|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The mess at GTS
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
I'm not surprised by hardball being played, that's been evident for weeks. I am surprised by the bible verses cited at the end of the GTS statement. Glib dressing up of a statement that explains nothing with "don't question us, we're in charge and you need to be reminded of gospel values that we are showing no evidence whatsoever of understanding." The worst sort of Christian cant. And this is even assuming that the board is justified in their actions: in the face of so many unanswered questions and strange events and allegations, it's still cant.
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Tom Breidenthal, Bishop of Southern Ohio, released a statement supporting the faculty and condemning the actions of the board. This is a big deal. Southern Ohio is a large and wealthy diocese. Breidenthal was a former professor at GTS and Dean of Religious Life at Princeton. Everybody I know respects him.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Thanks for posting about Bishop Briedenthal's statement, BA. I found that it was published on Facebook and picked up by The Episcopal Cafe. If the comments on FB are correct, he is the first bishop to issue a statement. Here's his conclusion:
quote:
It should be obvious why I am outraged as a former faculty member; any faculty member at any institution of higher learning should be outraged by this board’s action. Why am I outraged as a bishop? Because this action will go a long way toward confirming the unchurched in their assumption that institutional religion cannot be trusted. I continue to pray that the board will reverse its decision and reinstate the eight. Then real conversation can begin.
The bit about what the unchurched think about us ... sad, true, damning.
How are people chosen to serve on the GTS board? Can they be removed? And if a lot of bishops and dioceses agree with Bishop Briedenthal, will it matter? The Episcopal Cafe notes that the Diocese of California voted today at their convention to condemn the GTS board's action.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
I join in thanking Beeswax Altar for highlighting Breidenthal's statement, that rarest of things, power speaking truth.
Now let's see Katharine Jefferts Schori step up and step in.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by RuthW:
How are people chosen to serve on the GTS board? Can they be removed? And if a lot of bishops and dioceses agree with Bishop Briedenthal, will it matter? The Episcopal Cafe notes that the Diocese of California voted today at their convention to condemn the GTS board's action.
I don't know how the GTS board is selected. Every bishop has a list of approved seminaries. Bishops can simply stop sending postulants to General. General can't stay open without students.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
How are people chosen to serve on the GTS board?
I believe at least a couple of them are elected by General Convention. So next summer's GC could be interesting. (Normally that's an election that draws very little attention.)
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Now let's see Katharine Jefferts Schori step up and step in.
Does she have any specific role or leverage here? Or just the bully pulpit?
There's a moveon.org petition asking her to act, but of course it just says she "can make this right" -- not how.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Mainly bully pulpit, I think, appropriate for dealing with bullies.
If she and the other bishops issue a joint statement condemning General, and refuse to send any more students until the board resign, the board are done.
If she and the majority of bishops stay silent, they're condoning an attack on labor that'd shame the Pinkertons, in defense of a man accused of racism and homophobia. For a progressive church to act in this way is its end.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
For a progressive church to act in this way is its end.
All of TEC is doomed? That seems a bit overstated.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
For the confused amongst us.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
All of TEC is doomed? That seems a bit overstated.
Perhaps, but it markets itself to progressives. If it's seen to be giving the nod to strikebreaking, blackleg labor, and racial bigotry, its targeted demographic will, at the least, have second thoughts.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Now let's see Katharine Jefferts Schori step up and step in.
Does she have any specific role or leverage here? Or just the bully pulpit?
From
A History of General Seminary:
quote:
In 1817 the General Convention met in New York City and on May 26-27 [this Resolution] passed both Houses: That it is expedient to establish a General Theological Seminary which may have the united support of the whole Church in the United States and be under the superintendence and control of the General Convention.
The Presiding Bishop is the Chair of the House of Bishops and, I believe, also the Chair of the two Houses when they meet together (I need to check this when I have more time). So she does have more of a role than she would for any other Seminary.
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Thanks, Pigwidgeon.
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
For the confused amongst us.
I took Byron's post to be a pun.
