AtoM
Association of University and College Employees (AUCE) fonds
Advocacy and Bargaining
Association of University and College Employees
File contains clippings, correspondence, bulletins, and other records dated October 25, 1985 to November 21, 1985. Topics discussed include opposition to Ritchie and Associates (R & A) efficiency testing at UBC, the work-to-rule campaign, staffing and budget cuts, summaries of R & A final reports, legal information and background on R & A, grievances, an all campus unions meeting on contract negotiations and R & A, transcripts of CUE interviews with Vancouver Co-op Radio and the CBC on the topic of R & A, issues with campus mail delivery, and a memo on how librarians and library staff have been affected by R & A.
application/pdf
Many psychologists have conducted research on the determina- nts of happiness, studying such factors as money, heal th, sex, community, love, marriage and work . It has been found that job satisfaction was the factor most consistently related to happiness. Anyone who has been unemployed for any length of time is aware of the feelings of despair that can occur. Work can be an arena in which we are given the opportunity to demonstrate our talents, our knowledge, our creativity . People perform their jobs for a variety of reasons, many of them pragmatic, but what finally elevates a tedious or even harmful daily routine to an enriching way of life is the degree to which we are allowed to express our natural talents. Productivity, therefore, should not be inexorably linked with the process of making profits at any cost, but rather with the very human need to be useful and worthwhile, and joined to this is the also very human need to be appreciated and recognized as such . The ideal relationship between employer and employee might be one of symbiosis : mutual productivity and mutual recognition. And the work can range from mopping a floor to directing the course of an entire department. Maslow's theory of the hierarchy of needs supports this; he claims that psychological health, in fact, depends upon how high up the ladder of needs one climbs . Once the basic physiological, safety and love needs are met, it becomes necessary to reach for those satisfactions that come from what Maslow terms "metaneeds" - achievement, self-esteem, dignity, and finally meaning and self-actualization. He believed that, among other things , the pursuit of these metaneeds often produces, as a side effect, positive consequences for society as a whole. Given all of this, reading the Ritchie Report by Donald Gutstein reveals some very unpleasant threats to ~ ~-..t:t e r our sources of job satisfa c tion, our psycholog i cal health, and both our and the University's productivity . It is difficult to understand how the Administration could have been so stupidly short-sighted as to believe that an efficiency study of the sort that Ritchie and Associates have been conducting will ultimately repair whatever low productivity and high expenditure levels exist. By breaking down our jobs into automaton - like tasks, by standing over us and observing us, by making judgements upon us without any intrinsic knowledge of our jobs, by making us f i 11 in absurdly irrelevant reports every day, by disregarding our own hard-won expertise in our own jobs, and then ultimately by taking away our ability to determine the flow of our own jobs ourselves, they are destroying us. Children are treated lik e that, but eventually are allowed to grow up. The University administration is forcing us into a state of suspended infancy , forcing us to regress in the name of efficiency, as if employees who are patronized, dissillu s ioned, depressed, angry, hurt and profoundly dissatisfied could be more efficient, even if they so wanted. Clerical work e r s know that often the only sure source of job satisfaction is their right to make their own stamp on their job , be it by designing and prioritizing th e ir own tasks, or by participating in larger decision-making. Intelligent supervisors .• give only the most cursory direction, knowing that worker autonomy is far more "efficient" in the long run. Has the work of Ritchie and Associates heralded a return to a kind of dehumanized serfdom for University workers? Is the University merely playing at intelligent academia, while reveali - ng their truly appalling ignorance, not just of human nature in general, but the precedence set by more enlightened societies which actually solicit the ideas of workers in order to achieve greater efficiency, productivity and satisfaction for all? Sadly, and maddeningly, it appears so .UBC E association of university and college employees June 18, 1985 Eileen Stewart Director . Personnel Services Campus Mail Dear Ms. Stewart : Re: Ritchie and Associates We appreciate Mr. Grant's letter of April 23, 1985. At our last general meeting, our members instructed us to write a ·further letter objecting, in particular, to the failure on the part of the University, and its managers, to inform them properly about the purpose and methods of the Ritch~e and Associates review . In Mr. Grant's original letter of February 13, 1985, we were told that 'administrative procedures' were being analyzed, and that it 'may be necessary to observe the work being performed by individuals at the work place.' The emphasis appeared to be · on administration, and methods of operation. Mr. Grant's second letter went a little further, as regards one area of concern to us, and stated that there would be some 're-organization of the work' resulting from the review, and that this would, in some cases, have 'an impact on the bargaining .unit'. Obviously a major concern to our members is the possible loss of jobs - not only because s :ome of them may be displaced, but because many of our members already perceive their workplaces to be under-staffed. The · Vancouver Sun article of May 28, 1985, did little to calm their nerves. Vice- President Gellatly was quoted as saying, when asked about staff cuts, that he would not comment because he didn't 'want to get staff unduly upset' . Well, they're already upset, but they don't know whether it's 'unduly', since they haven't beei given enough information concerning the purpose of this exercise. It would seem, at a time like this, when the University claims to be in fiscal distress, that staff cuts would be the major purpose of such a review. Generally speaking, the University does not generate profits, so the primary cost saving that could result from an increase in productivity, and efficiency, would be through a subsequent reductio~ in staff. If this is not the proper conclusion to be drawn, we would be happy to know what is. It's not possible to overstate the extent to which full ·information can serve to reduce fear . • • • 2 11202-6383 Memorial Road, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C . V6T 1 W5 Telephone: 224-2308 Eileen Stewart, Page 2 The other major worry we have concerns the methods employed by Ritchie and Associates. Rumours are flying fast and furious - Ritchie and Associates ·are paid on a straight commission basis, and, therefore, have a high ·stake in seeing that jobs are cut; their last job was in Georgia, and their next in Alabama (right to work states); they stay in expensive hotels and fly home every two weeks . However, I ' ll try to restrict myself to what I've heard first hand. Some of our members have found the efficiency experts unobtrusive, and not at all bothersome. Others, however, report that the presence of these men , with th~ir stop watches and seemingly petty questions, has caused them considerable anxiety . Some of the people we've spoken to feel that too much · emphasis is be1ng put on monitoring phone calls, coffee and lunch breaks, time away from the desk, and so forth, and that the attention paid to actual work procedures is superficial, and is carried out with no real understanding of the meaning of the work being performed . Most people we~ve spoken to feel that their own managers, or they themselves, would be petter able to identity any inefficiencies in present systems, or meth9ds of operation . What Ritchie and Associates are doing is a time-motion study, and most of us feel it is inappropriate in a situation where the type of work being done involves more variables than can be accounted for by a study of time spent per function, and where employees have formerly been treated respectfully, and expected to have the maturity, and intelligence, to be responsible for their own use of time. This is a University , not a factory . In addition, the behaviour of these men, in some cases, has been perceived as being rude and deceptive. If our members were this closely watched by their own supervisors, many of them would call in their Union and initiate a grievance on the basis of personal harassment . The fact that the close scrutiny is coming from an agent of management, and not management itself, does not lessen the feeling of being harassed . I realize that Ritchie and Associates is a long way from MBO (Management by Objectives, which was introduced in the Library several years ago), but one would think that a group that is going to come in and closely observe staff for a period of weeks or months, would at least sit down with the staff and explain what they are doing, and allow some opportunity for questions to be asked. As it is, the staff" have to be satisfied with the assurances of their managers - managers who themselves are unhappy and apprehensive about the presence of Ritchie and Associates, and who, in some cases, are also in the dark as far as the purpose and methods of the review are concerned. In the Library Processing