Union for faculty,
staff needs the count to get the clout in Albany
To
the Editor:
Like all state employees, members of the faculty and professional staff
are represented by a unionUnited University Professions (UUP).
One
percent of gross salary is withheld from every paycheck, whether one is
an actual member of the union or a so-called agency-fee payer. In either
case, the services provided by the union are the same: raises, discretionary
increases, vacation days, vision and dental insurance, representation
and on and on.
A
number of colleagues may think they are members when, in fact, they are
agency-fee payers: your pay stub will indicate your status. It takes just
one signature to change from fee-payer to member.
Others
profess to have principled objections to joining the union. "We are not
steel workers" or "I don't think of myself as 'labor.'"
These
"conscientious objectors'" pay just the same as members, yet they don't
contribute the same. Their stance is costly, both to our chapter and to
UUP statewide. The chapter has fewer members and, thus, smaller representation.
And UUP statewide has fewer members and, thus, diminished clout with the
state and in the Legislature.
This
last point deserves emphasis. We need the count to get the clout. Of all
those lobbying for SUNY, our union is the most effective by far. Campus
presidents have just 64 votes, but the union is good for tens of thousands
of votes. No wonder that the Legislature listens to and hears the union,
while arguments from central administration wither on the vine.
Count
translates to clout. We miss the count of the many who consider the union
below their dignity, even as they submit their Delta Dental (insurance)
claims. Stop riding a crippled hobby horsehelp our university and
SUNY.
Just
do it: join the union, become a member. Call Chris Black at 645-2013,
and she will send you a membership form.
John
Boot
Professor
and Chair, Department of Management Science and Systems
President, Buffalo Center Chapter, UUP
Reporter should focus
more on results, rather than winning, of grants
To
the Editor:
I write to express gratitude for several articles in the last Reporter
(April 11, 2002). For example, the article by Patricia Donovan about the
health of homeless urban children was genuinely informative, and it was
good to print the research results of the doctoral investigator, Timothy
Sullivan, and the comments of Professor Steegman.
Similarly,
the article by Donna Longenecker about Professor Jeanette Johnson's research
about children from risky and/or impoverished environments was also intellectually
valuable and in some places eloquent. And Ms. Longenecker's article about
"Modest Mansions" and a prize-winning achievement in architecture was
informative.
Several
other articles also spread information about important national or local
intellectual achievements, including the effort to attract more talented
undergraduates.
I
suggest politely that if we are ever to becomeor resemblean
intellectual community, more articles such as these will be both necessary
and crucially important. In the past, we have usually been given many
articles primarily about the winning of grants, but seldomif everabout
the completion of grants or about the intellectual achievements of the
grant-investigations. Of course, I can understand why, from an administrative
point of view, there may be a greater interest in the initial award statement,
with the valuable overhead percentages. But if either grantor unfundedresearch
results are usually ignored or omitted, an unintentionally harmful bias
is conveyed or frequently demonstrated. In addition, more university readers
will probably gain much more information from articles such as these of
last week that present both intellectual knowledge and evidence of successful
intelligent completion of the academic projects.
May
I suggest that in the future there could be an increasingly wide range
of articles in the Reporter that reveal such research and interpretative
findings. We could also have reviews of university music and theater and
dance, as well as some professional book reviews. We could also read interviews
with both some ordinary and some extraordinary students. It would be interesting
to learn what visiting scholars from other schools think about their time
here. We could learn about some prize-winning students and also about
some people who must work very hard to pay their tuition bills.
It
might also be useful, although perhaps also frustrating, to learn about
the technological classroom improvements available and in use in some
SUNY, New York and nearby institutions.
Sincerely,
Vic
Doyno
Professor of English