By Charles Loiacono     

Harmony

           Harmony is a pleasant word that evoked a sense of tranquility. One envisions pleasing sounds and soothing colors. In social or business dealings, one assumes agreement. Indeed, the preamble to the AFA contract “seeks to assure the orderly and uninterrupted operations of the College by maintaining a harmonious relationship between the County and the College adjunct faculty.”

            Interestingly, the AFA and the County have enjoyed harmonious relations through-

out the years. Ironically, the Board of Trustees and the administration were not included in that sentence. Was that inadvertently omitted or did someone know something we did not know? Did that someone assume that disharmony would be the order of the day?

            I doubt that harmony or discord is preordained. Harmony comes about when elements, whatever they are, complement each other. If elements blend well together, harmony is the result—the elements are more pleasing together than they are apart.

            And so, harmony is a must if an organization, any organization, is to function successfully. Unfortunately, here at Nassau Community College disharmony had plagued the relationship between the Fanelli administration and the AFA. We hoped that with Fanelli gone change would come even though his administration remained. We had hoped that with a new president at the helm, the old crew would follow a new course. But the course has not changed.

The relationship between the administration and the AFA remains adversarial. The tactics being used by the administration and their lawyers continue to be conniving and dissembling. Someone in the administration will commit an act that violates the contract. Then they pretend that the contract does not prevent them from doing what they please. When that violation finds its way to arbitration, the lawyers wangle with every deceitful trick in the book.

One example will suffice:

Before the new neutral arbitrator was scheduled to hear his first case, John Gross, attorney for the administration, wrote him a letter giving his version of the manner in which time limits for grievances have been honored in the breach because the parties have always tried to settle disputes.

             When the first case was presented to the same arbitrator to whom he had written the letter, he argued that the case should not be arbitrable because the time limits had not been observed. When faced with the contradiction of Gross’ opposing positions, the arbitrator found the case to be arbitrable based on Gross’ letter describing the practice. He said the practice trumped the time limits.

            The point is that machinations continue to be the modus operandi. There will never be harmony if the ways of the old Fanelli administration are applied to the relationship between the administration and the AFA. We don’t know yet what role the new president is to play in this relationship. We will wait and see.