Blog

Robert Henman

Introduction

Question: Does economics affect every citizen of every country in the Global society? Yes, would seem to be the appropriate answer. A further question might be: How or what form of affect does it have? There are lots of statistical data available that provide more than sufficient evidence that wealth distribution is hardly an efficient component of economic activity. One statistic presently available is that less than 1% of the human population control 50% of the world’s wealth. The other 50% of wealth is shared out amongst the other 99% of the population. What follows is a few comments on problems in economic theory and Bernard Lonergan’s solution to those problems.

What is the origin of such disparity? 

One is that the current objective of economic theory is maximization of profit. Yet, some economists hold that the objective of economic activity is to provide a standard of living for the human population. Can you have profit maximization as the goal of economic activity and provide a standard of living for all at the same time. It would seem not. It contributes to the disparity both locally and globally. 

Locally we witness an increase in homelessness and a rise in rents that more and more people cannot afford. Globally and historically, we witness the drive for profit over the past 500 years of colonialization in Australia, Africa, Far East and the Americas. These invasions exploited the earth’s resources and the indigenous people’s culture and heritage all for wealth. In doing so they have arrested the development of the people and today we experience efforts of renewal of indigenous cultures, languages, religions and spirituality. Due to these centuries of exploitation, many of these cultures lived in both spiritual and economic poverty making equity a huge challenge in these times. Transnational corporations have elevated exploitation to a level beyond that of colonization which is now further complicated by the ecological crisis and the rise of populism. 

Now, what is the failure in economic theory? Current establishment economic theory work with models that do not analyze the actual data of economic activity. In other words, it is not concrete or empirical. Models are imagined and applied to circumstances from which central bankers and governments develop policies that affect our lives. Currently central banks have increased the basic bank rate causing people’s debt load to increase. 

News programs offer stock market reports and Gross National Product (GNP) numbers daily. These do not provide an actual view of the economy as a standard of living. Stock markets are a place where gambling occurs and affects only the wealthy for the most. GNP provides an overview of how the wealthy are doing, not how each individual is doing. 

What is the problem with economic theory? Models do not help. That is not science and only scientific understanding is an appropriate basis for developing policy. So, to analyze economic activity is to take any business and notice that there are two types of firms in any economy. A surplus production circuit and a basic production circuit. These circuits operate in relationship to each other. Science would work out the function of each circuit and reveal that the two circuits need to be in balance all the time. When one circuit draws on the other circuit an imbalance occurs which may be inflation. If the imbalance is sustained, it can deepen towards recession and depression. If we understand how the circuits affect each other, policy can be developed to retain the balance.

An Example

You can take any small local business and work out how the two circuits function and relate. Take a local cafe in Malaga, Spain that sells café con leche and bolleria to its customers. This cafe first buys a coffee machine from a coffee machine producing company. The coffee machine does not enter into the standard of living. The coffee machine can be used to make numerous cups of café con leche. So, it is still part of the surplus production circuit. If coffee machines are produced to be sold for domestic use, they are part of the basic production circuit as they enter into the standard of living for use in a domestic household. The producing of coffee beans and their sale to a coffee shop are part of the basic production circuit as they are eventually sold to consumers. When the café con leche is sold to you or me, it is a final sale; the café con leche is consumed and becomes part of our standard of living. If we purchase a quantity of coffee beans from a grocery store for home use, they are still part of the basic production circuit as it is a final sale that enters our standard of living.

One might think of what occurred during the pandemic as an example of the relationship between intelligent science and policy. First, virologists found out how the virus spreads and recommended policies of wearing masks, restrict close gatherings, washing our hands frequently. At the same time virologists worked at developing a vaccine and when they had done so, they recommended dosage amounts and time periods for follow up vaccinations. Intelligence preceded policy. 

Because, economics is not yet a science, by its focus on imagined models, policy tends to be guesswork. Witness what occurred during the 2008 Wall Street crash. The y did not know whether to print more money, let the banks fail or bail them out. They decided to bail them out. And the casino mentality began all over. 

