administration. Yet statistics about our community participation
in the elections are treated as top secret, and even this member’s personal
inquiries could not dig out some basic data. The website invites us to contact
the PAC for information, but I was shocked to learn from a committee manager
that the elections are controlled by the administration only. New candidates
are not allowed to participate in the final counting. The elections are
conducted against basic democratic rules and the manager was astonished to hear
that they are unlawful. It seems that some people there are not qualified to
hold more responsible positions but are pushed up by those who don’t like to
have fully competent partners on the higher posts. When questionable decisions
abound, the ruling circles dislike having the experts around. Often in these
circumstances, we hear loud rhetoric about the need to promote minorities,
immigrants, women or the young, and with this misused excuse, less competent
people are hired. It also helps to
cover the many appointments for staying of close loyal friends.
A cursory
glance at www.mcgill.ca/pensions shows that at stake here are about
one billion dollars belonging to present and previous McGill workers (about
twice the total value of McGill’s assets), and any small, innocent-looking
shifts in their location can be very significant for some CEOs on our Board of
Governors representing different corporations. Formally, these CEOs are not
allowed to participate in the PAC decisions, but the BoG nominates five
candidates (including one by the Principal) and only four are “elected” during
undemocratic voting. It is worth
mentioning that Mr. R.Rabinovich the BoG’s Chair and the CBC’s President is a
quite controversial figure to be from the beginning at McGill (http://www.spop.addr.com/article2.jpg).
The manager mentioned above was very elusive when I asked about the
Vice-Principal’s motives or the reported cases that prompted him to write that
ridiculous letter. I was asked for my name, and then put on hold for a good
five minutes while the manager consulted somebody. No more information was
forthcoming and the answers became ever-vaguer. This person was too nervous to
say more about those who were allowed to take away their pension savings in the
amount exceeding $60,000—even if still working and years before retirement.
However, it became clear that this great opportunity existed briefly for those
affiliated with a smarter union that had negotiated a better pension program
for some members of McGill. At this point, further conversation stalled as the
manager realized the fact of revealing and confirming some ridiculous facts
about the own Committee. At the end of the conversation, this person played
down all the controversial—if not surreal—facts that had been revealed. Repeating the same mantra that the
Vice-Principal’s letter had been motivated by concern for McGill workers’
finances did it. This poor person was
loyal to the administration and polite to me, but this is hardly enough to
prove that our pension money is growing well in our heavily-guarded McGill
“pension greenhouse” that is supposed to ensure our retirement visits to
Florida.
In his
letter, Mr. Yalovsky is obviously trying to scare us away from contacting
people who have explored the worsening performance of the McGill Pension Plan
administrated by him. We must remember that not long ago, the same pension plan
was famous in Quebec for the best gains, but has been nose-diving since we
imported two principals from U of T having already some problems there. Of
course, many other pension plans have been affected recently by the financial
crises, but this is a good opportunity to draw comparisons with them. Those
preventing us from doing so are incompetent, unscrupulous and dictatorial.
We must remember that our present financial guru replaced Mrs. Heaphy in the
emergency rush about four years ago. She was famous for the most stupid
financial decisions (http://www.spop.com/WEBPENK.html),
and also came here from U of T as a part of Mr. Shapiro’s networked crew. Mr. Yalowsky was hired as a quick
replacement after Heaphy’s discreet removal and does not have impressive
credentials in financial spheres. He is not a great expert in the field and was
not ashamed to report to the Senate last Fall his 2003 budget “mistake” of over
one million dollars. It may or may not be coincidence, but the deficit
presented in May of about $300,000 was connected with the salary of our present
Principal (http://www.spop.addr.com/b1.htm),
and after a few months, the Vice-Principal increased this deficit to $1.4
million. His excuse to the senators was that he had missed a few days in his
calculations for the budget year. He often talked of our growing budget
deficit, yet authorized expenses for a lavish celebration of Mr. Shapiro’s
departure. Similarly accepted was a Nero-style “installation” of the latest
Principal (Dr. Heather Munroe-Blum),
the most bombastic occasion in McGill history.
It is also Mr. Yalowsky’s policy to propose a 5% salary increase to
McGill managers when buying back two summer Fridays (see http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=2071
- so far never formally denied), and to offer a mere 0.8% salary increase to
unionized workers.
We cannot
change much, but if during a few elections we manage to install some more
honest people into the higher positions, we can slowly make changes. Our
Pension Committee selection and later election are coming up in seven days, and
members should take this very seriously. Let’s try to pre-select a candidate
whom we trust and then ask all members to participate in this “election” (we
also need to demand the dumping of the sick electoral procedure) with 100%
support for our candidate. Only by mimicking political parties’ pre-selections
can we increase our real influence.
I am
proposing Mr. Martinek from the library to be our PAC candidate. He has already
tried to be nominated to this committee but was unable to win against more
trusted managers. Now he has become a local manager, but there is hope that he
will retain his integrity and resist corruption by the big sharks. If he wins,
we’ll hear more truthful opinions about our money in the compulsory “McGill
greenhouse”. Please look at Mr. Martinek’s statement when it comes out and
pre-vote at spop70@hotmail.com or
eventually also at munaca@vif.com for being
sure of no manipulations. If other
people are seeing also other candidates it would be good to choose the best one
a.s.a.p.. The results will help us vote
later with more coordination and efficiency.
I would suggest a similar approach for our academics, who are in the
same boat.
Sincerely yours,
Slawomir Poplawski
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The
Vice-Principal’s questionable letter was:
To all members of the McGill
University Pension Plan
(French message follows)
It has come to our attention that over the last few months McGill University
pension plan members have been contacted by salespeople who directly or
indirectly reference the McGill University Pension Plan in their solicitation.
