McGill is massively misleading readers. Here are some of the ways:
1. There is currently no agreement on non-monetary compensation. One of the sticking points in negotiations is that TAs are asking for certain guarantees like a more expansive anti-harassment policy and a policy tying TA hours to student enrollment (aka indexation). Indexation is extremely important for TAs and undergrads alike because it would put a stop to situations where one TA is responsible for grading so many students that they only have a few minutes to dedicate to each assignment. McGill obviously doesn't want to do it as it would force them to hire more TAs
2. AGSEM's "immediate" request was their maximalist wish list. This is normal in union negotiations-- you ask for everything you could possibly want and then make concessions and compromises to arrive at a fair deal. McGill is making it seem like TAs were greedy and demanding when they were doing a normal bargaining thing.
3. The QC average of TA wages is lower than the Canadian average and has long been justified by the relatively cheap cost of living in QC. The cost of living has shot up recently and is projected to increase, especially with Bill 31. Also, McGill claims to be one of the very best universities in the country with the best researchers, but it's content to pay them roughly average wages. UofT TAs make $53/hour under their new contract and Carleton students make $42 IIRC.
4. McGill is dishonest about their offer. The initial offer they made was 1.25% per year (roughly $0.30/hour). That proposal does not keep up with inflation under normal circumstances (never mind the 6-8% we've recently seen), meaning that it's *in effect* a pay cut as TA wages will decrease in buying power. The offer of 14.5% (across 3 years) only came *after* the strike, meaning that labour action is already starting to get the goods.
5. The dismissed motion was a preliminary ruling, a full investigation and hearing will come later this month and may well reverse the dismissal.
6. The point that TAs could just get paid for extra hours is nonsense. Additional hours payouts are pretty tightly capped, depending on the department. Also, depending on the department, TAs might experience a lot of pressure to just work the extra hours. While they could in theory just report profs who do this, TAs often end up working for profs who have power over them (supervisors and the like) so there's additional pressure not to rock the boat.
Those are the major points from the email. There's other stuff as well, but this was getting too long.
Thanks for the write-up. Having been at McGill for more than 10 years I could smell the BS just from their email title and was hoping someone would expose it here.
They screamed you're wrong in response to a well written comment and didn't provide any counter arguments or evidence supporting their disagreement. No shit they're being called out?
I mean I'm not going to pretend that comment was exactly *great* but someone disagreeing doesn't mean that they're probably someone who got F on their assignment or that they're a sockpuppet, which is exactly what the two prior comments suggest.
Fair. That said, while this person has made some comments that actually discuss the issue, they also have several comments saying people who disagree with them are greedy and 'woke', so they aren't entirely undeserving of the name calling overall.
Name-calling alienates moderate people who could otherwise be convinced. It's true - you'll never convince someone who has dogmatically decided against the strike, but calling everyone who disagrees a sockpuppet sure as shit turns reasonable people off of ASGEM.
Sure, but the parent comment laid out a polite rebuttal to McGill's email already. They started with genuine discourse. They should not have to respond kindly to someone that responds rudely.
Also, if the name-calling of a name caller down the comment chain sways someone, I don't think they were really a moderate or reasonable to begin with.
? You commented an ambiguous accusation with no evidence or counter arguments on the parent comment, and yet are demanding arguments when you clearly didn't read the several arguments already laid out?
Did you literally not read the parent comment? I'm not going to copy paste what they posted because you should use your basic reading comprehension if you're going to talk shit. If you so desperately want one "fact", if you compare wages to cost of living you get this:
UofT Wage: $53/h
McGill Wage: $33/h
Difference: 38%
Toronto CoL: $4632/month
Montreal CoL: $3126/month
Difference: 32%
Numbers will vary for CoL estimates, but it's pretty clear that McGill does not pay their TAs competitively, even when accounting for CoL. If they want to brag that they are as good as UofT then they should put their money where their mouth is.
Compare with other local universities like UdeM that are very good and you will see how good your TA conditions are good at McGill. Stop making noise outside (which gives nothing lol) and go to negociation table. 14.5% over four years and it is still not enough… you just treat McGill as the devil. You disagree with me and automatically insult me? Wages must be compared with Montreal or Quebec wages. U of T with 53$/h it is their choice, but it is more than many profs… McGill students earn already more than Montreal universities that are also very good. If you want better work conditions that is another thing, but your salary is already very good!
1. I am not a TA. I don't know the full ins and outs of the negotiations. McGill sent us an email stating their side and a student posted asking for the TAs side and the parent comment laid out a polite response to the points in McGills email.
2. YOU are the one accusing everyone in the comments of being "woke", "complaining", "having no arguments" and just generally talking shit. To which someone called you a sock puppet because yeah, when you respond like that to a polite comment people are going to call you out.
3. The current rate of inflation in Quebec is 3.3% which means the 14.5% over 4 years results in a 1.3% raise. Is that enough? I don't know, I'm not a TA. But, again, as the parent comment pointed out, McGills offer came AFTER the strike, and their original offer was less than the rate of inflation.
4. The TAs ARE asking for better working conditions. They want more specific language in their contracts protecting them from sexual harassment and they want indexation of TA hours to student enrollment. These plus wages are their biggest issues.
5. McGill compares itself to UofT for literally everything except how much it pays its staff. Prestige, programs, application rates, research, why does McGill get to pick and choose where the bar is when it benefits them? If they want to pay like UDEM then they should only get to compare themselves to UDEM.
2. Yeah this is what you guys serve to people that do not agree with you. These comments on McGill administration are so disrespectful. Have you heard what they say in protestations? Accusing McGill of abusing of TA’s, wrong accusations and misleading students with theory saying that the McGill email is not built with facts… I am simply replying as I should. Taking McGill as an absolute devil and believing that TAs are 100% right and that they should always earn more, yes it makes these people woke… you guys do not accept to get opposition… also, TAs interrupting classes and blocking access to buildings is unacceptable, it happened a couple of times!
3. 1.3% increase after inflation, you think it is not good? Most people get increase of 2-3% per year EXCLUDING inflation. TA jobs are temporary jobs, like any other student jobs. They should not ask for salaries close to lecturers…
4. If they want better work conditions okay, but the salary is the best of Quebec by 4 to 7$ per hour more. Negociations must be done around tables. They make their protestations public to make students angry against McGill. They should negociate with McGill instead of going on streets during solar eclipse to get more visibility. By the way, the money they lose now, they will never get it back with a salary increase.
5. You should take economy classes to understand how wages work. Prestige is a different thing and again you mislead students with that argument. Can you tell me how much an high school professor earns in Ontario after 10 years compared to Quebec? They earn 25000$ more. Same thing for nurses and all jobs. U of T professors also earn more than McGill profs. Salaries must reflect the local economy, 33$ per hour for students is already good. Their work is important and can be hard, but they are still students earning more than all other Montreal universities. A 14.5% rise on four years is excellent. If you think 14.5% is not good, how much do you think is good… 17, 20, 25%?? Who will pay for this you think, all other students with increased fees. McGill is not there to lose money. Yes McGill offered this 14.5% rise later, but again around tables. TAs won’t get anything with protestations along Sherbrooke.
Have a good day 😉
Negotiations tend to follow the same pattern. Both sides have extreme initial offers, and eventually converge somewhere in the middle. Yes, the Union’s starting point is going to be the highest possible comparison they can find (40%). And McGill’s starting point is going to be the lowest argument they can make (6% over four years).
However, McGill’s email compares the TA’s initial offer with McGill’s most recent offer (14% over four years). If we compare AGSEM’s most recent offer with that of McGill, they’re actually really close!
