Last week, we were asked to reflect upon the “start of our legal education” and to “practice
concise writing” (something the university has mastered when it comes to providing students
with answers to their concerns about the strike). Feel free to disagree, but this strikes me as
premature. Despite speeches from the administration, a library information session, and
being called up one by one to receive a Civil Code of Québec, I hardly feel that my legal
education has begun.

Students at other faculties are experiencing their first classes, meeting their professors, and
starting their readings and assignments. Meanwhile, at the McGill Faculty of Law, first year
students are drafting their concise reflections, trying to hold on to any sense of normalcy,
unaware of when their classes will start and if their semester will be cancelled.

From the very first day of “class”, a large number of students formed a group in favour of the
professors’ union, went to their unofficial teach-ins, brought them coffee and baked goods,
made posters and joined the picket line, choosing to not attend the Dean’s presentations in
support of AMPL. Others, not wanting to take a stance, walked quietly past the profs and into
Old Chancellor Day Hall to receive another speech on how difficult this whole situation must
be for us and on how the start of this year is “unusual”. As if we hadn’t noticed already…

And what about the students who don’t support AMPL’s strike? I haven’t heard of any,
although I can’t say that I am surprised. The profs proudly advertise on social media and on
their website that their students support them, but these are the profs that will eventually be
grading our papers and assignments, which makes criticising their actions and not
supporting their union a risky proposition.

I know what you’re thinking: you don’t really expect me to believe that the profs would be so
petty as to retaliate against students who don’t support them, right? Although I don’t know
them personally, these are the same profs who waited outside the window of the Moot Court
to make noise with megaphones and ring bells for the entirety of the Dean’s Welcome
Speech on our first day. Realistically, what did they think this would achieve but ruin a
moment that students will remember for years to come, that they have studied and worked
hard for? These are the same profs who post memes of the McGill administrators on
Instagram and bring birthday cakes to their offices to facetiously thank them for their
cooperation. And then they wonder why McGill is so reluctant to give them a say in who
should be the next dean…

My criticism of the profs’ behaviour does not mean that I reject all of their concerns and
claims about the way they are being treated by McGill. In fact, I think that many of their
demands seem reasonable, based on the limited information that we have been given. But
what I will not accept is that they are doing this for the students. Both sides say that they
have the students’ best interests at heart and that they are doing their best to keep the strike
as short as possible, something I find very hard to believe.

The profs say that they are ready to stop the strike and go back to teaching if McGill
abandons its legal proceedings to decertify their union, which strikes me as very unlikely
since the consequences of having a union for such a small faculty would be far worse for
McGill than delaying their students’ education by a semester. In a recent email, Dean Leckey
asks students to “consider the bigger picture,” arguing very reasonably that if AMPL is
certified, over a dozen new unions could join the current 16, which would make labour
relations at McGill “unmanageably complex, cumbersome, and costly.” Funny, I could use
those same three adjectives to describe the situation we are in right now. And as for
considering the bigger picture, I hope that McGill is taking its own advice: a few first-year
students are seriously considering dropping out and applying to other law schools before the
end of the add/drop period. I just thought that the administration should know, since we
students know how horrible it feels to be kept in the dark.

As for AMPL, please stop pretending that you couldn’t stop the strike if you really wanted to.
I understand that McGill’s judicial review is a direct attack to your union, but there are
hearings set for December, where you will get the opportunity to present your case. If there
is a legitimate reason for you to be unionized, then you will win in court, and McGill will have
to admit defeat. Instead, you are determined to use the students as bargaining chips to get
McGill to fold. You say that going on strike again was such a hard decision, that you are
sympathetic towards the students receiving financial aid who will need to seek arrangements
if their schooling is extended by a semester. You say that you feel for the international
students who have paid a lot of money for a semester that might not happen. You say that
you sympathize with those coming from out-of-province who have just moved here, don’t
have a job to fall back on and can’t go home because they don’t know if they will have class
on the following day. I’m sorry, but I simply don’t believe you.

I urge you, members of the McGill administration and AMPL, to seriously consider the
consequences of your actions on the students you claim to care for so much. We should not
be your pawns in this labour dispute, but aspiring young professionals who have worked
hard to get where we are today, eager to start our legal education and learn at a faculty in
which we saw great merit. Please don’t prove us wrong.

A first-year BCL/JD student at the McGill Faculty of Law

The post Letter: Cui bono? appeared first on The McGill Daily.