Eighty-four years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

GEO endorses

CCFA

Wednesday, October 30, 1974

News Phone: 764-0552

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mi. 48104


HAH! AND THEY TALK ABOUT THE
WAR ON INFLATION
IN WASHINGTON!
SO? WHAT ELSE
IS NEW?

OUR REPRESENTATIVES IN
CONGRESS HAVE QUIETLY
RAISED THEIR 'EXPENSE'
ALLOWANCES BY MORE
THAN $9,00 PER MEMBER!

By DAVE GORDON
and MICHELE HOYMAN
THE GEO STEWARDS COUNCIL has
unanimously voted to endorse the
CCFA/UAW in the upcoming certifica-
tion election among clerical workers at
the University of Michigan, October 28-
November 1. GEO urges all clericals to
vote for the UAW in this election, since
a large show of support is important to
the continuing ability of the union to
effectively represent its constituency.
There are compelling arguments for
the necessity of unionizing in order to
deal effectively with this University. It
has been our bitter experience that the
only significant economic gains to our
constituency have come in response to
mass pressure. By establishing a collec-
tive bargaining relationship we have
been able to muster our unified strength
in direct negotiations with the Univer-
sity about our terms and conditions of
employment.
It is our understanding that clericals

have faced an equally adamant admin-
istration when attempting to improve
their salaries and working conditions.
(Until recently, a full time clerical's
base pay was less than a .5 time assist-
ant's pay.) The 8 per cent increase re-
cently granted clericals is a direct result
of their unionizing effort! It is concrete
example of the improvements to be
gained through unionization.
In our bargaining sessions, the Univer-
sity has openly admitted that adminis-
tration promises of pay raises quickly
become inoperative. However, it is only
through legal recognition, victory in the
upcoming election, that this improve-
ment can be secured and further gains
won.
CCFA/UAW, formed last year to ef-
fectively represent clericals, has shown
itself to be the popular representative of
University clerical workers. After being
the top choice in the recent three-way
certification election, it has gained the

support of AFSCME clericals, the other
organizing group previously seeking to
represent clericals.
Not only can the local CCFA organiz-
ing committee provide strong leadership
but the UAW service staff can offer con-
sistently competent technical and legal
aid in negotiating a contract. In fact,
UAW service representatives aided us
in bargaining a strong grievance clause
which has been agreed to by the Univer-
sity. This assistance has been extended
to many other non-UAW public sector
locals in this region. Furthermore, the
UAW has proved to be a strong and
effective voice in Lansing, where final
authority over the University's funding
lies.
The gains from unionization go far be-
yond economic benefits. Unionization
will mean an end to arbitrary practices
regarding conditions of work, criteria
for promotion and criteria for merit in-
creases. Far from taking away individ-
ual rights and flexibility, a union con-

UAW
tract would guarantee the above through
a grievance procedure clause and a
clause insuring employee input into de-
cision-making.
WE HAVE FOUND THAT a rank and
file participation is necessary for the
continuing effectiveness of the union. If
the union is to serve the interests of its
constituency, it must have the participa-
tion and representation of its members.
This may be especially true immediate-
ly after certification in order to insure
widespread input into the contract de-
mands and to effectively bargain with
the University. GEO and CCFA, as well
as other unions on campus, share a com-
mon bond in representing university
EES. It is our feeling that the unioniza-
tion of one segment of university em-
ployees can work for the benefit of all.
As we said earlier, a big vote in favor
of CCFA will send this message to this
University!!
* * *
For the GEO Stewards Council.

V


THOSE WHO DECLARE WAR
NEVER DO THE FIGHTING.
II
- ,


THEl MILWAUKEE JOURNAL.