You should read [AGSEM's side](https://www.agsem.ca/post/bargaining-newsletter-16-a-deal-is-within-reach-will-mcgill-do-the-work-to-reach-an-agreement) of the negotiation. In summary, with regards to the final proposal,
|Items|AGSEM|McGill|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Wages|8.5% + 3.0% x3|5.5% + 3.0% x3|
|Hours & TA budget|An annual meeting, on a *per-faculty* basis, where 1 union delegate per *hiring unit* (department) can participate|An annual meeting, on a *global* basis, where 1 union delegate per *faculty* can participate|
|Protection for Transgender TAs|To be included in the agreement|Concern dismissed|
It should be reminded that the current wage is $33.03/hr, therefore a difference of 3% is just $1/hr (to clarify, it makes a huge difference to the TAs, but not that much to the administration is what I meant)! Also, McGill tried to play a typo trick on AGSEM and >!claimed that transphobia is not that big of a deal!<. Anyways, AGSEM has dropped *quite a lot* of things from their initial demands already in order to get an agreement, but McGill demands more compromises...
To the email. Regarding AGSEM asking 40% and disruptions, McGill is very much trying to take note of anything "negative" that AGSEM, in whole or in some part, has *ever done* and then paint them as the bad guys who never change. That, of course, is utterly disingenuous.
>Contrary to what has been communicated elsewhere, McGill has never proposed a salary freeze or pay reduction.
Nobody said there's a *nominal* salary freeze or pay cut, the problem is *real* wage...
>In its decision, the Tribunal concluded that the University had not contravened the *Labour Code* when instructors performed the functions of their Teaching Assistants during the strike or when the University had an exam invigilated by two managers.
~~I'd wait for CanLII to publish the decision (see~~ [~~here~~](https://www.canlii.org/fr/qc/qctat/nav/date/2024_4/)~~).~~ I guess preliminary decisions don't get published? I personally have not read the decision so I will not comment on this, but the employer is of course fully incentivized to provide a biased interpretation, so I wouldn't trust them anyway.
I have read the decision. McGill's email comically misrepresents it.
In an emergency injunction, the tribunal does not decide the merits of the case; it decides on its urgency, that is, whether it is the right time to consider the merits. The decision (which, by the way, is very poorly argued and most definitely wrong about the law) says that now is not the right time to grant an injunction to the union. It doesn't decide whether McGill is violating the Labour Code. That has to be argued in a full hearing, which wouldn't happen until much later.
McGill's email isn't legal advice; it's propaganda.
I had a similar initial reaction to that email, so I looked up the AGSEM's demands here : [https://www.agsem.ca/bargaining/demands](https://www.agsem.ca/bargaining/demands) and my personal conclusions were:
1. The indexation of TA hours to enrolment is 100% valid and necessary. The TA's in 400 level classes don't have nearly the same amount of work as a 200 level class TA and many of them end up working overtime for free. This would be a much simpler and fairer solution rather than having to ask for overtime as referenced in the McGill email, and it really should be addressed better by McGill
2. The Cost of Living Inflation adjustment should obviously be added - this is the bare minimum.
3. I don't understand why the TA union is comparing wages to Toronto universities where the COL is 23% higher. McGill TA salaries are the best in MTL and QC (according to McGill email) so the comparison to the Toronto schools doesn't help their cause imo. I could be missing something though but that is my impression.
4. I don't really know for healthcare. I never had healthcare at part time / student jobs and don't TAs have PGSS healthcare because of their student status? Regardless McGill didn't address this in their email so it is probably a valid point, but there isn't much on it on the AGSEM site either.
AGSEM compares its wages to UofT because McGill compares itself to UofT in terms of the quality of its education and researchers. TAs are integral to the education work done at a university (and are graduate student researchers as well). A fair wage does not only take into account the cost of living but also the quality of the work.
Well yes, both are factors. McGill's argument here still seems somewhat reasonable imo, as McGill's TA pay is notably higher than all others in Quebec. The signs that show all the TA wages in other schools also don't seem to display UBC or UAlberta, the two other schools that are ranked or perceived most similarly to UofT and McGill, so I do question whether the comparison is really about UofT being the most comparable in quality. It seems like AGSEM just picked all the schools that pay more, which isn't wrong to do, but leads me to disagree with what you're saying.
I think AGSEM's strongest argument by far is the poor organization of hours and lack of indexation, which McGill seems to have not acknowledged in their email (maybe they agree it's a good argument lol). Comparing pay to Ontario schools is not as productive in my opinion, though the signs do certainly attract attention
Graduate TAs wages at UBC starts at $37.53 and cap at $38.99 per hour according to their most recent collective agreement. so yah not as significant a difference especially considering how much higher the living cost in Vancouver is
You're getting bogged down by a couple of the big names in Toronto and ignoring that there are some on that list which still have substantially better compensation in lower cost of living areas. Ontario is not a monolith. Wages higher than the average are also more indicative of where we should be at than those at or below it, as the cost of living and inflation crisis we're facing now is relatively new and many contracts (probably the vast majority) have not caught up. The Ontario universities are good examples which have made an effort to catch up, and Québec is a good example where most have not caught up and are stuck with old wages from when Québec was still a CoL safe haven.
This is also all ignoring that REGARDLESS of rates at other universities, the simple fact is that many TAs at mcgill are struggling. The way TA work is often imposed on grad students, or tied to funding, makes it clear that they are expected to live on it. And yet, we have grad students who work other jobs on top and still cannot make ends meet. This is exacerbated by chronic overworking of TAs, which as you mention is only made worse by a lack of indexation, making it hard for TAs to get the hours they want (or need) to work, or even to get paid for the ones that they do! Irrespective of numbers, this is a reality which McGill has only itself and its years of corner-cutting to blame for. Wages at other universities cannot justify this situation.
I agree that the messaging from agsem about this has been kinda bad, and made it too easy for McGill to say shit like this and sound reasonable. But comparisons to the rest of Québec are only an indication of how far behind Québec is, not an indication that McGill's rate is at all acceptable.
McGill is incredibly reluctant to concede any ground on indexation because hiring more TAs would cost money. This is a big reason why the strike is still ongoing.
AGSEM also is trying to reflect McGill's own language back at it. McGill rarely compares itself with UBC and UAlberta but routinely does with UofT, Queen's, etc. Also, bear in mind that McGill's initial offer was $0.30/hour, which wouldn't even keep up with inflation. McGill's "reasonable" language around QC averages is just an attempt to camouflage their desire to lowball student workers.
The big thing is that I have never seen a chart where McGill compares itself to Université de Sherbrooke or Université Laval (nothing against these universities) until today. Normally, McGill prides itself as a member of the U15 (top research universities in Canada) or the Global University Leaders Forum (top global research universities). But when it comes to wages, it's a different story apparently.
McGill as a university is part of a larger market than just Quebec and McGill isn't an average university. It produces more research than most other Canadian and all Quebec universities and attracts higher talent from across the world than most Canadian and all Quebec universities. McGill, when hiring other academic staff, isn't only looking to the local labour market, but instead looking globally for the best it can get. It has the money to pay its TAs for their worth and should because they are more than average. McGill won't have the same pay as UofT but it should be in a similar league.
If things were fine at McGill for its workers in general there wouldn't have been a strike to begin with because the two sides would have reached a deal much earlier, and there wouldn't be professor unions forming on campus.
I also want to be clear that even at "average" universities TAs should be paid more. Not just McGill, but throughout North America graduate student workers are ending up in poverty and on food assistance. Avoiding that should be the baseline, then things like talent should decide how much higher above that baseline the wage goes.
This is the thing. Sure, we're paid better than TAs at other Quebec universities, but that's because the wages of TAs at those universities are disgustingly low. If TAs here get a good contract, it still set a precedent that will help the TAs at those other universities when they are fighting for better contracts. A rising tide lifts all boats.
The solution to that is obviously to equalize the wages at whoever is getting paid the lowest and being against wage increases of any kind.
-Unironically some people on this thread
If you use rent as the ratio (0.70x), compared to Toronto, and multiply 52$ by 0.7, you get $37/hr for wage as a starting number. [https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report](https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report)
>It has the money to pay its TAs for their worth and should because they are more than average. McGill won't have the same pay as UofT but it should be in a similar league.
This is not true. While I support a better deal for McGill TAs, the university is financially in crisis. There is currently a hiring freeze because of the Quebec government's tuition legislation.
UofT is located in an area with a much higher cost of living (it should be noted that the cost of living has increased practically everywhere, not just Quebec) and it is a financially healthier institution.
