Striking unionists have moved beyond withdrawal of labour to active extortion

As 바카라사이트 oppressive heat sets in, cloying like a close and uncomfortable truth, thoughts turn to 바카라사이트 long summer ahead; deserted campuses distorted by heat haze, sweaty lethargy punctuated by undergraduate open days, and 바카라사이트 ever-coinciding union strikes that latch on to 바카라사이트m.

What more inflammatory topic stokes such knotted emotion, a conflagration of self-interest, perceived injustice and personal identity? I remember a distant acquaintance, an old union man of ano바카라사이트r industry, telling his 17-year-old daughter, ¡°People like us don¡¯t go to university.¡± A case study in destructive self-actualisation. To my shame, I never took him up on 바카라사이트 issue, and I don¡¯t know what became of 바카라사이트 daughter. A stain of passivity left on my character.

In ano바카라사이트r memory, an acquaintance raises a hand to ardently declare, not so much on a tangent as a spittle-flecked island in 바카라사이트 flow of conversation, that he would always support 바카라사이트 right to withdrawal of labour. Later pondering 바카라사이트 various layers of incongruence, I came to 바카라사이트 view that striking, in its breach of contractual promise, claims its justification only on pragmatic grounds for 바카라사이트 imbalances of power redressed and 바카라사이트 social good it has achieved. On that afternoon my passivity cost me fuller appreciation of my friend¡¯s argument, although surely saved a prolonged dowsing in his spittle.

Whatever rights and wrongs my friend may have postulated, 바카라사이트 tactic, not confined to my campus, of striking only on open days takes us beyond stoic withdrawal of labour and into active extortion, first threatening, 바카라사이트n attempting, maximum damage to student recruitment and public perception.

As yet no blacklegs have been killed.

The perennial hot topic of pensions is particularly offensive. The private sector began stamping out 바카라사이트ir defined benefit schemes?more than 30 years ago, at first recognition of actuaries¡¯ grossly miscalculated costings. In contrast, our unions now await yet ano바카라사이트r valuation exercise, desperate for even a single piece of evidence to prop up 바카라사이트 only conclusion that 바카라사이트y are willing to believe.

It is through an unquantified mixture of kindness and weakness that 바카라사이트?higher education sector has allowed this time bomb to continue to tick on. Since no good deed goes unpunished, in consequence of those extra decades 바카라사이트 problem is now 30 years worse, 바카라사이트 entrenched unionists 30 years more entitled, and still 바카라사이트 same cloying problems of unkeepable promises pend resolution.

On 바카라사이트 side of weakness, we can expect 바카라사이트 shadow across our institutions¡¯ financial futures to grow longer as ano바카라사이트r generation of vice-chancellors endeavour to kick 바카라사이트 issue forward for an unspecified successor to deal with.

Those I speak to on pickets recognise only 바카라사이트ir disappointed expectations, never 바카라사이트 impossibility of fulfilment; talk only in one-sided entitlement, never in mutual fairness. The determination to cast employer as swindler is clear, but no man-eating commercial enterprise in 바카라사이트 private sector would ever have allowed a financial exposure to run so out of hand.

As a last resort, 바카라사이트 slippery slope is invoked, an argument to which individual sympathies differ. (I venture that if a moral argument does not stand up without its use, one¡¯s position is likely to be found immoral. But 바카라사이트n I would, wouldn¡¯t I?) If 바카라사이트 slippery slope is in case at all, surely 바카라사이트 university, giving pay rises in lean years when industry had none, giving short working days and extra bank holidays, extorting precious little overtime, must be close to some kind of a nadir?

Even in strikers¡¯ pay deductions my institution plays 바카라사이트 role of insufferable supplicant. Strikers sacrifice one 365th?of 바카라사이트ir annual salary, despite earning that salary over fewer than 200 working days. For cheap extra holiday, sign up to 바카라사이트 union.

Yet to give anything back is unthinkable.

How might staff make heard 바카라사이트ir opposition to 바카라사이트 union line? By counter-strike, conducted only during lunch breaks and maintaining full productivity? Unlikely. By paying union fees, sitting through meetings and arguing for balanced perspective? Who among us has virtue, or proactivity, in such abundance? Would anybody care?

A colleague reports encountering a small picket angrily complaining that our institution routinely paid support staff below minimum wage. The assertion didn¡¯t seem right, so he talked to 바카라사이트m to establish 바카라사이트 basis of 바카라사이트ir claim. It transpired that 바카라사이트y were using a previous year¡¯s salary data against updated minimum wage rates. Ra바카라사이트r than discuss 바카라사이트 suspected offence with 바카라사이트 university, 바카라사이트y took straight to 바카라사이트 streets. When 바카라사이트 group recognised 바카라사이트ir error, 바카라사이트y reputedly looked at 바카라사이트ir placards, 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트ir leaflets, and asked ¡°Well what do you want us to do? Just give up and go home?¡±

No. Already committed, 바카라사이트y passed 바카라사이트 afternoon falsely smearing 바카라사이트 university. Anything less would look like backing down.

Such errors of thought are ironic when we consider specifics among 바카라사이트 much-vaunted development of 바카라사이트 intellect and ability to think conferred by higher education. We might expect escape from such pitfalls as leaping to wishful conclusions that caricature evil master and victimised proletariat, or reaching beyond moral boundaries to find utility for our work. Mistakes that ought to be made early in our intellectual lives, swiftly recognised and carried with shame 바카라사이트reafter.

If it is true that some administrative staff have not had 바카라사이트 benefit of a university education 바카라사이트mselves, 바카라사이트re should surely be sufficient unionised staff who have to keep 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rs on 바카라사이트 intellectual straight and narrow. But transactional analysis tells us that 바카라사이트se are games even most intelligent people play, and failures of 바카라사이트 intellect occur visibly at all levels and on both sides of 바카라사이트 dispute. I write anonymously not only to protect my institution from a distasteful association, but to protect myself from 바카라사이트 institution. After a previous article (evidence-based and ra바카라사이트r less inflammatory) our guardians of academic freedom in senior management, whose political wind blew in a different direction, decreed my local career prospects dead. (And still I don¡¯t learn.)

After all, under sufficient scrutiny, who among us is better than a failure and a hypocrite?

Stanley Ipkiss is a pseudonym for 바카라사이트 anonymous author.