Volume 28, No. 15 Editor: Mark Langer February, 1998 WHO'S PARANOID NOW? On Friday 6 Feb., in an unsigned statement, management responded to the last CUASA Communiqu‚ , characterizing it as "misleading" and "a paranoid fantasy", management claimed that President Van Loon's reassurances that layoffs "will be a one time exercise" have not vanished. If they haven't "vanished", then how exactly do they accord with the following management statement circulated on 11 December: "President Van Loon has stated publicly on several occasions that, while the process of program evaluation will be ongoing, there will be no further program closures for the purposes of improving the bottom line. Any further changes would be for the purposes of internal reallocation to strengthen programs." It is reasonable for us to inquire about the precise meaning of those "further changes". CUASA reads this as a clear indication that future layoffs will be an acceptable way of proceeding if they permit "internal reallocation". Indeed, despite management's claims of financial exigency, the recent crop of job advertisements in This Week at Carleton suggests that the proposed layoffs in SLLCLS are not motivated by financial exigency -- a suggestion reinforced by management's 6 Feb. admission that "strateg ic" considerations were a factor in the proposed layoffs. When CUASA negotiated the changes to Article 17 that opened the door to Senate's actions regarding layoffs, we never anticipated that "program redundancy" could mean anything other than the total elimination of one or more particular programs within academic units. Layoffs for such reasons had never before occurred at a Canadian university. As unlikely and unappealing as that prospect was, something far more sinister than this has come to pass. By defining "program redundancy" in such a way that courses in eliminated programs could continue to be offered, management has appropriated the right selectively to "cherry pick" by deciding who might be offered transfers or retraining. This opens the door to applying the same formula elsewhere in the university. To take a hypothetical case, let us suppose that management recommends to Senate that Environmental and Civil Engineering be altered by the declaration that the environmental program in Civil Engineering is now redundant. As with the small language departments, environmental courses could still be offered by Civil Engineering or the Science Faculty. However, management would have the right to reduce the numbers of Engineering faculty who would teach these courses. The funds freed up by such reductions could be used for unrestricted hiring elsewhere in Engineering or the university. As enrolment or funding trends change, potentially every academic position at Carleton is threatened. Anyone reading the recent job ads in This Week at Carleton can see this happening. Despite management's protests, it is not a paranoid fantasy to state the obvious. No one is safe. Academic staff require something other than the 6 Feb. 1998 jeremiad. The university community awaits a clear and unambiguous statement from President Van Loon that there will be no further attempts at layoffs for any reason. Even a cursory reading of the President's 26 September statement to General Faculty Board will reveal qualifiers and hazy language that leave open a variety of options. Remember that the President's assurance occurs on page 12 of a 13 page document filled with assumptions, scenario, and contingent outcomes. Remember too that this constitutes the "full context" in which the President instructed us that his assurances needed to be understood -- a fact which is even admitted by management's "Update". We ask you to consider this. What will you find more convincing from management -- name calling when CUASA points out the vague and ambiguous statements coming from Robertson Hall, or a clear signed statement from the President reaffirming that the attempt at laying off faculty will not be repeated under any circumstances? And, given that management is simultaneously hiring and maintaining that financial exigency is forcing layoffs, wouldn't you want greater evidence that all possible steps are taken to avoid layoffs from the already announced program redundancies? Give us that, President Van Loon, or put an end to these accusations of "misleading" and "paranoid fantasies". NEWS FROM THE SLLCLS FRONT CUASA has learned that Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Dean William D. Jones has been attempting to find a faculty member from a program outside SLLCLS willing to become administrative advisor to students in the closed language programs. At least one candidate has refused this dishonourable proposition. We encourage anyone else receiving a request to do the work of colleagues targeted for layoffs to consider the ethics of accepting such a post and to provide Dean Jones with the answer he deserves. CUASA members might also consider whether it is honourable for them to take on tasks that were previously done by SLLCLS members presently threatened with layoffs. Such tasks include evaluating transcripts and course equivalencies for students from foreign universities, evaluating transcripts for Bachelor in International Business students who have been or are about to go abroad for study, providing the Registrar with foreign transcript translations or assessments, etc. CARLETON PRIDE? LET'S "ICE" THOSE LAYOFFS! Members of the Carleton community have been invited to celebrate Winterlude at the third Annual Carleton Pride Candlelight Skate. CUASA salutes this event, and encourages all members of the university community whose pride in Carleton may have been shaken by the recent or impending layoffs of academic and support staff to come and express their feelings about "Carleton Pride" at the Hartwell Locks (by Dunton Tower) at 7 p.m. on Friday, February 13. We have been assured that there will be ice games, music and free hot chocolate at Oliver's for participants. CUASA will provide placards and buttons for all who do not think that layoffs are something to be proud of. So bundle up warm, grab those skates and come on down! Let's have some fun as we show solidarity with our beleaguered colleagues! MENDACITY WATCH In a 26 January 1998 letter to Stephen Astels of the Graduate Student Association of the University of Waterloo, Richard Van Loon wrote of the projected layoffs of Carleton faculty. "Unlike Waterloo," averred Van Loon, "we did not have access to pension plan surpluses to finance buyouts of faculty and staff." In a 3 February 1998 "Summary of Pension Plan Surplus Allocations" provided to CUASA by Elizabeth Springer, Director of Pension Fund Management at Carleton, detailing the plan years from 1993/4 to 1998/9, a pension plan surplus "of $35.5 million was omitted to contribution reductions, shared equally between plan members and the University". This means that the employer had access to $17.75 million in pension plan surpluses which could have been used to finance buyouts of academic and other staff. CUASA is certain that President Van Loon will correct this misstatement in a letter to Stephen Astels. We could appreciate receiving a copy.