Mining and Metallurgical Department

Motto for my correspondence with our principal, Mr.B.Shapiro:

We should discuss and ask our top administrators for help or good advice when having more complicated and general problems. Thanks to our great democracy only the best people are chosen to be at the highest positions and only by listening to their good advice we can improve our lives. We can also learn a lot from them and our future is in their hard working hands/minds. So, we must study how to respect them better and probably we should introduce special seminars at McGill because ONLY BY RESPECTING OUR LEADERS WE CAN LEARN HOW TO RESPECT OURSELVES!

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

Below is my letter from September 5 and after Mr.Shapiro’s answer from September 9:

e-mail: slawomir.poplawski@mcgill.ca

September 5, 2002

Att: Dr. B.Shapiro Fax: 398-4768, e-mail: bernard.shapiro@mcgill.ca

Dear Dr. Shapiro,

I think that before your final departure from McGill, our community needs to discuss your legacy. It is especially important since our new principal, appointed in secret by a select few, seems to share a similar profile with you: representing the interests of high finance and big companies rather than of ordinary people.

It seems to me (and probably to others) that you want to divide people into two groups who are treated very differently in our publicly subsidized University: The larger group consists of ordinary workers who are not respected and are pushed around by administrators at different levels.

I have seen you openly supporting the praise of managers for outsmarting and putting down the workers. This arrogance clearly does not bother you, as we see, for Ms. Haldane, the recently appointed editor of The Reporter, is much the same even after your intervention. Three months ago you told me my information had been sent to Ms. Haldane`s direct supervisor (Ms. K.Williams), but the latter also ignored her duty to investigate Ms. Haldane`s questionable behaviour. Ms. Haldane`s uncommunicative arrogance remained undiminished as she refused (already almost 3 weeks) to tell me whether or not the texts I sent would be printed or not.

Perhaps I was supposed to send you an anonymous letter, but that is not my bag. So I must insist that the public decide: I ask again that you intervene so that my letters questioning some controversial developments initiated by you at McGill are published. I also want to mention that Mrs. K.Williams, who is directly supervised by you, was very eager recently to send the same two letters (to everybody at McGill) responding to a hoax anonymous letter from the States, but refused to comment when asked by the press about McGill being sued for not respecting safety standards. She does not represent a private company or a family like the Bronfmans who have a right to be silent, but a publicly subsidized University.

I also ask for your direct opinion about the behaviour of Mr. M. Yalovski, who abused his power as Vice-Principal by forcing my chairman, Professor R. Drew, to reprimand me for a letter of mine written at the end of 2001. It concerned the Centraide campaign and I it was addressed to you, Dr. Shapiro, the campaign supervisor. I want also formally to tell you, Dr. Shapiro, about the even more controversial behaviour of The Gazette's editor over two years ago when Professor Drew was pushed to write me the letter attached below (enc.1). It was like a classic situation in Germany seventy years ago. The Gazette's "old boys" feel free to treat me like a second-class citizen in the occupied country and are openly angry on seeing my letter about the very controversial nomination of Mr. Rabinovitch as the CBC president. In fact he was nominated before at McGill as the Chair of BoG to launch him to this higher position in the network. I enclosed my publication in "The Tribune" that tells more about these nominations (enc.2).

Let us also not forget that in the spring, Mr. Rabinovitch was publicly called a "director of a fascist institution" -- and he did not try to sue for such a comparison.

Further to all these dirty politics about what is allowed or not to be published in our superficially free country, please look at the attached correspondence from Mrs.J. Leake and an answer from MUNACA thirteen months ago to which she was supposedly waiting to provide me her answer, but until today she did not (enc.3-7). It is only a matter of a few thousand dollars that McGill owe me for not recognizing previously my working status; yet she was forced to compromise her own honesty and refuse to answer the financial issue.

Exactly the same "solution" of Mrs. J. Leake as by simply not answering the complains is repeated by Mrs. W.Shirley (a quite high ranking official in the HR - enc.8 ). The similar solution; a different issue concerning not proper work and manifested arrogances when implementing the Pay Equity classification. In this case Mrs. W.S. by not answering is approving the controversial behaviour of Mrs. I.Godefroy who refused to correct her own mistakes and tried to blame others.

