~ EDGAR PAUK | (SC Mpg

Cre
There ts no doubt tn my mind that -_= the City
University needs one bargaining representative
é instruc nal staff.
for the whole . The arttfictal division in

two “units” under which wd have been
laboring

for two years now and which will last
unttl at least August 31, 1972 - when the two present
bargaining agreements are due to exptre - vannot be

allowed to continue beyong that date. On this

philosophy I belteve we all agree, meee

The

fundamental question, of course, ITS
ey how ts this goal to be accomplished?

There are different solutions

try to
1. The Legtslative Conferencep could take over the

Untted Federation of College Teachers by asking
for another bargaining election in Unit 2.
2. The United Federation of College Teachers could
try to take ober the Legislative Conference by
challenging tt inj Uniti.
3. A merger could take place.
4. A new organization could be jorned from
the extsttng two. .
These are the choices, and the only choices dictated
interests of the whole instructional staff (from Adjunct

Lecturers to Full Professors) of the City University.


Of the four posstbiltties, solutione 3 and 4 are, of
course, the most bloodless and should have the widest.
appeal. A& ta solution number 3, however, a merger

means thatcat best some compromise must be reached,

at worst that one organization ts_merged into the other.

Unfortunately, when the smoke of rhetoric ts cleared,

such merger does not seem acceptable to either organization,
at least at the present. But time ts of the essence if we
are gotng to make a common front against the Administratton,
tn time for the nest round of contract negotiattons.in

the Sunmer of 1972.

The sane considerations of time would seem to rule out

solution nunber 4, espectally in vtew of the national

affiltattons that both organizations have.

The chotce, when all is satd and done, comes down to this:

which of the two organizations has thé greatest potenttal

for becoming a ma :-.- spokesman for the whole

instructional staff of the City University in time for


(week

the 1972 contract negottations. Those of us
closely assoctated with the workings of the
bargatning agreements could not tgnore the
necesstty forc a chotce, since we are more than

of
A °<" what thts present diviston is

doing to the tnterests of the whole instructional

staff.
After serving fatthfully 1 Ea the faculty

of so-called "Unit 2" since the tnceptton of the Contract,

I have come to the coneluston that the United Federation
of College Teachers in the City University ts netther
healthy as an organization nor does it have the type

of 5 namely Dr. Israel Kugler, to restore it
to organtzattonal health. There are many reasons for
this situations reasons of which I becane slowly and

awar.

painful ae over the course of my involvement with
some

the organization, just as 707] ay
i othe ae:
SE" 6221202, before me and are realizting,at

race I have not come to this conclusion lightly,
even though it has always been my beltef that loyalty
to an organization

Po ees ee far less important than loyalty
to those prineoniae that nade lf Jotn the organization
tn the first placeff, Wendy the vigorous enforcement
of the rights of thea imisemuon total staff of the City

University.



I have, therefor, resigned my posttion and membership
in the Untted Federation of College Teachers ond iy
offered my services to the Legislative Conferencé, with
a view to having one bargaining agent for the whole

tnstructtonal staff in time for negottating a strong

contract tn 1972

As to the gallant members of the United Federation
of College Teachers ¥f vho fought so hard and

accomplished so auch despite

overwhelming odds, I trust they do understand id
wf my chotce and will follow thetr consciences in

reaching thetr own choice.


Mes QL
EDGa laa cies

| + = Tag ree

© Sra aerate atest