Volume 26, No. 8	Editor:  Mark Langer			October, 1995



	HAPPY FACES versus HARD REALITIES



How bad is it?



At the CUASA General Assembly, Steering Committee announced that it would

share  accurate information with our members.  In doing so, we informed

members of the unpleasant prospect for the fiscal future of the

University.  Numbers have not  changed much from those  previously

circulated in the Communiqui, when we urged our constituents to offer

revenue generating proposals.



In contrast, management's presentation at the Senate-sponsored information

session obscured the extent of the financial crisis.  Frequent references

to a "manageable problem" made it clear that it was to be managed by

employee buy-outs, lay-offs, program cuts and salary claw-backs.  Much of

this is reminiscent of the days when CUASA originally was formed, partly

in response to administrative mismanagement of financial problems.



Can a $26.4 million shortfall be "managed" in the ways proposed by Drs. 

Farquhar and Riordon? Will the Carleton we know and value be left

undamaged if these measures are implemented? We think not.  In the past,

we anticipated an operating deficit.  This has now been joined by the

threat of an enormous debt.  We must find means to generate additional

revenue.



What is being done by management?



The present uncertain situation in which universities find themselves

calls for a coordinated response from all parts of the university

community.  "Common Sense" would tell us that central to any such response

would be good communication.  President Robin Farquhar, in his address to

the Senate-sponsored Open Forum on November 20, referred to the need to

move in concert with other Ontario universities, with employees, and with

students.  Farquhar called for "broad consultation," and urged the

Carleton community to be "thorough, creative and forthcoming" in

addressing the university's problems.



We find these sentiments commendable in principle, but absent in practice.



Contrary to the impressions conveyed at the Senate Open Forum, CUASA was

told by President Farquhar that the University fund-raising campaign is

virtually suspended -- because he is a lame-duck president.



Contrary to remarks in the media and at the Open Forum, management has not

discussed problems and solutions with CUASA.  Management has cancelled

every meeting of the Joint Committee to Administer the Agreement since

mid-September.  Early in the fall term, CUASA and management agreed to

meet in Article 19 discussions about the university's future in advance of

collective bargaining.  At the first of these meetings, on October 16,

management announced that no substantive matters could be addressed until

we were in contract bargaining. 



We immediately handed them a memo seeking early negotiations.  Management

withdrew to consider its position.



Two weeks later, David Van Dine, writing on behalf of management,

responded with a memo informing us that they would select their bargaining

team and "commence the preparation of our proposals for a revised

collective agreement immediately."  He stated that, negotiations had to

wait until the provincial funding decisions were made in November, but

stated that in the meantime, our teams could meet to discuss process,

timetable and other matters.  It took over a month for management to name

its bargaining committee.  In the first week of December, when we

anticipated that bargaining could finally begin, we were told that

management could not negotiate until January, as it lacked a mandate.



Management's response over the past few months reminds one of the

behaviour of a rabbit caught in the glare of oncoming headlights.  It is

our hope that our executives will rouse themselves from this apparent

paralysis, and join us in discussions to address concerns of the present

and plans for the future.



The unwillingness of management even to discuss "process, timetable and

other matters" has not prevented them from unilaterally preparing to

modify the Collective Agreement.  These moves come close to sidestepping

the collective bargaining process.  For example, management refuses to

reduce any appointments from full to half time effective after 30 April

1996, and has advised chairs and directors that faculty over 65 are not to

be assigned teaching duties next year.  None of this was reviewed with CUASA.



What is to be done?



CUASA will continue to press management to live up to its responsibilities

to manage.  We will give our members the facts, no matter how unpleasant,

without sugar-coating.  We intend to conduct hard bargaining that

challenges management's quick fixes that fix nothing.  This round of

negotiations involves not only the terms and conditions of our employment,

but, in. many respects, those of a recovery plan for the university.  As

part of our bargaining process, we will be consulting and communicating

with our members as we formalize and represent our position in defence of

our contract and our University.





	CUASA ARBITRATION TEAM



At its meeting on December 6, 1995 Council appointed George Neuspiel and

Barry Rutland to the Arbitration Team for the upcoming negotiations.