[ 19. October 2014, 20:00: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
KJS is on the Board of Trustees. As Thomas Ferguson points out, KJS accepted the voluntary renunciation of ordained ministry from Mark Lawrence then Bishop of South Carolina even when no such renunciation was offered. Sisk was just following the example she set.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
KJS is on the Board of Trustees. As Thomas Ferguson points out, KJS accepted the voluntary renunciation of ordained ministry from Mark Lawrence then Bishop of South Carolina even when no such renunciation was offered. Sisk was just following the example she set.
The desire of Lawrence, and the leadership of South Carolina, to leave TEC was exhibited in a pattern of conduct over several years, something ruled on by a disciplinary board after complaints were filed from within SC.
Schori may have been technically incorrect, or may not (I'm not up on the relevant canons), but Lawrence's intent to renounce membership of TEC was clear and sustained. It's not comparable to the NY situation, based on a single letter, swiftly retracted.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Board went all in with the Dean.
I guess that was an option.
Of course they did; he's their boy. My guess is that GTS is hemorrhaging spondulicks and that the board gave Dunkle a mandate to turn things around at GTS by any means necessary. He failed to bring the faculty aboard, whether through their intransigence or his own incompetence (I'm guessing a little of both), and the board decided they weren't going to let that detail stop their train.
TEC may wind up with one fewer seminary. On the other hand, judging by numbers there really only seems to be a need for 3 or 4, not 9.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Some general questions that need answering:-
- how did the faculty come to have zero power in their own institution?
- how did General get into this financial mess to begin with?
- why did the board vest Dunkle with dictatorial power, not only over finances, but the entire running of the seminary (including service times)?
- how did the board at a mainline, progressive seminary come to be packed with strikebreakers?
It's the strikebreaking that does it for me. Even if the allegations against Dunkle prove baseless, that indisputably happened. One of Beeswax Altar's links coined a phrase that says it all: scab seminary.
Yes, they can get some desperate postgrads in to teach, but their caliber will be rock-bottom, both academically, and morally. Blacklegs are reviled even when they're starving. To blackleg just to get on in academia ...
quote:
After God had finished the rattlesnake, the toad, and the vampire, he had some awful substance left with which he made a scab.
A scab is a two-legged animal with a corkscrew soul, a water brain, a combination backbone of jelly and glue. Where others have hearts, he carries a tumor of rotten principles.
When a scab comes down the street, men turn their backs and angels weep in heaven, and the devil shuts the gates of hell to keep him out.
No man (or woman) has a right to scab so long as there is a pool of water to drown his carcass in, or a rope long enough to hang his body with. Judas was a gentleman compared with a scab. For betraying his master, he had character enough to hang himself. A scab has not.
Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage. Judas sold his Savior for thirty pieces of silver. Benedict Arnold sold his country for a promise of a commission in the British army. The scab sells his birthright, country, his wife, his children and his fellowmen for an unfulfilled promise from his employer.
Esau was a traitor to himself; Judas was a traitor to his God; Benedict Arnold was a traitor to his country; a scab is a traitor to his God, his country, his family and his class.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Byron:
Schori may have been technically incorrect, or may not (I'm not up on the relevant canons), but Lawrence's intent to renounce membership of TEC was clear and sustained. It's not comparable to the NY situation, based on a single letter, swiftly retracted.
Schori accepted a resignation that wasn't a resignation to make it easier to get rid of a thorn in her side. Her supporters looked the other way. Now, a Board on which KJS sits does the same thing for the same reason. This time almost everybody is shocked and horrified because the victims of the tactic are good progressives like themselves instead of those nasty conservatives. I find it amusing the faculty supporters think the PB is going to intervene and make this all better. Let me repeat...she's on the freaking Board!
quote:
originally posted by Fr Weber
TEC may wind up with one fewer seminary. On the other hand, judging by numbers there really only seems to be a need for 3 or 4, not 9.
Sure, TEC has more seminaries than it needs. I thought General would be ones that stayed open along the CDSP, Sewanee, and VTS. Looks like I was wrong.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Schori accepted a resignation that wasn't a resignation to make it easier to get rid of a thorn in her side. Her supporters looked the other way.
