Path: utzoo!lsuc!utmanitou!radio.astro!me!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!ois.db.toronto.edu!jdd From: jdd@db.toronto.edu ("John D. DiMarco") Newsgroups: ut.general Subject: Re: Immoral strikes Keywords: the right to strike Message-ID: <89Mar13.104507est.9391@ois.db.toronto.edu> Date: 13 Mar 89 15:44:52 GMT References: <89Mar7.140806est.9394@ois.db.toronto.edu> <1989Mar8.103749.29955@sq.com> <89Mar9.132354est.9394@ois.db.toronto.edu> <741@helios.toronto.edu> Distribution: ut Organization: University of Toronto, CSRI Lines: 69 In article <741@helios.toronto.edu> dooley@helios.UUCP (Kevin Dooley) writes: >In article <89Mar9.132354est.9394@ois.db.toronto.edu> jdd@db.toronto.edu ("John D. DiMarco") writes: a load of rubbish. > >John, John, John, > If your knee jerked any harder it would be imbedded in your chest. >Slow down. Think for a second. Were the union's demands really so >unreasonable? Stop patronizing me. Yes, I think the union's demands were unreasonable; I've listed my objections in earlier postings. > In the long run I believe that all the students at this >university benefitted from the strike. It is unfortunate that all we >got on class size was a committee to look into the problem. It should >be pointed out, though, that before the TAs went on strike, nobody has >ever taken a strong stand on this issue. That's not true. The problem has been recognized for years, and has been brought up in numerous Underfunding protests. In fact, the installation of the ACCESS course selection programme is primarily an attempt to control class sizes. But large class sizes are not the University's fault. Why, then, is CUEW-2 attacking the University on this issue? > Are we so evil because we >want to ensure that you get the best quality education possible? The point I'm making is that you're not attempting to ensure we get the best quality education possible at all. In fact, the willingness of the Union to engage in this strike is an indication that you care so little about 'quality education' that you are willing to hold undergraduates 'for ransom' against the University. >The strike was very short. It forced the administration to negotiate. >Perhaps one or two of your arguments might have the faintest ring >of plausibility if the strike had lasted through the exam period, but >in fact, it did not. Thank God the strike was short! Of course it forced the administration to negotiate. Had the strike continued, the damage to undergraduate education might have become irreversible. Because the administration has a committment to provide such education, they negotiated rather than renege on their committment. > On a personal note, though. John, are you just anti-union, or are >you opposed to quality education? It isn't clear from your postings. Is what I am saying so unclear? I'm not anti-union, I'm simply anti-strike- in-this-case. I'm not opposed to quality education, I claim your union is opposed to quality education. If this question is an example of your understanding of my news postings, perhaps I am wasting my time. > >Kevin Dooley, CUEW local 2 steward for Physics and Astronomy > >-- > Kevin Dooley UUCP - {uunet,pyramid}!utai!helios.physics!dooley > Physics Dept. BITNET - dooley@utorphys > U. of Toronto INTERNET - dooley@helios.physics.utoronto.ca John DiMarco, Undergraduate, graduating in May. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John DiMarco * We will live in the light * jdd%db.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net jdd@db.toronto.edu jdd@db.utoronto.ca jdd.db.toronto.cdn {uunet!utai,watmath!utai,decvax!utcsri,decwrl!utcsri}!db!jdd jdd.utcsri.UUCP --------------------------------------------------------------------------------