One of the more invisible fronts in the media work being done for and against the strike is the use of email and websites. The U administration has been particularly active in mailing out mass emails spinning their own position regarding the strike. See here for a recent letter from the U's head of HR. We wanted to take this opportunity to provide a critical reading of this letter. Thanks to Nate
Dear Ms. Carrier,
My name is Nate Holdren. I am a graduate instructor in the Department
of Cultural Studies and Comparative Literature at the U. I'm writing
in response to your recent message. To be blunt, your email strikes me
as a piece of misinformation designed to weaken support for the
strikers by depicting them as irrationally failing to accept the
university's supposedly reasonable offer. I would like to know, has
the university hired an outside consultant to help coordinate its
response to the strike?
Your claim that the university's offer is competitive in the
marketplace is disingenuous on two counts. First, what market do you
see the university competing in? As I understand matters, the
university is one of the largest employers in the state and as such
the university determines the market for service workers as much as it
is subject to this market. Second, the university is a public
nonprofit institution. You imply that the university should operate
otherwise - that is, that the university should operate as a market
institution - without providing an argument and without recognizing
that this is a tremendously contentious proposition.
Your reference to the market is also revealing. The private sector has
a significantly lower rate of unionization than the public sector, in
large part because of aggressive union busting by private sector
employers. The university appears to be behaving like a private sector
employer in this case, which is to say, the university appears to be
deliberately undermining the AFSCME locals.
That larger numbers of AFSCME members are still working does not
indicate that those AFSCME members are happy with the way the
university is treating them. I've spoken with about 30 strikers and my
students have spoken with about another 25. All of these strikers find
it very difficult financially to be on strike and almost all of them
have expressed worry about how long they can stay on strike. That is,
some people don't strike or stop striking because they can't afford
it. They can't afford it because the university pays low wages to
service workers.
Finally, for future reference, if you want your claim to value
employees to be taken seriously, you might consider sending impersonal
mass emails from an address the university employees can reply to.
Sending an email from "bulk-nr@umn.edu ", where "nr" means "no reply"
sends a message that you do not care about employees, that you only
want to lecture us. In order to reply to you, I had to do a google
search and I'm not entirely sure this is the correct address. For this
reason, I request that you acknowledge this message.
Yours sincerely,
Nate Holdren
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Monday, September 17, 2007
Student's Speak: Hunger Strike is On
Hunger Strike to Support AFSCME Workers’ Struggle for Justice: "Office Hours" and Public Teach-In on Tuesday
Hunger strikers’ “office hours”- 9:30-6pm on Tuesday, September 18, 2007.
Public teach-in - 1:00-1:45pm on Tuesday, September 18, 2007.
Location: east end of the Washington Avenue pedestrian bridge, in front of the Weisman Art Center.
Today at a noon press conference in front of Morrill Hall at the University of Minnesota, eleven University of Minnesota students declared that they are hunger striking to support the clerical, technical, and healthcare AFSCME workers who have been striking for a fair contract for thirteen days. A faculty member and a staff member are also joining the hunger strike to show their solidarity with the students and the workers. Professor Richa Nagar, who is hunger striking, said, “A hunger strike is not about sacrificing oneself; it is essentially about bringing attention to an injustice by shaming those who propagate it. The idea is that anyone who is human has the capacity to feel ashamed, and a hunger strike is a call to that person to show his or her humanity by correcting the wrong.”
Lauren Siegel, an undergraduate, read part of the group’s collective statement: “Our hunger strike is intended to draw attention to the workers’ struggle. Currently the administration has failed to offer a contract that keeps up with inflation, despite the fact that the legislature explicitly allocated money for that purpose.” She continued, “To have justice in our community would mean that nobody would go hungry. However, according to a recent survey, 25% of AFSCME workers have trouble feeding their families. We are making a conscientious choice to hunger strike, just as the Bruininks administration has made a choice to deny the workers a fair contract. They could choose otherwise. They could choose to give themselves lower salaries and give that money to the workers.”