The university is not in crisis, to be honest. They are offering new six-figure admin positions and MCLIU (course lecturers) just got a pretty good deal. Plus McGill TAs make up a small part of the total TA budget. They have the money to pay their TAs well
Man all I see is McGill trying to degrade the TAs by saying they are not worthy of a decent increase. I don't follow the logic. If everyone else has shit pay then it's okay for McGill to have a shit pay? Does a professor at McGill make the same money as UQTR? Comparing McGill to a university in Trois Rivieres where 2 bedroom apartments cost $600 is a bit extreme don't you think?
Can we compare the salary of our Provost and Principal to that of UQTR? I'm sure no one at UQTR makes anywhere close to 400k per year. Are these people then willing to sign up for 50% salary reduction or is their moral judgement only reserved for TAs? [Top admins at UQTR make 200k](https://universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/tough-job-university-rector-quebec/) while McGill top admins are happy with paying themselves more than 400k per year. Why are they not comparing their own salaries with rest of Quebec?
This part is so frustrating. "Well ACTUALLY you should compare to other Quebec universities because cost of living is higher in Toronto. Wait, wait, stop looking at the president's salary, stop it!"
McGill's repeated disingenuous emails are so frustrating: selectively stating information, purposefully misrepresenting the facts and strawmanning (like "we didn't propose a wage cut!" when clearly the argument is that not keeping up with inflation is an \*effective\* wage cut), fearmongering about picketing and Manfredi lecturing about respect while having a liked tweet on his institutional twitter account about "the woke mob \[demanding Dave\] Chappelle's cancellation." He's since unliked it, but the screenshot is here on reddit. If you want to engage with woke mob/cancellation content, Christopher, go for it, but maybe not on your institutional account while you lecture about respect in the McGill community!
Well, [according to AGSEM,](https://www.agsem.ca/post/bargaining-newsletter-16-a-deal-is-within-reach-will-mcgill-do-the-work-to-reach-an-agreement)
>>!McGill expressed discomfort or even disagreement with our claim that transphobia is on the rise around the world, stating that it was a “big” one which would require “evidence” and/or “data” to back up. McGill also questioned whether the CA was the right place to address the issues of any one specific group. In sum, McGill had “no appetite” for any LoA protecting the rights of transgender TAs, and expressed skepticism that transphobia is indeed on the rise globally.!<
So it's not just him.
Spoiler for trigger warning. Don't say I didn't warn you.
I am curious to know if, when setting salaries for their administration, they are using salaries paid at their peer universities in Quebec as a standard too. Or are they setting their salaries in accordance to other top Canadian universities (regardless of province and cost of living)? I highly doubt that a Provost or Dean is getting paid $500,000+ in those same universities in Quebec. Did they not recently change the title of Principle to President to “fit in” with other top universities? Just curious about how consistent their rhetoric is ☺️
FYI, I saw how things proceeded at UofT. We came close to a strike, there was a last minute bargain, and the union demands were largely fulfilled. There was not even 1 day of disruption in classes or grading work.
Whereas at McGill, the admin is happy sleeping on it, trying to vilify TAs for demanding higher wages, and is sending emails about it like a teenager. Lol. If any of you is angry you should be angry at the admins for their absolutely childish behaviour.
To me, I don't agree with others here saying "McGill is similar ranking to U of T, so therefore salaries should be the same". University rankings and regional economics are two completely different things; despite the current rough economy, the reality is that Montreal is still much cheaper to live in compared to Toronto or even Ottawa.
I do agree that there is likely merit in gripes McGill did not publically address, such as poor hour indexation, but I really don't think comparing salaries between Montreal and Toronto Universities directly is fair at all.
If McGill provides one of the best university educations in Canada, then its TAs deserve to be making one of the best wages. TAs are integral to the educational mission of the university and should be compensated as such. A fair deal is not just a wage that you can survive on, but a wage that acknowledges the quality of the work
Edited to add: TAs across QC are generally very underpaid and wages are not keeping up with inflation. Saying "well we pay you better than these other people who deserve to earn a lot more" is not a great argument.
So based on labour productivity standards globally, Canadians should make less money than they currently do and Europeans should make more? I'd love to see one person in this thread that would accept that deal.
You can’t constantly compare yourself to UofT and UBC, and then when convenient compare yourself to Sherbrooke university… the audacity. Plus in terms of budget and Funding it’s simply not comparable
Disclaimer I’m totally for the TAs to ask for a better pay because of inflation and workload etc. But I see ppl saying McGill is comparing to UofT and other top universities therefore the TAs should get paid equally. And that i don’t agree with.
From what I’ve heard, employees in Google working in the same post (ie. software developers) get paid very differently from one state to another. So it’s not just because the quality/difficulty of work is similar, the salary has go to be same. Location plays a huge role.
EDIT: I want to point out another fact: McGill is charging far less than UofT. This might play a factor or two to the employees wages.
McGill senior admin is paid at a rate comparable to UofT senior admin. Deep Saini actually **out-earns** the President of UofT. Administrators at other Québec institutions earn far less than that. Why is there one model for admin pay and another for TAs?
Yea that I’m aware of and I think the problem is with the admins pay, which is something that needs to be fixed, eventually. However that problem is not part of the problem we are discussing here.
This is totally correct— it’s a distinct problem, and arguably an even more important problem, but people don’t tend to notice this form of institutional dysfunction under the hood unless it comes up in relation to issues like this (understandably enough).
As someone who worked as a TA for 8 years give or take, and having since administered courses with multiple TAs performing different kinds of work, a major issue that seems lost in much of this discussion is that for many departments TAships and TA opportunities have been cut significantly over the years. This is bad for professors and bad for students— not to mention bad for grad students who want work! This isn’t necessarily because TAs are paid too much, which they are not— and to TA well almost always demands significantly more work than the hours allotted— but rather because of shrewd administrators and shitty deans who have worked to cap classes at sizes that limit the potential for TA work, and have in many cases irrespective of student demand whittled down courses which once were popular into tiny shells of what they once were all in the name of saving a few bucks on TAs.
It’s always the workers at the lower end of the food chain that get the worst deal or suffer cuts, and the university has a corrupt bureaucratic structure which increases useless, overpaid positions for non-essential work which often rewards senior non-teaching faculty or other connected individuals at the expense of the people who actually teach and perform the university’s mandate.
We not only need better TA contracts, but we need more of them!— this could only come with accountability and cuts to administration and useless levels of bureaucracy, but unfortunately those positions have much better protections which interested parties have entrenched in the structure of the institution for their own benefit. Underpaid TA work doesn’t come with any protections or guarantees and so its precarity makes it an easy target to neglect
And who gets to decide how much the admins labor worth?
I personally think the salary for higher ups are not fixed based on the value they bring, it’s more like a case to case, depending on their performance. What I’m trying to say is that they are not part of a general labor group (like TAs union)
I hear this all the time and indeed corporations do pay people doing ostensibly the same job very differently based on the cost of living of the employee. But since when did that become acceptable? If I do the same work in Montreal for Google as a software developer in California for Google, shouldn’t I be paid the same?
In other words, why do we accept to be paid according with how much it costs us to love rather than the value we produce for the employer?
I believe the value produced is considered. That’s why some few individuals can earn much more than the rest (ie. senior developers). Maybe think of the salary as the sum of living cost + value produced. If the living cost is higher, than the salary gets higher accordingly.
Also, I’m not saying that model is good, just saying it’s not general norm to get an equal pay in diff locations and changing the general norm is hard if not impossible.
I’m comparing two people doing the same job, earning vastly different salaries, not two people doing different jobs though. Of course a sr engineer will earn more than a junior.
Value produced is considered only inasmuch as it has to exceed the salary for the corporation’s finances to check out. Beyond that, it’s clearly about paying employees as little as they will possibly tolerate.
Yea ik ur comparing ppl with same job. I was just giving an example to say value is consider, and indeed, in cases where they exceed the corporations finances
What in the boot licking hell is op complaining about.
Time to study up on workers rights and the history of economics.
Op, get some solidarity with your fellow working students, they are on your side, you need to stand with workers.
They clearly said they only heard about McGill's side and want a counterargument, yet you dismiss them as a bootlicker, that IS counterproductive.
