Too often, unions -- and, in particular, public service unions -- place protecting the interests of their members over those of the public.
A case in point: A Canadian Union of Public Employees official at Carleton University expressed outrage that Hassan Diab had been removed from his summer job instructing a sociology course. “He’s innocent until proven guilty,” the union official said.
That may be true, but it also is irrelevant. Defenders of Diab’s right to teach ignore the fact that he faces very serious charges. He is accused in France of the murder of four people in the 1980 bombing of a Paris synagogue.
I am not amazed that Diab no longer teaches the summer course. I am amazed that the university initially allowed him to teach the course despite knowing of the serious allegations against him. The court has concerns he might flee the country. It required him to post bail of $250,000, be accompanied at all times and wear an electronic monitoring bracelet.
Critics of Carleton’s decision to remove Diab from his teaching position claim the university did this only because of a letter from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. Surely B’nai Brith had every right to express its views about employment in a public institution largely supported by taxpayers. Its objections are no different than those of a women’s organization that protested the retention in a teaching position of a faculty member who had been charged with a serious sexual assault. The women’s group would have every right to do so.
Removing Diab from his teaching post was the right thing to do. Perhaps teachers believe they are immune from such action, but this happens
regularly in the real world. When the mayor of Ottawa was charged with a relatively minor offence, he vacated his office, and police officers across the country regularly are taken off the job, albeit with pay, while under investigation. The integrity of their offices requires this action be taken.
A letter signed by 30 members of the Carleton sociology department claims that not allowing Diab to instruct “is an attack on widely held democratic values.” If that is the case, these teachers should have been protesting other dismissals, such as the recent removal from the federal Liberal shadow cabinet of a woman who resigned under pressure when accused of mistreating her live-in housekeeper.
The basis of the letter from the sociology instructors, however, was less about Diab’s innocence until proven guilty than it was about protecting the employment rights of fellow teachers. The letter claimed that Carleton had “violated a legally binding contract with him and contravened the collective agreement.” There was nothing in the letter about the obligation of these publicly funded teachers to maintain the reputation of their university.
Bill Beswetherick is a retired Canadian Forces officer who has lived in the area for 15 years. He is a member of the Whig-Standard’s Community Editorial Board.
