About
Empowering academic staff in the McGill Faculty of Science.
Below you can find answers to some questions you may have about the Association of McGill Professors of Science. Don’t hesitate to contact us if you have questions that aren’t answered below, or if you wish to get involved.
What is AMPS? Why are we organizing? What are the advantages of a faculty union?
What is the purpose of the Association of McGill Professors of Science (AMPS)?
AMPS is currently conducting a card drive to become a union. Our goal is to represent academic members in the Faculty of Sciences at McGIll. AMPS will promote and represent the interests of academic staff in the Faculty:
* promote a positive working environment, free of discrimination, interference, restriction, or coercion;
* advocate on behalf of faculty members; and
* have the exclusive authority to negotiate, apply, and defend collective agreements.
AMPS could potentially play other roles in advocating for reform, supporting academic initiatives, helping faculty connect with one another socially and professionally, etc. The key principles underlying all of the above are collectivity, collegiality, and independence.
Who is organizing this?
AMPS has an interim executive, consisting of the following members:
Interim President: Louigi Addario-Berry (Mathematics and Statistics)
Interim VP Internal: Renee Sieber (Geography)
Interim VP External: Giulia Alberini (Computer Science)
Interim Secretary: Rosalie Belanger-Rioux (Mathematics and Statistics)
Interim Treasurer: Bill Coish (Physics)
AMPS will hold an election for its first regular executive members within six months of its certification by the Quebec labour tribunal.
Who can join AMPS?
All academic staff in the McGill Faculty of Science who are not already unionized (through MCLIU, AMURE, or another union representing McGill staff), including part-time staff.
So AMPS would be a union?
Yes. Once AMPS is certified by the Quebec labour tribunal, it would have exclusive collective bargaining rights for academic staff in our Faculty, just as the four recently established unions do for their respective faculties or schools: the Association of McGill Professors of Law (AMPL-AMPD), the Association of McGill Professors of Education (AMPE), the Association of McGill Professors of the Faculty of Arts (APMFA) and the Association of McGill Academic Staff of the School of Continuing Studies.
How would a faculty union work?
The purpose of a union is to represent the interests of academic staff to the university, and to advocate for us when necessary. The idea is that the union negotiates a contract with the university that better defines our jobs and working conditions, and that lays out our rights as well as the recourse we have when those rights are violated. The union would negotiate the contract with the university and then be the first point of contact for faculty who have questions about their working conditions or need help. The union’s constitution is a public document. AMPS is governed by an executive committee and by the membership. After the union is certified, we will have an election so that members will choose their executive, who will serve for defined terms. The membership votes on big things like contracts; the executive handles the day-to-day running of the union. Additionally, each department will have a union steward, who will keep academic staff informed of what’s happening in the union, and who will provide a first point of contact with the union if we have questions, concerns, or need help with an issue. The union can also advocate for us, and once there is a collective bargaining agreement between the union and the university, this will be much easier to do than at present.
What do we have to do to become a union? What are the obstacles?
What is required to certify AMPS as a union?
In order to be certified, approval of > 50% of eligible members needs to be obtained. Our card campaign aims to sign up considerably more than 50% of our colleagues, and we are already well on our way. Once we have enough cards, and once we have invited all faculty to sign, we will apply for certification to the Quebec labour tribunal.
Is card signing confidential?
Yes, confidentiality is strictly upheld by Quebec law. The only people who will know you signed a union card will be the Association’s Executive Committee and the Quebec tribunal. It is illegal for your employer to even ask. Quebec legal precedent shows that this law is strictly held up in practice.
Would I have to pay dues to AMPS?
Yes. Per Quebec law, everyone must pay $2 during the card-signing campaign. After certification, a dues structure will be established. Usually, gains in salary and other benefits from the first contract offset costs from union dues. Our colleagues in Law, Arts, Education, and Continuing Studies settled on 1.5% of salary. Union dues are also tax-deductible. The details of the dues structure will be up to the AMPS membership. Quebec law requires all members of a bargaining unit to pay dues, whether or not they are members of a union.
If we were certified as a union, would AMPS be independent? Or would it affiliate with a provincial or national union?
Ultimately, this is a decision that the membership would have to make. Two potential options would include affiliation with the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), as many Canadian faculty unions are affiliated with CAUT, and affiliation with the Fédération québécoise des professeures et professeurs d’université (FQPPU). Affiliation means that we would have access to the funds, resources and expertise provided by these organizations. It would not mean we have to sacrifice any meaningful self-governance. However, it is also possible for us to affiliate with other organizations, or to remain unaffiliated.
Is a faculty-specific union likely to be challenged in court?