Cente, for example, Ritchie and Associates met with management ., and the librarians in turn assured the staff that it was the workflow that would be studied, that stop watches would not be used, and that people would not be • • • 3 .. Eileen Stewart, Page 3 individually monitored. Now the librarians are angry because Ritchie and Aisociates appear to be doing exactly what the staff had been assured they would not do - that is, they are closely watching individuals at their work, timing their trips to the washroom, their coffee breaks, asking for records of sick leave and doctors appointments, and so on. One other concern that has been communicated to us is the cost . of this study. Our members have not had a wage increase in more than a year, nor have they been paid the step increments which are contractually their due. When they find themselves being scrutinized by a host of men with stop watches and clipboards, whose intention is to interfere with their methods of working, and possibly recommend the elimination of their jobs, or increase their workload by eliminating someone else's job, and who, in the process, waste their valuable work-time, they wonder where the money is corning from. Having said all that, there are a number of things we would like to request . First of all, we would like more information about the purpose and methods of the review. Is the purpose to increase efficiency, or to save the University money by cutting staff (the two don't necessarily go together)? Is Ritchie and Associates really a return to Taylorism, as every- thing we've heard, both from our own members and from our sister locals here and at UVIC, leads us to believe? Or do they actually attempt to understand the work we do in such a way as to produce a report that will help us do it better, more 'efficiently'? v-lhere have they worked be fore, and what have been the results of their studies? We would also like to know the cost of this review, and what funds are being drawn on. We would like a commitment from the Univ~rsity to supply the Union · with a copy of Ritchie and Associates' final reports once they are completed. We would like assurance that nothing that is said to these men, or observed by them, will be used for the purpose of disciplining any of our members. Finally, we would like a meeting to be arranged between the Union, the University and representatives of Ritchie and Associates . Thank you for your attention to this matter. Yours truly, Ted Byrne Union Coordinator cc. A. Bruce Gellatly Vice President Administration and FinancePu AUCE LOCAL ONE ~ERS RITCHIE M'IDASSOCIATES On Friday, July 26, 1985, the Director of Purchasing informed his staff of the recommendations made by Ritchie and Associates for the Purchasing Department. Put simply, Ritchie and Associates ' report claims that the Purchasing Departm- ent can be efficiently run with 30% less staff! If this is the kind of propo- sal that we can expect in the other administrative areas of our barga~ningunit, then we have good reason to worry about a large potential loss of jobs, and a severe reduction of services to the rest of the University. No one, amongst the AUCE members we have spoken with, believe that Ritchie and Associates, in the short period of time that they are here, develop anything like a real understanding of the nature and meaning of the work we do. They look at the surfaces : the 'workflow ' , the utilization of time and movement. The crudity of this review is now borne out by their proposal for Purchasing: you don't need a highly paid specialist to tell you that you can save 25% (their original proposal) of a $600,000.00 budget by eliminating six and a half posit- io~t that cost $150,000.00 in salaries (the figures are approximate, but very close). When questioned specifically about the Ritchie and Associates recommendation for Purchasing, Eileen Stewart, Director, Personnel Services Department, said that the information our members...were given is inaccurate, and misrepresents the actual situation. She maintains that no decision has been made that any positions are to be cut. Ritchie and Associates have studied the workflow in Purchas i ng, and have determined, on paper, that the work can be done by a given number of employees. This does not mean that the University is going to accept their recommendation, or even necessarily test it exactly as proposed (in fact , as we found out yesterday morning, the proposed reduction in the number of buyers has been reduced by one; they now propose that the department can operate with four less buyers rather than five less, as was originally proposed). The University intends to implement this proposal on a tria l basis. The staff will be reduced for the period of the test ~ run, but there will be no loss of pay . If the tr ia l run is successful, even then it does not mean that the University will decide to lay off any staff. Ms. Stewart maintains that all this could mean that several people will be freed up to take on new duties, and actua l ly expand servi- ces. If there are layoffs resulting fr~m the Ritchie and Associates review, she has given us ~very assurance that the reductions of staff would be handled through reassignment, attrition, early retirement, and so on, before anyone would be actu- ally put out of a job . So who do we be.lieve? Obvio ,usly, if the University is spending the kind of money we expect they are spending • on this study, they would be very unlikely not to implement the recommendations that result from it. According to our information, Ritchie and Associates have claimed that they can achieve a 25-30% increase in eff i ciency in every area that they have studied . I f their way of achieving this is the same elsewhere as it apparently is in Purchasing, then those of us who work in administrative areas can expect to see a large reduction of the workforce , and those of us who work in other areas of the University can expect to see a serious reduction of services. Just a reminder that we will discuss this issue further at a one hour membership meeting on Thursday, August 1, 1985 (12:30pm - 1:30pm IRC 1)., Please attend if you can! July 30, 1985 Ted Byrne Union Co-ordinator Canadian University Employees 2170 Western Parkway, UBC, Vancouver, B.C V6T 1V6 November 5, 1985 224-2308 CUE Work to R~le Bulletin #1 At a Special General Meeting on October 24, 19.85, close to 500 of our members voted overwhelmingly in favour of a motion to work-to-rule in r esponse to the University's use of the firm Ritchie and Associates . A statement regarding work-to-rule and a list of work-to-rule tactics (see attachments #1 & #2) were distributed at that meeting . • • • • • • • Subsequent to the October 24th meeting, a Steering committee was struck to coordinate our work-to-rule campaign. The members of the committee are: Ted Byrne (224- 2308), Nellie cavasin (3711), Hel~n Glavina (5911), Rochelle de la Giroday (222-5273), Mary McKenna-Forkin (7696) and Maureen Barfoot (7172) . This committee will be meeting weekly in order to prepare bulletins, buttons, steward meetings, division and shop meetings, and generally monitoring the campaign. If you have any questions, please contact any of the above mentioned individuals, or your shop steward. • • • • • • • The particulars of this campaign, and our demands have been communicated to the University, and some discussion has been had. It remains to be seen how .the University will respond to our demands, but that response will depend largely upon your commitment to this campaign . • • • • • • • The Operating Engineers will soon be taking a vote regarding work-to-rule. Discussions are also ongoing with CUPE 116. The TAU, the Defend Education Services Coalition, and our sister local at UVIC sent messages of support to the October 24th meeting. A personal message of support was also conveyed to us from Jeff Rose, the CUPE National President. CUPE National has made a coltlmitment of defense funds to this campaign, and we expect to have the benefit of a full-time research person on campus for a couple of weeks. Ritchie and Associates are already at work at uvtc, UBC and Dalhous'ie. There are six CUPE locals effected, and CUPE is concerned that this problem may spread to the many other under-funded campuses across the country where CUPE members are working . • • • • • • • fJ· '• - 2 - A letter was sent to the Vancouver sun (see Attachment #3) after the appearance, on October 24th, of an unfortunate article ·headlined: · 'UBC efficiency report pleases union official'. -~ We have included in this bulletin a press release issued by the CUPE National President (se e Att achmen t #4) for the benefit of thos ·e of you who have not seen it . • Also attached to this bulletin you will find an article on yet another consulting group currently employed by UBC (see Attachment ff5). The Arthur Anderson Group has re-structured the Information Systems Management department and is installing a sophisticated and expensive computerized accounting system for the University. Similar to the effect of Ritchie and Associates, they have imposed stringent work systems and are implementing permanent procedures to be follow~d long after their withdrawal from the department . • Attachment #6 was submitted as an article for the .Library Bulletin, at their request. The Library Administration decided that it should not be published. Following is a se lection of quotes from two interviews with Vice President Gellatly. One was published in the above mentioned Library Bulletin, and the other was conducted by Patrick Munroe on his CBC program, the Afternoon Show. Library Bulletin Interview with Br uce Gellutly "R & A looked first at tradition a l administrative areas on campus, and to the extent that we were getting good results there, · it's being looked at for other areas as well." ... "R & A are assessing tasks. They are not assessing people. They make no comment upon the quality of how people perform the job. They address the effectiveness of how things are being done in terms of scheduling and organizing," he · said. ''Staff can be assured that R & A are not observing how people are doing the work. The point is that most people work very hard. It is a case of how the work is organized to make the best use of their time and talents," said Mr. Gellatly. "What they (R & A) do is to organize the work to make the best use of staff 1 s time and talents. It is the work they plan, not the people they plan." ... ~- ; - 3 - "R & A bring unique skills to the job which allows for · control of the system, controlling the process, and analysing the work . Most of our managers wouldn't have the time even to do these kinds of observation~. R & A bring to bear certain expertise we can use at this time." .