Me, I'm no supported of Schori. Her early imposition of a sexuality-based "moratorium" was a disgrace, and she knowingly ordained a pedophile. Sad to say, as episcopal bosses go, she's one of the better examples.
So when I draw a distinction between the two situations, it's based on the facts, not favorable bias. Lawrence maneuvered for years to get SC out TEC: his schismatic intent was suspected back in '07, which proved well founded. He should never have been raised to the purple.
Even if Schori acted wrongly then, the two situations aren't comparable.
quote:
Now, a Board on which KJS sits does the same thing for the same reason. This time almost everybody is shocked and horrified because the victims of the tactic are good progressives like themselves instead of those nasty conservatives. I find it amusing the faculty supporters think the PB is going to intervene and make this all better. Let me repeat...she's on the freaking Board!
So's the bishop of NY, who's now repented and apologized. As pressure grows, Schori may well do likewise. If not, her legacy will be, to say the least, tarnished.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
And now the Bishop of New Jersey has, reluctantly, gotten of the fence, and agreed to support Dietsche's call for unconditional reinstatement.
What stands out is that he seems to have no concept of just what he's put his name to. He says his support for "conditional reinstatement" was based on "deep concern that [faculty] have not, as far as I am aware, rescinded the ultimatums." He seems not to understand that his concerns are irrelevant. He broke a strike, and fired tenured faculty not only without cause, but without even the appearance of process.
As these people so cocooned in their ivory towers that they don't even know what strikebreaking is, and why it's so reviled? If so, the disconnect helps explain why TEC is in such trouble.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Try
Shipmate
# 4951
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Schori accepted a resignation that wasn't a resignation to make it easier to get rid of a thorn in her side. Her supporters looked the other way.
Me, I'm no supported of Schori. Her early imposition of a sexuality-based "moratorium" was a disgrace, and she knowingly ordained a pedophile. Sad to say, as episcopal bosses go, she's one of the better examples.
So when I draw a distinction between the two situations, it's based on the facts, not favorable bias. Lawrence maneuvered for years to get SC out TEC: his schismatic intent was suspected back in '07, which proved well founded. He should never have been raised to the purple.
Even if Schori acted wrongly then, the two situations aren't comparable.
quote:
Now, a Board on which KJS sits does the same thing for the same reason. This time almost everybody is shocked and horrified because the victims of the tactic are good progressives like themselves instead of those nasty conservatives. I find it amusing the faculty supporters think the PB is going to intervene and make this all better. Let me repeat...she's on the freaking Board!
So's the bishop of NY, who's now repented and apologized. As pressure grows, Schori may well do likewise. If not, her legacy will be, to say the least, tarnished.
Mark Lowrance ought to have been dealt with a church trial under Title IV for violating the canons on abandonment of communion. That would have been fair and just. But interpreting verbal remarks at a convention as a resignation of orders is a flat-out violation of our canons. The canon concerning resignation requires a written letter of resignation and it is intended only for cases when the bishop or priest is renouncing ordained ministry completely.
As for the seminary situation, construing a work stoppage as a resignation seems to be a logical extension of the same theory. I'm much more in sympathy with the GTS 8 than I am with +Mark. But they've been treated in the same way by the powers that be in TEC.
--------------------
“I’m so glad to be a translator in the 20th century. They only burn Bibles now, not the translators!” - the Rev. Dr. Bruce M. Metzger
Posts: 852 | From: Beautiful Ohio, in dreams again I see... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
And now the Bishop of New Jersey has, reluctantly, gotten of the fence, and agreed to support Dietsche's call for unconditional reinstatement.
What stands out is that he seems to have no concept of just what he's put his name to. He says his support for "conditional reinstatement" was based on "deep concern that [faculty] have not, as far as I am aware, rescinded the ultimatums." He seems not to understand that his concerns are irrelevant. He broke a strike, and fired tenured faculty not only without cause, but without even the appearance of process.
As these people so cocooned in their ivory towers that they don't even know what strikebreaking is, and why it's so reviled? If so, the disconnect helps explain why TEC is in such trouble.