This is extremely unlikely. McGill has dropped its challenges of all existing faculty unions, and has now accepted the reality of faculty-level unionization. The odds that McGill challenges AMPS’ right to unionize are extremely low.
We have the full support of AMPL-AMPD and consultation with their attorneys. In addition, strict laws prevent McGill from punishing faculty for unionizing. In particular, if we decide to pursue a collective agreement, McGill is required to proceed with “business as usual” in the interim. If an agreement is not reached, an arbitrator can be called upon. The legal and political context in Quebec is extremely union-friendly. The law is on our side and we don’t expect legal challenges. But if there is a challenge, AMPS is prepared to defend the Charter right of academic staff to organize.
Why aren’t we pursuing alternatives to unionization, like MAUT? What about the existing structures of university governance?
Doesn’t unionization make the relationship between faculty and administration more adversarial?
Not necessarily. Unions fight for collegial decision-making. Most university faculty in Quebec and Canada are unionized, and administrators at other Canadian institutions are used to working with faculty unions. Of course, periods of contract negotiation can be stressful, but the reward would be more control over our working conditions.
As it stands, the current relationship between University administration and the faculty is mostly top-down in practice. The mechanisms for collegial faculty governance outside of departments are not as democratic as they should be. For example, faculty can’t even bring a question to University Senate without the prior approval of a Steering Committee that is dominated by upper administration members; the same goes for making a motion. Faculty of Science Council has such a low attendance rate because it has not been seen as a place to address serious faculty concerns for over two decades. New bureaucratic burdens like Workday and new grant management or reimbursement procedures are introduced without meaningful consultation, without workload adjustment, and without adequate staff support. While existing governance mechanisms are important—especially for matters like academic mission, programs, and curriculum—we believe a union will strengthen democratic governance in other areas.
In our view, AMPS would help improve relations between faculty and upper administration. Moreover, an independent Faculty Association could facilitate invaluable conversations between administration and faculty, while preventing and resolving misunderstandings. In this way, we anticipate that AMPS will spark immediate benefits through establishing more accountable, transparent, and collegial decisions from upper administration. Further, the union would be a space for faculty self-governance. It could improve morale and could help prevent resentment towards the administration. And AMPS would always have its door open to the Dean and University administration for them to express their own views to the membership or its Executive.
Doesn’t MAUT already negotiate on our behalf? Do we need something beyond MAUT?
MAUT talks with the administration about salaries and benefits, but they do not negotiate as an equal partner. The outcome of their discussions with administration is not based on a contract, and as such they have no leverage mechanism. Effectively MAUT is merely consulted by the administration and, even when it is, it has very limited effect on the outcome.
As MAUT explains in their own documents, they are not a union nor do they currently want to be. MAUT is also centralized. There is currently no mechanism for independent deliberations among academic staff within our Faculty. A union negotiates a contract with administrators as equals and defends its members from administrative overreach.
Wouldn’t it be better to advocate for University-wide unionization?
The two goals (Faculty- and University-level unionization) are not mutually exclusive. In fact, certification of AMPS could be a “game changer” in a more robust shift towards McGill-wide unionization. Nonetheless, University-wide unionization is a much bigger task and could take many years to come to fruition. In addition, a benefit of Faculty-level unionization is that it can be more tailored to the particular needs of the Faculty of Science and help to reorient the administration towards decentralized governance. Moreover, the existing McGill Faculty Associations have already formed the Confederation of Faculty Associations of McGill University (COFAM), which will negotiate at a common bargaining table over mutually agreed upon university-wide matters. AMPS is invited to join COFAM once it is certified by the Quebec labour tribunal.
Wouldn’t a Faculty-level union be relatively weak? What could it realistically accomplish?
First, anything set out in a collective agreement would supersede McGill policy as it pertains to employment conditions, including salary policy, benefits, grievance policy, tenure/promotion policy, etc. In addition, Faculty-specific needs can be part of a collective agreement (e.g., policies on course releases, decision-making processes, etc.), thus making a Faculty union potentially stronger in some ways. Second, to the extent that Faculty-level collective agreements would result in different policies for a given Faculty, McGill may be motivated to make some policy changes university-wide in order to minimize administrative burden and to prevent other Faculties from unionizing (due to “sweeter deals” for Faculties with unions). In this way, Faculty-level unionization is more likely to institute rapid change across McGill than (merely) pressing for a University-wide union. Moreover, COFAM (mentioned in the previous answer) provides a strong platform for university-wide negotiation on points of interest to all faculty.
What happens if MAUT becomes a union down the road? Would we be kept out of it?
