MACOMB COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY ORGANIZATION
MEMORANDUM
TO: MCCFO Members
FROM: Jim Yizze, President, MCCFO
RE. John Bonnell Suspension - Update
DATE: May 10, 1999
1. As I reported to you in the memorandum dated March 31, 1999, John Bonnell and his wife filed two civil suits in U.S. District Court. Judge Borman has been assigned both cases. One suit seeks an injunctive order from the court that would immediately reinstate John to his teaching position permanently or least temporarily, "pending a determination of the issues at a hearing to be set by the court." The second suit seeks monetary damages in excess of $50,000 for mental anguish, wage loss, and attorney fees.
2. A hearing on the first suit seeking an injunctive order was held in Detroit at District Court, on May 6. Judge Borman presi4ed. I n attendance were John, his wife, and their attorneys, attorneys representing the College, our attorney, MCCFO Officers - Marie Baeckeroot and Will Romano, and myself. After much deliberation and persuasion from Judge Borman, it was decided that the College hearing related to John's current suspension with pay should take place. The College hearing is scheduled for 1 p.m. on Sunday, May 16, at South Campus. (Recall that this hearing was postponed - see item two in my March 31, 1999 memorandum.) The Judge did not order injunctive relief as requested by John's attorneys. Rather he wants to wait until after the College hearing to find out if any of the. outstanding issues can be resolved before he acts. Judge Borman asked the Union to allow John to have his attorneys in attendance at the College hearing. Even though we are not required to allow outside attorneys to attend such a meeting, we agreed because the judge asked us to. However, we insisted that this decision does not set a precedent for the Union and that MCCFO representatives, including our attorney, will be there to continue to represent the Union's interests.
3. Not surprising, the news media has often done an inaccurate, incomplete job of reporting the John Bonnell situation. Rather than being objective, there is a tendency, at times, to sensationalize the situation and it also seems that the media is being duped into becoming propaganda tools. As a result, there is confusion, misinformation, and perhaps an impression that the Union may not be living up to its duty to represent a member in a fair and impartial way.
It is important for every member to understand that the duty of MCCFO to give fair representation to its members does not mean that the Union is required to support all requests to grieve the actions of the College against any of our., members. Rather, it is the Senate's responsibility to consider all such requests in an impartial, objective manner; to assemble all facts and opinions; to deliberate; to vote in a democratic way based on the merits of each case that is presented. A decision not to support a grievance does not mean we are failing in our responsibility to represent MCCFO members.
4. I believe much of the confusion related to handling the issues related to this matter is the fault of John Bonnell. No one is denying the right of John Bonnell to defend his positions regarding academic freedom and language usage in the classroom. The problem is that he has to make a decision as to who should represent him. If he seeks Union support through the collective bargaining agreement then he cannot supplement or adjust the process to suit himself. Rather, only t"he Union has the authority to manage the manner in which MCCFO representa'tion is given to any individual through the contract. If this form of representation is chosen, then John must realize that not all decisions may turn out as he wishes. When personal attorneys are brought in to the Union's process, the emphasis shifts from the interests of everyone to the interests of on e individual. If John is unhappy with who handles MCCFO matters, that does not give him the right to replace them with other people. He has another option, that is, he can waiver his rights to MCCFO representation in this matter pursue his cause through other means. He does not have the right and to redefine the Union's process to suit himself