I really don't think this old left view of striking workers resonates quite as much as you think it does in the 21st century US. I'm also not sure the faculty had a legal right to strike either. We may yet hear a judge's opinion of that. Firing them and calling it a resignation is the main problem even if it turns out to be legal. Not ad
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Try, accepting (arguendo) that Lawrence was entitled to a trial, due to his clear, declared intent to secede from TEC, and take his diocese with him, I'd rank the wrong as minor compared to the New York fubar. The NYC power imbalance just isn't there in SC, and if Lawrence intended to use his trial as a platform, it could've destroyed the church. The constitution isn't a suicide pact.
Beeswax Altar, what matters isn't how this strikebreaking plays in some right-to-work red state, but amongst the progressive constituency courted by TEC. With the breakaway of most of its conservative wing, and the end of its role as de facto national church, that's its target demographic in the marketplace of religion. Even if they're limosine liberals, the allegations of bigotry will hit home.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Lawrence's trial would not have destroyed TEC. That's just silly. If the evidence he intended to leave TEC was that obvious, the thing to do was to follow the canons. However, one thing I've learned about politics in TEC is that only those who disagree with you are required to obey the constitution and canons.
I'm not talking about right to work red states. I'm talking about the US as a whole. Striking workers just don't get as much sympathy as they used to get. I live in a rust belt state with a complex view of unions and strikes. Besides, TEC shouldn't have a constituency to which we market. If we do, we've already ceased to be a church that proclaims the gospel.
In fact, the statement of the Bishop of New Jersey represents everything wrong with TEC leadership. He calls on the Board to contract with a mediator outside of TEC to facilitate reconciliation etc... What kind of bullshit statement is that? You don't have to look outside of TEC, bishop. I'm Beeswax Altar of BA Spiritual Solutions. At BASS, we offer a number of sacramental services designed to maximize the grace received by our clients. Sounds like you need our Reconciliation package with the added confession and listening modules.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
I wish you joy in your startup. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
OK, hyperbole at play in " destroyed," but a trial would've been a circus, a protracted stage for Lawrence to seek converts and destabilize TEC, all with a verdict never in doubt.
I've gone read the canon, and the sticking point is the written notification limb. Given Lawrence's very public statements, and institutional support down south (just what is it with SC and secession ...), that's a technicality. Schori fulfilled the advice and consent provision, which is the safeguard. She does appear to've obeyed the spirit of the law.
As for labor, it's no wonder that folk are ambivalent about unions in the ghost town of American industry. TEC appeals to an altogether more idealistic crowd. Whether it should or not is, of course, a matter for debate. As a believer in the market, I'm all for it.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Byron, I've not really been following this thread, but a Director and a Board of Trustees who take advantage of staff who have withdrawn their labour to sack them, may be aggressive or even bullying, but they aren't scabs or strikebreakers. They're the bosses. You expect them to try and suppress strikes. That's what bosses do.
A scab is an offensive accusation strikers use to call people names who don't strike with them. It's designed to make them feel guilty and whip up hostility towards those not one strike from sympathisers outside the business.
A strikebreaker is a person who takes the bosses' money to come in from outside and do the job of someone who is on strike.
As this strike is an unofficial one, i.e. it hasn't been called by a union, it's difficult to argue that staff that haven't joined it are scabs. There is though an argument that, irrespective of whether they might have been motivated by concern for the students, those from outside who have agreed to cover the classes of the striking staff could have to answer the accusation of being strikebreakers.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Enoch, they're a board at a seminary, not railroad barons, and not expected to act like bossmen. You're right, scab's a strong word, but a word rightly used by the other dean in response to strong actions. People should feel wretched for so much as thinking of crossing a picket line.
However haphazardly, the faculty set up a union and went on strike. To allow strikers to be dismissed at-will takes us back to the Lochner era. What can we expect next, Pinkertons milling around 21st St., perhaps a biplane or two buzzing overhead.