Humphrey Institute graduate student and hunger striker, Dani Indovino, talked about why the students care about the workers’ struggle. “We are not speaking for the workers. Our hunger strike is a student-initiated and student-led action.” She elaborated, “we are outraged that Bruininks and his administration have let the ideal of quality education take second-stage to efficiency and profitability. For this university to create the best learning environment for us students, the whole university community must be treated with respect and fairness.”
Another hunger striker, a political science graduate student, Susan Kang, explained why they have chosen the tactic of a hunger strike. “We have tried every possible way of communicating our demand that President Bruininks and his administration offer a contract which keeps up with the cost of living. Yet, they refuse to listen to us. In opposition to the administration’s monopoly over on-campus media, we hope that our protest will serve as a platform for engaging in dialogue with students about the union’s position.”
The hunger strikers welcome their fellow students, community members, and the press to come and talk with them about the strike and their vision for a future of the university in which all workers are treated fairly. They will hold “office hours” between 9:30am and 6pm everyday, in front of Morrill Hall. All are invited to attend a public teach-in, tomorrow, Tuesday, September 18th, 1:00-1:45pm. Professor Ajay Skaria will speak about Gandhi’s hunger strikes, and Professor Ron Greene will talk about “Collective Bargaining for a Collective Citizen.”
Also, supporters are signing up for a “24-hour solidarity fast,” to begin at 1pm on Wednesday, September 19th. Solidarity fasters will wear green armbands that say “fast” to signify their participation. The fast will begin after a mass protest by faculty and students called “struck speechless”: thirty minutes of silence followed by one minute of noise, from 12:15 to 12:46pm, Wednesday, to protest both the Administration’s unfair offer to the workers and their dismissing of the faculty’s dissent as “noise.”
PHOTO OPPORTUNITY: Students are undertaking a student-led hunger strike for justice in solidarity with the AFSCME workers. They are available for interviews on the patio in front of Morrill Hall, from 9:30am to 6pm, everyday. When it rains, they will move to the cover of the east end of the Washington Avenue pedestrian bridge, in front of the Weisman Art Center. Press personnel are also invited to visit the “office hours” or the Church after hours for interviews and photo opportunities. A phone call to our contact person prior to a visit is much appreciated.
Hunger strikers’ “office hours”- 9:30-6pm on Tuesday, September 18, 2007.
Public teach-in - 1:00-1:45pm on Tuesday, September 18, 2007.
Location: east end of the Washington Avenue pedestrian bridge, in front of the Weisman Art Center.
Today at a noon press conference in front of Morrill Hall at the University of Minnesota, eleven University of Minnesota students declared that they are hunger striking to support the clerical, technical, and healthcare AFSCME workers who have been striking for a fair contract for thirteen days. A faculty member and a staff member are also joining the hunger strike to show their solidarity with the students and the workers. Professor Richa Nagar, who is hunger striking, said, “A hunger strike is not about sacrificing oneself; it is essentially about bringing attention to an injustice by shaming those who propagate it. The idea is that anyone who is human has the capacity to feel ashamed, and a hunger strike is a call to that person to show his or her humanity by correcting the wrong.”
Lauren Siegel, an undergraduate, read part of the group’s collective statement: “Our hunger strike is intended to draw attention to the workers’ struggle. Currently the administration has failed to offer a contract that keeps up with inflation, despite the fact that the legislature explicitly allocated money for that purpose.” She continued, “To have justice in our community would mean that nobody would go hungry. However, according to a recent survey, 25% of AFSCME workers have trouble feeding their families. We are making a conscientious choice to hunger strike, just as the Bruininks administration has made a choice to deny the workers a fair contract. They could choose otherwise. They could choose to give themselves lower salaries and give that money to the workers.”
Humphrey Institute graduate student and hunger striker, Dani Indovino, talked about why the students care about the workers’ struggle. “We are not speaking for the workers. Our hunger strike is a student-initiated and student-led action.” She elaborated, “we are outraged that Bruininks and his administration have let the ideal of quality education take second-stage to efficiency and profitability. For this university to create the best learning environment for us students, the whole university community must be treated with respect and fairness.”
