Did McGill agree to drop judicial review if AMPL accepted its offer?
McGill did NOT agree to drop judicial review.
Because McGill retained an absolute veto over every element of the agreement, it could terminate all of its obligations, including in respect of judicial review, unilaterally
Instead, McGill asked AMPL to agree that it could no longer strike. Once accomplished, even if McGill terminated the agreement, AMPL would be precluded from striking.
McGill also insisted that AMPL agree to positions that both the arbitrator and the TAT had rejected, which McGill could then use against AMPL to decertify it
Why won’t you accept McGill’s version of an agreement in order to save the semester?
McGill offer is worse than doing nothing
McGill demands that we accept as fact positions rejected by two independent tribunals
The TAT rejected McGill’s claim that the bargaining unit was inappropriate because it only represented one faculty
The arbitrator rejected McGill’s claim that it had to cancel the semester if we were not back by October 1
McGill is asking the union to unilaterally disarm – to permanently give up the right to strike for this collective agreement – but that it retains its full ability to attack our very existence.
Will the fall semester be canceled?
McGill told the arbitrator – it had never said the same to us – that the semester would be lost if we were not back by October 1 while telling students that the semester was safe
The arbitrator rejected McGill’s claim
If McGill were to cancel the semester, it would be an arbitrary decision aimed at harming students
There is no rule or regulation in Quebec or Canada that sets out the length of semesters
For example: UK universities only start their semesters on October 1
Other universities in Quebec have not done the same despite similar situations
If you go back, what will happen to the semester going forward?
We have put forward a comprehensive back-to-work protocol setting out what would happen the remaining semester, but McGill refuses to discuss it with us
We are conscious of the stress of students and that we cannot overload them with work
We therefore propose that professors focus on the core elements of each course in the time remaining in the semester
We also propose that professors adjust assignments and exams to reflect the time remaining in the semester
As some students graduate in December, we propose maintaining the remaining course schedule for the fall semester
What is required for you to agree to return to class?
First, no agreement is possible without McGill accepting our very existence
We made this clear from the very day, two years ago, that McGill launched its court action to get rid of its first faculty union
Second, we need a process through which we reach our first collective agreement within a reasonable time
McGill has dragged its feet at every stage, trying to delay the inevitable
We are willing to work with the arbitrator – not our first choice but we accept McGill’s choice on this matter – to resolve outstanding issues in an expedited manner
Third, we need a back-to-work protocol that does not place additional burdens on either students or professors, particularly junior professors, all of whom already face much hardship due to the strike that would be exacerbated by more work
What are the roadblocks to an agreement?
McGill insists that the union accepts as facts positions that both courts and the arbitrator have rejected as untrue
McGill asks us to permanently give up our right to strike without making any concession
McGill refuses to negotiate a back-to-work protocol before we return to work
McGill asks us to trust it – after it has engaged in multiple violations of labour law –but is unwilling to trust us
As experts agree, McGill’s lawyers must have told it that it will lose yet McGill persists in spending student, taxpayer, and donor money on every legal maneuver that Walmart’s lawyers can dream up (at high hourly fees)
Should students launch a class action against McGill?
We have heard rumors that students are considering launching a class action against McGill for multiple breaches
We are not in a position to advise students on this; they should consult a lawyer if this is something they wish to pursue
What did the arbitrator conclude in last week’s ruling?
McGill told – without ever having informed us before – the arbitrator in a closed session where we were not present that the fall semester would be irretrievably lost if we were not back teaching in September
After reviewing statements by McGill administrators that this was not the case and after reviewing the law, the arbitrator found that McGill was not proven that the semester was at risk
The arbitrator ruled that he would move expeditiously with the parties to first find a mutually acceptable agreement through mediation
The arbitrator set dates for mediation on October 8, 9 and 14
The union agreed to the arbitrator’s findings and process
You say McGill is acting in bad faith. Are you pursuing any complaints against McGill about this?
We have filed a number of complaints against McGill for both illegally interfering in the internal affairs of the union, and unlawfully retaliating against union members
McGill settled one case, not admitting liability, but reversing the actions we complained about, giving us something extra we had requested, and paying us compensation
The TAT ruled, in an emergency hearing, that McGill had prima facie violated the Labour Code by directly contacting our members even after we advised McGill that this was illegal
A full hearing on this matter will be heard by the TAT on October 11
We are in the middle of hearings before the TAT on certain retaliatory measures against our members. We are optimistic that the TAT will rule that McGill acted illegally
We are contemplating other complaints based on McGill’s behaviour but hope to reach a global resolution with McGill before having to do so
