Grad students condemn SFSS lockout

The Graduate Student Society’s council voted unanimously last week to officially denounce the Simon Fraser Student Society for their lockout of the staff members of CUPE 3338 Unit 5.

The undergraduate student society’s board of directors locked out its workers after a unanimous vote on July 8, asserting that their compensation package has become a financial burden that threatens the financial solvency of the organization. Although the GSS is an independent organization and their membership does not overlap with the SFSS, they argued that the lockout constitutes a breach of an agreement to share services between the two.

Specifically, council passed two motions: one denouncing the lockout on the basis that it “prevents GSS members from accessing vital services for which they have paid” and that “the GSS is a union employer that respects the collective bargaining rights of workers”, and a second demanding that the SFSS end the lockout, return to the bargaining table, and seek ways to provide the affected services to grad students, because “council believes that the [SFSS] has fundamentally breached the Agreement to Provide Services between the SFSS and the Graduate Student Society.”

“The SFSS directors are talking about wholesale changes to the system, but our agreement was upon the premise that the services were provided to the GSS in a specific way,” stated Kevin Partridge, the sociology/anthropology faculty rep who is also on the bargaining committee of the Teaching Support Staff Union.

The GSS pays a fee to the SFSS in order to be able to access various student services. Over the 2010–2011 period, the GSS paid out $45,000 under the agreement. Services covered by the agreement include the Ombuds office, Women’s Centre, Out on Campus, and a free legal clinic.

At the meeting, the topic of seeking remuneration for the disruption of services due to the lockout was brought up, and another suggestion to withhold funding the following semester was put forward, but council did not make a final decision on either issue.

According to the GSS-SFSS contract, in the event of a breach of agreement, a notice may be sent by the other party, while the party in breach has up to 30 days to rectify the problem. If the breach is not corrected, the other party may terminate the agreement.

Concerns were raised over the 30-day wait. “By the time the waiting period is over, it will already be the fall semester, and there’s going to be an influx of new students trying to get into the system who are going to need counseling,” said one faculty rep.

Coordinating and External Relations Officer Mike Soron responded that while the timeline was not ideal, the GSS would like to “uphold our side of the agreement, and the council as a trustworthy partner in this contract.”

Speaking before the meeting, SFSS president Jeff McCann said that “the graduate students voted to leave the SFSS because they did not feel that their members were being represented, and because they didn’t feel that the fees paid equaled the value received. This position is exactly what this board is working towards in a more fair wage structure, that creates a balance of value for the undergraduate membership for the fees paid.”

On the assertion that the SFSS had breached the Agreement to Provide Services, McCann added, “the person who put forward that claim needs to have another look at the contract. The dues are based on last year’s actual costs, not on the service levels provided this year . . . In the next fiscal is when they would pay based on the services we provided this year.”

This July meeting saw a higher than usual turnout, likely due to the controversy surrounding the lockout. SFSS at-large representative Arry Dhillon was also present.

Despite all the information offered by various council members over the course of the discussion of the two motions, when Dhillon asked to see by a show of hands, who felt fully informed on the issues surrounding the CUPE lockout, only half of the room raised their hands.

Immediately after, a vote was called for the second motion regarding the staff lockout, in which there was a unanimous vote to pass.

Esther Tung News Vol. 138, Issue 12