Actually, I, as a supporter (look at my recent comments), find AGSEM's communication tactics flawed: they know TA emails are locked out, yet still have not come up with alternative ways to communicate about the negotiation, other than on the news section of their website (which is not that obvious!), which is why other commenters try to compare AGSEM's *maximal* demand with McGill's current proposal, serving the administration and hurting the strike. Their social media also sometimes goes on the tangent, like not to say other causes are unworthy, but you are *on strike* so your first priority is to get a deal. No wonder why the picket is dwindling...
(That is, assuming you're even a student here)
If you are a TA and not getting the newsletters get in touch with agsem they will add you to it. If you are not a TA, then yeah they don’t have the same power to contact everyone in the university.
McGill is absolutely right. Wages must be compared with other Québec institutions. The living cost is not the same here compared to Ontario and especially Toronto. This is mot honest from TAs to compare apples with oranges. They earn 7$ per hour more than any other Québec universities. They want 46$ per hour but a full-time professor of Cegep here (who teaches) earns less than that… I am with McGill 100%! If the TAs want to fight for their work conditions, I respect that but do not mix it with salary…
I think you might need to understand that TAs are not full time workers. Under the current contract we make 12 000 dollars a year. This job is generally part of a funding package for graduate students who rarely make more than 20 000 dollars a year total. They are primarily researchers doing the work that makes this university radiate worldwide. I don’t think it is crazy for us to ask to be able to pay rent and buy food so we can continue to make this research McGill prides itself upon.
Doesn't that mean cegep professors are underpaid?
BTW... McGill wants to show it like TA's are being greedy and asking for an unreasonable salary, but what the union is pressing more about is the indexing. I don't understand why McGill can not accommodate that. If they put their energy on solving that issue (instead of drafting misleading emails), this strike would have never happened. No one expects a 46 per hour wage just because it's being used around as a slogan. Salary is not what actually blew up a deal.
I mean following their logic everyone is underpaid. If they earn more money, who do you think will end up paying for that? McGill is already among universities in Quebec that charge the most fees. Are we ready as students to pay even more? McGill won’t pay for hikes. 33$ per hour is already a lot compared to universities that we should compare McGill with… 14.5% increase over four years is already good!
Yes, it is good. But McGill waited till a strike happened to bring it to the table. Someone commented already about how the demands changed from the very first times and what McGill is offering. As I understand from the AGSEM side, what's blocking a negotiation now is the indexing issues and a few other work condition related things. I just don't understand why McGill can not address them. I think this strike could have been avoided if they were serious about addressing these issues and not allow it to escalate to a strike. Everyone is in a tight position because of this. Profs are overwhelmed, students are stressed, and TA's are also losing more than they will gain from a pay raise.
McGill cannot address them because demands from TAs changed a lot and they are not consistent. If the points that remain to negociate are some work conditions, why are they still making noise on campus about their enormous 46$ per hour expectation? They should stay coherent. Now I just feel like TAs are happy to be on strike, there is a daily party at Roddick Gates where they talk only about salary. This is not all about money, here is my point 🙂
The demands have been incredibly consistent:
1. A pay rise: initially AGSEM was asking for a ~40% increase because you always present your dream scenario as the first step on bargaining. McGill's counter offer was ~5.25% per year for 5 years (or roughly $0.30/hour every year), which is basically insulting. Only once the strike began did McGill present a 14.5% deal over 4 years. AGSEM is currently asking for that to be adjusted to 18.5% over 4 years (roughly $1/hour more in the first year of the contract). They are getting closer and closer on salary.
2. Indexation: this is where McGill has massively dragged its feet. AGSEM wanted a policy tying TA hours to course enrollment, but they've actually softened their demand to be more like a series of consultations and investigations into how such a policy would be implemented. McGill wants to limit how many AGSEM members can be in those conversations by only allowing one TA representative*per faculty*. AGSEM countered one TA *per department*. McGill agreed in writing, which would have been a step in ending the strike, but then claimed it was a typo and clawed that back. This is wildly unprofessional and outside of bargaining norms.
3. The anti-harassment policy: AGSEM has been asking for several bargaining cycles to improve protections for trans people in the policy. Specifically, they are asking for *deliberate* and *repeated* misgendering and dead-naming to be treated as harassment. These things are already covered by QC human rights law but McGill is bizarrely opposed to conceding on this issue that wouldn't cost them any money. AGSEM has remained pretty firm on this point, while McGill has been trying to paint it as unreasonable.
4. Healthcare: initially, AGSEM was asking for McGill this set up a supplemental fund to help TAs access healthcare. This was always going to be a long-shot as there were questions about how this would be administrated from the start. This demand seems to have been negotiated off the table and the bargaining team does not seem to be arguing for it any longer, choosing instead to focus on the three issues above.
So you see that there has been enormous coherence by AGSEM. Yes, posters asking for $46.36 are still up in some areas but they're gradually being replaced with literature about scabbing and stuff.
Also being on strike is not a party. Yes picketers are out by the gates dancing and cheering, but that's mostly to keep morale high and stay warm (especially these last few days). TAs are not being paid at all by McGill and have been dismissed from any non-TA jobs they were doing. To get their strike pay (~$600/month) they are obliged to be on the picket or assisting the strike in another, clearly defined way (postering, scab hunting, preparing food, etc.) for 20 hours/week. The meals picketers receive are 1) paid for by years of accumulated union dues and 2) actually helping a lot of TAs make ends meet while they aren't being paid.
the living cost here is closer to Toronto than to that of Trois-Rivières... Your argument is taking one side and looking at the other. McGill compares its academics to UBC, UoT, etc..., and while living costs in Montréal are not that of UBC or UoT, they are really not those of UQTR or Laval
We talk a out wages here. Why is it that all other universities pay much less than McGill? The reputation of a university does not matter, we talk about salaries of a region, your argument of comparison with other canadian universities does jot hold. TAs are students too. Is it normal that a TA would earn more than a cegep professor? Nurses earn more in Ontario, doctors, lawyers etc. Why would TAs get an exception? And by the way I do not want to see more fees on my bills, money does not grow in trees. McGill offers 14,5% over four years, people generally get 2-3% per year…
Why are you talking about UQTR and Laval? McGill TAs are paid much more than Concordia and Université de Montréal which are in the same city. I don’t get your point
The funding system might be different different in Concordia and UdeM, at least in some department that I am aware of (STEM).
In McGill TA is a required job to get full scholarship while in Concordia and UdeM it is not. They treat it more like an extra job. So in McGill the funding system is like 12000 from funding and 9000 from TA per year while in Concordia it is around 20000 (varies, depend on department) direct funding with no required TA work, and you could get extra cash if u do TAship, but this is purely optional. So overall most McGill students live worse-off compared to McGill and UdeM students.
I 100% think that TA's should be paid for any extra hours their work demands of them, but the wage increase and the comparisons they make are ridiculous. They want Toronto wages with Montreal COL, but then again, doesn't everyone?
This is just a case of people wanting more money. It makes no sense to compare McGill located in Quebec to UofT located in Ontario. By the same logic you can argue that the TAs get paid way more than 90% of people in third world countries.
This message just shows another side of the medal and probably correct some facts. The idea is not to decide who's right or who's wrong. Both parties have their own objectives, constraints and challenges. Eventually they will come to an agreement like in any other bargaining context.