Here we can see an arrogant bureaucratic solidarity that so clearly has been raised by students in the last "Newsweek". It seems that these bad administrative habits from McGill are well known even in the US. Now a very young editor is openly supported and trained by Mrs. Williams to behave in the same way.

I am expecting of you, Dr. Shapiro, that in your last days as CEO of McGill you inform the public about many more controversial issues at the root of our modern social systems. Let us recall as the real heroes the old OIC member and the British director of a big laboratory who, on live TV, dished the dirt on sport and GM food. You know, I know and most people know that something nasty is cooking inside our educational sector. It is up to you to dish the dirt on it, so that we can attain a level of educational democracy seen in Europe, with properly administrated and financed schools and universities instead of the endless promotion of privatization.

We need an honest, sensitive person like you to break the routine egotism which people cultivate at the expense of integrity and social peace.

Regards,

Slawomir Poplawski

P.S. I hope that this time The Reporter is not yet "put into bed" (as it was said by you in May) and my texts can be still included and the other issues are less urgent for your intervention.

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

This is Mr. Shapiro’s answer:

Monday, September 09, 2002 12:17 PM
From:	Bernard Shapiro <bernard.shapiro@mcgill.ca>
To:	"slawomir.poplawski"
Subject:	Your email
	Urgent New

Dear Mr. Poplawski,

I have received and read your email of 6 September 2002. I have, however, a different perception of the issues which you outline, and I am not, therefore,planning to take any action at this time. I will, however, copy your email and my response to those individuals that you cite. It is only fair that they understand your perception of the situation.

I do appreciate the effort you have made to bring your concerns to my attention.

Bernard Shapiro

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

Mining and Metallurgical Department

Wong bldg, room 1280

September 9, 2002

Att: Dr.B.Shapiro

Subject: Your e-mail answer

Dear Dr. Shapiro,

Thanks for your quick response, though I wonder if you and your subordinates saw the eight documents that were attached, which incidentally had been faxed to you before. When I enquired whether these documents got through, it seems they had strangely "disappeared" (according to your secretary). You also finished your work quite early last Friday, yet I received a confirmation that apparently you had read my e-mail - sent soon after your left the office! Your answer does not match your position and experience: I think your subordinates are not shown anything to understand my perceptions; rather, I think they are presented with your opinion and asked to "act accordingly". This "strategy" does not look or sound formal, and historians analyzing some painful social stories from the past might name it quite differently. It is hard to believe that a humanist like you, Dr. Shapiro, wrote it. It is also hard to believe that a person like you would not do everything to publish the opinion questioned before in the McGill press and promote openness at our University.

Therefore, I request that you send a proper letter signed by you (addressed to my office or home).

Promoting a real exchange of different opinions is worth a much bigger effort.

Regards,

Slawomir Poplawski

Remarks: This letter is still unanswered by Mr.Shapiro. He is fully aware about its existence and during the Centraide meeting at the Faculty club on September 19 he had answered my question: “Do you, Dr. Shapiro, have someone answering letters to you as for example Mr. Chretien, has?” and he responded: “No, I am answering myself”. At that time he had small cold and was apologizing for his voice. It was also nice for me to hear from him that he does not have bad feelings about my writing when asked if I was hurting him with my direct writings.

So, it seems that we have a very good principal who is very opened and only people around him like: Yalovski, Williams, Haldane, Leake etc are probably too narrow minded or shaped to behave as “kapo” in some concentration camps during the WWII as it was described in my comments to a correspondence with him in May 2002. We must remember that thanks to them {those “kapo”} many German dignitaries during many publicized courts were quite successful to defend their image when telling about not instructing “kapo” to be so cruel against the prisoners. Now, some people can believe that they were very beautiful people who liked classical music, opera and collecting art or fine porcelains, and only nasty international conspirators are framing them as bad individuals responsible for the all war crimes.