tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4816079077396500265.post1504898656677144427..comments2023-06-08T11:22:40.299-05:00Comments on EleanorAve: State of the unionsEleanorAvehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07495658124424730131noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4816079077396500265.post-63226630623805054892012-02-24T16:49:44.660-06:002012-02-24T16:49:44.660-06:00Welcome to the intractable world of legal semantic...Welcome to the intractable world of legal semantics. Nobody can deny we are students, since we're enrolled in degree programs. But we have come to a point where a hard line must legally be drawn--are we or are we not employees under PERA? This is an election year, so Republicans have jumped at the opportunity to be anti-union. The Regents have jumped at the opportunity to be pro-union. We all use political machines to our advantage, but we certainly didn't have the opportunity to edit the proposed legislation. However the hard line is drawn, it'll come with a set of consequences that both sides may dislike. That's what happens when laws are linked to one another at (sometimes tenuous) semantic points.LHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09972655230888204968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4816079077396500265.post-8947319003463555542012-02-23T19:25:10.746-06:002012-02-23T19:25:10.746-06:00Long time listener, first time caller... just kidd...Long time listener, first time caller... just kidding...<br /><br />Anyhow, you bring up a good point in that there are intellectual property implications tied up in the student versus employee debate. Personally, I am opposed to the unionization of GSRA's, but if the argument is that GSRA's are "students" and not "employees", the same should apply to our intellectual property rights while affiliated with the University.<br /><br />I am by no means an expert in this area, but my understanding is that current undergraduate students at the University of Michigan own most, if not all of the intellectual property that they produce since they are classified as "students." However, as a GSRA, the University considers me an "employee" in this regard and lays claim to a large portion of any IP that I may generate in my time here. The University should not be able to pick and choose when I am considered to be a "student" versus an "employee" based on what is most convenient (or dare I say, profitable) at the time. <br /><br />djsdjshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18243091037384603227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4816079077396500265.post-7972441899725602052012-02-23T14:35:42.335-06:002012-02-23T14:35:42.335-06:00Oops, FAMILY educational rights and PRIVACY act*Oops, FAMILY educational rights and PRIVACY act*LHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09972655230888204968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4816079077396500265.post-8912559586885419472012-02-23T10:22:45.390-06:002012-02-23T10:22:45.390-06:00Joe, I think you make valid points too. In fact, ...Joe, I think you make valid points too. In fact, this is the only criticism of SB 971 I've seen so far that doesn't resort to outright lies and ad hominem attacks. But here are some counterpoints:<br /><br />1. Your main concern is that this bill will prevent unionization in the future, should that ever become necessary. But the law already prohibited us from unionizing. SB 971 just makes that more clear. Further, the political composition of MERC is likely to change to an anti-union bias in the summer. If this hearing had lasted until then, it is likely MERC would've ruled against GEO. Fickle, right?<br /><br />2. SB 971 prevents GEO from forming a compulsory union under PERA (Public Employee Relations Act), but doesn't prevent the University from voluntarily recognizing a union. We could not be forced to join and pay dues however. Given the current composition of the Board of Regents, I doubt they'd be opposed to a voluntary union. And I think this arrangement is a good compromise.<br /><br />3. The political climate of Michigan will certainly change in years to come. Along with that could come changes in law, including Right-to-Work. PERA could change too. <br /><br />Finally, here's something to chew on: Public Employees are subject to the Freedom of Information Act, i.e. the contents of your emails on Government (read: CAEN) computers can be requested under FOIA. Students, on the other hand, are covered by FERPA (Federal Education Rights Protection Act). As it stands, FERPA trumps FOIA. But isn't the whole legal argument a matter of whether we are employees *OR* students? Which law would we be subject to? Think about the implications for intellectual property.LHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09972655230888204968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4816079077396500265.post-6728229996070708862012-02-23T08:54:52.203-06:002012-02-23T08:54:52.203-06:00I disagree with your conclusion, but you make some...I disagree with your conclusion, but you make some valid points. I'd like to remind you of something, however. All faculty were, at some point or another, GSRAs who worked their ways toward a Ph.D. under other faculty members. This works in much the same way as all parents were at one point children. It seems conceivable then that as our parents have a pretty good feel for what is good for us (particularly when we are very young), our faculty mentors may as well know what is good for us as GSRAs... and for that matter, most faculty were GSRAs far more recently than most parents were children, so I am sure they remember what it was like. Just a side note.Annahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06981534086754917154noreply@blogger.com