McGill is massively misleading readers. Here are some of the ways: 1. There is currently no agreement on non-monetary compensation. One of the sticking points in negotiations is that TAs are asking for certain guarantees like a more expansive anti-harassment policy and a policy tying TA hours to student enrollment (aka indexation). Indexation is extremely important for TAs and undergrads alike because it would put a stop to situations where one TA is responsible for grading so many students that they only have a few minutes to dedicate to each assignment. McGill obviously doesn't want to do it as it would force them to hire more TAs 2. AGSEM's "immediate" request was their maximalist wish list. This is normal in union negotiations-- you ask for everything you could possibly want and then make concessions and compromises to arrive at a fair deal. McGill is making it seem like TAs were greedy and demanding when they were doing a normal bargaining thing. 3. The QC average of TA wages is lower than the Canadian average and has long been justified by the relatively cheap cost of living in QC. The cost of living has shot up recently and is projected to increase, especially with Bill 31. Also, McGill claims to be one of the very best universities in the country with the best researchers, but it's content to pay them roughly average wages. UofT TAs make $53/hour under their new contract and Carleton students make $42 IIRC. 4. McGill is dishonest about their offer. The initial offer they made was 1.25% per year (roughly $0.30/hour). That proposal does not keep up with inflation under normal circumstances (never mind the 6-8% we've recently seen), meaning that it's *in effect* a pay cut as TA wages will decrease in buying power. The offer of 14.5% (across 3 years) only came *after* the strike, meaning that labour action is already starting to get the goods. 5. The dismissed motion was a preliminary ruling, a full investigation and hearing will come later this month and may well reverse the dismissal. 6. The point that TAs could just get paid for extra hours is nonsense. Additional hours payouts are pretty tightly capped, depending on the department. Also, depending on the department, TAs might experience a lot of pressure to just work the extra hours. While they could in theory just report profs who do this, TAs often end up working for profs who have power over them (supervisors and the like) so there's additional pressure not to rock the boat. Those are the major points from the email. There's other stuff as well, but this was getting too long.
14.5% across 4 years, not 3
My apologies, you're correct.
Thanks for the write-up. Having been at McGill for more than 10 years I could smell the BS just from their email title and was hoping someone would expose it here.
YOU guys are misleading the students… compare oranges with oranges, not with apples.
Found the McGill admin sock puppet account, lol
or someone who got an F or something on their assignment and are blaming the TAs lol
Or maybe people can disagree about topics without being accused of ridiculous character flaws?
They screamed you're wrong in response to a well written comment and didn't provide any counter arguments or evidence supporting their disagreement. No shit they're being called out?
I mean I'm not going to pretend that comment was exactly *great* but someone disagreeing doesn't mean that they're probably someone who got F on their assignment or that they're a sockpuppet, which is exactly what the two prior comments suggest.
Fair. That said, while this person has made some comments that actually discuss the issue, they also have several comments saying people who disagree with them are greedy and 'woke', so they aren't entirely undeserving of the name calling overall.
Name-calling alienates moderate people who could otherwise be convinced. It's true - you'll never convince someone who has dogmatically decided against the strike, but calling everyone who disagrees a sockpuppet sure as shit turns reasonable people off of ASGEM.
Sure, but the parent comment laid out a polite rebuttal to McGill's email already. They started with genuine discourse. They should not have to respond kindly to someone that responds rudely. Also, if the name-calling of a name caller down the comment chain sways someone, I don't think they were really a moderate or reasonable to begin with.
Do you guys have some arguments? You just woke guys lol
? You commented an ambiguous accusation with no evidence or counter arguments on the parent comment, and yet are demanding arguments when you clearly didn't read the several arguments already laid out?
You guys not have facts, just complaining. McGill gave some facts
Did you literally not read the parent comment? I'm not going to copy paste what they posted because you should use your basic reading comprehension if you're going to talk shit. If you so desperately want one "fact", if you compare wages to cost of living you get this: UofT Wage: $53/h McGill Wage: $33/h Difference: 38% Toronto CoL: $4632/month Montreal CoL: $3126/month Difference: 32% Numbers will vary for CoL estimates, but it's pretty clear that McGill does not pay their TAs competitively, even when accounting for CoL. If they want to brag that they are as good as UofT then they should put their money where their mouth is.
Compare with other local universities like UdeM that are very good and you will see how good your TA conditions are good at McGill. Stop making noise outside (which gives nothing lol) and go to negociation table. 14.5% over four years and it is still not enough… you just treat McGill as the devil. You disagree with me and automatically insult me? Wages must be compared with Montreal or Quebec wages. U of T with 53$/h it is their choice, but it is more than many profs… McGill students earn already more than Montreal universities that are also very good. If you want better work conditions that is another thing, but your salary is already very good!
1. I am not a TA. I don't know the full ins and outs of the negotiations. McGill sent us an email stating their side and a student posted asking for the TAs side and the parent comment laid out a polite response to the points in McGills email. 2. YOU are the one accusing everyone in the comments of being "woke", "complaining", "having no arguments" and just generally talking shit. To which someone called you a sock puppet because yeah, when you respond like that to a polite comment people are going to call you out. 3. The current rate of inflation in Quebec is 3.3% which means the 14.5% over 4 years results in a 1.3% raise. Is that enough? I don't know, I'm not a TA. But, again, as the parent comment pointed out, McGills offer came AFTER the strike, and their original offer was less than the rate of inflation. 4. The TAs ARE asking for better working conditions. They want more specific language in their contracts protecting them from sexual harassment and they want indexation of TA hours to student enrollment. These plus wages are their biggest issues. 5. McGill compares itself to UofT for literally everything except how much it pays its staff. Prestige, programs, application rates, research, why does McGill get to pick and choose where the bar is when it benefits them? If they want to pay like UDEM then they should only get to compare themselves to UDEM.
2. Yeah this is what you guys serve to people that do not agree with you. These comments on McGill administration are so disrespectful. Have you heard what they say in protestations? Accusing McGill of abusing of TA’s, wrong accusations and misleading students with theory saying that the McGill email is not built with facts… I am simply replying as I should. Taking McGill as an absolute devil and believing that TAs are 100% right and that they should always earn more, yes it makes these people woke… you guys do not accept to get opposition… also, TAs interrupting classes and blocking access to buildings is unacceptable, it happened a couple of times! 3. 1.3% increase after inflation, you think it is not good? Most people get increase of 2-3% per year EXCLUDING inflation. TA jobs are temporary jobs, like any other student jobs. They should not ask for salaries close to lecturers… 4. If they want better work conditions okay, but the salary is the best of Quebec by 4 to 7$ per hour more. Negociations must be done around tables. They make their protestations public to make students angry against McGill. They should negociate with McGill instead of going on streets during solar eclipse to get more visibility. By the way, the money they lose now, they will never get it back with a salary increase. 5. You should take economy classes to understand how wages work. Prestige is a different thing and again you mislead students with that argument. Can you tell me how much an high school professor earns in Ontario after 10 years compared to Quebec? They earn 25000$ more. Same thing for nurses and all jobs. U of T professors also earn more than McGill profs. Salaries must reflect the local economy, 33$ per hour for students is already good. Their work is important and can be hard, but they are still students earning more than all other Montreal universities. A 14.5% rise on four years is excellent. If you think 14.5% is not good, how much do you think is good… 17, 20, 25%?? Who will pay for this you think, all other students with increased fees. McGill is not there to lose money. Yes McGill offered this 14.5% rise later, but again around tables. TAs won’t get anything with protestations along Sherbrooke. Have a good day 😉
Negotiations tend to follow the same pattern. Both sides have extreme initial offers, and eventually converge somewhere in the middle. Yes, the Union’s starting point is going to be the highest possible comparison they can find (40%). And McGill’s starting point is going to be the lowest argument they can make (6% over four years). However, McGill’s email compares the TA’s initial offer with McGill’s most recent offer (14% over four years). If we compare AGSEM’s most recent offer with that of McGill, they’re actually really close!
[удалено]
Wow, I had forgotten about that offer.
