TAGS
ON CAMPUS
STUDENT LIFE
OFF CAMPUS
EDUCATION

GOVERNMENT
MONEY
COOL
VARSITY BLUES
UTSU
ADMINISTRATION
BIOLOGY
ART
MUSIC
FOOD & DRINK
ELECTIONS
IN THE LAB
FACULTY
TECHNOLOGY
HEALTH
FILM
PROFILE
NUMBERS
INTERVIEW
LITERATURE
PSYCH
BRIEFS
THEATRE
LOVE & SEX
DESIGN
GENDER
ENVIRONMENT
LONG FORM
POP CULTURE
THE VARSITY
SPACE
LAW
PRO SPORTS
SIMCOE HALL
TORONTO
HUMAN RIGHTS
MISSISSAUGA
UTSU DEFEDERATION
FROSH
SCARBOROUGH
PHOTOGRAPHY
INFOGRAPHICS
FAITH
BEST OF 2012
GUIDES
LGBTQ
FASHION
RACE
DRUGS
ALUMNI
EUREKA
EDITORIAL
DANCE
SGRT
RELIGION
JOURNALISM
INTRAMURALS
JOB MARKET
COMMUTE
INVESTIGATIVE
PODCAST
University of Toronto's Student Newspaper Since 1880

Former CUPE 3902 chief negotiator hired by university

Timing of Mikael Swayze’s departure from union raises doubts about last year’s high-stakes contract negotiations

By Rida Ali
Published: 3:49 am, 1 October 2012
Vol CXXXIII, No. 05 under

The Varsity has learned that Mikael Swayze, chief negotiator for CUPE 3902 during contract negotiations with the University of Toronto administration earlier this year, was hired away by the university weeks after concluding high-stakes bargaining that made headlines in this newspaper over the threat of a TA strike.

Swayze was employed by the union from December 1998 until his departure in April 2012, and acted as the chief negotiator for CUPE 3902 Unit 1 during talks last year. CUPE 3902 represents all teaching assistants, writing instructors, and lab demonstrators at the university.

Swayze left the union for a position as a strategic labour consultant within the university’s Department of Human Resources & Equity. University spokesperson Michael Kennedy said the university does not comment on matters involving individual employees.

Sources within CUPE have suggested that as chief negotiator, Swayze had significant strategic weight in shaping the tone and direction of the negotiations. His duties included training the bargaining team and giving strategic counsel. He was also the designated voice of CUPE 3902 Unit 1 during the bargaining process with U of T administration.

When a deal could not initially be reached, 91 per cent of union members voted in favour of a strike last December.

University administrators and students prepared for the worst as negotiations went on into February. The strike was narrowly averted when a last-minute deal was struck at 2 am, two hours after the deadline had passed.

From the beginning, the final terms of the agreement appeared to be contentious. The bargaining committee was divided 4–3 on whether to recommend the offer for ratification. James Nugent and Ashleigh Ingle, two members of the bargaining committee opposed to the final terms, resigned in protest.

The terms of the agreement were unenthusiastically adopted by the membership in a later vote. Sixty-seven per cent (1197 members) voted in favour of the agreement, while 600 voted against. CUPE’s 2009 ratification vote garnered 97 per cent voter support.

The new terms included establishing a working group to look into ballooning tutorial sizes and replacing the doctoral completion grant with an allotment of $250,000 over two years for unfunded fifth- and sixth-year grad students. The university also agreed to give graduate students two one-time payments totaling $150,000 to compensate for increased workload.

Current CUPE 3902 chair Abouzar Nasirzadeh declined to comment, adding that his current contract forbade him from commenting on staff matters. But some of Swayze’s former colleagues say they feel betrayed.

“The ink was hardly dry on the tentative settlement that Swayze and other bargaining team members signed when Swayze accepted his new post,” says Nugent, who sat on the committee with Swayze and acted as spokesperson during negotiations prior to his protest-resignation.

Swayze stated that he did not start searching for a new job until after the deal was finalized.

“Collective bargaining concluded in February and the contract was ratified at the beginning of March of this year,” he said. “Completing this round was a major project for me in my career. With my major project for the year completed, as someone mid-career, I contemplated my future and commenced a job search.”

Swayze also noted that the job listing for the new labour relations position at U of T was not posted until mid-April, when changes in staffing warranted the creation of a new position.

Nugent says members of the union looked to Swayze at the time “for a certain degree of leadership and guidance as to whether or not the U of T Administration’s final offer was adequate, was indeed their ‘final’ offer, or whether our union should have continued bargaining or taken strike action.”

“My role as staff rep involved being a problem solver,” insisted Swayze. “I had no vote in any decisions made. My only role was to provide my best professional advice.”

“This kind of move — from union to management — is quite common in labour relations at the university and more generally in the industry,” he added. “For instance, Angela Hildyard, vice-president, human resources and  equity was a leader in OPSEU 578 at OISE before moving over to an administrative labour relations role.”

  • randy womanimal

    whadda barfbag that swazack ass is

  • Ace reporting

    Based on naught but unspecified “sources within CUPE”, Ali
    insinuates that a single employee in the hire of CUPE 3902 swayed the TA
    bargaining
    team into endorsing a sub-par deal that was not in their interests and
    only “unenthusiastically adopted by the
    membership in a later vote”. It is clear that Ali and her unnamed
    source want us to conclude that the UofT dangled a high-salary gig in
    front of Swayze in exchange for him throwing the union under the bus.
    How exactly he did this is unclear; Ali offers no evidence
    *whatsoever* that connects the outcome of bargaining to Swayze’s career change.

    Indeed, it’s too bad that Swayze and Nugent — unlike
    the current Chair of CUPE 3902 or, for that matter, the Administration
    – validated this trash by contributing to it. Their lack of discretion
    not only lends a thin veneer of credence to this innuendo-filled piece
    of sensationalist nonsense, but in so doing reveals much of their own
    character.

    On the one hand, Swayze’s attempts to justify his
    treachery on the grounds that such moves are “quite common in labour
    relations” comes across as pathetic. Why he would feel the need to
    respond to Ali’s hackery — beyond, perhaps, an all-consuming guilt for
    betraying an institution he apparently spent years helping build — is
    beyond me. Although Dante speaks of a special place for those who betray their benefactors, Swayze has reason not to abandon all hope: the knowledge that he follows in Angela Hildyard’s illustrious footsteps
    will no doubt provide him a modicum of comfort and warmth in the icy
    ninth circle.

    Nugent’s assertion, on the other hand, that the
    membership only acted the way they did because of the advice of Swayze —
    who, he insinuates, was working both sides of the table — smacks of
    sour grapes. I find it hard to believe that the 1,800-odd graduate students who voted on the collective
    agreement are so gullible that they aren’t capable of making up
    their own minds. Those who chose to vote ‘yes’ no doubt did so for a
    myriad of reasons. Whatever their reasons were, to suggest that the majority only voted
    the way they did because Mikael Swayze
    held a Svengali-like hold on them is downright insulting.

    So, shame all
    around: on the Varsity for publishing this trash; on Swayze for his
    treachery; and on Nugent for insulting the intelligence of his peers.