โDavid Porreca, FAUW President
On 15 November 2023, a message was posted to the Lecturers Connect blog that caught my attention due to several factual errors it contains. This brief post aims to correct each of these in turn.
โWhile Prof. Hardy retired in July, she only got removed in November on the grounds that she is no longer a member of FAUW.โ
The Faculty Relations Committee decided to remove Prof. Mary Hardy at its second meeting of this yearโs cycle back in September, not November. The removal of Prof. Hardy is completely unrelated to the removal of Dr. Tan for reasons of conflict of interest.
โWe strongly believe that FAUW and Lecturers Connect have common goals in improving Lecturers working conditions, and should work together in achieving these goals.โ
FAUW very much shares these goals. The means by which to achieve them was what was in question when it came to Dr. Tanโs removal from the P76/77 PDC: her involvement in P76/77 negotiations for Lecturers on behalf of FAUW along with her leadership position in a union drive for Lecturers outside of FAUW are clearly incompatible.
โโฆthe future union โto maintain a close relationship with FAUW in the same way that Renison Association of Academic Staff (RAAS) doesโฆโ
The biggest difference is that the RAAS members were never originally part of FAUW, so them having a separate union was never an issue for the integrity of the organization.
โAt the November 7th Town Hall, the FAUW President mentioned that neither the governance review nor a FAUW unionization drive are among FAUWโs top priorities.โ
The governance review is very much among our top priorities, but it is not an exercise to be taken lightly. We need a full complement of staff in order to undertake this sorely needed review and give it the attention it truly needs and deserves.
โCollegial governance works when the two parties agree. But what if they disagree? Is there really any way to influence the employer? Unfortunately, FAUW has little to no leverage in this.โ
FAUW has plenty of leverage, since our agreement is necessary for any changes to any policy that affects terms and conditions of employment of faculty (Class F and FS policies), or the MoA. The fact that we are not unionized provides additional leverage in terms of having the possibility of unionization remaining on the table at any and all times. Institutions get the unions they deserve, and UWโs administration hasnโt warranted one โ yet. The added advantage is that unlike for a union and the lever of striking, our leverage does not threaten to disrupt students in their studies.
โEarly in the history of the labour movement, it has been understood that the employer and employees quite often have conflicting goalsโฆโ
There exist conflicting goals, but there is also plenty of too-often-overlooked common ground. Collegial collaboration is often more productive, less expensive, and yields beneficial results with less effort than adopting a reflexively adversarial stance.
โโฆunions have their own staff, whose salary are usually paid entirely from membersโ dues. In contrast, FAUWโs staff is being paid by the university, at least partially.โ
FAUWโs staff are 100% paid through FAUW dues.
โ[FAUWโs governance] review was launched in November 2021 and supported by the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), but still has not gotten off the ground two years later.โ
We retain the support of CAUT in undertaking the governance review. As stated above, it is the lack of staff support that has hindered FAUW from beginning the governance review in earnest. In the two years since the governance review was mandated, FAUW has only been fully staffed for approximately six months.

