🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <741@helios.toronto.edu> dooley@helios.UUCP (Kevin Dooley) writes:
>In article <89Mar9.132354est.9394@ois.db.toronto.edu> jdd@db.toronto.edu ("John D. DiMarco") writes: a load of rubbish.
>
>John, John, John,
>	If your knee jerked any harder it would be imbedded in your chest.
>Slow down.  Think for a second.  Were the union's demands really so
>unreasonable?

Stop patronizing me. 

Yes, I think the union's demands were unreasonable; I've listed my objections
in earlier postings.

>  In the long run I believe that all the students at this
>university benefitted from the strike.  It is unfortunate that all we
>got on class size was a committee to look into the problem.  It should
>be pointed out, though, that before the TAs went on strike, nobody has
>ever taken a strong stand on this issue. 

That's not true. The problem has been recognized for years, and has been brought
up in numerous Underfunding protests. In fact, the installation of the ACCESS
course selection programme is primarily an attempt to control class sizes. 

But large class sizes are not the University's fault. Why, then, is CUEW-2
attacking the University on this issue?

> Are we so evil because we
>want to ensure that you get the best quality education possible?

The point I'm making is that you're not attempting to ensure we get the best
quality education possible at all. In fact, the willingness of the Union to
engage in this strike is an indication that you care so little about 
'quality education' that you are willing to hold undergraduates 'for ransom'
against the University.

>The strike was very short.  It forced the administration to negotiate.
>Perhaps one or two of your arguments might have the faintest ring
>of plausibility if the strike had lasted through the exam period, but
>in fact, it did not.

Thank God the strike was short! Of course it forced the administration to 
negotiate. Had the strike continued, the damage to undergraduate education 
might have become irreversible. Because the administration has a committment 
to provide such education, they negotiated rather than renege on their 
committment.

>	On a personal note, though.  John, are you just anti-union, or are
>you opposed to quality education?  It isn't clear from your postings.

Is what I am saying so unclear? I'm not anti-union, I'm simply anti-strike-
in-this-case. I'm not opposed to quality education, I claim your union is 
opposed to quality education. If this question is an example of your 
understanding of my news postings, perhaps I am wasting my time.

>
>Kevin Dooley, CUEW local 2 steward for Physics and Astronomy
>
>-- 
> Kevin Dooley         UUCP - {uunet,pyramid}!utai!helios.physics!dooley
> Physics Dept.        BITNET - dooley@utorphys
> U. of Toronto        INTERNET - dooley@helios.physics.utoronto.ca

John DiMarco, Undergraduate, graduating in May.
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John DiMarco	* We will live in the light *	jdd%db.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net
jdd@db.toronto.edu 	jdd@db.utoronto.ca	jdd.db.toronto.cdn
{uunet!utai,watmath!utai,decvax!utcsri,decwrl!utcsri}!db!jdd	jdd.utcsri.UUCP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------