clerical
debate
To The Daily:
I HAVE BEEN to several
meetings held by personnel and
department heads (many who
have never been readily avail-
able to speak to clericals be-
fore). Our esteemed admiiistra-
tive staff has been given a can-
ned program by their own es-
teemed "union breaker" to
"help" us make an "informed
choice." They are in no way
teling us to vote non-union.
They want us to make a rational
choice based on logic and not
one based on emotionalism. They
evidently see no reason to be
more than mildly concerned
about substandard wages and in-
equitable benefits. Of course I
understand that with the wages
they receive, they ar not con-
crned about paying bill; or the
price of groceries.
They profess a strong in-
terest in the welfare of the
clerical employes. I uce the
word profess because I beleve
it farcial to assume the ad-
ministration is concerned about
anything more than their ab-
ject fear in dealing with t h e
UAW at the bargaining table.
OUR CONCERN is a voice.
They profess to listen, and yet,
we have not been heard. We
have found a way to be heard.
The recent meetings held by
personnel are proof enough. The
administration is very obviously
listening to the approaching
tread of the UAW.
-Jane Gould
Concerned Clericals for
Action
October 24
To The Daily:
IT'S TIME that clerical work-
ers at the University of Michi-
gan took a long, hard look at
unions. Some people are telling
us that all unions, especially the
UAW, are "Big Business"
greedy to acquire more dues-
paying members. If this is true,
why did the UAW wait to be
invited to the U of M campus
by Concerned Clericals for Ac-
tion before starting an organ-
izing drive? Why, with so much
anticipated revenue at stake,
has the UAW let clericals run
this drive instead of sending in
a dozen professional organizers?
We will have a UAW local only
because the majority of cler-
cals o; campus decide to vote
that way.
But, some skeptics say, after
a while all unions do little more
for their members than collect
dues. How many of the auto
workers of today would like to
go back to the "good old days"
before they had a union? In
1929 the typical auto workers
worked 1012 hours for $5.00 a
day, seven months a year. The
rest of the time the plant was
closed and a worker had no in-
come, no unemployment insur-
ance, and no vacation pay. To-
day an auto worker earns about
$5.50 per hour (straight time);
during layoffs he receives 95
per cent of his regular pay.
Among other benefits auto work-
ers can retire after thirty years
of service at $500/per month,
have a blue cross/blue shield
plan that pays for prescriptions
and dental work, and have a
week of holiday time off be-
tween Christmas and New
Year's. How quickly would auto
workers have achieved this from
a wise and enlightened manage-
ment?
BUT THE University might
point out that clerical employes
in Ann Arbor are not auto work-
ers. What expertise does t h e
UAW have in the field of repre-

senting public employees? For
over a year an independent un-
ion of clerical employees have
hben trvino, ,n,,cesful tn e-

Letters
But no one should vote for a
union because of its track re-
cord some place else. We will
have a strong UAW local on
Michigan's campus when cleri-
cals unite together and realize
that we can have a voice in de-
termining our wages and work-
ing conditions. A union will give
us the strength we need to de-
termine our own future.
-Lili Kivisto
Library Assistant
October 23
To The Daily:
THE UAW claims that the
new contract at Wayne State
University gives clericals "a 30
per cent increase over the next
two years and provides for cost
of living protection." What they
actually received is a 6 per cent
range adjustment the first year
with a 5 per cent step increase
for those eligible on their anni-
versary dates and a 4 per cent
range adjustment the second
year with a 5 per cent step in-
crease for those eligible on their
anniversary dates. Those who
are at the maxim in their class-
ification will not receive these
raises. The limited quarterly
cost of living supplement pro-
vides for a maximum of $65 per
employee the first year and a
maximum of $471 per employee
over the two years as the cost
of living index rises. As you can
see this is not a 30 per cent
raise. Vote NO.
-Betty Cummings
Spokeswoman
Secretaries for
Nonunionization
The University of
Michigan
To The Daily:
AS LONG AGO as 1933 white
collar workers who had never
thought of trade unions began
to wonder if their clean hands
and "white collars" were suf-
ficient recompense for having
nothing to say but "yes sir"
about their hours, pay and work-
ing conditions. In October of
1974, this 42 year old question
must be answered by 3,200 cleri-
cal workers employed by the
University of Michigan.
There have been many at-
tempts to cloud this very basic
issue. The UAW has been char-
acterized as big business. I
would agree that the UAW is
big business, but the important
question here is "does it per-
form the services it was set up
to carry out?" The answer to
this question is an unequivocal
yes. The UAW has negotiated
some of the best and most pro-
gressive contracts in the coun-
try.
THE STATEMENT has been
made that the UAW has had
very little experience with pub-
lic employees. While this is
true, we need to ask the Wayne
State AAUP, the Wayne S t a t e
Staff Association, and the Wayne
StatetClerical and Technical As-
sociation what they think of
the UAW's expertise and ability
to negotiate for public emplyes.
Again ,the answer would be posi-
tive. It is important to note that
the abovementioned groups are
not even members of the UAW!
The strike fund has been ques-
tioned. Let me 'just say t h a t
should U of M clerical workers
ever go on strike, while the
strike itself would be illegal, we
would indeed be paid strike
benefits.