Communicating to economists about this problem is and has been difficult as economists do not study actual economic activity and subsequently, do not have any experience of what is science. I have experienced this in conversations with economists as have my colleagues who have worked in this field much longer than I.

Conclusion:  

Communicating with economists has not been helpful, so I offer this very brief description of the problem and solution and should you wish to converse with economists, journalists or politicians, it would be a most worthwhile effort. Also, discussions with friends within the context of this brief essay might also be worthwhile. This analysis was worked out by a Canadian philosopher, Bernard Lonergan, in the 1930s and 1940s. His works on this topic are published with the University of Toronto Press. I add below Lonergan’s texts as well as a few others that have been published on his economic theory for those who wish to go more in-depth into what would constitute a science of economics that would eventually provide a standard of living for all and ease the disparity of wealth in the global community. Lonergan states in his book that it is not greed that is the root of the problem, but ignorance on the part of current economic theory and theorists. Greed is easily possible when one believes that profit is the goal which is based on a mistaken theory of economics.

Robert Henman has been lecturing in Philosophy, Ethics, Peace Studies and Child Studies at Mount Saint Vincent University since 1984. He taught Medical Ethics at The Dalhousie Medical School from 1990-1994. He has published three academic textbooks, two co-authored text books and one novel. He has published articles in Neuroscience, Philosophy, Ethics, social science methodology and education in various academic journals. Over the past five years he has been performing research in economics and has provided lectures on economics in 2018 and 2023 in Malaga, Spain where he and his wife, Olive, have been spending their winters since 2007. He was born in Amherst NS and is married to Olive Dewan-Henman. They have two grown children and three grandchildren. They have spent their winters in Spain since 2007, where his wife sings with a choir and he carries out his research. 

References 

Primary Sources

Bernard Lonergan, For a New Political Economy, CWL 21, ed. Philip McShane, University of Toronto Press, 1998. 

Bernard Lonergan, Macroeconomic Dynamics: An Essay in Circulation Analysis, CWL 15, University of Toronto Press, 1999. Edited by Frederick Lawrence, Patrick Byrne & Charles Hefling Jr.

Secondary Sources

Robert Henman (2024) Academic.edu (99+) A Brief Introduction to Bernard Lonergan’s Economics as a Science Current Economic Theory | Robert Henman – Academia.edu

Philip McShane, Economics for Everyone: Das Jus Kapital, Axial Publishing, Vancouver, BC, 3rd Edition, 2017.

Philip McShane, Piketty’s Plight and the Global Future: Economics for Dummies, Axial Pub., 2014.

Philip McShane, Sane Economics and Fusionism, Axial Pub., 2010.

Philip McShane, PastKeynes Pastmodern Economics: A Fresh Pragmatism, Axial Pub., 2002.

Philip McShane & Bruce Anderson, Beyond Establishment Economics: No Thank-you Mankiw, Axial Pub., 2002.

Philip McShane, James Duffy, Robert Henman & Terrance Quinn, Seeding the Positive Anthropocene, Edited by James Duffy, Sean McNelis & Terrance Quinn, Axial Pub., 2022.

Terrance Quinn & John Benton, Economics Actually: Today and Tomorrow Sustainable and Inclusive, Second Edition, Island House Press, Toronto, Canada, 2023.

Lauren McKenzie
CUPE 3912 Vice President, SMU, the Language Centre

The first stop for most non-native English speaking students (NNESS) attending universities in Canada are language schools within the university. Language schools also act as a pipeline for international student tuition fees as learners are accepted conditionally to university programs upon completion of language courses, usually called ‘bridging programs’. Students undertake intensive courses in academic communication, critical thinking and research standards to prepare for full time study.  Moreso, students are welcomed into a community where they find safety.

The Language Centre (TLC) at Saint Mary’s University (SMU) has been supporting the cultural and academic transition of learners and newcomers for 25 years. Thousands of students have passed through these doors and many have gone on to earn degrees from SMU and become permanent members of our community. 

