Well, this week started in spectacular fashion! Thanks to all the Queen’s astronomers, the CUPE and USW members, and others who helped us watch the eclipse with enough knowledge to make some sense of it, with our free glasses, and with the ease that came of not really having to think about how that knowledge got to us, how those tens of thousands of glasses got distributed, or how the field was prepared or cleaned up afterwards. What an incredible experience, made all the better for our colleagues’ expertise, enthusiasm, care, and labour. The hype was really worth it!
1. Last week, something else not previously seen at Queen’s: about 400 people, representing all union locals, gathered on a work day in the main gym of the ARC for a combined members’ assembly at which representatives of CUPE, USW, and PSAC announced a coordinated bargaining strategy, which will be supported by QUFA, for the coming season of contract negotiations. Speakers from CUPE, USW and PSAC talked about the impact of now-repealed Bill 124 on their members, about their diminished spending power and other effects of job insecurity in inflationary times, and about the impossibility of managing workloads given current and proposed reductions in staff. They also discussed their commitment to collaboration and mutual support among bargaining units. Budget cuts and austerity measures have already made many people’s jobs worse, and they have done perhaps irreparable damage to people’s respect for and investment in their workplace. But the communal response to them has heightened people’s energy for organizing, their knowledge of the union landscape at Queen’s, and their awareness of the labour that actually goes into keeping this place running. The message of the assembly was that any gains to be won for union members are going to come through solidarity. We are going to hear a lot more about it in the coming months. The Queen’s Journal story on the rally is here.
2. In the context of lay-offs, ‘voluntary exits,’ and unfilled staff vacancies, work will still need to get done, but there are going to be fewer people to do it. Just a reminder that it is not permitted for members of one union to perform another union’s work. For instance, the USW collective agreement (p. 28) has specific language about this in Article 18.15.a: “Non-bargaining unit individuals employed by the University shall not perform duties normally assigned to bargaining unit members if doing so will result in the layoff, or in a reduction of the regular work hours, of any bargaining unit member.”
3. Queen’s, as we all know, is not the only institution in Ontario, nor in Canada, projecting a deficit. The underfunding and de-valuing of higher education is a global phenomenon. There is a lot for us to learn from looking at the way this phenomenon has transformed – and not for the better – post-secondary education in Australia, New Zealand, and the UK, all countries where Nous Group consultants, now busy at Queen’s, have played a significant role in university restructuring. Similar transformations have also been launched at public institutions in the US under the guidance of hostile state governments and a cadre of consulting firms, including the infamous McKinsey, an agent of many scandals (see here and here and here and here, among others), and apparently the inspiration for Nous. Queen’s Board of Trustees Chair, David Court, is Senior Partner Emeritus of McKinsey & Company, which he joined in 1983.
For the most part we learn of the gutting of higher education – a process initiated and pushed by neoliberal and conservative governments and then facilitated by consultants and senior administrators across the sector – one institutional story at a time. This list of austerity and restructuring measures that have been implemented across the UK was prepared by the University and College Union branch at Queen Mary University in London (where Provost Matthew Evans previously oversaw the restructuring of the School of Biological and Chemical Sciences). The list is sobering.
4. This blog post from the union at Queen Mary University addresses the recently initiated restructuring of their Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. They make the case that there is no financial justification for the “HSS reorganization and voluntary severance scheme.” Sound familiar? Queen Mary, they argue, is not short of cash. “[O]ver time surplus cash generation is trending upwards … Management talk constantly about shrinking sources of income and a rising, unsustainable cost base. But this simply isn’t borne out by the figures. It only applies if you compare present figures with the post-Covid peak… Projecting from the latest figures shared with the unions, even after the projected “shortfall”, Queen Mary is still on course to generate over £75m in surplus cash this year, which is more than in any year prior to 2021.” It’s an argument that is familiar to many of us here at Queen’s. For anyone not yet familiar with it, this report lays it out. The main point is that Queen’s also has growing financial reserves that could be used to mitigate the projected deficit. The University’s senior administrators and the Board of Trustees have made financial decisions that seem to prioritize future building projects over present-day wages and salaries or maintaining a high quality educational experience for our students. As one often-repeated example, the University will allow only a tiny percent (less than 1%) of the income made on the university’s considerable non-endowed investments to be used for the operating budget. You can read more on this here and/or search on the ‘budget’ tag on the Queen’s Coalition Against Austerity website.
5. More from the we-are-not-alone file: Faculty members at St Mary’s University in Nova Scotia have made a public call for the resignation of the university’s president and the chair of the board of governors, for mismanagement. 85% of faculty members voted on a motion of no confidence, 91% of whom supported the motion.
6. The rumours about restructuring plans continue unabated in FAS, with Heads being refused permission to discuss these plans with other faculty, staff, students, and even their department managers. It is believed that significant staff cuts will be undertaken this year and next. Meanwhile, FAS has proposed a motion to introduce a new degree plan and new “modular” degrees. It is anticipated that this significant change to degree programs will lead to increased demand for academic advising from both prospective and current students, increased demand for Major and Minor plans as students build their “modular” degrees, an increased need to for departments to collaborate with other units to offer cross-listed courses and coordinate timetable needs. We might also anticipate increased difficulties – for instance, lack of available seats and timetabling conflicts – as students try to access the courses they need across multiple degree plans. How will it be possible to manage this situation with fewer staff to advise them? Another aspect of the proposed degree plan is a “joint honours” option in the humanities and social sciences. When a joint honours program was introduced several years ago in the science departments, it was deemed unworkable, and the plan was abandoned.
7. A letter has gone to the Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Science, signed by 17 heads of department. It uses the word ‘catastrophic’ to describe the impact of changes that are being planned (though not communicated to other staff, students, or faculty).
8. Once again, a reminder to please attend the Faculty of Arts and Science Faculty Board meeting on Friday, April 19th at 3:30 pm in Mac-Corry B201 or via Zoom. The agenda is available here. This meeting will provide the opportunity for the required second vote on a motion from the floor that was passed at a previous meeting in March. The motion addresses issues of timing and transparency around restructuring in FAS.
9. Last week the Queen’s Journal published a story on the top 5 earners at Queen’s. For comparison, the USW staff pay grid is here.
10. Some news from the Queen’s Renew Project: Another Nous survey is coming our way. No new information is available on the ‘update’ page of the Renew Project website. Still, we learned this in an email sent to those who will be receiving the survey: “Next week Queen’s will launch Part 2 of the UniForum Service Effectiveness Survey. Queen’s is conducting the survey in two parts. Part 1, completed in February, included 35 of the 70 services that are part of NousCubane’s benchmarking program. Part 2 of the Service Effectiveness Survey will include the remaining 35 services not included in Part 1. Thank-you to those who took the time to complete Part 1 of the survey. Queen’s had a strong response rate for Part 1 of the survey – 47 per cent at Queen’s, in comparison with a median survey response rate of 30 per cent across the broader Uniforum program.” As previously noted in this newsletter, the high response rate could have resulted from staff and faculty solidarity, with people responding as a way to show their support for their colleagues’ work. The low response rate elsewhere calls into question the quality of the benchmarking data that universities are paying for.
11. Finally, it bears mentioning that QCAA has been hearing from staff and faculty members who have attended multiple meetings with various combinations of senior administrators in FAS. Increasingly they are reporting that the problem in FAS is not simply a lack of transparency, rather, it seems like there actually is no clear, fully costed-out restructuring plan for the Faculty. They have also remarked on a lack of consideration for or understanding of the collective agreements that govern employees’ work.
Thanks to the colleagues who provided copy and advice for the newsletter this week!
Queen's Coalition Against Austerity 