The basic questions before us
are, (1) Are the titles "white
collar" and "U of M secretary"
comparable to a 40-50 per cent
raise?" That 40-50 per cent is
the extent of the difference be-
tween our salaries and the sal-
aries of unorganized employees;
(2) Don't we, as an integral
na,. n the Universitv working

to

Th

vote yes October 28-November
1, 1974.
-Deborah Moorehead
School of Social Work
October 24
To The Daily:
JUST ABOUT everything re-
garding the pros and cons of
unionization of U of M clericals
has been said by now. But, for
the benefit of those whose minds
must be boggled by all the state-
ments "for and again", I, too,
would like to add my two cents
worth. (Alas, unfortunately,
these days, my two cents is only
worth one.)
On the one hand, there is the
union which recognizes that in
this day and age, it takes more
$s to live on,and that in order
to merely survive, we need
more money. Oversimplified,
perhaps, but when it comes
down to basics, survival is the
first order of the day.
Then there is the anti-union
group which cites that among
the fringe benefits U of M cler-
icals enjoy, are such goodies as
subsidized tickets to sports
events and the pleasure of work-
ing in a stimulating environ-
ment.
THERE ARE, as I see it, two
choices:
1) We could feed our families
shredded sports tickets while at
the same time reminding the
kiddies of how stimulating
mom's or dad's job may be. To
add further credence to this, we
might quote the words of our
venerable President to "lick our
plates clean".
or...
2) We can vote "Yes" for the
Union.
-Bella Leach
October 18
To The Daily:
THE PUBLIC PRESS carried
a story regarding the anti-UAW
campaign that William Neff has
organized. We cannot quarrel
with the University taking an
anti-UAW stance, but we note
that it blows the neutrality cov-
er that the University had pre-
viously professed.
We do object to Mr. Neff's use
of facilities in the Natural Sci-
ence Building during working
time to train a cadre of anti-
UAW supervisors. We further
object to those supervisors us-
ing University facilities to as-
semble clerical employees dur-
ing working time to present
anti-UAW viewpoints.
As you know, we are restrict-
ed to non-work time in our pre-
sentations to the eligible em-
ployees. We therefore are de-
manding equal working time and
equal University facilities for
the presentation of our view-
points.
Due to the short time remain-
ing until the election, we look
for a prompt reply.
-Hubert H. Emerick
Assistant Director
UAW-TOP Organizing
Department
October 17
To The Daily:
DURING THE past several
weeks the Personnel Office of
the University of Michigan has
been running a slick, union-
busting campaign to break the
organizing effort of U of M
clericals. Under the cover of
hypocritical phrases about "neu-
trality," the University has been
resorting to every cheap, anti-
union trick in the book. In its
propaganda letter to clerical
employees dated 22 October
1974, the University came out
with this astounding piece of

management gibberish: "Under
the present employment rela-
tionship with the University,
you, as an individual have every
rioht stn m,,-meo ur individal

Daily
individuals." With a union which
they themselves democrad-ally
control, University clerical work-
ers would have the collective
power required to win a mea-
sure of democratic control over
their working lives. The exer-
cise of this collective, demo-
cratic power in a struggle with
University management is the
only possible guarantee of "in-
dividual rights" in an employ-
ment relationship.
THE CONCRETE reality be-
hind the University's celestial
nonsense is that the University's
"more flexible approach" h a s
left U of M clericals far behind
unionized factory and office
workers. Unionized produW-tion
and office workers in the auto
industry (and non-union workers
the auto companies fear would
organized if their wages and
benefits fell behind the organ-
ized workers) make half again
as much as unorganized U of
M clericals. They have cost-of-
living protection and better pen-
sions and medical insuran:e, en-
tirely paid by the comp:rny.
They have more holidays and
vacation time. They have in-
come protection if they are sick
for extended periods or laid off._
layoff protection will become
more and more critical as the
economic crisis deepens and cs
union-scale wages and better
working conditions encourage
clerical workers to stay at the
U of M. Turnover will no longer
eliminate enough people to satis-
fy management.
Through struggle with man-
agement, unionized workers can
win some control over the hours
they work and how they are
scheduled. They can limit t h e
amount and type of work they
do, so that clerical workers do
not end up doing the work of
their bosses without getting the
bosses' pay. Unionized workers
can enforce their contract ard
t h e i r "individual rights"
through a real grievance pro-
cedure. Presently, under the so-
called Standard Practices Guide,
the University sits in judgement
on itself when employees have
grievances. Obviously the Ui-
versity will never convict itself
on any important issue. The pro-
cedure involves a blatant con-
flict of interests and is a j'idi-
cial absurdity.
LASTLY, for most clerical
workers, employment at the
University of Michigan is a
dead end. The so-called "merit
system" of raises and promo-
tions sets clerical workers
against each other, since the
only way one person can get
ahead is to clAw her (his) way
over the backs of others. In the
end, only management gains.
Management pets rise to the top,
and the University gets more
work out of its employees for
less money. The real meaning
of management's phony concern
for "individual rights" is their
genuine concern for the "rignt"
of the University to pay low
wages and require more work.
It is unfortunate that the Uni-
versity cannot be a bit less hy-
pocritical about its self-interest.
-Peter Solenberger
October 28
To the Daily:
THE UAW claims that cleri-
cal workers at Chrysler Corpora-
tion are unionized. Some cleri-
cals in some departments are
unionized; secretaries are not.
It is obvious that Chrysler Cor-

