AWDU Silences Opposition

AWDU Silences Opposition

Charges have been leveled that the ruling caucus, Academic Workers for a Democratic Union (AWDU), are not so democratic after all. We agree. Our experience with AWDU is that they are tyrannical and violently opposed to any dissent.

Charges include:

• Using consensus as a form of decision making whenever possible and when a decision is obviously too contentious to come to consensus then using a vote by majority rule. Then using the decision of that the majority rule vote to guide the actions of the union. What about what everybody else wanted to do? Huh?
• Voting for what they think, not what we think. When an AWDU member votes they act like they are some kind of elected representative and speak for their constituents. But doesn't this mean that they are discounting what people at other campuses think when they vote? For example if Duane Wright, Unit Chair of Davis, votes he only considers what he thinks and what people at Davis think. But why shouldn't he be responsive to the members at Santa Barbara. He should at least split his vote in an act of solidarity with his own opposition.
• AWDU elected leaders have actually said things. Publicly. But when they speak they do so out of their own opinion. This is partisan and is divisive.Obviously everything we say has our own biases in it. So why should AWDU be allowed to speak at all. For example: When UAW 2865 President gets on the phone to talk to other unions or the international, he speaks his own mind - not what we are thinking. Sounds like an abuse of power to us!

Couldn't AWDU do what we do, and keep the debate within our own ranks instead of sharing their ideas, opinions, and strategies publicly. Obviously no one from the University Management will ever read our blog. I mean its the internet, how easy can it be to find it?