GSA funding article distorts finances, facts

Tuesday, May 12, 1998

GSA funding article distorts finances, facts

RESPONSE: Grad division unaware of bargaining issues on election
ballot

By Jim Turner

I write in response to the Viewpoint article (May 4) by Joseph
Nevins titled "Administration hinders right to unionize." In this
article, Mr. Nevins asserts that "the UCLA administration is trying
to go forward with a bogus poll on unionization," that "Murphy hall
is orchestrating the holding of a referendum on SAGE during the
upcoming Graduate Student Association (GSA) elections" and that
"the UCLA administration has pulled out a new, underhanded tactic
from its bag of tricks."

It may be of some interest to report the events which led Mr.
Nevins to deduce that representatives of the GSA have joined forces
with the administration to "subvert the democratic process" and
plot the downfall of SAGE/UAW.

On April 17, GSA President Andrew Westall wrote to
Vice-Chancellor and Dean Claudia Mitchell-Kernan requesting
temporary funds to help support GSA’s infrastructure and
programming needs for 1997-98.

One of the items for which the money was requested was "to mail
a ballot pamphlet to all registered and enrolled graduate students,
informing them of the candidates, the issues (dental insurance, GSA
fee increase, new public policy council, election of Academic
Affairs commissioner) and any other relevant information." On April
14, Vice Chancellor Mitchell-Kernan responded to Mr. Westall
indicating that some of the requested funds would be provided,
including those requested for mailing ballot information.

Contrary to Mr. Nevins’ claim, this was not an "unprecedented
move." The GSA has, in prior years, requested and received
temporary funds from the graduate division in support of their
efforts to increase graduate student participation in GSA
elections.

I can state unequivocally that the Graduate Division was totally
unaware of GSA’s desire to include questions regarding collective
bargaining on the election ballot. Indeed, we had no knowledge
whatsoever of this issue until April 22, when Mary Ann Massenburg,
a UAW lawyer, faxed a letter to Chancellor Carnesale claiming that
"the UCLA graduate student government is planning to conduct a
union recognition survey with the encouragement of the UCLA
administration."

In sum, Mr. Nevins has concocted a conspiracy based on an
inaccurate and misleading interpretation of why the Graduate
Division provided funds to support the GSA election process. It is
also my understanding that he was informed by GSA representatives
that the administration had no involvement in their desire to poll
student opinions on collective bargaining. This is, quite simply,
the truth.

Mr. Nevins has every right to promote his own agenda. It is, in
my opinion, a disservice to do so in ways that knowingly distort
relevant facts.