•• "There's a whole variety of tpings that are not happening that we need to be concerned about. One, for example, is the absence of a salary increase for two years, and now we 1 re into the third year. If dollars can be generated, which can be freed up and there's no reduction in the performance of the service or the improved service and those dollars can be used for salary increases - that's one area where we'd likely want to consider . " ••. "A memo from issued (issued the questions seprecy. There about." the President's Office is being September 16 ). only because some of being raised imply there is some really is none that I am concerned CBC Afternoon Show Patrick Monroe: I guess some people might be saying, since UBC is already in a deficit situation, why do they have to spend more money. I mean, I've heard that one of these contracts is for 1.3 million dollars, now ... Bruce Gellatly: No, that's not correct. And as I say, I'd prefer not . . . PM: How much is it? BG: Well, fee for dollars •.. the one that is completed tomorrow, the that particular program · is 67,500 PM: And that•s one of twelve? BG: That's right. And the annualized savings on that will be exhibited at something in the order of 74,000 dollars, which we should be able to save each year from here on. We will be paying for that fee through the savings. That particular program will not involve any layoffs whatsoever, and as a matter of fact in most cases there will not be any layoffs. I appreciate that there is some concern, but the Univer~ity has had a freeze on appointments that Dr. Pedersen put in last November as part of our restraint environment. PM: What about ongoing series out there. the negative effect that this of studies ·is having on your staff f.', ' \ - 4 - BG: Well, .. I 1 m inc+ined to think that any change has that kind of effect. You can't make change without dislocating .. the comfort that people have with the way things have a l ways been done. In the case, there was som~ reference that was made to our custodial in which it was referred to the fact that it's a very time and motion study type thing. That is not the case. What happens is this firm does look at all the tasks that are required to perform a custodial task. They do look at the work to time relationships of this. How much time it takes to do each component of the work. They look at the frequencies in which that is done, and the times are simply used to develop the routes, as to how long, and what we should be able to expect our custodians to do without changing the existing level of standards. PM: What will you do if your employees decide to work-to-rule. BG: Well, I think we have little option but to carry on. As indicated, I' think the work-to-rule, as I understand, indicates that people would work to their job descriptions. PM: Which doesn't include filling out efficiency study forms. BG: Well, it's the supervisors who would be filling these out in most cases • • • • • False Econe>m.ies At a shop stewards meeting on · October 23, one of our stewards suggested that we keep a list of 'false economies' created by Ritchie and Associates. The example that she -used was the rapid creation of an •underground' system of delivery as a result of the re-routing and staff reduction that was imposed on campus Mail and Delivery. Suddenly we had a multitude of people running around delivering things by hand, employing couri~r services, etc . Tnis is a 'faise economy'. Another example might be the number of people currently forced to clean their own offices. If ·you have any additions to this list, or facts · that might support the examples already given, please send them in to the Union office. Grievances Arbitration has been invoked on the grievance concerning the Payroll department . We are grieving reduction of the work force (5 . 04 ), consultation (24 . 05), contracting out and job posting s ( 5.05, 22.01} and employee files (23.01) . Under 23.01 , we are ~rguing that employees should have the - 5 - opportunity to contest the information contained on the activity report forms, since these forms constitute an evaluation of performance, and could be used as cause for discipline. The employees claim that the times allowed for the performance of duties are unreasonable. On this point, the University responded: 'These reports are being used to collect data on productivity and are . not being used for disciplinary purposes. Should the University ever change its mind and decide to make use of the Daily Activity Summaries for disciplinary purposes, then copies will be provided to the employee c0ncerned and placed on file in the Staff Records Section of Personnel services, as is required by this article.' The article states: 'Copies of any document which · constitutes, may result in, or arises from disciplinary action, shall be provided immediately to the employee concerned and entered in her/his file in the Staff Records Section of the Employee Relations Department • • • • • • • • End of B~l1eti~ #1 . '· .... . .,. University Employees October 24, 1985 At t a c J::L.-rrn.e n. i:,... tl 1 ' RITCHIE & ASSOC IA T E S WORK TO RULE It is our belief that, because of : the severe cut backs of the past ·.three years, the majority of CUE ·members ai;e working against ·backlogs arid pressure ere a ted by understaffi~g. We believe that many of us are currently working to capacity ·· or beyond capacity in an attempt just to keep our heads above wat e r. Now the water has been deepened in some .areas by the changes to working procedures introduced by Ritchie and Associates . The effect of the !idded pressures this entails has had a disas1:erous ef feet on some ,of our members, and on the services that they provide . we beli~ve that by working t o rule, we can demonstrate to our employer that the majority of us have already been worki ng .beyond what should be reasonably required of ·tis, and that the j,mposition of additional pressure and a further speed-up is not acceptable to us. ~e are not asking you to slow down. We are ask i ng you not to -speed up under the current pressures to the point where your health is at stake or the quality of your work is jeopardized . You should work to the rule of the contract, to the requirements of your job description . The University , at this point, does not deserve more t han t hat from you. ~any of you work in areas that have not been directly effected by Ritchie and Associate s. However, we think you will agree that the cut backs to date are already ef feating the amount of work required of you, often beyond what is reasonable . WE a re asking those of you who hav e not yet had to deal with the effic i ency review to show your s olidarity with those who have by also taking part i n this work t o r ule · campa igne Reme mber. v ou ma v be next. I f t his campaign is ef fe cti~ e ~ we hop e · that it will not only ·serve as a s t rong expres s ion of our feeling about the curr ent situation at UBC, but a lso bring some pre s sure to bea r on th e Universi t y to reco ns i der its use of th i s fi r m t o ac compli s h what i t should be ab le to acc ompl i s h· in a humane way wit h its own .J;"e sourc es . ' ' The University has said that it does ·not inte nd t o l ay peop l e off as a result of this r ev i ew. They have argued th a t any c uts c an b e ~et throug h del e t i on of f ro z en positions , attritio n , r e assign- . ment, early r e ti rerr,en t , etc . We want a writte n agr es ment t ·o thi s effect. We a lso wan t: payment of our increme nts . I f th ey ca n fin d the money to pay Ri t c hi e and Associates, t hey s ho u ld be able to find the money t o pay us wha t we are owed~ Ritchi e and As s ociat es are not t he only on es who have a contract with th e Univ e rsit y . I n addition , we want s ome s er i ou s attention pai d to t he cons ultati ve process outlined i n our collectiv e agreement . We feel this can bes t be done by the Universit y agre e i rrg to meet wi t h a cormni tte e of our members. The Execut i ve strongl y e ncour a ge s you t o vote in fav our o f t he work to rule motion. Ted Byrne For t he Executive .Canadian University Employees At.t.a.c:::h.men.t 2170 Western Parkway, UBC, Vancouver, B.C V6T 1V6 224 - 2308 October 24, 1985 WHAT XS WORK TO RU .LE? work thoroughly, and show concern for quality. fill out Ritchie & Associates forms correctly, and thoroughly. Don't let the form box you in: put down the actual time · it takes to perform your duties, and add any duties that are not listed on the form -- make them aware of exactly what ·you do, ·and how long it takes. - _keep a carbon copy of each form for future reference (the union ·· is arguing that these forms constitute performance reviews and should be provided to the employee} don't take direct orders from Ritchie and Associates. fill out Ritchie and Assoeiates' forms on employers time. do strictly your own job duties, unless the duties you are asked to perform are those of a lower classification ·-·· occasionally encompassed by our own, or unless you are paid a temporary promotion rate for performing duties of a higher classification. do not speed up, work at a reasonable pace for the job. take all breaks, lunches, to the minute. grieve anything that is legitimately grievable. if you are legitimately sick, book off. take medical and dental appointments at your convenience, according to the contract leave on time for lunch and at the end of the day. if overtime is requested, point out that the employer is required to • endeavour to keep overtime to a minimum and to meet requirements on a voluntary basis'. Don't volunteer, make them demand it -- but do it if you are ordered to. • refer complaints to managers, the Administration, Ritchie and Associates whenever appropriate . take your vacations (some of us don't!) lodge any legitimate complaints re: health and safety, physical plant, custodial services, campus mail, etc. attend union meetings stewards, see article 7.01 apply for reclassifications if you feel it is justified -- this is often put off for a variety of reasons. start petitions re: decline in services; write letters, and particularly encourage managers and faculty to do the same -- but be sure you put the blame where it is deserved. read through the contract and see if you can add to this list . don't slow down, don't be obstructive or insubordinate . #'. /, Canadian University Employees A l.::. · L:. a c l l.111 e r 1. t:. · , # 3 2170 Western Parkway, UBC, Va ncouver, B.C V6'l' 1V6 224 -230 8 October 28, 1985 . Vancouver Sun Editorial Board 2250 Granville St Vancouver, B. C. 'Setting it straight' Dear Sir or Madame: Re: October 24/85 Article 'UBC efficie ~cy re port pl e ases union official• Just to set the record straight: I very definitely did n6t say that I was pleas~d with the Ritchie and Associates' report on AV Services that was released on Wednesday, October 23 1 1985 . I am reque s ting a retraction of the statements made in the above captioned sun article. In fact, the report has very , little direct impact on our bargaining unit . Some of the savings result from the deletion of one of the three CUE positions in AV. Services. This position has be en vacant since before the Ritchie & Associates review commenced. There was also some indication that part ot this work would be contracted out to temporary employees. I'm not pl e ased about that. I expressed very clearly to your reporter my feelings about the AV Services report. It is a small, self-supporting unit where savings can be realized without a severe reduction of staff. This is not tru e of the Library, for example, which is many times the size of AV Services. So the 'success' of this report, as claim ed by the Administration, does not alleviate our fears of job-redu-ction and decline in services. I would also like to add that the report on AV services gives us a much clearer picture of the nature of the 'management control system' be~ng put in place. It is a system of control which extends beyond the dreams of even the most obsessively regimentational manager. It allows for the tracking, to the minute, of an employee's work in such a way that the work is quantifiable, and the performance measurable to an extent that should not be acceptable even to the most highly mechanized workers, let alone workers whose work is varied and service oriented. Thank you for the opportunity to correct the unfortunate impression left by Wednesday's article. Sincerely, Ted Byrne Union-Coordinator i) . A t. t. a. c::h.men. t. C\.,\IH\' I ,,o, or l'I Ill.IC t:\11'1.0\t:I." s, '.'lllC\ r c,, \IHI., 11: 1., rn,c no, 1•1 HI.II.JI " Bri1i~h Columbi.J R.,i:iorlJI Otti,:c S T A T E M t N T • !OS. ;53; · 6th Str.:ct Burn~by. B.C. \ 'JS 3.\\ 1 (60-0 ;:;.9:31 Telex: 0-1.3;1 .i ;o Jdf Ro~ .\"ufioii,1/ /'n·si,/,·11/ Pr, ..... it/1•11/ "''''""·" September 23 , 1985 News Co n ference - Jeff Rose - UBC It is well known to people in this province that there is a crisis in education at all levels - elementary , high schoo l, college and university levels. All are se - verely threatened , demoralized and struggling to fulfi ll their mandates . At some universities here in B.C., the situation has gone beyond crisis to emergency. Employees are working within a n environ ment of fear and uncertainty . At the Universities of British Columbia and Victoria , something has arisen that has worsened an already intolerable situa - tion. A company, Ritchie and Associates, a large Amer·ican consulting firm, has been conducting a cost-cutting review of the non-academic departments at both universities . University a dministrators at both institut i ons brought Ritchie and Associates in with virtually no advance notice to employees, department heads or deans . This lack of information - before and since - has led to a great deal of speculation and disturbing rumours, which have served to exacerbate an already tense working climate. Generally employees at both universities had been used to being well informed about administrative decisions, with manage ment making an effort to stay in touch with their ~C'\ C:ununinl!" l · . emo oyecs . ,\ '11/11111<1/ ·'""r('f1lfT · l r11,1.,11rR But bn the issue of Ritchie and Associates, there · .X'O'd,,,,('-,,..~,,,,;.,. "''!'{~'t n ' t been a word . · °"'"' ~1..-,,~ p n <1:noJt· l.anid Lucir ,il'hol,on Tom 0· 1 . -:011 Jad , a,,.li, · Cc·t1t-r,J/ I u,· /6r1":l/l.'r,,h 1 k 'f° ,,,f,_,,/, ·,;/\ ... . ,,. , ,,,. \ It ' s been nothing but secrecy. 2 #4 t ' Statement Page 2 This secrecy typifies an overall attitude by manage- ment today towards education and educational institutions throughout the province .. (Ultimately, · universities are public institutions administered by ~anagements hired by the Government. Ultimately, the Government must take res- ponsibility for the health and well-being of these insti- tutions.) This behaviour is another example of the Govern- ment's continuing attack on the educational system, be it through Ritchie and Associates, ·or the firing of the Van- couver School Board, or cutbacks in needed educational support services. The presence of Ritchie and Associates has increased the already tense working environment at both unive~sities. The employees involved realize that - in general terms - benefits could perhaps be derived from studies which are carried out effectively. · But with no consultation on an issue such as this, studies on any workplace are destined to be ineffective at best and damaging at worst. Beyond that, there is the issue of cost. All indi- cations are · that Ritchie and Associates are costing the Universities of British Columbia and Victoria large quanti- ties of money. It seems odd to us that, at a time of res- traint, and a time when both universities are pleading "no funds", they should be spending big money in this manner. It seems that the days of involving employees in building a stro~ger education system are gone. Gone too are the days of tre.ating employees with respect and con- sideration. The Government and management have lost sight • • • 3 : - St ate:nen t Page 3 --- -- ~-- - ·- -·-·-----... -- ---- - ~---... -- --·- --- - ver s i tie a, s tro n,:::, .,, dn . . t ' a 11.n.1.st:c a 1.V(3 ,,....~ .. -:~ . .... c~ - s0 1J.l of cu r e du c.a ti ,..:.-1! ·J.l make . . t' average 1n st1tu·1on . our u n i.- t hem: I c a l :!. OD thEr- :n.:·::\ i:':.9~ 1n2;nt of t.t- ·3 *.,.•;;.lv ~:cs ity 0f Vi c ·· 7"0ri · a r'l . ...... , ·1. "'·" ... J·-. -;,-~~-·- .. .. t,.. . • • o '-:: :,:;,.~ ·'·-~ --~·- ... ,,.,1,·•·-n,..,_·~ ·.:, +-~ - ... _ ...., L.J. f..":: ~ .11.:. - ~, .. ->.~ ..1.i.J...Y - : )~ ... - r .: ... ,:-~ . ..:..1. · •. ~loJ- c. .• : .... . c . • , ~ iollo win g ~c fncc o t 1. If no t jl 2. is th ere t hat Ritchie ana Ass c ci at ~s ··,:,.. 3. Will the . man a geme nt s of th e t wo u n i v e rsit i es s i t <low~ with their emp l o}·ees as s ~on a s poss ibl e, -co t a:'..k 2.bou t this in t ole r ab le s:i. tua tio n '? Will t !1ey in vol v i2 th ei ::- empl ox·ees , make , t bem pa~t o f the s y s tem again, a nd_ i.n doing s6 strengt hen education over a l l t hr ough t he ki nd of collaboration and consult a tion t hat i s at the he ar t of a st rong and in dep endent e ducatio n a l s yste~ ? - 30 -~ opei u-4 91 \ i . ,· , I i,r-ticlc on R itchie an< l A ssociates for L ibrary D ullctin T ed B yrne, U nion C oordinator, A U C E L ocal O ne I attended the A ug. 22, 1985, m eeting at w hich O O ug M c+ nnes addressed the library staff on the issue of R itchie and A ssociates. I w ould like to m ake several observations on :S ir. M cinnes' presentation. F irst of all, I w ould like to congratulate him for his decision to hold such a m eeting. T his is the first tim e, to m y know ledge, that an adm inistrator has called a·m eeting of all staff to discuss the purpose and pr.ocedures of the R itchie and A ssociates' review . T his is a step in the right cirection, and it is unfortunate that the U niversity has not t< \.ken such an open and public approach to this issue in general. P art of the reason for the high level of tension and apprehension on the part of the staff is · the apparent secrecy that surrounds this project. T his tension w as very evident at the m eeting, but I believe it w as som ew hat m uted by the sym pathy that the staff feel tow ard M r. M cinnes and the difficult position this