Closure of The Language Centre

Once a thriving, profitable school in the heart of Halifax, TLC was left unrecognisable as a result of poor management and neglect. On January 23, 2024, CUPE 3912 was informed that all operations at TLC would cease by the end of April 2024. SMU has chosen to abandon all English language programs, the IELTS Testing Centre and the teacher training course that share the building. 

Impact on Instructors

In spite of the importance of their work, language instructors are amongst the most precariously employed workers in the increasingly unstable labor force. Very few English language teachers in post secondary education are unionized and most have no more than 8 – 12 weeks of job security. Most have no health benefits or access to university pension programs. They are typically excluded from perks such as access to parking or to wellness facilities and tuition discounts. Despite the fact that these are highly educated and specialized workers, they are second-class citizens in our sector.

Local 3912 is disappointed with the callous way that TLC instructors have been treated. The university administration did not consult with instructors and no business plan or vision for the future was ever communicated. The University stood by as the previous director of TLC hired three full-time instructors from outside the union to teach English language courses. This ignored precedence and robbed CUPE 3912 members of their right to bargained work. That director was fired, and the position left vacant. For the past several years the employees have stood witness as more administrative staff were hired, even though the University stopped recruiting and student numbers dwindled. 

The first time instructors, many of whom have been at TLC for decades, heard from the senior administrator overseeing the unit was in an after-hours email from a complete stranger who laid off the entire workforce over their lunch break, before they had to face awaiting students. They were deeply saddened by the loss of their jobs and the impact that this will have on international students and the community.

Impact on Students

The other casualty of the university’s callous actions are the international students who came to Saint Mary’s in good faith. These learners gave their significant international student tuition fees to The Language Centre with hopes of starting full time study at SMU, which has now abandoned them in their journey to full-time post secondary study. This is not just about money as these students have strict visa rules that require them to attend the programs they have been approved for. Thus, SMU has cast students out with no clear plan as to how they will begin full time study in the fall, bringing doubt and uncertainty to their visa status, educational plan, and future.

We are left asking what will future language learners at SMU do and how will their academic needs be addressed? The internationalization of higher education means more than just accepting large tuition fees from non-citizen students. It requires meaningful academic support so that learners are successful. Saint Mary’s has systematically disassembled the academic community that created a fair and equitable academic environment for international students who speak English as an additional language. International students are poorly served by an institution that depends so significantly on them because students are marginalized by their language and immigration status. 

CUPE 3912’s Response 

We were in the midst of bargaining our next Collective Agreement when the Employer indicated that they would not return to the bargaining table, as TLC would close. Our CUPE National representative advised us to request a return to the bargaining table from the Employer, citing the statutory freeze in place due to the status of active bargaining and the possibility of filing an unfair labour practise complaint. Fortunately, the employer agreed to return to the bargaining table to discuss the terms of the closure of TLC.

After a difficult day of negotiations, we reached an agreement for TLC instructors. This included non-monetary items, such as access to the Extended Family Assistance Plan, SMU email accounts,  Brightspace course shells, the Patrick Power library, employee records, and the health clinic for those who receive primary care at SMU. The Employer agreed to 3% retro pay and a lump sum payment to the local, so that members at TLC can determine the most equitable way to allocate funds. The Employer repeatedly referred to the dire financial situation at SMU – and we reminded them no one feels that more than instructors at TLC.

In Parting

I extend my heartfelt best wishes to all my colleagues at TLC. I thank the CUPE 3912 Executive Board for moral support, the knowledge and experience that helped to navigate this situation for the instructors at TLC. Being a CUPE VP has opened my eyes to the world of the labour movement and the incredible challenges facing the post-secondary sector. I intend on staying involved, continuing my education and activism and stepping up when and where I can make a difference. I look forward to attending the first All Committee Meeting (ACM) of the Post-Secondary Action Committee in Ottawa this month, where I will speak to the issues – the creation of a second class within the higher education sector, shoddy contracts for newcomers, and international students’ contentions with citizenship issues – while building solidarity with workers facing similar challenges across our sector.