poration recognizes the fact that
secretaries are the right-hand
of management and that secre-
taries and their bosses cannot
be adversaries during ;ontract
negotiations without it affecting
their working relationship as
well as the overall effectiveness
of the comnanv. If the "nower

To The Daily:
THE EDITORIAL by J e f f
Lipshaw had some good points
and some bad ones pertaining to
the Military Officer Education
Program's (MOEP) appeal for
accreditation in LS&A. L i p-
shaw's first point was about his
only good one. We involved in
the MOEP wish to have our
courses objectively reviewed for
credit just like every other
course such as in the Pilot
Program, Residential Colege,
Course Mart, or any other pro-
gram of the University. I agree
wholeheartedly that MOEP
should follow the established
procedure in applying for ac-
credditation.
The second point made by Lip-
shaw is the one I disagree with
the most. The link between
ROTC and the Vietnam War is
hard to see. Althogh the mili-
tary did the finghting in Viet-
nam let me point something out.
The reason for our involvenent
in Vietnam was made and sup-
norted by the civil ; control of
the military, namely the Presi-
dents of the USA. Nixon, John-
son, or even Kennedy c o u ld
have ended our involvement at
any time for they had the sole
responsibility for the actions of
the military. The military has
and still only follows the dire-
tives from the Commander-in-
Chief that resides at 1600 Petn-
sylvania Avenue.
DEAN WITKE'S statement
used by Lioshaw is one of very
narrowmindedness. I and every
other nerson sh-11 agree that
the war in Tndn-hina is NOT
over. It has been going on for
-v1er 2000 years. Any one who
has done even limited research
on Tndochina knows that the
neonle of Indochina have not
only fo"ght the Americans, but
the French before us, the Jap-
anese before them, not to men-
tion between themselves; and if
von so way back, even the
Chinese have foeht in Indo-
china. I agree with Dean Witke
that the war is not over. As
Plato said. "Only the dead
have seen the end of war". The
onestion should be: Is the di-
rect Amrericn involvement at
n end in Vietnam? Also, what
if anm link does the foreign pol-
icv of the United States have to
do with the oi'estion at this Uni-
rorsity shout accreditation of
the MOE'P courses. As I have
dtated before. Dean Witke's link
is very shallow and narrow if
it exists at all.
I state again that the m1i-
tarv was not resnrnsible for our
involvement in Vietnam. The
nirilia , and Political heads of
the militnrv sent the armed forc-
e into Indochin. The military
did the dirty work and natur-
a1!v was made the scanegoat by
the American Public. But this is
not the alestion at hand on this
cans today. The auestion is
whether or not a certain pro-
gram of courses should be giv-
en credit in the University.
T FATL to see Dean Witke's
11k hetiveen Vietnam and the
1TC. I challenge him and Mr.
T nmhaw to Prove their points
"ith Gbstantial evidence and
lni-ial reasoning. I wish to see
a^n demni^ freedom apolied equal-
l- to all nrograms and courses
of the University, including Pilot
Prnrram. Course Mart, the
MOEP. and all others alike.
Even r do not know whether or
nt MOP is worthy of credit.
All T wish to see is that is be
even an objective review by
the cnrrierilam committee. The
narrowminded Prejudice of Kit-
ke and Lioshaw is now known.
I think it is time for some
simple objectivity in the decid-

someone
else's wsar

I

El IRE-TI '5 I~' ~ -

U~ r-74 lAzi /~ Z