10 thoughts on “Yes or No?

    • Well done. I believe this captures what every fair-minded person is thinking right now.

  1. I agree with what you’re thinking but I have to say that the contract is creating a disapparate existing versus new hire structure which clearly is used to destroy the union from within. (Look at the current labor environment at Caterpillar as an example.)

    If you’d don’t believe me than, here’s what we have straight from the proverbial horse’s mouth.

    ” – Lanes: This was to be a topic for a future meeting on implementation. We understand there has been confusion on this point: We can commit to the fact that current employees would stay in the current lane system, with the new lane system applying to new employees.”

    Its a divide and conquer Trojan horse to make the contract look better that is actually is.

    Also don’t forget we simply do not have a contract in front of us to review all we have is a list of “promises” most of which are not even clearly fleshed out by either party.

    • I agree with this.

      I also think the Professionals and especially Part Time Professionals are getting hosed (again), at least from the very little information I’ve heard on their deals.

      Finally, one last point that isn’t on the Realist’s list: I would have been very proud and impressed with our Union leadership if they said, “Oh, you want a deal, do you? Let’s bring CCCLOC in, too. You want student success pay in our contract? Then let’s make sure that the other half of the people teaching our students have livable wages and benefits and a pathway to career stability. You make a deal with them, too. That’s our condition.

      • As one of the part-timers in CCCLOC, I appreciate your publicly stated support. I hope all of the full-timers can stand with us during our on-going negotiations with CCC.

      • Thanks….YES…..What about our professional sisters and brothers? They get nothing. Would we, again, ask those who receive nothing to stand against this contract on behalf of a few? Our adjuncts? are starving. We are short handed in every department. Our adjunct turn over rate affects everything.

        Personally in my fantasy land, I’d rather see a contract that included fair promotion policies to ensure a hiring process for long term highly qualified adjuncts into full time positions. However, CCCLOC was established as with most other adjunct unions, they were established as separate entities. To me, as an adjunct at that time, I saw this is a huge blunder and now I still believe that to be true.

        As for this 1600 contract, voting no will cause great anguish to our adjuncts if worse comes to worse eg. 2004, as they 1) have their daily attendance taken by administrators, 2) have student attendance counted every session, 3) receive conflicting messages about what to do from administration and FT faculty, 4) try to explain to students why FT are not in the building. Any possible strike places our adjuncts between a rock and a hard place. Who do they support? Hey, been there. done that in 2004, we lost good people who supported the FT cause and suffered for it….Could I put my adjuncts in the same position?

        I should also mention that the 1708 contract negotiations took two years to negotiate and will be revisited in a year, I am told? What happened here?

        It took 4 years to recover from 2004. Maybe you weren’t there……..be grateful you missed it.

        Thanks for the concern about our colleagues Philo Dave. This is exactly what has been on my mind.

        Peace

  2. Whoever is out there downrating the post and comments, you should know that Realist has merely compiled the positions of people as stated at yesterday’s meeting and in various related posts.

    Whether s/he feels equally committed to all of them, I don’t know, but it shows that s/he has, at least, been listening to the positions and thoughts of colleagues and recognizing them as reasonable.

    Personally, I very much appreciate the thoroughness and generosity (and accuracy) shown by The Realist in compiling this. Use it as you will–dismiss the points that you find to be irrelevant or untrue or inaccurate, but I think it’s disingenuous not to acknowledge the service and usefulness of the compilation.

    At least explain yourself…

  3. Hey Everyone, If you are still looking at this post…There is an article in today’s Sun-Times about the contract.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s