At least men in the cut or at the pithead were under no illusions of being tenured. The board trampled over the faculty's employment contacts. Congrats, they've gone so far even the Lochner court would be appalled.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
You can't haphazardly set up a union and call a strike. I don't think labor law works that way at all. Both sides were wrong to treat the fiasco like a labor dispute in the first place.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Byron posts:
quote:
I've gone read the canon, and the sticking point is the written notification limb. Given Lawrence's very public statements, and institutional support down south (just what is it with SC and secession ...), that's a technicality.
Technicalities, also known as due procedure, are a key element of law. Failing to observe them carefully suggest either laziness or a very weak case.
I'm not au fait with NY labour or contract law (although it would appear that many lawyers specializing in this area will have a field day and skiing trips paid for out of this) but would seem to me that the board should have taken much stronger steps to deal with staff grievances and try to bring in a mediator at an earlier point-- perhaps they did and we don't have all of the facts yet. If this were an RC seminary, at least we could pull out Leo XIII and Piux XI on labour relations against which we could measure the board's actions.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos navis
# 5818
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
=Of course they did; he's their boy. My guess is that GTS is hemorrhaging spondulicks and that the board gave Dunkle a mandate to turn things around at GTS by any means necessary. He failed to bring the faculty aboard
I somewhat agree up until the last clause, where I am uncertain. It seems increasingly possible that the board hired the dean with the intention that he would antagonize the faculty into resigning so that they could hire younger, cheaper replacements. And the faculty walked right into the trap. I see no need to commend the board, but neither see I any need to side with the resigned faculty. They overplayed their hand, and lost. That's how the game goes.
[ 21. October 2014, 01:15: Message edited by: Mockingbird ]
--------------------
Forþon we sealon efestan þas Easterlican þing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, þaet we magon cuman to þam Easterlican daege, þe aa byð, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.
Posts: 1443 | From: Between Broken Bow and Black Mesa | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
...the resigned faculty. They overplayed their hand, and lost. That's how the game goes.
And the students also lost.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
It seems increasingly possible that the board hired the dean with the intention that he would antagonize the faculty into resigning so that they could hire younger, cheaper replacements.
Do you have any evidence for this?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Augustine, the rule of law isn't about following rules, it's about right defeating might. Laws are merely a tool to that end, and sometimes, spirit trumps letter. If it didn't, then what Beeswax Altar describes must prevail, and the bossmen triumph 'cause the faculty didn't fill out the correct form before it went on strike. God save us from the kingdom of the bureaucrats.
Mockingbird, I suspect you value justice a great deal more when you have need of it.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
You can't haphazardly set up a union and call a strike. I don't think labor law works that way at all. Both sides were wrong to treat the fiasco like a labor dispute in the first place.
As I understand it, you have to get authorisation cards signed by the majority of effected employees and then ballot. I don't think that would be hard to organise with only 10 people and some legal advice. It is entirely possible that they followed the process laid down in federal law.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Augustine, the rule of law isn't about following rules, it's about right defeating might. Laws are merely a tool to that end, and sometimes, spirit trumps letter. If it didn't, then what Beeswax Altar describes must prevail, and the bossmen triumph 'cause the faculty didn't fill out the correct form before it went on strike. God save us from the kingdom of the bureaucrats.
Mockingbird, I suspect you value justice a great deal more when you have need of it.
Byron-- our experiences clearly vary. I found over the years that close attention to procedure was one of the really powerful defences afforded to the weak against the mighty. Time after time, I saw that this proved to be an essential tool against abuse by the powerful. In my experience, it was the bosses who, so convinced of the rightness of their cause and relying on the power of their status, ignored the paperwork.
A bottle of decent rioja will facilitate the description of about 4 or 5 cases which would substantiate this.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
If the NY courts are anything like the courts I have ever had dealings with (I used to be a regulator, not a lawyer), then they will look at things in chronological order, and they will consider what is reasonable. Part of that reasonableness is what efforts have been made to avoid or resolve a dispute. Though of course there is a big difference between a court of law and a tribunal. That's as well as the strictly legal considerations.