Another hunger striker, a political science graduate student, Susan Kang, explained why they have chosen the tactic of a hunger strike. “We have tried every possible way of communicating our demand that President Bruininks and his administration offer a contract which keeps up with the cost of living. Yet, they refuse to listen to us. In opposition to the administration’s monopoly over on-campus media, we hope that our protest will serve as a platform for engaging in dialogue with students about the union’s position.”
The hunger strikers welcome their fellow students, community members, and the press to come and talk with them about the strike and their vision for a future of the university in which all workers are treated fairly. They will hold “office hours” between 9:30am and 6pm everyday, in front of Morrill Hall. All are invited to attend a public teach-in, tomorrow, Tuesday, September 18th, 1:00-1:45pm. Professor Ajay Skaria will speak about Gandhi’s hunger strikes, and Professor Ron Greene will talk about “Collective Bargaining for a Collective Citizen.”
Also, supporters are signing up for a “24-hour solidarity fast,” to begin at 1pm on Wednesday, September 19th. Solidarity fasters will wear green armbands that say “fast” to signify their participation. The fast will begin after a mass protest by faculty and students called “struck speechless”: thirty minutes of silence followed by one minute of noise, from 12:15 to 12:46pm, Wednesday, to protest both the Administration’s unfair offer to the workers and their dismissing of the faculty’s dissent as “noise.”
PHOTO OPPORTUNITY: Students are undertaking a student-led hunger strike for justice in solidarity with the AFSCME workers. They are available for interviews on the patio in front of Morrill Hall, from 9:30am to 6pm, everyday. When it rains, they will move to the cover of the east end of the Washington Avenue pedestrian bridge, in front of the Weisman Art Center. Press personnel are also invited to visit the “office hours” or the Church after hours for interviews and photo opportunities. A phone call to our contact person prior to a visit is much appreciated.
Friday, September 14, 2007
A Striking Voice
The Union Movement has never depended on Mainstream Media to report the issues that matter to working men and women. In an age of increasing media conglomeration an independent voice is more important than ever. AFSCME continues in the history of alternative media and is producing a daily strike bulletin, Today is day 10 of the AFSCME strike, hear the strikers speak.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Safe Reporting
We should have known better. Shelman of the STRIB comes to campus only to turn away from reporting the strike to report on campus safe sex. Was the teach in just not sexy enough? I would have worn something a little off the shoulder if I had known the criteria for what counts as timely news. Good picture by Elizabeth Flores headlined by U Strikers, supporters rally on east bank. To bad Jeff missed it. By the way, is the STRIB against safe sex? What's up with the question mark in the headline: Safe Sex? One last thing to ponder: a bunch of health workers are on strike, this is not a positive developlement for health education on campus.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
RIght On
If you are still wondering why AFSCME is on strike, check out Ann Markusen's editorial in the Sept 12 Star Tribune.
Access to Power Not = Balanced Reporting
Was that Jeff Shelman I saw on his bicycle today at the WALKOUT FOR AFSCME TEACH-IN today? Glad to see him back on the beat. Though, we do note his strange use of “experts” in Wednesday’s STRIB. A business professor to explain to our dear readers why “no-one wins.” Why not a labor historian, or an expert in social movements or a political scientist, dare I say, a communication scholar. All are in a better position to explain why a worker might temporarily decline her wages now in order to gain the recognition necessary to earn more wages in the future. Perhaps, we should not be surprised that our business professor would reduce the quality of life to a rather banal quantitative marker. Oh yea, Jeff, becoming President Bob’s mouthpiece is a bit unseemly. When BOB is talking to you, but not listening and talking to AFSCME, students and faculty, that is a good sign that you are being used to spin his propaganda. Next time you talk to President Bob, ask him what is so fair about asking AFSCME to give up their step increases but not the teamsters? We see through his divide and conquer rhetoric and false appeal to fairness; the STRIB should too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)