Letter to Madame Suzanne Aubry, President of UNEQ
By agreeing to sit on the advisory committee set up by UNEQ in February 2023, I had in mind to find ways of doing things adapted to the financial capacities of writers. But I was quickly called to order: the ultimate objective of this committee was to fix the associative contribution in such a way as to ensure the permanence of the UNEQ as a group of artists. The dice were loaded. Not only was my presence on this committee unnecessary, but it gave my peers a false sense of security by letting them believe that the other members and I had power. This was not the case. At most, we have made a few proposals without consensus, which the UNEQ board of directors will approve or not.
For my part, after having listened to the explanations of the general manager during three meetings of three hours each, I have come to the conclusion that this draft collective agreement is a bottomless pit.
Will the writers who earn the most agree to support the UNEQ fund? Need we remind you: half of the members of our association earn less than $3,000 a year. These negotiations will therefore be largely paid for by the writers who earn the most. However, this minority does not need these improvements since it already benefits from contracts that exceed the requirements of a standard contract.
If, at least, the writers had been consulted in a democratic way! But no ! This major transformation of our association was voted on by 44 people out of a total of approximately 6,000 Quebec authors! Through this resolution, the UNEQ wants to oblige all those who publish a book — from the poet to the author of the Guide de l’auto, members and non-members of its association — to contribute to its fund, that is 6,000 contributors! All this without having DULY informed, consulted and voted in advance the community of artists that the latter wants to charge.
To justify its eagerness to impose a contribution on writers, the UNEQ continues to raise the specter of the lack of funds to carry out its associative obligations. Setting a membership fee should be the result of a long democratic process. How many avenues have been explored to satisfy the needs of writers?
Will UNEQ’s current reservations be used to undertake negotiations whose outcomes are improbable? Our association plans to spend $400,000 a year, maybe more, to negotiate with Quebec publishers. The UNEQ offers writers the opportunity to ride a Tesla, while their means allow them to travel by bicycle.
I remain convinced that if the UNEQ had clearly presented the real stakes of these collective negotiations, this certification project would have died on the order paper.
Fortunately, we will have the chance to decide on March 29.
All in all, and for several years to come, these new union possibilities will probably serve only one group: the employees of the UNEQ, whose number will increase as the negotiations progress.
For their part, at the end of this long and necessarily costly process, the writers will not be richer. On the contrary, the already poor half will be even more so because they will have to pay a contribution in addition to their UNEQ membership. And the richest will perhaps publish where a contribution will not be imposed on them, who knows?
This opinion piece engages only its author.