Back to the issue of resignation vs. dismissal. It is very regrettable that the faculty's original letter never said they were going on strike. They really should have said so explicitly. What they did say was "either he goes or we go". We now know that they never intended to resign, but that only came out later.
Most people have heard of "constructive dismissal". If your employer or your co-workers make life impossible for you, you feel forced to resign. But the courts will look to see if both sides have been honouring the contract of employment. If the situation under the employer's control was such that the employee was no longer able to deliver their side of the bargain, then they will be deemed to have fired you, and anything that flows from that will be treated accordingly, even though you said you resigned.
There is another side to that coin though. If you as an employee make it impossible for the employer to do their job, then you as employee can sometimes be deemed to have resigned, even though you never handed over any resignation.
Quite where this case stands in all this, I don't know. As I said way back at the beginning of the thread, I suspect it depends on legal precedent in that state. Finding that out sounds expensive to me.
Finally - why on earth did the faculty not join a proper professional association (which I guess passes for a trade union in NY)? There must surely be one or more that cover teaching staff in HE. There would have been two obvious benefits. Firstly, the substantial costs would have been borne by the association, not them. Secondly, they would have been advised properly on how to conduct and resolve a dispute. I still suspect that they have been poorly advised so far, though I may be wrong.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Byron wrote: quote:
...the rule of law isn't about following rules, it's about right defeating might.
That probably describes most criminal law and a lot of stuff like judicial reviews. It doesn't adequately cover most civil law, which is about resolving disputes between contracting parties. If this ever gets to court, it will surely be a civil dispute.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Byron:
the rule of law isn't about following rules, it's about right defeating might.
That's absurd on so many levels. One, it assumes that might is always wrong. The seminary has more might than the faculty. Hence, faculty is right and the seminary is wrong. So, let's suppose the NLRB brings a lawsuit against the seminary. The might of a small indebted seminary pales in comparison to the federal government which hires lawyers by the boatload and prints the money to do it. Now, the law of might makes wrong calls for the rule of law to protect the seminary against the government.
Two, your premise essentially assumes that the right side is not required to follow any rules at all. However, right is essentially being defined by you. Problem is the wrong side also think its right. Being right, the wrong side can then do whatever it takes to triumph. Unfortunately, both sides assuming that they were right and could do whatever it took to triumph is what got us in this mess in the first place. Indeed, as I previously said, TEC has been operating this way for sometime and it isn't the least bit Christian. I roll my eyes whenever I read the phrase "respect the dignity of every human being" because I know the person typing it really means by it.
Three, there was no reason the faculty couldn't fill out the paperwork.
quote:
originally posted by Doublethink:
As I understand it, you have to get authorisation cards signed by the majority of effected employees and then ballot. I don't think that would be hard to organise with only 10 people and some legal advice. It is entirely possible that they followed the process laid down in federal law.
It's a lot more complicated than that. 30% of the employees have to fill out cards requesting a union. These names are then sent to the National Labor Relations Board with the request that an election be held. The NLRB then contacts the employer and asks for the names of all its employees. The purpose of this is to both verify the names on the cards match actual employees of the company and to establish which employees are entitled to vote. After that, the NLRB sets the date for an election which the NLRB administers. If a majority of workers vote for a union, then the union is certified. Only then is the employer legally required to bargain with you.
quote:
originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
There is another side to that coin though. If you as an employee make it impossible for the employer to do their job, then you as employee can sometimes be deemed to have resigned, even though you never handed over any resignation.
Should this fiasco be adjudicated in court, something like this will probably be the issue. Otherwise, the faculty could just say the Board fired tenured faculty without following the protocols to do so. Maybe not. I don't know.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
That's absurd on so many levels. One, it assumes that might is always wrong. The seminary has more might than the faculty. Hence, faculty is right and the seminary is wrong. So, let's suppose the NLRB brings a lawsuit against the seminary. The might of a small indebted seminary pales in comparison to the federal government which hires lawyers by the boatload and prints the money to do it. Now, the law of might makes wrong calls for the rule of law to protect the seminary against the government.