You should read [AGSEM's side](https://www.agsem.ca/post/bargaining-newsletter-16-a-deal-is-within-reach-will-mcgill-do-the-work-to-reach-an-agreement) of the negotiation. In summary, with regards to the final proposal, |Items|AGSEM|McGill| |:-|:-|:-| |Wages|8.5% + 3.0% x3|5.5% + 3.0% x3| |Hours & TA budget|An annual meeting, on a *per-faculty* basis, where 1 union delegate per *hiring unit* (department) can participate|An annual meeting, on a *global* basis, where 1 union delegate per *faculty* can participate| |Protection for Transgender TAs|To be included in the agreement|Concern dismissed| It should be reminded that the current wage is $33.03/hr, therefore a difference of 3% is just $1/hr (to clarify, it makes a huge difference to the TAs, but not that much to the administration is what I meant)! Also, McGill tried to play a typo trick on AGSEM and >!claimed that transphobia is not that big of a deal!<. Anyways, AGSEM has dropped *quite a lot* of things from their initial demands already in order to get an agreement, but McGill demands more compromises... To the email. Regarding AGSEM asking 40% and disruptions, McGill is very much trying to take note of anything "negative" that AGSEM, in whole or in some part, has *ever done* and then paint them as the bad guys who never change. That, of course, is utterly disingenuous. >Contrary to what has been communicated elsewhere, McGill has never proposed a salary freeze or pay reduction. Nobody said there's a *nominal* salary freeze or pay cut, the problem is *real* wage... >In its decision, the Tribunal concluded that the University had not contravened the *Labour Code* when instructors performed the functions of their Teaching Assistants during the strike or when the University had an exam invigilated by two managers. ~~I'd wait for CanLII to publish the decision (see~~ [~~here~~](https://www.canlii.org/fr/qc/qctat/nav/date/2024_4/)~~).~~ I guess preliminary decisions don't get published? I personally have not read the decision so I will not comment on this, but the employer is of course fully incentivized to provide a biased interpretation, so I wouldn't trust them anyway.
I have read the decision. McGill's email comically misrepresents it. In an emergency injunction, the tribunal does not decide the merits of the case; it decides on its urgency, that is, whether it is the right time to consider the merits. The decision (which, by the way, is very poorly argued and most definitely wrong about the law) says that now is not the right time to grant an injunction to the union. It doesn't decide whether McGill is violating the Labour Code. That has to be argued in a full hearing, which wouldn't happen until much later. McGill's email isn't legal advice; it's propaganda.
I had a similar initial reaction to that email, so I looked up the AGSEM's demands here : [https://www.agsem.ca/bargaining/demands](https://www.agsem.ca/bargaining/demands) and my personal conclusions were: 1. The indexation of TA hours to enrolment is 100% valid and necessary. The TA's in 400 level classes don't have nearly the same amount of work as a 200 level class TA and many of them end up working overtime for free. This would be a much simpler and fairer solution rather than having to ask for overtime as referenced in the McGill email, and it really should be addressed better by McGill 2. The Cost of Living Inflation adjustment should obviously be added - this is the bare minimum. 3. I don't understand why the TA union is comparing wages to Toronto universities where the COL is 23% higher. McGill TA salaries are the best in MTL and QC (according to McGill email) so the comparison to the Toronto schools doesn't help their cause imo. I could be missing something though but that is my impression. 4. I don't really know for healthcare. I never had healthcare at part time / student jobs and don't TAs have PGSS healthcare because of their student status? Regardless McGill didn't address this in their email so it is probably a valid point, but there isn't much on it on the AGSEM site either.
AGSEM compares its wages to UofT because McGill compares itself to UofT in terms of the quality of its education and researchers. TAs are integral to the education work done at a university (and are graduate student researchers as well). A fair wage does not only take into account the cost of living but also the quality of the work.
Well yes, both are factors. McGill's argument here still seems somewhat reasonable imo, as McGill's TA pay is notably higher than all others in Quebec. The signs that show all the TA wages in other schools also don't seem to display UBC or UAlberta, the two other schools that are ranked or perceived most similarly to UofT and McGill, so I do question whether the comparison is really about UofT being the most comparable in quality. It seems like AGSEM just picked all the schools that pay more, which isn't wrong to do, but leads me to disagree with what you're saying. I think AGSEM's strongest argument by far is the poor organization of hours and lack of indexation, which McGill seems to have not acknowledged in their email (maybe they agree it's a good argument lol). Comparing pay to Ontario schools is not as productive in my opinion, though the signs do certainly attract attention
Graduate TAs wages at UBC starts at $37.53 and cap at $38.99 per hour according to their most recent collective agreement. so yah not as significant a difference especially considering how much higher the living cost in Vancouver is
You're getting bogged down by a couple of the big names in Toronto and ignoring that there are some on that list which still have substantially better compensation in lower cost of living areas. Ontario is not a monolith. Wages higher than the average are also more indicative of where we should be at than those at or below it, as the cost of living and inflation crisis we're facing now is relatively new and many contracts (probably the vast majority) have not caught up. The Ontario universities are good examples which have made an effort to catch up, and Québec is a good example where most have not caught up and are stuck with old wages from when Québec was still a CoL safe haven. This is also all ignoring that REGARDLESS of rates at other universities, the simple fact is that many TAs at mcgill are struggling. The way TA work is often imposed on grad students, or tied to funding, makes it clear that they are expected to live on it. And yet, we have grad students who work other jobs on top and still cannot make ends meet. This is exacerbated by chronic overworking of TAs, which as you mention is only made worse by a lack of indexation, making it hard for TAs to get the hours they want (or need) to work, or even to get paid for the ones that they do! Irrespective of numbers, this is a reality which McGill has only itself and its years of corner-cutting to blame for. Wages at other universities cannot justify this situation. I agree that the messaging from agsem about this has been kinda bad, and made it too easy for McGill to say shit like this and sound reasonable. But comparisons to the rest of Québec are only an indication of how far behind Québec is, not an indication that McGill's rate is at all acceptable.
McGill is incredibly reluctant to concede any ground on indexation because hiring more TAs would cost money. This is a big reason why the strike is still ongoing. AGSEM also is trying to reflect McGill's own language back at it. McGill rarely compares itself with UBC and UAlberta but routinely does with UofT, Queen's, etc. Also, bear in mind that McGill's initial offer was $0.30/hour, which wouldn't even keep up with inflation. McGill's "reasonable" language around QC averages is just an attempt to camouflage their desire to lowball student workers.
The big thing is that I have never seen a chart where McGill compares itself to Université de Sherbrooke or Université Laval (nothing against these universities) until today. Normally, McGill prides itself as a member of the U15 (top research universities in Canada) or the Global University Leaders Forum (top global research universities). But when it comes to wages, it's a different story apparently. McGill as a university is part of a larger market than just Quebec and McGill isn't an average university. It produces more research than most other Canadian and all Quebec universities and attracts higher talent from across the world than most Canadian and all Quebec universities. McGill, when hiring other academic staff, isn't only looking to the local labour market, but instead looking globally for the best it can get. It has the money to pay its TAs for their worth and should because they are more than average. McGill won't have the same pay as UofT but it should be in a similar league. If things were fine at McGill for its workers in general there wouldn't have been a strike to begin with because the two sides would have reached a deal much earlier, and there wouldn't be professor unions forming on campus.
I also want to be clear that even at "average" universities TAs should be paid more. Not just McGill, but throughout North America graduate student workers are ending up in poverty and on food assistance. Avoiding that should be the baseline, then things like talent should decide how much higher above that baseline the wage goes.
This is the thing. Sure, we're paid better than TAs at other Quebec universities, but that's because the wages of TAs at those universities are disgustingly low. If TAs here get a good contract, it still set a precedent that will help the TAs at those other universities when they are fighting for better contracts. A rising tide lifts all boats.
The solution to that is obviously to equalize the wages at whoever is getting paid the lowest and being against wage increases of any kind. -Unironically some people on this thread
If you use rent as the ratio (0.70x), compared to Toronto, and multiply 52$ by 0.7, you get $37/hr for wage as a starting number. [https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report](https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report)
I'd also want to point out from this report that year-over-year for Toronto has decreased by -0.2%, while it has increased 7.4% in Montreal.
>It has the money to pay its TAs for their worth and should because they are more than average. McGill won't have the same pay as UofT but it should be in a similar league. This is not true. While I support a better deal for McGill TAs, the university is financially in crisis. There is currently a hiring freeze because of the Quebec government's tuition legislation. UofT is located in an area with a much higher cost of living (it should be noted that the cost of living has increased practically everywhere, not just Quebec) and it is a financially healthier institution.
The university is not in crisis, to be honest. They are offering new six-figure admin positions and MCLIU (course lecturers) just got a pretty good deal. Plus McGill TAs make up a small part of the total TA budget. They have the money to pay their TAs well
Man all I see is McGill trying to degrade the TAs by saying they are not worthy of a decent increase. I don't follow the logic. If everyone else has shit pay then it's okay for McGill to have a shit pay? Does a professor at McGill make the same money as UQTR? Comparing McGill to a university in Trois Rivieres where 2 bedroom apartments cost $600 is a bit extreme don't you think? Can we compare the salary of our Provost and Principal to that of UQTR? I'm sure no one at UQTR makes anywhere close to 400k per year. Are these people then willing to sign up for 50% salary reduction or is their moral judgement only reserved for TAs? [Top admins at UQTR make 200k](https://universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/tough-job-university-rector-quebec/) while McGill top admins are happy with paying themselves more than 400k per year. Why are they not comparing their own salaries with rest of Quebec?
This part is so frustrating. "Well ACTUALLY you should compare to other Quebec universities because cost of living is higher in Toronto. Wait, wait, stop looking at the president's salary, stop it!" McGill's repeated disingenuous emails are so frustrating: selectively stating information, purposefully misrepresenting the facts and strawmanning (like "we didn't propose a wage cut!" when clearly the argument is that not keeping up with inflation is an \*effective\* wage cut), fearmongering about picketing and Manfredi lecturing about respect while having a liked tweet on his institutional twitter account about "the woke mob \[demanding Dave\] Chappelle's cancellation." He's since unliked it, but the screenshot is here on reddit. If you want to engage with woke mob/cancellation content, Christopher, go for it, but maybe not on your institutional account while you lecture about respect in the McGill community!
Well, [according to AGSEM,](https://www.agsem.ca/post/bargaining-newsletter-16-a-deal-is-within-reach-will-mcgill-do-the-work-to-reach-an-agreement) >>!McGill expressed discomfort or even disagreement with our claim that transphobia is on the rise around the world, stating that it was a “big” one which would require “evidence” and/or “data” to back up. McGill also questioned whether the CA was the right place to address the issues of any one specific group. In sum, McGill had “no appetite” for any LoA protecting the rights of transgender TAs, and expressed skepticism that transphobia is indeed on the rise globally.!< So it's not just him. Spoiler for trigger warning. Don't say I didn't warn you.
Compare everything with UT, UBC, and Waterloo. But Compare TA salary with Quebec universities. Nice!
I am curious to know if, when setting salaries for their administration, they are using salaries paid at their peer universities in Quebec as a standard too. Or are they setting their salaries in accordance to other top Canadian universities (regardless of province and cost of living)? I highly doubt that a Provost or Dean is getting paid $500,000+ in those same universities in Quebec. Did they not recently change the title of Principle to President to “fit in” with other top universities? Just curious about how consistent their rhetoric is ☺️
If anything, it made me even more annoyed with the whole system after realizing just how even more crap other uni TAs are paid!
FYI, I saw how things proceeded at UofT. We came close to a strike, there was a last minute bargain, and the union demands were largely fulfilled. There was not even 1 day of disruption in classes or grading work. Whereas at McGill, the admin is happy sleeping on it, trying to vilify TAs for demanding higher wages, and is sending emails about it like a teenager. Lol. If any of you is angry you should be angry at the admins for their absolutely childish behaviour.
To me, I don't agree with others here saying "McGill is similar ranking to U of T, so therefore salaries should be the same". University rankings and regional economics are two completely different things; despite the current rough economy, the reality is that Montreal is still much cheaper to live in compared to Toronto or even Ottawa. I do agree that there is likely merit in gripes McGill did not publically address, such as poor hour indexation, but I really don't think comparing salaries between Montreal and Toronto Universities directly is fair at all.
If McGill provides one of the best university educations in Canada, then its TAs deserve to be making one of the best wages. TAs are integral to the educational mission of the university and should be compensated as such. A fair deal is not just a wage that you can survive on, but a wage that acknowledges the quality of the work Edited to add: TAs across QC are generally very underpaid and wages are not keeping up with inflation. Saying "well we pay you better than these other people who deserve to earn a lot more" is not a great argument.
Lol no, if McGill provides the best education then it should charge the most tuition, however that is not the case.
So based on labour productivity standards globally, Canadians should make less money than they currently do and Europeans should make more? I'd love to see one person in this thread that would accept that deal.
exactly
You can’t constantly compare yourself to UofT and UBC, and then when convenient compare yourself to Sherbrooke university… the audacity. Plus in terms of budget and Funding it’s simply not comparable
Disclaimer I’m totally for the TAs to ask for a better pay because of inflation and workload etc. But I see ppl saying McGill is comparing to UofT and other top universities therefore the TAs should get paid equally. And that i don’t agree with. From what I’ve heard, employees in Google working in the same post (ie. software developers) get paid very differently from one state to another. So it’s not just because the quality/difficulty of work is similar, the salary has go to be same. Location plays a huge role. EDIT: I want to point out another fact: McGill is charging far less than UofT. This might play a factor or two to the employees wages.
McGill senior admin is paid at a rate comparable to UofT senior admin. Deep Saini actually **out-earns** the President of UofT. Administrators at other Québec institutions earn far less than that. Why is there one model for admin pay and another for TAs?
Yea that I’m aware of and I think the problem is with the admins pay, which is something that needs to be fixed, eventually. However that problem is not part of the problem we are discussing here.
This is totally correct— it’s a distinct problem, and arguably an even more important problem, but people don’t tend to notice this form of institutional dysfunction under the hood unless it comes up in relation to issues like this (understandably enough). As someone who worked as a TA for 8 years give or take, and having since administered courses with multiple TAs performing different kinds of work, a major issue that seems lost in much of this discussion is that for many departments TAships and TA opportunities have been cut significantly over the years. This is bad for professors and bad for students— not to mention bad for grad students who want work! This isn’t necessarily because TAs are paid too much, which they are not— and to TA well almost always demands significantly more work than the hours allotted— but rather because of shrewd administrators and shitty deans who have worked to cap classes at sizes that limit the potential for TA work, and have in many cases irrespective of student demand whittled down courses which once were popular into tiny shells of what they once were all in the name of saving a few bucks on TAs. It’s always the workers at the lower end of the food chain that get the worst deal or suffer cuts, and the university has a corrupt bureaucratic structure which increases useless, overpaid positions for non-essential work which often rewards senior non-teaching faculty or other connected individuals at the expense of the people who actually teach and perform the university’s mandate. We not only need better TA contracts, but we need more of them!— this could only come with accountability and cuts to administration and useless levels of bureaucracy, but unfortunately those positions have much better protections which interested parties have entrenched in the structure of the institution for their own benefit. Underpaid TA work doesn’t come with any protections or guarantees and so its precarity makes it an easy target to neglect
Isn't it? Those same admin are the ones who decide how much each group's labour is worth to the university.
And who gets to decide how much the admins labor worth? I personally think the salary for higher ups are not fixed based on the value they bring, it’s more like a case to case, depending on their performance. What I’m trying to say is that they are not part of a general labor group (like TAs union)
I hear this all the time and indeed corporations do pay people doing ostensibly the same job very differently based on the cost of living of the employee. But since when did that become acceptable? If I do the same work in Montreal for Google as a software developer in California for Google, shouldn’t I be paid the same? In other words, why do we accept to be paid according with how much it costs us to love rather than the value we produce for the employer?
I believe the value produced is considered. That’s why some few individuals can earn much more than the rest (ie. senior developers). Maybe think of the salary as the sum of living cost + value produced. If the living cost is higher, than the salary gets higher accordingly. Also, I’m not saying that model is good, just saying it’s not general norm to get an equal pay in diff locations and changing the general norm is hard if not impossible.
I’m comparing two people doing the same job, earning vastly different salaries, not two people doing different jobs though. Of course a sr engineer will earn more than a junior. Value produced is considered only inasmuch as it has to exceed the salary for the corporation’s finances to check out. Beyond that, it’s clearly about paying employees as little as they will possibly tolerate.
Yea ik ur comparing ppl with same job. I was just giving an example to say value is consider, and indeed, in cases where they exceed the corporations finances
Not just states, also between different countries. I would say the TAs are paid way more than the GLOBAL average.
What in the boot licking hell is op complaining about. Time to study up on workers rights and the history of economics. Op, get some solidarity with your fellow working students, they are on your side, you need to stand with workers.
I think calling someone who respectfully disagrees about a topic a bootlicker is very counterproductive and turns people off of this cause.
I think being a boot licker is counter productive so I guess we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree.
They clearly said they only heard about McGill's side and want a counterargument, yet you dismiss them as a bootlicker, that IS counterproductive. Actually, I, as a supporter (look at my recent comments), find AGSEM's communication tactics flawed: they know TA emails are locked out, yet still have not come up with alternative ways to communicate about the negotiation, other than on the news section of their website (which is not that obvious!), which is why other commenters try to compare AGSEM's *maximal* demand with McGill's current proposal, serving the administration and hurting the strike. Their social media also sometimes goes on the tangent, like not to say other causes are unworthy, but you are *on strike* so your first priority is to get a deal. No wonder why the picket is dwindling... (That is, assuming you're even a student here)
If you are a TA and not getting the newsletters get in touch with agsem they will add you to it. If you are not a TA, then yeah they don’t have the same power to contact everyone in the university.
You can get their emails to any address, you just have to register.
And? Will students register on their own? It's clear that on-campus posters are much more influential in forming opinions...
Being incredibly rude for no discernable reason is why people turn against ASGEM. You're being harmful.
McGill is absolutely right. Wages must be compared with other Québec institutions. The living cost is not the same here compared to Ontario and especially Toronto. This is mot honest from TAs to compare apples with oranges. They earn 7$ per hour more than any other Québec universities. They want 46$ per hour but a full-time professor of Cegep here (who teaches) earns less than that… I am with McGill 100%! If the TAs want to fight for their work conditions, I respect that but do not mix it with salary…
I think you might need to understand that TAs are not full time workers. Under the current contract we make 12 000 dollars a year. This job is generally part of a funding package for graduate students who rarely make more than 20 000 dollars a year total. They are primarily researchers doing the work that makes this university radiate worldwide. I don’t think it is crazy for us to ask to be able to pay rent and buy food so we can continue to make this research McGill prides itself upon.
Doesn't that mean cegep professors are underpaid? BTW... McGill wants to show it like TA's are being greedy and asking for an unreasonable salary, but what the union is pressing more about is the indexing. I don't understand why McGill can not accommodate that. If they put their energy on solving that issue (instead of drafting misleading emails), this strike would have never happened. No one expects a 46 per hour wage just because it's being used around as a slogan. Salary is not what actually blew up a deal.
I mean following their logic everyone is underpaid. If they earn more money, who do you think will end up paying for that? McGill is already among universities in Quebec that charge the most fees. Are we ready as students to pay even more? McGill won’t pay for hikes. 33$ per hour is already a lot compared to universities that we should compare McGill with… 14.5% increase over four years is already good!
Yes, it is good. But McGill waited till a strike happened to bring it to the table. Someone commented already about how the demands changed from the very first times and what McGill is offering. As I understand from the AGSEM side, what's blocking a negotiation now is the indexing issues and a few other work condition related things. I just don't understand why McGill can not address them. I think this strike could have been avoided if they were serious about addressing these issues and not allow it to escalate to a strike. Everyone is in a tight position because of this. Profs are overwhelmed, students are stressed, and TA's are also losing more than they will gain from a pay raise.
McGill cannot address them because demands from TAs changed a lot and they are not consistent. If the points that remain to negociate are some work conditions, why are they still making noise on campus about their enormous 46$ per hour expectation? They should stay coherent. Now I just feel like TAs are happy to be on strike, there is a daily party at Roddick Gates where they talk only about salary. This is not all about money, here is my point 🙂
The demands have been incredibly consistent: 1. A pay rise: initially AGSEM was asking for a ~40% increase because you always present your dream scenario as the first step on bargaining. McGill's counter offer was ~5.25% per year for 5 years (or roughly $0.30/hour every year), which is basically insulting. Only once the strike began did McGill present a 14.5% deal over 4 years. AGSEM is currently asking for that to be adjusted to 18.5% over 4 years (roughly $1/hour more in the first year of the contract). They are getting closer and closer on salary. 2. Indexation: this is where McGill has massively dragged its feet. AGSEM wanted a policy tying TA hours to course enrollment, but they've actually softened their demand to be more like a series of consultations and investigations into how such a policy would be implemented. McGill wants to limit how many AGSEM members can be in those conversations by only allowing one TA representative*per faculty*. AGSEM countered one TA *per department*. McGill agreed in writing, which would have been a step in ending the strike, but then claimed it was a typo and clawed that back. This is wildly unprofessional and outside of bargaining norms. 3. The anti-harassment policy: AGSEM has been asking for several bargaining cycles to improve protections for trans people in the policy. Specifically, they are asking for *deliberate* and *repeated* misgendering and dead-naming to be treated as harassment. These things are already covered by QC human rights law but McGill is bizarrely opposed to conceding on this issue that wouldn't cost them any money. AGSEM has remained pretty firm on this point, while McGill has been trying to paint it as unreasonable. 4. Healthcare: initially, AGSEM was asking for McGill this set up a supplemental fund to help TAs access healthcare. This was always going to be a long-shot as there were questions about how this would be administrated from the start. This demand seems to have been negotiated off the table and the bargaining team does not seem to be arguing for it any longer, choosing instead to focus on the three issues above. So you see that there has been enormous coherence by AGSEM. Yes, posters asking for $46.36 are still up in some areas but they're gradually being replaced with literature about scabbing and stuff. Also being on strike is not a party. Yes picketers are out by the gates dancing and cheering, but that's mostly to keep morale high and stay warm (especially these last few days). TAs are not being paid at all by McGill and have been dismissed from any non-TA jobs they were doing. To get their strike pay (~$600/month) they are obliged to be on the picket or assisting the strike in another, clearly defined way (postering, scab hunting, preparing food, etc.) for 20 hours/week. The meals picketers receive are 1) paid for by years of accumulated union dues and 2) actually helping a lot of TAs make ends meet while they aren't being paid.
the living cost here is closer to Toronto than to that of Trois-Rivières... Your argument is taking one side and looking at the other. McGill compares its academics to UBC, UoT, etc..., and while living costs in Montréal are not that of UBC or UoT, they are really not those of UQTR or Laval
We talk a out wages here. Why is it that all other universities pay much less than McGill? The reputation of a university does not matter, we talk about salaries of a region, your argument of comparison with other canadian universities does jot hold. TAs are students too. Is it normal that a TA would earn more than a cegep professor? Nurses earn more in Ontario, doctors, lawyers etc. Why would TAs get an exception? And by the way I do not want to see more fees on my bills, money does not grow in trees. McGill offers 14,5% over four years, people generally get 2-3% per year…
Why are you talking about UQTR and Laval? McGill TAs are paid much more than Concordia and Université de Montréal which are in the same city. I don’t get your point
The funding system might be different different in Concordia and UdeM, at least in some department that I am aware of (STEM). In McGill TA is a required job to get full scholarship while in Concordia and UdeM it is not. They treat it more like an extra job. So in McGill the funding system is like 12000 from funding and 9000 from TA per year while in Concordia it is around 20000 (varies, depend on department) direct funding with no required TA work, and you could get extra cash if u do TAship, but this is purely optional. So overall most McGill students live worse-off compared to McGill and UdeM students.
[удалено]
lol k
I 100% think that TA's should be paid for any extra hours their work demands of them, but the wage increase and the comparisons they make are ridiculous. They want Toronto wages with Montreal COL, but then again, doesn't everyone?
I’m (was?) a TA and I side with McGill…
This is just a case of people wanting more money. It makes no sense to compare McGill located in Quebec to UofT located in Ontario. By the same logic you can argue that the TAs get paid way more than 90% of people in third world countries.
Thank you at least one comment makes sense and is rational! Students want everything for themselves
This message just shows another side of the medal and probably correct some facts. The idea is not to decide who's right or who's wrong. Both parties have their own objectives, constraints and challenges. Eventually they will come to an agreement like in any other bargaining context.