efficiency study has put hirn in. It w as obvious from som e of his rem arks that the L ibrary adm inistration had V i(Jorously resisted the arrival of R itchie and A ssociates. H is position seem ed to be that the decision to hire R itchie and A ssociates cannot be reversed, and therefore w e had better ty to m ake the best of it. M r. M c Innes assured us that the !,ibra -ry has a firm agreem ent w ith the U niversity adm inistration .regardi:.ng the degree of control that L ibrary m anagem ent · w ill have over the J?rocess, and that hopefully som e of the problem s that have occured elsew here c-an be avoided. H e also assured us that t.he entire review w ould be carried out w ith a high degree of constant a~d open consultation w ith staf f . It is to be hoped that th e se am bitions can be realized. M r. M cinnes stressed three points w hen explaining the neerl fo r this review : im proved m anagernent m ethod~, im rroved efficiency, and the need for a tca~pus-w ide m ana9em ent control system • to determ ine real staffing needs. H e said that the prelim inary study in L P C show ed that the C entre's 'inform al' approach to supervision perm itted a considerable am ount of tim e to be lost. lf this 'inlor~al' approach exists, and is not a m isperception on the part o~ R i cc h ie and /\ssociatcs - and if such an inform a l approach is in fact detrim ental to the operation of the C entr~, w e don '·t undcrstnnd w hy L ibrary m ilnagcm ent itse lf could no t i dent ify and corrc .ct the problem . In other w ords, w hat is the problem w ith the U niversity's ow n m anagem ent, and 1,:hy .:1r-c they not usin9 their ow n rc5ourccs? O ne of. the !;O J uU on:; lo thti problm n o( m anagem ent m ethods w hich w ill be intr-oduc< 'd by H itchi~ nncl J\!..!;O C i.'.ltcs w ill be trainin< J !.,c :;:;ion:; ('1 .:nm 1m 11de .-1linn 1111:ct:in< ;!.:') for !> upcrvisor:; nn< l m ,1n.1< 1c1·"· S npci·vir;on; w ill be tr.:iincd in 'basic fllt1nt1qcm cnt concepts': scttin< J olJjcctivcs, planning, im plcm entin9 olnns. control and follow -up ('positive control'). W e have seen f!lany of th e docum ents from these •com m unication ' m eetings•, and w e feel that their apor0ach is very basic, and in no w .iy an advance on the kind of training already provided by the L ibrary to its superv _isors. T he m ain result of increasing the control that supervisors exercise over staff - if they are successful in im posing it - w ill probably be a w orsening of staff relations.· A s for im proved efficiency, M r. M cinnes said that there has hcen no criticism of th~ L ibrary's current operations. S o the real question, for R itchie and A ssociates, is w hether or not the sam e level of services can be m aintained w ith less staff. F rom w hat w e have seen so far, this is not accom plished by radical changes to ~ethods of operation, but rather by a sim ple calculation of the am ount of w ork and the tim e required to accom plish it. R itchie and A ssociates have no expertise in the area of L ibrary system s, and so the question that w as asked at the m eeting regarding m aintenance of quality is a very crucial one. R itchie and A ssociates' calculations in the P urchasing D ept. indicated that a sizeable reduction in staff w as possibl.e. T he calculations them selves w ere severely criticized by both m anagem ent and staff in that departm ent. W e have no indication at this tim e as to w hat t;> e.rcentage of 'savings' w ere predicted by the prelim inary · study in L P C . In P urchasing the final recom m endation cam e very close to the prelim inary projection. T he im portant question there is w hether or not these 'savings' can pe effected w ithout a reduction in the quality of service. F inally, there is the question of an ongoing _ 'm an a9em ent control system '. M r. M cinnes stated that it is im possible ·for the U niversity to continue m aking arbitrary percentage cuts as a response to the crisis situation im posed annually by governm ent cuts to the U niversity's budget. S o far, the U nivesity has m anaged, w ith som e difficulty, to m eet these reductions. G iven the severity of the reductions over the past se veral years, it is unbelievabl e to us that the P rovincial G overnm ent intends to continue cutting aw ay at the post-seconda1:y education system . H ow ever, w e w ere told that this is to be e~pected, and .that w e m ust be prepared. In order to be prepared, w e need a cam pus- w ide m anagem ent control system that w i:ll allow t).P . adm inistration to determ ine 'real staffing needs', so that such cuts in future can be m ade rationally, and w ith the least dam age to the U niversity. S o this review is being presented as a k ind o.~ contin(Jency plan to a llow the U niversity to face further cuts, ll such cuts are forthcom ing. O ur question is: given the a tt:i:tude of the P rovincial G overnm ent tow ard higher education, is it not m ore likely that the results of the R itchie and A ssociates' review w ill be used to determ ine future cuts to the U niversitv's budget? · O ne last point. D o w e really deserve this kind ot treatm ent? O ne result of this review has already been a serious decline in m orale, and incrc .:iscd anxiety for both staff and m anage m ent. O ur bargaining unit has not seen a w age increase for over tw o years, and m any of us arc struggling to get along on w hat w e earn. T he U niversity refuses to pay already agreed to increm ental increases, and yet has spept to date several tim es that am ount on this review . T he w ork-force has already been consiucrably reducc< l as a result of hiring freezes and attrition, and m any of us arc w orking in areas that ere short staffed. C ould the U ni vC ?rsi ty have not found a w ay of dealing w ith their problem intcrnal.ur, using their oun abundant resources? rt r~ p, 0 i ro rt * m Bulletin To: · All CUE Members Re : Ritchie and Associates Final Report on Financial Services n n 1.a:~ As you niversity last summer there would be no final reports . Then in October, probably as a result of the bad press they were receiving, the University made a public presentation of the AV services final report. The Unions were invited to the presentation - we were the only one that showed up. While the press met w1rH ~r;t,~R,e~y in a separate room, we were given a long presentation by the Director of AV Services. Also in attendance were senior staff from AV Services, representatives from Personnel Services, and three of Ritchie and Associates' senior men. We were given the Operating Procedures Manual, so that we had substantial information on all as~ects of the review. There were three CUE positions in AV Services, and part of the .savings claimed by Ritchie and Associates came from the deletion of one of these positions. However, that position was already vacant, and slated for deletion before the review had even begun. The review itself had very little impact on our members in the front office. The rest of the staff belong to Cupe 116. The review was extremely comprehensive, and the majority of 'savings' was to #'i-.,61 come from '-improved utilization ef ntaff' - in other wordtt, 1:7ot lP \\\~ , (J\ increased productivity, . decre~se~ costs~ and increased user ~JV l-; ..,1 fees. There was very 11. ttle 1.n the review that we could , 6~1C~ Gtl -t.i-bize, aside from the degree of control that was to be vtu v\?··~-~~t J exercised over the individual wo:r:kers. i . 0 r-h-1 (' v' "'~ Just before Christmas, the Union received a copy of Ritichie and Associates' 'Final Project Report' on Financial Services. This time it arrived in a plain brown envelope, so to speak. There was no elaborate presentation, no procedures manual - ~st four pages of iiieaninglecs generalization, and a brief ~a...rj~ appendix which really explained what had been done. Without a full understanding of how the 'management control system' works, what does a sentence like this mean: 'By setting short term goals, through the use of Reasonable Expectancies (R/E's) and by developing a sense of urgency, the supervisors now have the means to accurately measure work accomplishment on a "short interval" basis'? Some of the 'benefits' of the system are reported as follows : 'Supervision is better trained in management concepts'; 'There is a better awareness of operating conditions'; 'An increased and improved level of communication exists between supervision and management', etc. The attachment explains the _, ... 