APSCUF election results, and some musing on implications

This past weekend (April 16-17), APSCUF elected its officers (Pres, VP, Secretary, Treasurer) for two year terms.  The electees (I don’t like the term “winners” because it implies that those who didn’t win are “losers”) are:

President: Steve Hicks, Lock Haven

VP: Ken Mash, East Stroudsburg

Secretary: Helen Bieber, Kutztown

Treasurer: Chris Hallen, Bloomsburg

Ken Mash is the only new officer, replacing Amy Walters, who stepped down.

The re-election of Steve Hicks as President is significant for a number of reasons.  I voted for (SPOILER ALERT!) Steve and Ken (Helen and Chris ran unopposed, so those votes weren’t nearly as dramatic) because I’ve been satisfied with the work Steve has done in his first term as President, and with the work Ken has done as statewide Meet and Discuss chair.

Are they perfect?  Of course not, and the campaign run by Rob Mutchnik for President and Debra Cornelius for VP aired some legitimate concerns–if you’re reading this with much interest, you already know what they are, so I won’t air them again here.  I hope, and fully expect, that Steve and Ken will take those concerns more seriously than simply to nod their thanks at Rob and Deb for raising them.

I also hope, although I didn’t vote for them, that Rob and Deb will continue to fight on behalf of APSCUF.  The vote tallies were decisive but not overwhelming, which tells me at least these two things: (1) in general, Legislative Assembly delegates are satisfied with the current administration; but (2) Rob and Deb struck enough chords with the delegates to demonstrate that there’s still plenty of work to be done moving APSCUF forward–especially in the near term, as we move into negotiations season, but also in the long term.

Unlike some other delegates, I see the pending negotiations season as an *opportunity* to take on that work, rather than a crisis towards which we’re dashing headlong.  We all know that the negotiations will be difficult, as PASSHE continues to misrepresent the budget situation and its impacts.  We know that we’re entering negotiations with a different kind of process in place, and a different kind of dynamic among the campuses as a result.  From my point of view, given the shift in APSCUF’s ethos over the last few years, all that “uncertainty” actually opens up possibilities for the union, at the state level, to commit to democratic processes, creative mobilizing efforts, and negotiations postures/strategies that would have been very hard to commit to before.

Obviously, preparing for negotiations and possible job actions is hard work no matter what.  If that hard work can, in this instance, have positive short AND long-term effects on our union, I’d rather that than work our asses off for a mediocre contract and no long-term impact.

Advertisements

One Response to APSCUF election results, and some musing on implications

  1. Steve Hicks says:

    I’m stunned to read, on a blog (proves they don’t always publish the truth!), that I’m not perfect! Stunned. I won’t bother differ in this small space…

    But, seriously, I wanted to respond to the line about “chords” struck by our opponents and re-echo (or is that redundant?) what I said Saturday after the result: I know campaigns are good because they create a crucible for ideas and they force candidates to articulate their ideas, and shape them for voter consumption. Ken and I learned a lot from this experience (you want to see our articulation, see OUR blog at steveandken2010.com) and will use it to improve APSCUF in the future.

    I think the chords of diversity and unity brought out in Friday’s debate are worth paying attention to. I have tried — my record on this stands up to comparison — to be diverse in my selections. Although “perfect,” I can do better.

    Of unity, I will repeat what I’ve said in other forums: we argue, but it’s amazing how much our leadership agrees on the IMPORTANT large issues. There’s been little dissent on the retirement plan overture — we aren’t going to let PASSHE buy out senior faculty and not replace them without SOMETHING in return. To just take it when we have bargaining rights would be wrong.

    And we all agreed to pushback on the giveback request from the Chancellor last summer. ALL.

    So where are we divided? Most of the differences I hear about are about style, and a great deal of this presidential and vice presidential election was about style. Do we deal with the system management with an in-your-face attitude, or do deal with calmly and professional and an appropriate firm no. In the end, it’s still “no.”

    Thanks for your support, Seth, and thanks for having a blog to keep some of our members informed.

    Steve

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: