Time for a Midnight Snark

Three facts

1.      Dr. Meadows, at a department meeting recently, said several times that perception is reality.

2.      Dr. Meadows, at the same department meeting, admitted that the college has a morale problem (which he tried to water down by adding that any organization this size has a morale problem, and a problem which he seems to think is the sole function of salaries).

3.      At the last bargaining session, April 5^th, one of the administration representatives began the session by putting on a stern face and leveling several “charges,” for lack of a better term, at PSCFA. One of those charges was that the union was responsible for lowering the morale of the college.

Well.

 Most of the other charges leveled at us were, upon closer examination, simply the result of misunderstanding by one side or the other. Fine. That happens.

But to say that WE are responsible for low morale at the college? To say that WE are the reason that sometimes the bargaining sessions seem contentious? To indicate that various vice presidents, department heads, secretaries, and faculty of the college are walking around mopey-faced because of the union?   

As evidence, we were offered the following: 1. “Someone” (unnamed) from the union leadership had made snarky comments to someone else (also unnamed) about the recent selective raises given to selected admin/professional types (not faculty) and to Keegan employees; and 2. We had had the effrontery to actually print the raise graph for those admin/professional types and Keegan employees in the last issue of this publication. These anonymous comments were defined as “malicious.”

When pressed, the admin person refused to be specific about who the “someone” was, what comments were made, to whom they were made, or anything else—just that an anonymous complainant made an anonymous complaint about the fact that an anonymous member of the Association “leadership” said something “malicious” about the fact that the administration chose to raise, without any explanation, the pay of twenty people and Keegan employees.

The same administration that has not given us any decent raise in …. how long?

The same administration that has enough money (according to Dr. Meadows) to hire three (THREE) companies (and then fire two of them) to come up with a new logo for the college.

The same administration that, apparently, perceived a morale problem with SOME administrators and commenced to study wages for administrators so that our administrators, SOME of them, would not be all teary eyed when they got paid?

But didn’t bother to study faculty salaries or career service salaries?

 No wonder the maintenance people are walking around with long faces and snarling at the union leadership. No wonder we are booed when we walk past a secretary’s desk. No wonder we are pelted with rotten fruit at All College Day functions (doubly sad because that day is a real morale raiser, as we all know).

Yup, Ed, perception is reality.

We imagine that if you were to take a survey and ask “Who DO YOU PERCEIVE is responsible for the low morale at the college—1. snarky faculty union leadership members or 2. top administration or 3. (write in candidate)…. Come to think of it, instead of US imagining, why don’t YOU imagine what the answer would be, what the perception is. And therefore what the reality is.

 As to contentious bargaining, all of the people for the Association were surprised, nay, shocked. Yes, each side can be somewhat heated while explaining its position. Both sides take shots at the other in, what we thought was, good natured ways. Yes, Jennifer Brahier is a math wonk. Yes, Keith Prendergast can be a smart-ass. Yes, Keith Samuels is getting retirement pay AND Keegan pay ($30 an hour). Yes, a Tallahassee lawyer paid more than any faculty member is on the administration side of the table. Jibes were traded about those things and others. We felt that those jibes were good-natured. Apparently not.

Apparently, because one of the members of the Association leadership is snarkily going around lowering morale by making anonymous comments to anonymous complainers, the administration side of the table is hurt and dismayed. Feels threatened. Probably kick the dog when they get home.

Wow, that last paragraph was snarky. Please, all employees at PSC, buck up. Smiley faces, everyone. Everything is fine, in fact wonderful, except for that snarky union thing.

Drink with an umbrella in it, anyone?

Admin did not respond to our proposals for Article 15 (salaries), but the state budget has not been approved, so the delay on that is understandable, despite the $50,000+ that the BOT approved for twenty selected admin/professional types, not to mention the additional outlay for the 2% increase for Keegan employees BEFORE the state budget was approved.

At the last meeting, the only major change (really, lack of change) in admin’s proposals is no change for sick leave buyout. Obviously, studying sick leave buyout at other colleges and finding that most pay up to 100% did not occur to the administration—just studying salaries for admin/professional people so that upward adjustments could be made for SOME.

Sorry, more snark snuck in that last paragraph.

And you didn’t hear it here, but the admin has hired three of the four horsemen of the apocalypse as admin types, and is negotiating to hire the fourth.

Sorry, that’s probably malicious.

We won’t lower your morale any more because we have been put in our place—our happy place.