'savings' to be realized: 13 positions (out of 54) are not required; a nnualized savings resulting from R&A's recommendations will be $247,570.00 . An average wage for the positions to be cut multiplied by 13 would come to about $247,570.00. A simple . equa t ion. Currently the Financial Se rvices Dept. is seriously backlogged, and understaffed. Some of the cuts have occured already, and all of them will have been made by mid - Summer . Over the period of the R&A review, the University has left positions vacant in Finance , or filled them with agency temps.:;tgigR:kX They have had a considerable number of vacancies : atx~eastxfigaxc~e~pxex «axex~e~E~~e~HEse~~~g£kegRi£gk~e~HEEg~ss~g~s£es~~HE~~0Ecxex~~oed several people have resigned, and one was fired . Many others are anxiously looking for jobs elsewhere . An alarming number of positions are now· filled through contracting out (agency temps), ao~citxbasceueoxg@txt@c:khec~oio:kcwhe~e and some of these positions have now been filled by temps MHX@Rij beyond the three months allowed {W~ in ~ur contract. T~is problem is being grieved, and is also the subJect of a complaint to the Labour Board. It appears that the University is kix±R~ leaving vacancies, and NXXXRij hiring agency temps so that when the cuts are made they will not have to lay __ o~f-f -1:-7g-1;1-lar em1:_l ~~ There is a provi~ ·ion ~n ou 7 contract for oa·obMJ·~A"'lH / the hiring of temporary employees , but the University does not lr ~' \' '~ want to do this because these emp l oyees would have rights under MD'f--~,, ~f our contract, and after three months would become continuing f{Jt I½ employees . It is hard to believe that Finance can survive the loss of 13 positions, given the chaotic situation that exists there now . Ove r time is being required in some areas, and we have heard that people are taking work home with them for fear of not meeting deadlines, and not reporting this work as overtime! We also received a xe~igx:kxigNx:k«ex~am~ fin~al report for the Campus Mail Room . After all of the problems created by the two R&A 'wet runs' the mail room staff were subjected to, :kxexxiNaxxxe~~xx R&A reported as follows: Implementation of the System has not resulted in hard dollar savings as a result of reduced manpower requirements - the current actual crewing •. . prove(s) to be a good match to the required hours of the department •.. Use of the System will reduce the liability of over - time usage incurred by the past practice of granting vacation time i•on demand'', rather than on a pre - planned basis . The value of this, plus user problems caused by uncontrolled back - logs, cannot be asertained. /1,...,, .-.- 7 -£5T . lAh ' . A full report~x~xe~ax on the Finance Department, and the ·entire R&A review, will b e presented publically by the Union at the beginning of February. A researcher hired by the Cupe national is currently working on this project.CANADIAN UNION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES SYNDlCA T CANAD I EN DE LA FONCTION PUBLIQUE 21, rue Florence Street Ottawa, Ontario K1P OW6 (613) 237-1590 Telex: 053-4878 Jeff Rose National President Presid(ltJ national Jean-Claude Laniel .\'ational Seaetar:l'-TmlSurer Secrttaire-tresorier 11ati11nal Tom O'Leary Jack Rodi( Bcnoil Doyon Luci( Jl.icholson Mikt Dumltr (i,'11,Ta/ I·1a-J>, ..s1J,·ou I "iu-pmwmo x<'niruux Joe Denofreo Representative B.C. Regional Office Dear Joe: May 13, 1986 Enclosed is a copy of a letter from the California Publ ic Sector Union Law Firm recommended by my contacts in Washington. The firm has obviously taken some trouble to look into the Ritchie situation. The findings are explained in the letter. Perhaps after you have read it and talked matters over with CUE, the CUPE Locals and Don Gutstein, you could .get back to me about what we should do next. With warmest personal regards . JC/bas opeiu 491 Encl. c.c. J. Rose T. Byrne D. Gutstein J. Hughsman Yours fraternally, OHN CALVERT Senior Research Officer " , 3 \~se \,lf\ . \. .. $' .: '( ~" . v.e~) ' ,~.,.,. ....Payroll grievance, Libby Nason, Nov. 20/85 - 5.04 - there was understaffing in Sept., but they addressed it: brought in extra people, authorized overtime - problem solved - so what have we to grieve - told her that if the current staffing level is adequate, then the remedy (an agreement that it would not happen again) would not be worth the arbitration - I intend to investigate current staffing levels - I'm certain that we can establish that the situation in Sept. was as we described it , and did breach 5.04 - 22.01 - told her Clerk 1 was legit. to include in step three, since issue was raised at step 2 - again she said they have agreed that they were in error, and are prepared to remedy, so how can we pursue - 23.01 - heart of the matter - activity report forms - she said that they have told us, and our members, over and over that the forms are not intended to be used for discipline, and if we don't trust them then go ahead to arbitration, waste the union's money , etc. - I pointed out that she had said in her letter that they cou l d be used for discipline, and that the article says any document that ttiay lead to discipline - she said they don't have to give us--(our members) copies of performance evaluations - I said that when a performance evaluation was given, if it was adverse, a steward would be called in, the document would be given to the employee, and be grieved if disputed - that, she said is a document that would be going on the personnel file, the activity report forms are not, will not be going on the personnel file - if they did decide at some point to use the forms for discipline, they would then go on file and our member would be given a copy - I continued to argue the point, and she finally said she didn't give a shit if we believed them or not, that she's pissed off and go ahead, go to arbitration, you're just looking for a little dispute, etc., we'll make sure that everyone knows how CUE is wasting it •s money - I told her that is preci ·sely how we, and our members, feel about the activity report forms - we went on to talk briefly about consultation: she asked what we were grieving - told her the report forms, which constitute a change in working procedures - she said that no decision has been made that people will be permanently filling out report forms, so not a· perma ·nent change in working procedures - when they do make such a decision they will inform our members, and consultation will be followed - they have told us that that decision has not yet been made, and in spite of what some Ritchie person might have said to one of our members, Ritchie does not manage the University ... - she said that the no. of people in Payroll currently same as last year, and they now have less work to do - I said I wasn't convinced that they have less to do, based on what our members have told me - and if staffing level adequate, why all the problems, all the complaints about cheques not paid, etc. - she said it was because they had one less supervisor - Els Mol - and that Els used to be the problem solver, the one who sorted out all of these problemsPayroll, R&A Nov. 22 - Chuck - Kerris quit, effective Dec. 6 - see letter of resignation - heal th reasons, rela .ted to pressure - they are still understaffed - more work than they can handle - worse than ever before this time of year - most of the problems occur because of other departments making mistakes, not getting things in on time - hard to pin down to Ritchie and Associates - internal problems result more from low morale, split in payroll not working out - external problems: Chuck feels that a lot of the problems result from problems created in other areas by R&A, ie . changes that have resulted in delays, errors that then effect Payroll - but not all Ritchie related - asked him for precise information re. complaints, payroll delays etc . but he said it was all confidential, and couldn't really give me details - Cheryl had referred to long five page letter of complaint, went to Chuck, he gave to Seeley, Seeley took to Craig, and they wound up apologizing to the woman who wrote the letter and 'making us look bad' ·_ letter was sent while Laney was still there, but Cheryl said she couldn't imagine even Laney swearing at someone at the counter (that was one of the claims) - I asked Chuck about the letter, and he said it was confidential - asked him if it came from an individual or a group - he said from an individual, but was a general complaint about Payroll services - asked him if the source was credible, and he said no\. \ . .._._ All Campus Unions Meeting Nov. 13, 1985 Barry Hodson (OTEU), Lionel? (OE), Pat House, Kitty Byrne, Ted Byrne, Margaret Friesen (Librarians' Assn.), Geoff Crampton (Fae. Assn.), Joe Denofreo, John Calvert (Cupe Research Officer), Rob Mingay (Cupe PR) , Horacio de la Cueva and Rod Haynes (TAU) Contract Negotia tio ·ns. OTEU: no negotiations currently will be meeting once Barry is properly preped by Bert Mitchell Physical Plant, main problem contracting out AMS settled: one yr. freeze, 2.5 in second year, no freeze on increments (frozen at expiry of agreement, but now paid retro. ) Faculty: - several months negotiations on salaries - Univ. ·stalled for a couple of months over budget uncertainties - Univ. ' s held to 2%, discretionary, determined by dept. heads (not acceptable to Assn.) - normal career progress increments frozen for 2 yrs. and Univ. says they will continue to be frozen - Fae. says money should be used to pay merit increases - arbitration on 12 firings in Dec. - binding if board unanimous in decision - Univ. has admitted can afford 2% and arbitration will have to decide how allocated: ie. merit increases or discretionary - Fae. are asking for 5%, which they believe they can justify, but ultimately they think it will be 2% and really a question of how it will be distributed - arbitration re. 12 on Dec. 16 OE - three year agreement offered - O, 2, wage reopener - jurisdiction and contracting out main issues and getting rid of Ritchie and Associates Geot'f Crampton : Fae . had meeting with Univ. Council to discuss their public survey - indicated to them then that this year no indication yet as to what budget will be (in past the council has known by this point) - this= i ndication that there will be some increase, otherwise they wou l d say Cupe 116 (absent, but Joe reported): in mediation - already had zero year and won't accept 2 such years - they want sg. in the first year - Andrews had tabled $500 signing bonus - R&A is issue now - no layoffs within the life of contract has been on table from outset, and they are sticking to that demand - no layoffs demand - Univ. will obviously not discuss or give any favorable indication until after Faculty arbitration re. terminations - longer they wait to settle, the more interest they collect on the money i ' Nov. 13, 1985 Campus Unions meeting, p. 2 TAU - some agreements - access to list of members every month eg. - no wage offer - now left on. table for TAs: wages, tuition waiver - no meetings since March - have never yet met with Eileen Stewart - will be meeting with her soon Faculty: - motion re. R&A - letter to Smith - concern that R&A will have effect on librarians - Pres. Smith assured them that R&A will not be reviewing the work of the librarians Jo _e: repeated comments re. R&A as way of reducing level of supervision= self supervision with report forms - so eventually will have effect of reducing management staff (ie. librarians as well) MF: - librarians' duties not being considered - time spent in analysis of tasks is taking inordinate length of time and they h~ve no experience so their work needs constant correction - time taking and effect on morale the main problems (note: librarians later made point that they are training R&A in an area in which they have no expertise, so not only taking a lot of time, but R&A will leave here with 'expertise' they did not have when they arrived, and at our expense) Faculty: Smith said R&A would probably not go beyond LPC - LPC is purchasing/requisitions function, so library experience is not important (Sidney Mindess repeated this later: also said that Smith said the kind of schedules they were corning up with for custodi'ans · were a bit 'silly' (!), didn't think they needed to be so detailed, all they really needed to tell people is hene's the building you're responsible for, you have one day to do th~ work, e~. this strictly off record) Geo££ and Margaret left at this point - John asked they for 1. i ·nfo. re. services ad 2. Comrn.erce Faculty that may be able to help in research: mgt. consulting systerns •.• why Ritchie? - rngt. theories OE - Traffic and Security - down 25% Kitchen and ____ ? down 30% John: have to document such reductions: before and after • ,r' Nov. 13, 1985 Campus Unions meeting, p. 3 Joe: research, pr. - get messag e across to students Rod: Fae. Assn./TAs/Librarians, all on our side to some extent, should be no problem get ting info. out to undergrds. and grd students - major thrust should be to get rid of current AMS, elect progressive body students: Rehab. Medicine cut altogether, program cuts Senate not able to guarantee to any dept. that if students begin program they will be able to finish - this . . is very serious Rob M. : get all campus groups together for rally, press conference, or sg. - press confer ence with reps. from all campus groups Joe: after Research has prepared report we can have one - day conference and present publically - follow up with press conference and communique John: importance of building c oalition, incl. students, faculty division of tasks : - more resear ch - muckraking, interviewing - pr, separate campaign - job action - alliance, coalition - conference - John - Ted, Rob - Joe coordinate - Ted and Horacio will work on getting students involved , TAU will work on fac. invo l vement, liase with Ted/Joe Note: Joe and John talked to K en Andrews next day - not going to involve 116 in coalition of any sort, but willing to distribute any literature , s upport us, participate in conference, help the researcher gather information , etc.\ Barry Foord cc D. Mcinnes Dr. R. D. Russell Campus ma i·l Bob MacDonald# Since ialking with you in early October about our problems arising from campus mail backlogs, we have been monitoring our receipts d~y by day as well as trying to 'live' with the problem. If anything, the situation has become worse, indeed we have yet to see any real improvement in receiving periodicals. Because the~e has been no improvement, and discussions with the campus mail . supervisor indicate no prospect of resolving the situation, we can only view it as chronic, and serious. A copy of a memo from our serials division librarian is attached, o~tlining the situation as we understand it (in campus rnail) 6 and describing some of the problems we ar.e encountering~ If no improvment can be obtained, the library and its users will face a continuing deterioration of services, a great deal of extra and perhaps wasted effort, and inevitably there will be extra direct costs o • Other departments and faculty must be experiencing the same kinds of proble ms , since most journals are sent by third~~ fourth class mailo The l ib rary has no means to circumvent this problem, at least not quickly. Our plans to use postal boxes can no t be put in place quickly because the mailing addresses must be revised for more than 22,000 current subsc~iptions. As you know, we are also investigating the use of boxes in the United State s~ and this wil l also take some time to implement. We expect it will take more than a year to imp l ement the use of postal boxes. When i n p lace, thi s wi ll redu c e the handling of this mail through the campus ma il oper at ion, bu t requires that the ir truck pickup mail at Station G on 10th avenue. I don' t know what the ne t benefit will be to camp us mail , ho wever, the library should ga i n by getting materi als sooner as well as r e duce our internal sorting of s ome mail .. I und e rstand th e difficulty of budgets, bu t urge the univert ity administration to seriously consi de r putti ng addi t ional s taff into the campus mail operation, if only on a te mporary basis~ The operational problems for the library and th e r e duced ~e r vices to faculty and students represents a very high price to pay for saving a co uple of staff positions in campu s mail ope rations. · The extra time a.nd wasted time within the libra r y serials ope ration s alone represents a con si derable expense that should be wei ghed aga inst any direct savings in c ampus mail .. Jl~I V~ u· J I ( .. . .€. UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA INTERDEPAR TNlENTA L MEMORANDUM '" TO 'Jo:- ~:a :=:o .,a lc .•. ·~······ .............................. ········ ................ . FROM " . ;:::J r-l Y') ; , ~·1, .. 1 .•') .. ..... ....... 1'~ • ..... ' ........... • •••• • ·-· •••• •••• • ••• ••••• •• ••• •· •••••••• •• •• • • L l \;r-a :-\ · ,\ ·:':~.~~; i .:3 ::--~ 1: io~ t L:PC ........ ·-····-··--...... ·······•·••·· ····· ........................ . ,............. . ~o Y"" i ;:i, -- r "';.' r· or-••• •• ..................... .. ____ _ ,.._,_ • • .,.J,;.- .... . .. ..... ....... .. . .1•••• •• • :;031 ········································································ DATE . .. ~~::?:.- ... 9/].:. .... PHONE ........................ ·-······ Re: s~ri~l5 Division ~ail ~he Se~ials Division, w~ich maintains app~ox~~ately 22,000 cur~e nt s~bscriptions, does not keep track of i ncoming nai l, however, our deliveries ha,1e been so unpredictab::e -:J--r:.r t:1e past fe-.-; ,...,on~.___- .l..'-,a.1- \ 1:::. :,;:,\;, 0 '-' 0 g1L1 ..... .1-0 do -o r-t ---,...1...::19 ,-.r-i..o}--.~r 9/85 LI \.-. ;::> ~ : l · L,. • .. ,_ .I-. - _,._ t. '- ,::> • :::, C,._ · _ _!_. -..J-L -..,1~ r , 'h ' ' - 1 . . . r-1· 1 (.I..'. we ue~an a rougn meas~rernen~ or on_y inco~ing per1O_1.ca s ~~is :s .l..~i·~ ~ ~1--r ~~il) 1."" Q inc~ sL~c~ - 1 ~- , .___!,~~,PS') 1.· n t~o -a-~ ..L '-'' ..i-U . _ _.c....::,.::, :Hf,,,,.6.,_ , J u -~t t: '-- ... ::: ,..__ _;""'· .. ---~ • _ ,_ ..:;, ~I t~ wav as w2 ~easure periodicals c~eck e~ , I ~ave attached a . . coov of one of our recent charts. see how erra tic . .. our- deli.· I2r::"Js are from t :1e chart. !_-'-2 r e ceive our "'ail f::-0::1 r-,-,n,1- r--"'1 P,i·o·- .1..("'\ Qc.1..0,..,.or q ,,.::-i.,...!:,~is -oooolc, ~,.... .,.Lpr ~;:-:;re ..._c. , ,: ,-, -:::> .. 0.J..~• - .... J... ,__ l.. ...J- - J ' ........ ____ .. - .. -- _;., '- .. ,- ~ ........ callef ~ampus ~ail supervision to fi~d o~:: t~e cause of the n-:,1;:::.,, ;::lr;~ !JY"gr-. rar-:10: 1 s "t·r.a1.·1 -!-o ~~.1.. us o:.1r :-::-:ai.l. \,,... - - -- .J - • ._ - - - '-" • I l ._ • .- '- :,:j ,_ • ..,. o u:::· ca 11 s do T~ is ~~ole situation see~3 unus~al 1:o Serials Jivisio~ s~a~~- In past, there have ~ee~ o~~asional pro~le~s (lots o~ ~a ~l o~e da y, little t~e next, ""'nr c:""' "" "") u""~,·e·,·c.,r t~1 · c-·-s .:!..,i,!.. 1.·-,..,~· S ·""p- -;:- t-o ;....."" +-r,o ,..,o,•r: ,-,r \ C . v - '-' , . • , l ....,1 .. J \ .._. ' • , .:.:> - - ·- C.:. - '-' • • , ._ - . , , -- ~ .,, C... - • • '-- , l - - • . .., ...._J ·! • ~: ~/ c '; e c ,, - :. s t a f f i s u n a ;J l 2 to d () t e i r- o ,') tl ·'1 r1 ('") r t ~ ! e s e c i~c~:: ~s-:2 ~·::es. ,....,nr.-,· -,{~ 1-,~y 5r::\rd 01 , ato P'.ty 1 11.· .... n° ~v 0 and ~_. ~/ _i ~i:-ed t0e J.. ._, - C j ' . '-C • ... . : '-' C..:. -. :-_ .1.. .:... ' .. .!.. - : .. '-:::::; .._ ' - - 4 ca~p us ~ail ~oo~ in o~der to get first '.'"\and in~or~ation fro~ 1:~e s,..;?er'.r i_sor , Jo~n Hrn,·1e. r:~r. ~:owe 1.-;as :no s t co-o;'.)erati\;e and i:iEcr-iT;at.:.. ·Je. '.-Iere is ::.~·ie Ca~iJUS Vi2il '.'<00:-:1 situation as I unde~s~a~d it ~ro~ our visit today: ... .,_. staff • P _r_i n_r to '-'urr•et cuf- ..... ):::.,- 1,rs .L.)1.::,,_·.1...,,..:::::. ,. ; -: .rA 4 c:: ,eor,l O t-ror 1~1.· nG -. - _ _.._, - ':; '- , c::;., - '- ' \... . - \,._,., • • - - - - t-' -- ....__ 9\; .- I • :;) t::Qr ra--n""'' l~ ""a1.• 1 ,.,...,~...,.L. dv-r\--.<'.>~ Lo '"'.' .c.,, 1 .L.!me rl"°''°1 ') '-"1Ql1 '-·1\! _ ·.._ . . ti ;..1 \. ..j 1"" l • ..:.. t , a •- .L u r--' ;..-c::......: L : J.. v - - """'...LI t o. . • - ~_; , . ., .!.. __ J. t ~ is yea~~ It dro?~ ed recent!y t~ 7 ~ull ti me and 2 ·.:---.~· •. 1_:-- 1_, \/. "n"'...,"" en !..1,, .L.\~ er-"'.> .;~ ~'"' ~ 10 v;)-iili"t-\/ l e ::!- 1.·n - -- 1 r\;;-~C L , . L.~ 1 , _1. _ - _:__, .. " ... _ .:..-~'-"' ·· __ -1. _ \,,. s~af~ing. For instanc e , if a~yon e of the existing staff is si ck or on holiday , backl6; of mail is a certainty. Ye ste rday, so~e of ~r. Howe's ho u~l y s taff was restored te~por ar ~ly (now ~ac ~ to 7 full time and 3 ~ourly). In addition, overti~ e is ~eing work ed "l. --1..,,a11" c:.,;er,, n1· g~1.. ..,, - "'-'~ 1 --:' - 1 I - • • l.,. 