Ex-typist complains

Having resigned as typesetter, and having heard that the editor is maligning me to all and sundry, I wish to describe the conditions I have had to put up with in working for Salient. Job hunters interested in the vacancy may read this as a warning.

1.	The Pay. This was Colin Feslier's responsibility. The first time he deigned to pay me was 2 months after I started though I must explain the delay was partly due to the fact that Colin lost all my time-sheets and we had to "forge" new ones. That was a month ago now and I'm still waiting for my second pay. . .
2.	The Editor. Bruce never once told me how big the issue was going to be or how many hours work there was. As in the staff notes of two weeks ago I was expected to "just keep on hitting the keys'. Bruce's main method of communication is terse little notes telling you when to be up at Salient or vague messages through John Henderson. Expect to find the notes continually changed—like if it says "Come at 5" and you're reading it at 1 o'clock when you return at 5 it ll be changed to 5.45, so you sit around waiting for ¾ hour. Don't take Bruce's word seriously either—½ hours work could mean 2 hours 3,4,5, etc. And vice versa. It was quite usual for me to traipse up to Salient 3-4 times in a day. As most of the typesetting is done in the weekend, any arrangements I made invariably had to be cancelled at the last minute—makes for a great social life.
3.	Conditions. There's no door on the typesetting room and as its the first place people see when they walk into the office, you'll be interrupted continually by demands for 5c for the Xerox, 10c for the vending machines, where's Bruce? who never, but never, tells anyone where he's going, etc. You equipment's pretty dicey too. Expect to have to beg for lettex every time you run out. In the last two weeks I made 3 specific complaints about the typewriter only to be told that it wasn't Bruce's department. Field the ball, boy. There was stage when I never knew where the next ribbon was coming from.
4.	The hours. When I first took on the job I was told that there'd be about 25-35 hours work per week. In the last two months (apart from 8 hours outside work) I never did more than Salient and New sheet—a total of approx. 27 hours per week. Consequently I decided to get another job—part-time from 9 to 2. Bruce made no objection when I told him that I had the job, but then turned around and accused me of dictating my hours to him. You might think that Bruce operated under pretty flexible, casual conditions, and you'd be dead right. But I was always expected to be on time. Ask Bruce how many times he turned up just when he said he would.

Then there was the Publications Board meeting last week when Bruce didn't think it necessary for me to attend—although they discussed such things as how much outside word I could do. As usual Bruce decided what I could do and then told me. Personal consideration? He doesn't know the meaning of the phrase.

On Friday last I arrive half an hour late, after arranging with Bruce to do at least 4 hours work, only to find he's told "The Paper" they can have the typewriter for the night. Bruce is nowhere in sight. That was when I decided he could screw some other mug around and I quit.

If you're planning on taking the job I suggest you wait till next year when Bruce isn't editor.

My quarrel is/was with Colin Feslier and Bruce Robinson. My apologies to other Salient members such as Christine Haggart, Anthony Ward and John Henderson etc., who may have been inconvenienced by my sudden resignation.

(If Salient has looked a bit empty for the last two weeks here is the major reason—Due to a disagreement between myself and the typist the typist quit without any notice on the friday night before a Salient was due to be produced. If it had not been for several people giving up weekends and spare week nights to typeset the last few issues you would have seen no Salients at all.

The above letter gives one side of the disagreement. Most people who have had anything to do with Salient or Publications Board would know the validity or otherwise of Janet's claims. They would also know that much of what she says is either untrue or in considerable dispute. Unfortunately Janet Murphy had decided that the letters column of Salient is the best place for her comments and so readers who have no first-hand knowledge of the situation are being subjected to a highly prejudiced view of the whole thing.

Points 1 and 3 have nothing to do with me. They were the responsibility of the Publications Officer (Colin Feslier) who has now resigned to the relief of most people. However, Janet seems to blame me for some of Colin's crimes. In fact, during this year I have regularly had to do Colin's job for him because that was the only way I could be sure of things getting done. Several issues would never have appeared this year if Colin had been relied on to ensure regular supplies of ribbons, paper, lettex etc.,

Point 2. I started on Salient half way through the year and for quite a while the organisation was quite bad. Recently as Janet knows the organisation has been much better. As for those offensive comments in the staff notes. I advise you to read the staff notes (issue 15) and see for yourselves whether or not they say what Janet would have them say. Needless to say Janet found no fault with them when she typed them.

Point 4. While Janet was working for us a set of normal hours of work' were drawn up which were to correspond roughly to the actual hours of work. They were supposed to form the basis of regularising typing hours. Janet's job made a mockery of these normal hours'. Why I did not complain at first was because I was unsure as to whether or not I had any right to expect Janet to be available for at least the majority of these hours. I was informed by the Publications Officer that I had a reasonable right. Even so I was unwilling to complain about Janet's hours and only did so as part of a rather heated exchange on the Friday night that she left.

Although I pointed out to Janet that she had inaccurately reported the Publications Board meeting she only removed one portion of her 'report' on this meeting. At this meeting Publications Board was asked if its typist (i.e. Janet) was available to do up to ten hours a week of outside work. I said that it was unlikely and went off to see Janet. She said that she could do about 10 hours a week more than she was doing which I then passed on to the Board. If that's not personal consideration I don't know what is.

Lastly the question of me telling the 'Paper' that they could have the machine is not true. I had specifically told the 'Paper' when they could use the machine. They arrived more than two hours before they should have so that when Janet turned up to work she was confronted with another typist already there. She asked a Salient staff member what was happening and he said that he thought I had told the 'Paper' that they could use the machine.

Most of the criticisms in Janet's letter were first heard by me on the Friday that she left. I feel that if these criticisms were of such importance to her that she should have made them earlier.—ed.)

Infuriating conditions

I was approached last week to take over the typesetting, as Janet Murphy had resigned in disgust. You may recall that I returned a message via your envoy I H to the effect that I had no [unclear: ntention] of working under the same conditions. I know that Janet is writing to you as well, but I'm writing in support so that people can see that the work conditions you impose are really infuriating.

[unclear: i] know only too well that Bruce Robinson has no idea how long something takes to type. A promised three hours work takes even my pondering fingers half an hour. The vice-versa is even more annoying. It's about time Salient was better planned, so the typesetter (and others) knew a bit earlier whether the weekend is going to be wholly lost or not. In other words, the typesetter gets thoroughly messed around by an incompetent, uncommunicative and insensitive editor.

This is bad enough, but putting up with Colin Feslier's procrastination is just as exasperating. All he has to do is authorise our pay. Instead, he keeps losing the time-sheets and simply doesn't bother to do a thing.

Robinson is editor solely by default—may the job be given to the first alternative, Maoist, Trot or Young Nat—but the parasite Feslier, at least should be booted out forthwith, rather than maintaining the pretence that there is an operative Publications Officer.