So loyal readers, as I relayed to you on Saturday, the regime rescinded its communications policy and in the process threw the faculty union president under the bus. I am still perturbed by this and I have endeavored to see the 'under' in all of it. Was this desperation on the part of the administration, seeking to shift responsibility for another failure? Or was there something deeper? Does the administration believe that the union has no power and subsequently its leadership can be publicly sacrificed without consequence? The timing of this cannot be coincidental. Faculty are in midst of union elections. Maybe this was done to further demoralize faculty and suppress turnout. Or maybe this was done to incite faculty to distract them from voting. The point is there is a union election. It might be the most important election in the past 15 years as it is the union that is responsible for protecting faculty rights in the workplace. If you believe the union has represented you well, I imagine you will vote to stay the course and continue with the current leadership. If you believe that a new course is needed then you will vote differently. The crucial element here is that faculty must vote. The union is only as strong and vital as its membership. If union members do not stand up, take responsibility for their union and vote, then I fear the worst is yet to come.