If MAUT eventually becomes a union, then it would be easy for AMPS to merge with it, if both parties desired. In the meantime, we anticipate that AMPS’s and MAUT’s goals would overlap and we would work collaboratively together (as is the case between MAUT, AMPL-AMPD, and the other existing Faculty associations).
I value my membership in MAUT; would I no longer be eligible if we form our own Association?
Per MAUT’s Constitution, academic staff who are not covered in a collective agreement are eligible for MAUT membership. Given that it may take some time before AMPS would have a collective agreement, our faculty would continue to be eligible for MAUT in the interim (as is still the case for Law faculty).
Additional questions and concerns
I already have a good deal with McGill. I’m worried about my salary going down, or losing other benefits.
Unions are run by their members, so unlike with decisions made by upper admin, you would have an opportunity to voice your concerns and actually vote on any contract we make. The point of a union is to increase salaries and benefits for everyone; as the saying goes, unions build floors, not ceilings. This might result in more equal salaries across the faculty at some point in the future, but it is extremely unlikely the union would accept any deal that reduces salaries or benefits to its membership.
What about retention offers?
As with merit, AMPS can negotiate for a contract that allows for retention offers. Departing faculty have reported a general unwillingness by McGill to negotiate on many aspects of their compensation and working conditions. McGill has done especially poorly in retaining diverse faculty. Given that most universities in Canada (and all within Quebec) have unionized faculty, any drawback in this respect would be minimal—plus unionization can make working at McGill more desirable for new hires and also provide less need for faculty to seek retention offers.
What about merit raises?
Once certified, AMPS can negotiate for whatever we want, including a salary system that retains a merit dimension, as well as better cost-of-living adjustment, so that our salaries keep up with inflation. We could also ask for a one-time bump to get our salaries in line with those of faculty at other universities in Canada; changes in how merit is evaluated; changes in the appeal system for merit decisions; and other changes to the salary structure. Whatever we seek will be decided upon by our members.
Would we have to go on strike?
Strikes are relatively rare events and would have to be authorized by a majority (as set by our union’s constitution) of a full membership vote. So there would be no chance that you would be asked to go on strike without being asked for your vote on the issue first. If there ever was a strike, faculty who participated in union activities (like a picket) would be paid out of strike funds (that’s part of why we pay dues), and that income is tax exempt in Quebec.
Don’t unions make it difficult for organizations to fire problematic or poorly performing employees?
The same could be said for the tenure system: even without a union, McGill has very little power to fire tenured professors. Union efforts could also make workload demands more transparent and equitable for people carrying exceptionally heavy loads due to underperforming colleagues.
What about powerful union bosses?
We are a small organization, we have a democratic process enshrined in our constitution, and we elect officers for relatively short terms. Compare this with the current system, in which, while faculty members are consulted about department chairs and deans, they do not elect
their supervisors in any binding way. For instance, in at least one recent case, the Dean of Arts overruled a department’s first choice for chair. In contrast, the structure of the union ensures continuous accountability. In other words, your union leadership would be much more accountable to the faculty than your chair or dean is currently.
I thought professionals didn’t form unions. Aren’t unions primarily for people who are paid hourly wages?
Any employee paid a salary may benefit from unionizing, no matter their pay structure (hourly or yearly) or type of work (blue collar, white collar, etc).
I have had negative experiences dealing with other unions at McGill, so why would I join one?
Even though most faculty in Canada are unionized, we know that some McGill Science faculty only have experience with unions as managers, and not as members. Viewing AMPS through the prism of one’s experience as a supervisor dealing with the course lecturer or RA unions is not a reliable guide. Those unions pertain to highly contingent and usually part-time, “casual” employees, and our contract would not look like theirs. Experience with a large union is also not a good indicator: AMPS will be small, and it will be easy for any member to have access to leadership.
Join us
We think there are a great many potential advantages to unionization and relatively few risks. If you’re in favor of the general direction but have doubts or worries about some of the details, then join us. AMPS will be run by its members, and skeptical voices will make us stronger as we work together for our common good. Would you like to get involved? Email mcgillscienceunion@gmail.com from a non-university email address and we’ll be in touch.
Sister associations
Academic staff in other faculties have already unionized; here are some of our sister associations.
- AMPL: the Association of McGill Professors of Law
- AMPFA: the Association of McGill Professors of the Faculty of Arts
- AMPE: the Association of McGill Professors of Education
- AMASCS: the Association of McGill Academic Staff of the School of Continuing Studies
- AMLAS-APABM: the Association of McGill Library Academic Staff
- COFAM: Confederation of Faculty Associations of McGill
- Others are in the works – watch this space!
/