Cameron Ells
CUPE 3912 President

 “Working people don’t get what they deserve, they get what they negotiate.” CUPE 3912 NSCAD member Rebecca Roher created this image some years ago. The text is a variation of a 1996 Chester Karrass book title. She gave permission for CUPE 3912 to use this image in our current bargaining cycles of Collective Agreement negotiations with Dalhousie University (Dal.), Saint Mary’s University (SMU), Mount Saint Vincent University (MSVU), and the Nova Scotia of Art and Design (NSCAD). 

Three are the next version of the 2020 – 2024 Collective Agreements with Dal, SMU and MSVU. Two will be first collective agreements with NSCAD and for the SMU Teaching Assistants, two units new to CUPE 3912 in 2023. One is for the SMU Language Center Instructors, where the employer is closing their program.  Our Lead Negotiator for what might be six employer agreements in 2024 – CUPE Staff Representative  Mark Cunningham – reminds us that negotiations are about our relative balance of power.

Institutions, be they social, educational, legal, political, or otherwise, have long term sustainable strength  – like an ecosystem – where there is a capacity to adapt to ever changing circumstances.  

Within the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), compared to some other organizations, there is relatively more space, scope and opportunity for local, independent decision making. Within CUPE 3912, there is space, scope and opportunity for the six different Negotiating Teams to do things differently while sharing a similar mission, and some resources, to improve member working conditions. 

CUPE 3912 members are also an uncommonly and relatively diverse group of backgrounds, experiences, and skill sets. The opportunities are there, to speak, listen, think about, discuss, and consider a variety of perspectives, before legitimate democratic decision making takes place. 

Innovations, improvements, experiments, or adaptations by one CUPE 3912 negotiating team may be an influence on what is used by other teams. Some “oh whoops” or some accidently “spilled milk” along the way, can be part of an acceptable price to encourage creativity and informed risk taking. Our SMU Instructor Bargaining Proposal mandate involved online voting for each proposal. Some developing first contract text being developed will be shared by the new SMU Teaching Assistant and NSCAD teams. Innovative pension proposals developed for one unit of CUPE 3912 instructors will be used in proposals with other employers. We help each other.

A now former Dal President thought that the 2022 CUPE 3912 Dal strike was probably necessary in order to achieve our November 2022 agreement. Our demonstrated capacity to competently organize and execute a strike if necessary, is a useful tool, effort and option, in support of our negotiations.  

With each bargaining cycle, CUPE 3912 members have ever increasing opportunities to be informed, involved and contribute to our negotiations and related efforts to achieve our goals. Our diversity, encouragement of creative adaptations, informed risk management, and bottom up decision making instincts, helps us to achieve our goals.    

Karen Harper
CUPE 3912 member at SMU and MSVU
Former CUPE 3912 President and Communications Officer

A union such as CUPE 3912 helps improve working conditions for its members through collective bargaining and grievances. Another way union members can influence working conditions in the academic environment is through shared university governance. University governance is essential to the operation of the university and includes the Senate and Board of Governors. The Senate is ‘responsible for the educational policy of the University’ and the Board of Governors ‘oversees the conduct of the University’s affairs’.

Full time faculty and sometimes part-time faculty are involved in governance at Canadian universities. The Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) has a campaign on Shared Governance (see their video). ‘Decision-making powers are concentrated in the hands of a few, who act behind closed doors, while the voices of academic staff and other key stakeholders are being weakened or silenced. Collegiality — or shared governance — is at the heart of what a university is and should be.’ CAUT is putting together information on university governance across Canada including the composition of Board of Governors and Senate. An initial glance at their results shows that at least ten universities have a Senate with at least one designated member who is a part-time instructor.

At Saint Mary’s University, full-time faculty and students are part of the Board of Governors and the Senate, but part-time faculty are currently not eligible to vote or serve on Senate, despite teaching a third of the courses.

