Editing Note: A previous version of this article erroneously stated that the previous Communications Manager, Dave Sorensen, took a “sabbatical” and departed from the university. MUN’s Manager of Media Relations has reached out to the Muse, emphasizing that the Communications Manager had no role in strike negotiations and that the sabbatical was actually a “planned vacation” followed by a planned retirement. The previous version of this article also accidentally implied that LUMUN members would be “locked out of their offices.” MUN has explained that this is not currently being considered, nor has it been discussed.

In a recent communique to the media, LUMUN President Allison Coffin claimed that the University administration was incorrectly representing the offer which they presented to the union and the public.

“Memorial University has been making factually inaccurate claims to the media about the offer they presented to us in negotiations. Normally such details are not discussed in the media during ongoing negotiations, but given that incorrect information is being presented by the Employer we are now required to clarify the facts for journalists covering this issue.”

Allison Coffin, President of the Lecturers Union of Memorial University

LUMUN’s primary contentions with MUN’s recent statements target the following assertions by MUN:

1. MUN’s offer would approach the average rate for Atlantic Canada
2. MUN’s offer to LUMUN would boost lecturers to the fifth highest salaries for Atlantic Canadian universities. 

This is disputed by LUMUN, according to a table provided, which shows the actual rankings never reaching fifth place nor achieving the Atlantic Canadian average. Furthermore, according to LUMUN, the calculations appear to be directly recycled from talks with MUNFA. LUMUN also states that they are unable to determine what numbers the university was sourcing to present their information.

The table above was provided to the Muse in the recent media release from LUMUN. According to the union, it displays inaccuracies on behalf of MUN’s communications to the public and media. Elaborating on the situation, the LUMUN President stated the following:

“We don’t know what numbers they used, nor how any averages were determined (all steps? Floor? Ceiling? Multi years? One year?). Rankings are here discussed in terms of top of scale since this is the maximum pay a Lecturer could theoretically achieve at an institution, and proposals made would get rid of steps. What this does mean, however, is that whatever calculations were used to devise Memorial’s claimed ‘average’ wage are at least a year out of date.

However, even taking into account up to date data on university pay levels (our data is current as of this January) the Employer’s offer does not achieve 5th place out of 12th in any time frame. Also again the amount offered to MUN never reaches the average of Atlantic Canadian universities.”

Allison Coffin, LUMUN President

LUMUN went on to criticize MUN further, stating that “the claims Memorial University are making have no real impact in analyzing the fairness of an offer.” Specifically, MUN was critized for their perceived failure to observe that “wages are not static” and change with increases- thus altering the rankings each year.

“This renders discussion of rankings all but useless. When MUN says we will be 5th, they are making an absolute statement about a dynamic system. We can talk of rankings in a given year, but not overall.”

Allison Coffin, LUMUN President

Thematic in the media advisory was a critique of the lack of fairness received from MUN towards the union. 

“[Memorial’s] argument about comparisons to other universities also misses the core point of LUMUN’s calls for fairness, since LUMUN has argued that Lecturer wages should be comparable to pay normally given for a course at Memorial University.

The offer fails completely to account for the increased costs to Lecturers living in NL for example, a major factor that hurts the competitiveness of wages for Lecturers at Memorial.”

Allison Coffin, LUMUN President

LUMUN concluded the letter by calling on MUN to “provide factual proof of further claims.”

“LUMUN sincerely hopes that this is not the totally-lacking-standard of research rigour that the University holds itself too when deciding how to allocate money internally.”

Allison Coffin, LUMUN President

Attached to the release were a series of “quick facts” which can be summarized as follows:

1. The Auditor General reported that MUN was catering employees and guests with an “Employee Service Award Dinner,” which cost $6,936 and provided food and alcohol to its attendees. PCI salaries stand at $5,000-5,875. In November, during an interview with VOCM, Coffin stated that LUMUN was “gobsmacked” regarding the administration’s spending habits. Specifically, she stated that the dinner itself was the same cost to cover a LUMUN member “to teach 104 students an economics course” without enough funding leftover “to get everyone a 2-piece fish and chips.”
2. MUN may not lead the country in lecturers pay- but it does rank the highest administrative salaries per student, at a rate of $2,369 per student.
3. A list of strike facts and FAQs can be found at the LUMUN Website: https://lumun.ca/2024/02/23/lumun-strike-facts-and-faqs/

A few reflections on the absolute state of things…

Contemplating the dispute between the university and LUMUN is liable to give one whiplash. Once again, the student body finds itself observing strange habits on behalf of faceless bureaucrats they have never met.

Simultaneously we can view the strange recurrence of MUN allegedly failing to employ academic standards during their negotiations. This, of course, is a reference to the episode last year when our paper reached out to MUN regarding what clearly appeared to be plagiarism in their tips on how students should cross the picket line. After responding to our inquiry, the previous Communications Manager blamed the cut-and-pasting on a clerical error, proceeded with a “planned vacation” for the remainder of the strike, and then retired from the university amid a complete implosion of Timmons’ presidency.

However, this was not the only instance during the 2023 negotiations, which prompted frustration over salary figures which did not have a clear origin. We also reported on figures that the university “modified” in their presentation, which misrepresented payroll data during the labour dispute.

Even more broadly, we see the frustrations of academics, which continually present itself in many facets outside of our campus and country. Climate change is the example that comes to mind most prominently- but you might also think of the growing gap between the rich and poor, human rights violations,  the lack of new housing projects in our province, the crime rates, or even electoral results South of the border. The role of a strike, working-class protestors, or mass mobilization in the face of empirical disagreements over math seems surreal- but it happens every day. Our campus is a microcosm of the greater trend society faces: a leadership deficit. In the background of this is a student union election, which makes one wonder about the future of our university.

A brief note on the question of “misinformation” vs “disinformation”

Over the next few days (or weeks, if there is a strike) you’ll likely hear an array of disagreements varying about different interpretations and facts. It may stress you as you engage in your midsemester studies and approach final exams. However, any of us who went through the MUNFA strike (or even the 2019 Winter Semester) can attest that it will not go on forever. In one sense, the strike can only conclude with a mutual agreement on information regarding money and labour. Good faith arguments are the backbone of fair negotiations, which LUMUN is likely referring to.

It necessitates differentiation that, according to the APA’s definition, “misinformation is false or inaccurate information- getting the facts wrong.” Distinctly, “disinformation is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead- intentionally misstating the facts.” It is now up to the University administration to respond to LUMUN’s call for “factual proof” of their claims and prove their intent, clarify their statements, or apologize for inaccuracy.

“The spread of misinformation and disinformation has affected our ability to improve public health, address climate change, maintain a stable democracy, and more.”

American Psychological Association, 2024