Two, your premise essentially assumes that the right side is not required to follow any rules at all. However, right is essentially being defined by you. Problem is the wrong side also think its right. Being right, the wrong side can then do whatever it takes to triumph. Unfortunately, both sides assuming that they were right and could do whatever it took to triumph is what got us in this mess in the first place. Indeed, as I previously said, TEC has been operating this way for sometime and it isn't the least bit Christian. I roll my eyes whenever I read the phrase "respect the dignity of every human being" because I know the person typing it really means by it.
Three, there was no reason the faculty couldn't fill out the paperwork.
By "right defeating might," I didn't mean we should default to David against Goliath, but that might and right should align. The rule of law is about decisions being made on the basis of reason, not power. If mom & pop sue megacorp, and their action is baseless, megacorp should win.
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Byron wrote: quote:
...the rule of law isn't about following rules, it's about right defeating might.
That probably describes most criminal law and a lot of stuff like judicial reviews. It doesn't adequately cover most civil law, which is about resolving disputes between contracting parties. If this ever gets to court, it will surely be a civil dispute.
Depending on the venue, Schori and the other bishops may well have been allowed to argue that Lawrence's antics were equivalent to notice in writing.
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
Byron-- our experiences clearly vary. I found over the years that close attention to procedure was one of the really powerful defences afforded to the weak against the mighty. Time after time, I saw that this proved to be an essential tool against abuse by the powerful. In my experience, it was the bosses who, so convinced of the rightness of their cause and relying on the power of their status, ignored the paperwork.
A bottle of decent rioja will facilitate the description of about 4 or 5 cases which would substantiate this.
You're right, playing by the rules can be a powerful tool in the arsenal of David, but Goliath (with his divisions of attorneys) is no slouch at that game, so it cuts both ways. If checking the right boxes gets a justified win, great, but the if it always decides things, justice takes a back seat to legalism.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Depending on the venue, Schori and the other bishops may well have been allowed to argue that Lawrence's antics were equivalent to notice in writing.
That's quite possibly so, Byron (though it's not a dispute I've been following in any detail).
However it does presuppose an administrative model of church, which I am increasingly uncomfortable with in relation to my own church's structures.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Faculty going back to work. Year of reconciliation with outside assistance.
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Here is the faculty's letter accepting an apparent invitation to return to work.
At this time, I would like to offer my services as ombudsman for the GTS community.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Chast, there seemed to be some hesitance to post links in this thread which I do not understand but was abiding by. Beeswax Altar has now posted the link where I found the news.
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Here is the faculty's letter accepting an apparent invitation to return to work.
At this time, I would like to offer my services as ombudsman for the GTS community.
You'd probably end up firing the Dean,the Professors and the Board.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos navis
# 5818
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
It seems increasingly possible that the board hired the dean with the intention that he would antagonize the faculty into resigning so that they could hire younger, cheaper replacements.
Do you have any evidence for this?
The only evidence one needs to assert that something is possible is a lack of evidence that it is impossible.
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Mockingbird, I suspect you value justice a great deal more when you have need of it.
This is profoundly irrelevant to what I wrote.
--------------------
Forþon we sealon efestan þas Easterlican þing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, þaet we magon cuman to þam Easterlican daege, þe aa byð, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.
Posts: 1443 | From: Between Broken Bow and Black Mesa | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
You asserted it was increasingly possible, which is different from asserting it is possible. It implies a measure of levels of possibility. Why does that measure seem to you to be increasing?
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
It seems increasingly possible that the board hired the dean with the intention that he would antagonize the faculty into resigning so that they could hire younger, cheaper replacements.
Do you have any evidence for this?
The only evidence one needs to assert that something is possible is a lack of evidence that it is impossible.
Then how are you measuring the increase of this possibility?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Lawrence's trial would not have destroyed TEC. That's just silly. If the evidence he intended to leave TEC was that obvious, the thing to do was to follow the canons. However, one thing I've learned about politics in TEC is that only those who disagree with you are required to obey the constitution and canons.
True that. And the current PB seems only to care about enforcing canons relating to real estate.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