Efforts to change this started years ago in 2016 when Phil Bennett (CUPE 3912 VP for SMU PT instructors at the time) requested and received a legal opinion from CAUT about whether part-time faculty have the right to vote and stand for election to the Senate and Board. The response was YES – the Senate is not within its rights to exclude us.

One of my goals when I became president of CUPE 3912 in 2019 was to explore options for our members to serve on Senate. I made some progress at SMU before the pandemic and bargaining became too overwhelming. I met with the chair of the SMU Senate bylaws committee and forwarded a letter I requested from CAUT about the importance of part-time faculty being on Senate.

Last fall I resumed my quest by meeting with the SMU Senate bylaws committee. They are very supportive and plan on proposing a bylaws amendment that will enable us to vote and serve on Senate as academic staff (bylaws) . However, this would not establish designated seats for part-time faculty on Senate, which would require the opening of the University Act. Senate currently includes fifteen members selected by the academic staff.

The bylaws committee is gathering information about the wording of eligibility for part-time instructors at other universities and determining the wording of their proposed amendments. Any proposed bylaw changes would need to be approved by the entire Senate. They have asked me to survey SMU part-time instructors to provide information to present to the entire Senate. This is a great opportunity to educate our members and to get your input on whether we should seek designated seats on Senate and to assess how much interest there is for individual members to run for election to serve on Senate.

What you can do:

• Keep informed and please complete the short survey about governance this spring.
• The Senate has recently established a Cross-faculty Committee to review the ICE (student evaluations) including issues related to EDI and would like to include a part-time faculty member. If you are interested in sitting on this committee, please contact smu.cupe3912@gmail.com by March 15, 2024.

Neil Balan
CUPE 3912 Member at SMU and MSVU
Member of the SMU PT Faculty Negotiating Team

As a long-time contract faculty member involved collectively with different unions across different universities, I’ve joined and participated in caucuses and working groups (for instance: universities fossil fuel divestment, universities and migrant rights). Though similar to a more formal sub-committee, a caucus or working group is an informal issue-centered way of organizing semi-regularly to talk, engage, and exchange ideas and assessments. They can serve as valuable ways to build unity, tease out internal contradictions and antagonisms, and connect members. While they don’t have any formal remit within the union, and while they aren’t tasked with any kind of policy development, caucus or working group work can generate opportunities to collectively organize and mobilize our membership. They provide methods for clarifying ideas about our labour, the institutions we navigate and negotiate, and the wider social and structural forces that shape how we work.

Beyond your teaching work and your time spent trading your labour for pay, do you have an outlet for some of your social, political, or political economic concerns whether in relation to university spaces or beyond? It could be that you’re able to work, write, and/or produce academic or scholarly work that addresses these concerns. Maybe you’re part of a research or community-based action network. Or maybe you scream (daily) into the social media void, generating bits and pieces of analysis or commentary.

My sense: our common interests as union members and workers allow us an opportunity to share, develop, and discuss whatever we deem to be matters of concern and importance. A caucus or working group need not be onerous. It can work like a reading or study group with decidedly measured expectations. The goal: we can learn about issues collectively and together. It can start in an inchoate way with the core concern “in-solution” and requiring further condensation and consolidation enabled by way of ongoing encounters and meetings. The initial task of most working groups or caucuses is straightforward: agree on a mandate or goal, select a more concrete focus, and decide on a way of structuring engagements. Go from there.

Consider this a call to action by way of doing what many of us do well: reading, thinking, writing, talking, and sharing. For my part, I’d like to propose two working groups: the “Neither Excellence nor Excellent: Austerity and the Barely-Public University” Working Group and a “What’s New in Progressive PSE Policy in Canada” Working Group.

If you’re interested in ether, email me at neil.balan@smu.ca or neilbalan@gmail.com.

If anything, working groups and caucuses are at their best when they are member-driven and ground-up. If neither of these proposed groups aligns with your interests, think about proposing or pitching something else. Doing things together only makes us a stronger unit and stronger union as we head into our next round of bargaining.