100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

July 30, 1976 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1976-07-30

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.


The Michigan Daily
Edited and managed by Students at the
University of Michigan
Friday, July 30, 1976
- News Phone: 764-0552
Wheeler dealer?
rTHIS WEEK a member of Ann Arbor's City Council
claimed that Mayor Albert Wheeler endorsed Secre-
tary of State Richard Austin for the Democratic U. S.
Senate nomination in order to get Wayne County of-
ficials to exclude the city from the controversial "Super
Sewer" plan. The member told the Daily that Wheeler
had earlier indicated strong support for Congressman
Donald Riegle. but that "old friends" were influencing
him to vote for Austin - "old friends" who were Wayne
County officials with influence over the sewer plan.
It is unclear at this point how much Wheeler was
motivated by pure expediency in backing Austin. He
claims he was just reviewing with the council member
"one of the ways of operating politically to serve your
constituents," and that the sewer consideration, while
it was discussed with Wayne officials, was a relatively
insignificant in his support of Austin.
But the old "reviewing of political options" argu-
ment is the same one Richard Nixon used to try to de-
fraud the Ame'rican people. Wheeler is no Nixon, but the
alleged political maneuvering and deal-cutting is dis-
honest and deceptive to Ann Arbor voters.
"That's just the way politics works," say some. How
unfortunate that they may be right about a mayor The
Daily has supported throughout his political career.
preservinga union .. .

P " f 1MH1!WAL;KEEJOURNAI
-~ }
'Well, I don't care what you think you see . . our air force
just released a report discounting unidentified flying objects!

To The Daily:
Two items recently appeared
in the University Record of
which clericals should take
note. The first gives full de-
tails about the upcoming decer-
tification election for UAW Lo-
cal 2001. The second relates the
status of the University-GEO
nevotiations. It occured to me
just how important decertifica-
tion is to the 'University admin-
istration. If clericals vote to de-
certify, it will release almost
the exact amount of money the
University needs to meet GEO's
economic demands.
Decertification would make
the university doubly happy: it
could pacify GEO at the same
time it watches the clericals de-
stroy their own chances for fu-
ture gains. What this means for
the clericals is no pay raise, no
way of holding the University to
obligations it had during the life
of our contract, no defense
against unfair actions of super-
visors, no way to prevent lay-
offs, and no fair system of pro-
motions. For 3000 clericals, ab-
solutely nothing.
A CLERICAL for decertifica-
tion said in The Daily that she
was willing to take her chances
with the University. Does she
realistically consider what those
chances are? Does she know
when the University will start
paying us what we are worth?
Does she have any idea when

the University will start treating
us with the respect- it accords
other job families? A realistic
guess supplies this answer:
when hell freezes overt
I prefer to work out realistic
solutions to real problems. I'm
casting my vote to preserve
our union!
Judy Sisung
UAW Local 2001
To The Daily:
My main objective in work-
ing as a clerical at the Univer-
sity of Michigan is to earn a
living. I initially chose to work
as a clerical here because it
was the most beneficial job op-
portunity I had at the time in
the area; I am still here be-
cause it remains to be so.
When I first began working
here there was no union. I was
hired, given a merit increase,
and promoted based on my abil-
ity and experience. Now there
has been a union here for al-
most one year. I am suddenly
stripped of my right to a merit
raise no matter how good a job
I may do. I cannot move to
another position unless I sit 'be-
hind my desk the greatest num-
ber of years, and for all practi-
cal purposes, I am restricted
to a promotional group even
though my added "job related"
classes have qualified me for

and are more suited to moves
elsewhere.
I AM FORCED to pay ser-
vice fees to a group I do not
wish to join, to abide by ideas
I do not support, to be called
"sister" by people who are not
even acquaintances, and to be
molded into a worker I will not
be. I am told this is all in
the name of equity, that it has
come about from unfair super-
visors and management, and
that if I wa to voice my' opin-
ion to joi e union.
cerica l
for um
First of all, equity does not
carry with it the unquestioned
right to strip all of us of our
individual rights. Seniority car-
ries with it many more inequi-
ties than it was supposed to
correct. Secondly, I agree, un-
fair supervisors do exist. But
if I have a "supervisor" prob-
lem the union solution of griev-
ing won't solve much for me,
I still remain with the same
supervisor. I will move if abso-
lutely, necessary, but give me
back the right to do it my way.
Grieving is degrading. Above

Letters should be typed and limited to
400 words. The Daily reserves the right
to edit letters for length and grammar.

all, I would never work for my
enemy (the union calls this
"brown-nosing"!)
Finally, to voice my opinions
I am supposed to join the union.
It has even been suggested that
those that feel as I do vote in
a block. When I join a group
it is because I believe in it and
what it represents. The union
has done one thing 'for me (an
extra floating day at Christmas)
and many more against me.
THE CLINCHER is that once
I sign a UAW card I am not
to voice anti-union sentiments.
Now how can you truly voice
an opinion if you're not to speak
against the group? Once a mem-
ber you must always remain
so. Some equity! Also, they ob-
viously are not interested in or
will not accept anything I truly
believe in.
A case in point is the ques-
tionnaire regarding contract de-
mands sent to all clericals. It
left no room for opinions other

than the basic union ideas (sen-
iority, flat dollar increases, un-
reasonable benefits). It was to-
tally biased and even threw in
propaganda to influence your
answers!! And I'm supposed to
join that to voice my opinion?
How can any one of us be
proud of this group as our "rep-
resentatives"? The letter sent
by the union to all clericals en-
titled "A Letter to All Clericals
In Defense of Our Union" did
not reasonably discuss issues.
It wasted my time and my mon-
ey (service fees for postage)
name-calling.
When I join a clerical group
it will be one which I'm proud
represents us. It will not be a
group whose core is force and
who relies on name-calling rath-
er than reason. My needs are
best represented by no union
at all.
Jacquelyne DenUyl
Secretary, Grad. School
July 28

. destroying a union

Gop, c ov {ts was e//; M clra;
ycu w yoi95 sycc's
decrde fi! yov Z Crem_
nfea' td o ecame haf ,vfy CAs5/ s
a ryrrrrrSt ? :: /uas a s/or fd rha
By cy/5.C 6-arh
Pete Schneeberger
ond
John Gaijilean ~~______ _

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan