Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Well a nice reason to finish my phd faster

[Warning: I am only stating opinions.]

Today I've found out that the syndicalisation of the student will go through. Apparently 74% of all people that could vote throught the postal vote voted yes. As such the syndicate will be formed. I've got a few problem with this, first I did not receive a voting ballot, even if I should have according to the criterium they where supposedly using if I was the only one I could thing it was a mistake but at least an other Astrophysic student find himself in the same situation. Second if they could only get 35% of the people to sign their card when they showed up in person how is it possible that 74% say they approve in a postal vote. My opinion is that something smells fishy.

To make matter worse apparently all vote that where not sent in where considered to be vote for the no camp. I'm wondering how it is possible that far more then 70% of the people are for the syndicalisation (oh it is possible, it's just that previous attempt showed a very diffrent trend) when the 26% against include: the people that didn't care enough to send a vote, where for the syndicalisation but forgot to vote, people that refused to vote because not voting ment no.

One possible theory is that those that did not sent a vote where simply not counted.. (quite easier to get 75% for then since most people for will send in votes), that the "voting" process is screwed and biased (afterall I've got at least 2 peoples that should have been able to vote that couldn't) or that they simply are posting the result they wanted. I wouldn't have wondered much about a close vote, but 74% is just too much for me to accept it without asking question.

Oh well I'd challenge those number but I've asked if anyone would back me up.. no one seems interested and since I do not want risk my life and health for a few month of stupidity I'll just use this as motivation to finish faster.

1 comment:

Krimpoff said...

That is the way Union works in Québec. They are "preparing the future".

Oh by the way, you are right about possible dangers to your health. Unions tend to think that intimidation is a legal way of behaving to get someone "good" opinion.

Unions were created in a time when people needed to be defended against powerful and immoral companies. They are a part of our history and had a very good influence on our way of life. But now, since those times are mostly gone (sadly, there are still employers with prehistoric attitude *cough*Wal-Mart*cough*), unions are very much like the "evil" they claim to fight. Big syndicates now are capitalist businesses, with a goal to make money before all.

Funny fact : do you know that, besides governmental instances, unions are the only organisation who don't have to ask you before taking your own money? You don't have the choice to be in the Union, if there's one where you work. They don't ask you, they only take your money. And intimidate you if you don't agree.

This situation is too bad. The basics are : Unions should be there to help people. That's it. Somewhere in history, they forgot.