These salespeople may at times invite members to a seminar which may be held on
campus or arrange for an individual meeting.
We would like to inform you that neither the University nor the Department of
Pension Management has provided your name to any such organization. These cold
calls are undertaken without the endorsement or approval of the University or
the Department of Pension Management.
Should you decide to attend a session or personally meet with these
individuals, you do so at your own personal risk.
We would like to take this opportunity to inform you that a series of
information sessions have been developed by the Department of Pension
Management specifically dealing with the McGill University Pension Plan. These
educational programs highlight the features and benefits of the pension plan
and assist you in planning for your retirement. The dates and times for upcoming
sessions will be posted on the Department of Pension Management website (www.mcgill.ca/pensions) and on the McGill Community
Calendar in the near future.
Morty Yalovsky
Vice-Principal (Administration & Finance )
January 23, 2004
- - -- - -- - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - -
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - ---
Block
1 February 7th letter to a few friends at McGill
with a subject: Could the $1 billion in McGill’s Pension Plan “evaporate”
in an Enron-type scheme? It was
the first letter aimed to alert their attention toward the Pension Plan.
Dear Friends,
For most of us, the
Enron affair was shocking, but too exotic to learn from, coming as it did from
the increasingly-wild USA. Actually, the US is a very poor country with a
dominant culture obsessed by power and money and ruled by the media, which
methodically exploit human weaknesses and are influenced by
cancerously-networked social parasites.
It is a beautiful and hard-working country, yet it is cursed with
arrogant leaders pre-selected for circus elections and closely “lobbied” by
“special interest” groups, which partly explains an increasing animosity
towards it.
We in the north—poorer
financially, begging for Hollywood’s leftovers in the cinema industry and
without military might—find it easy to comfort ourselves with the illusion that
we are more innocent and more temperate. This illusion blinds us to the fact
that things such as Enron could occur here. We might pay the price for not
paying attention now.
Are we really aware
that present and previous university workers together possess almost one
billion dollars in their McGill Pension Plan? This is about twice the total
value of McGill’s assets—and only nine people control it.
Have we paid close
enough attention to these nine key figures (five nominated by the financial
sharks from BoG representing voracious corporations and only four nominated in
undemocratic elections), with whom is entrusted this billion, reserved for our
vulnerable golden years?
At the same time, our
supposedly financially-savvy Vice-Principal Dr. Yalovsky is trying to scare us
from hearing external opinions about the pension program, which is supervised
by him. Echoes of Enron.
Please go to http://www.spop.addr.com/money.htm
in a site http://www.spop.addr.com
or http://munalist.no-ip.info/ for
these issues, along with Yalovsky’s letter and some suggestions for increasing
our control as legitimate shareholders of the billion dollar fortune. I would
be grateful for your comments.
Sincerely yours,
Slawomir Poplawski
- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -
Block
2 February 13th letter to a few friends at McGill
with a subject: New candidate for the
Pension Plan Committee. It was the second
letter concerning the Pension Plan.
Dear MUNACA and MUNASA Friends,
It seems that some mysterious financial gods are
protecting us. The best candidate for
the Pension Committee has recently emerged from the McGill dumping-ground
otherwise known as early retirement. It is Mr. Jim McVety working many years in
McGill’s Internal Audit Department as the most senior auditor. At a relatively young age, this candidate
was offered, about eight years ago, a package with the highest number (in
McGill history - *) of years of paid salary as a golden handshake or
outbooting. His outstanding knowledge
of this institution as a senior auditor was not liked by the new bureaucratic
and dictatorial Principal. This murky
deal (in firing Mr. Jim McVetty) was a part of a newly-introduced
cleansing policy by Mr. Shapiro who at the time was pushing out many other
devoted financial specialists from McGill.
Only these experienced specialists were able to
estimate precisely the economical disaster behind Shapiro’s pompous
declarations covering the de facto brutal extermination of free academic
spirit, openness and respect for uniqueness.
The Fifth Column’s agent of the corporate elite needed a free hand to
devalue these educational standards. He
needed, instead of self-respecting individuals, scared university employees, so
he could promote a privileged few over the majority. This represented the far-reaching corporate policies which
control society, and the idea of
privatizing this university was part of his quietly but consistently
implemented racist objectives.
The information about Mr. McVety’s willingness to
participate in the coming elections was accidentally passed to me by Mr. Peter
Martinek, who was not sure however if it was true. I have verified it and can add that Mr. Martinek, obviously impressed
by Jim’s experience (**), was unwilling to challenge him and give up his own
candidacy. I share his enthusiasm
toward Mr. McVetty.
McVetty alone cannot change
much where the Pension Plan is concerned, but at stake is our presence and
activism. We must stand firm for the
financial autonomy of McGill’s Pension Plan.
The Plan must first serve us, not the interests of big
corporations—interests supported recently by Mrs. Monroe-Blum’s downsizing of
the BoG. Our next step is to demand
more representation of workers in the elected Pension Committee at the expense
of the BoG’s nominations.
Yours Sincerely,
Slawomir Poplawski
(*) – Let me know if you are aware of other cases of
HR offering years of paid salary to the most prominent, networked or most
inconvenient members of our community in exchange for their early retirement.
(**) – Mr. McVetty was mentioned a few times in the
Gazette’s business section in reports about his successful struggle against a
big corporation that was trying to cheat its share holders.
P.S. MUNACA
recipients of this letter are kindly asked to forward it to their close
managerial group members, as I do not have a list of people affiliated with
MUNASA who are participating in the same PC election (more in http://www.spop.addr.com/money.htm).
