SUBMISSION TO THE MAD HATTER TOs Open Letter to Douglas College Staff, Faculty, & Students FROM: Laboratory Technicians and Educational TPlanners RE: Status of Laboratory Technicians and Educational Planners You may or may not be aware that Laboratory Technicians and Educational Planners have been caught in a dispute among the Douglas College Faculty Association, Local 62 of the §.C.G.E.U., and Douglas College Council regarding the appropriate bargaining unit to represent us. Because of this, we are excluded from the current contracts of both groups, which means that we are excluded such contract benefits as increases in salary. Recently an appeal was made to College Council, for interim financial relief to alleviate the hardships imposed on us by the dramatically increasing cost of living. The result was an offer from College Council of a $600. lump sum payment, plus a $100./month increase beginning October lst, 1975. Using the BC se. ble contradt.4s 8 yardstick, since this was the minimum contract ecttlement, we noted that the College Council offer was $525. less than the equivalent lump sum would have been under a B.C.G.E.U. contract, and the offer fell $75/month short of the equivalent monthly staff salary increase. Thus, the technicians and planners rejected the offer and proposed an alternate amount. The Faculty Association agreed not to sign any Letter of Understanding covering the Laboratory Technicians and Edticational Plannets unless the amount proffered was nearer the minimum awarded staff (see Attach~ ment 1, Roger's letter to J.P. Daem). However, the B.C.G,.E.U., Local 62, has not: seen fit to concur with the suggestion of a more equitable increase {see Attachment 2, Mary Pat's letter to D. Porter). They have furthermore refused to discuss their rejection with representatives of the Faculty Association. Thus, we are forced to face the ultimatum of accepting an insulting token payment or nothing at all (see Attachments 3 and 4, Bob Lisson'’s letter and the proposed Letter of Understanding). cont'd