2. ?rioritie3. C2:,1pus nail prio:::- it ie s 2!'."e: i. r..;r~1.. c 1 ac:~ ,.,...a1· 1-••• .. --...:.>L. .....,.:.) i ,t ~, '"' Ca::1,......, s '1' i 1 • • ! • ~-..I ._ . ... • • • a. - ' c . r~aiJ.i~<; lists ( so;;:21::.i::.es ·'.)eco:-:-12s ~i:- st priority); ~. T~ird clas3 ~ail~ ·.~,, ou,:;cr:: a-Fl-or •e,· c,:,...,~,) r.rrf l-~:::> .... ;:!,...,r,0 "' _is .... h.· at t'.-le r-e :, 1 J e; _ _,_, , - -·- .i'- .,,,1-..-.. ·-· !-;i _ ; .- --~- "-•'- - ..t.. -:;, ;:ir e. oro'::;::,1---1,, ?l"lQ '.---.rir:-..., o -~ 1 1 , ... r::'"'rl- ,=,r 1..·., 1· rd c 1 :')r-s =ai· 1 •- • - ·- - J - '-' .J _. ::j ,_ •• --' ' - ._; - ._ '- '- l. . ' - <.;. ..::, II I ••• co:-1ti:1ued ••• 7!ov. "'... . , !·.c l.:. 3~ 3~cklaqs ••• continued ••• stacked on t~e loading dock . This is in addit~on to any backlogs t~at may exist for t~e other prio~ities. I t a??ears t~at the first three priorities are always c~eared ~efo =e the fourt~ priority ( thicd class mail ) . For instance, Serials Div. knew t~at ca~pus ~ail was ' ,..:; 1 d 1-. , • • L ' • ' .J.. ,.. 0 I- ,.. 'T sc::e-....u_e '--o worK over-cime L;--ie nig:1'--. o:::: c1....:; .. ~-..e expected to receive a lot of our t::ird cla3s mail this • ( o.- I- r ) '] L ., ' ' 1 , f • ' rnorni_ng ,.__ .o • \·e 901... 1.ess -:::::1an a norr.1a ..... cay s 1.,-1orcn .. Mr. Howe explained that t~is was because his staff spen~ .J..' • t• •l..• L ,.. ' ,-, f • 1 • '--~eir over ~me on get'--ing par_ o~ a oacK~og o mai_ing 1 1.· ts ' .a.. "'" 1 • • t t I • ,.. l'r • '"J _ _ 01-..1... ,':Y conc_usior. is :..-:a:., eve:n ir \....u:npus -1al.!.. works overtime, we ma~ still not get many of our journals. -r 1 . ' . -J..mp i c a-:.1.ons tor t~e Serials Divisio~ Our journals are lowest priority ~o= Cam~us Mail sorting. ~henever there is a ~acklog, our ~aterial is delayed. When a large backlog develops (the current situation) 1 we will =eceive backlog a little at a ti~e out of sequence. T~is . ,., . d l • • 1 d . means we wi_i senc our ven ors c_ai~s ror issues a~rea y nere~ I .c •·•0 o'o - 1 , ,.....~""'\ o= .1-·- .:-~ -o"l.-.!-.0..t: !-· ,. ... !n,... ,,o t ·i· 1 1 d-mag 0 0• 1 r .,_ 11'1 ';.. , d __. '- . I - v . , .!. .:.> ;;;, J.. l. . _ l. , , -'- > ':;j ' ./', .._ .'~ .._ 0. - C:: '-' J.. rep· 1 ta~ ; ~y") • • ,.; !..._ ou- .. ,,::::.ndo,.....~ r:"\~,-.. -"'a;, .L.o ....,c~~ ~o cor-n ; n \··a·ves - .._.. • ._ -....1 d -, - \..,. , - , .._ sJ • - " C .. , ..l.. _ \... '- , 1 ;;:> .__ • , ''- _ I , • whe ~ we do get it. It i s diffic:..ilt to rationally allocate ' - - d !.. } • ' • • 1. ' s1:.a=:.: :-esources ur. er -...,1ese circ:.i:r:sr.ances.. T;-iis app_ies -:.o -] 1 L~ ·...,r~rv 10-:-..i-~o n s r=r-c::,-i~1; .... ,... ! o .,r ....,a1 c ,,.;a ra,...,pu -· 1'-11,· ~1 C. ... ..L _ ....J .,,_ __ _ .l _ "'- '--" _ \ _ \::; .._, - _._ _;. l , ':::i _, -' J.. i t -- ·, ...1.. ,._ , , l ::::> .1, • C ..i... • ('O,-.,c, lees cri L.~r-al p,-01.-...lom-· ar- L'..-,;:,L !..' ..-.. c, _.;Ql'Y"Y\al c r1a\/ 'oo ..J ;.~C ..,;. ---L..J..'- .L. ,,,...J.-.,_t1 , :::> _ t:,:: ~.L'-\..... '-·'~ ..J ~.L~ .. _._....,;. _. ;,r .J. '- ' d · .c 1 -1- • ' . ., ' - 1 L . . . carnage lL erL i n tne mai~ ~ags r or o~go eaving c n em on the loading doc.~~ at this ti:7ie o= year r:1ay ca_use \·1ater d2mage 1 ., L . 1 ...3 L .. .. , • ' • • t · . 1 as we ... i . asc~y, we uo no~ rea1~y K~ow wnat is in · ne mai_ ~ags un t i l t hey are opened 2nd s8rted o Thus 7 first class ra2il may be trapped ir. the backlogo This is our ~eavy sub s cription renewal t ime. If our renewal invoices (first class mail) are accidentally trapped in the backlog, there is a danger that some of our subscriptions will lapseo Of coursej my remar~s above do not only apply to t~e Serials Di ~ision~ Anyone receiving third clas s mail in t~e Library system or elsewhere on ca mpus must be e x perienc i ng some or a l l of t~e problems outlined abo ve o 1/Jhat to do ~y perso~al opinion is that this situation s h ould not be allowed to co~tinue as it is potentially damaging to the University's reputation and certainly damaging to t'., e Library's reputation. We will not be able to get our journals to our customers ( faculty, students ) in a timely ~annero Our vendors may not trust our clair:1s0 I would appreciate anything you can do to urge the University Administration to see that Campus Mail is staffed at a level which will make backlogs t he exc~pti6n rather than the ruleo While you try to resolve this si tu ation, I plan to keep in touch with Mr. Howe so that I can mon i tor the situationo fflt- - r1z , :,V - ' THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA INTERDEPARiMENTAL MEMORANDUM TO i.;ncLA EXI:CGTIVE ······································································ FROM Phyllis Reeve · ..... ... . .. ... $4) ....... . ................ ............................... ........ ......... .. ..... .............. . •• •'••••••••••••••••o•••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••• •••••• •••• ••••-.••••••• .................... ..... .... ···-··········· ............. DATE ~! .. !i~X .. ................. PHQ'f\lE ... ~:!.~1 ................. Re : UBCLA PROGRESS RZPORT : LIBRARIJ\NS AND RITC HIE REVIEtv I am pleas ed that UBCLA is addressing the problems raise d by the presence of Ri tchie and Ass ociates. However, I c1m concerned that the situation may not be full y understood. Some· ques tion able dist inction s a re being made bet ween groups within the Library: 1. between Public Service s and Technical Process in g . The refer ence process is obviously beyond R&A conce p ts. However, does the work of an LA2 in Main differ ra dica lly in type from the work of an LA2 in LPC? Goals in Proc ess in~ are determined by Pu blic Se rvic e need s, and it is of ~rime importance to keep remindin g R&A of t ~is fact. This shoul d not be taken to mean that I think LA2s in Pub lic Serq i ce · should be observed by R&A; on the contrary, I think ti1at no Library staff snou ld be so obse rved. 2. Between li brarians who su pe rvis e a::d li b rarians w!lo do not. This distinction is pu zzling, since the i ,npli c,.iti.o n seer:; s t.o be t hat non-supervising librari ans ma:/ le more likely to be subj e ct0d to anal~ 1 sis than non-supervising professionals. If it i s t iiough t t: ·1.::i,t supervi :;i:1g librar i ::.?, s are €?)!!empt from t r1e analysis because t!1cy ar ~ s~l.pervi s ing , I would po int out t:1at o ur procedure s are s;.;.ci1 t hat it is imp o ss .:.- l e to an al y? <: the st,: .. f: ' s ,?ar t of t .:ie t ask :,.;itl1ou t also lo ok ing at r.iy pa.rt . :.ook ing at :.::~ que sti o~ from anot her vi e"·Toin t: is a li b rarian engaged a comp licated bibliog raphic se a rc h more readily timed than a profe ssor coll ecting data for presentatio n to coll ea -:;ucs or students? F.ow ca n such dis tin ct ions be made among pr ofe ssionals and mel!'b ers of the Faculty Associatio.n. 3. Between Librari ans and Support Staff. T~1is distinction has been partial_ty a ddress cd above. I i1ope th ere is no feeling in UBCLA that anything has been a,.c.cp 0p .:J.j,,~hed if pro fe -ssional lib rarians are exempted from R&J'\ scrutiny. Our e..~41,bil, 'kf with our staff is rapidly d i sappea ri ng. Your memo suggests tnat we ··answeL quest ions from staff abou t t h e Ri tchie revi ew with factual answers ... I have ~al:'.t empting since earl:.· summer to do j ust that., but "factual answers 11 are diff icult to come by. -'l'h e Library administrator~ -.Ii:. - especially Bob MacDona ld - have t!'ied valiantly to keep us informed, but they have not thems elve s been able to .ascertain e~actly what the facts are. I would like i nvite Pub lic Se t.vi::; e 1 i ~ rarians, especia l ly t!1ose on the ti3CT,.,..l\ ::::xcc'.1t i ve; to spen d some ti me in :;:,pc. '!'hey cou ld observe an Li bra r y Assistant tryi:1 g to label a book while a RSA :nan s t a nds at ber elbow. They could then . tr~ , t o "recognis e that tas ks not pe o_?l c a ::-0 being observed" - and they coul d try to conv ince th e Li brary Assistan t. 'I'i1ey co uld observe librarians bein g obse ~ ·, cd as they ta l k , and <-Jv ,~n l eavin J t ~1c ir desk c.1lenclars b l ank becau se cf R&A ' s eye s. [~~@~:q·'~"~/ NOV2 6 1986 1 In considering the processing snags which may develop, UBCLA librarians should know that three clerks, with a co mbined expe rience of more than forty years, hav e r e signe d iron Financ L3l Se rvi c '3s in protest over the ~es ult s of . ~& A work. T:1ey are bc i n') replaced by temporary employ ees from Off ice Ove rloa d. Hould you like your derive<l c~taloguing to be done py Off ice Overload :- Beaause I shall not be a.>le to attend t:ie Nov. 28th meeting, I am taking tnis me~s to express my view to the Execu tive and other members of UBCLA.
Clippings
Record-keeping works
Transcriptions
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Image provided for research and reference use only. Permission to publish, copy, or otherwise use these images must be obtained from Rare Books and Special Collections http://rbsc.library.ubc.ca
Researchers must complete the RBSC Research Agreement to access material in the fonds. Additional restrictions apply to select files in the Committee series, which are closed until 2086. Permission to access the closed files may be obtained from CUPE 2950. See archivist for details.
University of British Columbia Library Rare Books and Special Collections
Labor unions--Canada (AUCE)
Labor unions--Officials and employees (AUCE)
Labor unions--Organizing (AUCE)
[Ritchie & Associates records] (1 of 3)
Text