If you have difficulty reading the newsletter, please go to www.patriotreturns.com to see the latest release.
THE PATRIOT RETURNS |
Vol. 49, No.4 October 13, 2009
Since 1992, The Patriot Returns has sought to inform faculty and staff about the shenanigans and waste that have become so regretfully characteristic of the City University of New York. We've also seen, heard and read about the sometimes comic and other times horrific activities engaged in by the "leadership" of our union, the Professional Staff Congress; and we've reported them to you. The Patriot receives many requests to publish letters to the editor and to the university community at large. These include complaints about and criticisms of the administration and the union, as well as informational updates and helpful ideas. We thank you all for your input and support. The Patriot Returns strives to be a voice for the silent majority of CUNY's staff and faculty, not simply an outlet for the opinions of our editor-in-chief. On occasion, we are sent articles penned by frustrated faculty which are so genuine and impassioned that we feel an obligation to share them with our readers. The following is one such piece. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Why Staging Public Demonstrations at Stella D'Oro Weakens Our Union By The June edition of The Clarion included an article about the PSC's extensive efforts to engage in public demonstrations on behalf of the striking bakers of Stella D'Oro, efforts that continue to this day. The article goes to great lengths to detail the unflagging efforts of our New Caucus union president and others to stand in solidarity with the workers at their factory. Whether or not this assistance actually yielded real results for the bakers in their conflict with corporate management appears to be questionable. The victory of the bakers against Brynwood Partners was won in the courts after all, not in the streets. But even this success was short lived, as Stella D'Oro was subsequently sold to Lance, which has announced it will close the Bronx facility and move production to Ohio. It is unlikely that that the baker's union has any further recourse to this action. However, the real question for PSC members is this: How does our union's expenditure of time and resources (substantial resources – our dues money) on public protests on behalf of another union benefit the PSC members and make OUR union stronger? Faulty Logic: Faculty = Bakers Although not specifically elaborated upon in the June article, the underlying reasoning for the PSC approach goes something like this: If our union doesn't protest in the streets with the factory workers, then PSC members will be next to suffer the same fate at the hands of management. Several enthusiastic supporters of the protests have expressed it this way: "If management can do this to them, they will try to do it to us too", or "We have to send management a strong message." This is a very clear case of faulty reasoning. First, it is a false assumption that the ONLY way to aid fellow union members is by marching in the streets. At its core, this erroneous PSC reasoning operates under the assumption that the working situations of bakers and CUNY faculty and staff are exactly the same. It also assumes that the "management" at Stella D'Oro and the "management" at CUNY are the same: that they behave the same way, operate according to the same rules, and answer to the same constituencies. Of course, this is not true. How many bakers get every summer off, have paid sabbaticals, or receive tenure? How many corporate CEO's are appointed by elected officials? The real problem is what this reveals about the strategic thinking at union headquarters. The first goal when one engages opponents, is to understand them: their motivations, strengths, weaknesses, internal conflicts, etc… Clearly our union leadership has made no attempt to do this with the CUNY administration, and have instead embraced a false "straw man" model of CUNY based on ideology, rather than reality. The CUNY administration no doubt recognizes this. And this recognition gives them a great political advantage. They know that our union leadership has little or no interest in understanding the political dynamics of CUNY, and that union leaders would rather march in the streets than put in the serious effort needed to deconstruct and analyze CUNY dynamics. This translates into a weaker bargaining position for our union all the way around, including and especially in contract negotiations. What the Numbers Say A cardinal rule when staging public demonstrations is that one should never engage in such a tactic unless an overwhelming turnout can be guaranteed. A public demonstration gives your opponents the opportunity to gauge the real "boots on the ground" strength of your support, so such an action should be carefully organized to project strength, not weakness. The PSC Protests at Stella D'Oro are a case in point. Although the union leadership repeatedly issued calls for members to turn out, and were able to attract some members of NYSUT to join them, all their very substantial efforts yielded only a very small number of PSC union members at the protests. No matter that the "activist" New Caucus group claims a turnout of 50, 100, or several hundred PSC members at their public demonstrations, those figures do not attract the interest of CUNY Central. It is not the few members that show up that reveal the true strength and resolve of the PSC. It is the many tens of thousands of members that do not; in this case easily more than 19,500, well over 98% of the union. When your opponent can see that over 98% (and more likely 99.5%) of the membership ISN'T turning out to support the PSC's choice of action, the weakness is plain for all to see. And that translates into a weaker negotiating position at the bargaining table. Conclusion This is not a criticism of the PSC for wanting to support other unions. Supporting fellow members of the labor movement when it is appropriate is a sound strategy and the right thing to do. The problem is the poor choice of methods that the New Caucus leadership repeatedly employs. It invariably ends up hurting our union. Indeed, rushing to hold a public demonstration seems to be the primary method this union leadership relies upon to advance all agendas, no matter what issue is at hand. Given that any attempt at assembling a large PSC member turnout is contingent upon overcoming the logistical nightmare of pulling together union members spread across multiple college campuses in all 5 boroughs of New York, public actions of this sort as the primary response are clearly a poor tactic for the PSC to employ in general. But no matter what tactics are employed, what should be most important is how the results advance the interests of our union membership. This leads to one final question. Since these methods are clearly having a negative impact upon our union and its ability to advocate effectively for the membership, why then do the New Caucus people continue to use these tactics over and over and over again? In the end, there is really only one answer that makes sense: The current central union leadership is ultimately not really interested in effectively advocating for the needs of its membership. Sharad Karkhanis, Ph.D.
Issues of The Patriot may be accessed at As you know, Susan O'Malley has sought to silence the Patriot by bringing a lawsuit which seeks to limit his free speech and financially bankrupt him. Interested colleagues have weighed in at |