Ohio University Unionization Information

Decrease in Health Premiums?

2009-04-28T17:26:00.000-07:00

In general, I see all health care issues as union issues, because faculty unions negotiate these benefits in collective bargaining agreements. That said, I have decided to reproduce Senate Chairman Sergio Lopez-Permouth's recent email. It raises at least two important issues: 1) We have no real agreement with the university regarding our health care benefits. Even though Faculty Senate has done a reasonably good job of preventing further damage to our benefits, we are at the mercy of the university; 2) University officials seem happy to spin this issue in an attempt to mislead some of us. Below is Sergio's message. Your comments are welcome.

Dear Colleagues,

As you all know, Luis Lewin, Associate Vice President for Finance and Administration for Human Resources, sent out an e-mail in the afternoon of April 23 informing us that our premiums for Health Insurance will be going down this year. Unfortunately the complete picture is that the decrease in our premiums has been partially bought through increases in employee contributions. Said increases will have a much larger impact on employee family budgets than the little reductions on premiums mentioned in Mr. Lewin’s e-mail message.

I find it discouraging that the administration released such a misleading statement promoting the impression that we have good news while the reality is that our salaries are frozen while our overall contributions to Health Care through deductibles and copays are in fact growing. To make matters worse, the net growth in our out-of-pocket expenses for health care hits those employees with smaller salaries the hardest, especially those whose families may be dealing with illness.

Please rest assured that Faculty Senate will continue to pursue this issue in support of all Ohio University employees.

Sincerely,

Sergio

Sergio R. Lopez-Permouth, Professor of Mathematics,
Director of the Center for Ring Theory and its Applications
and Chair of the Ohio University Faculty Senate
Ohio University
Athens, OH 45701
Phone: 740-593-1262
FAX: 740-593-9805

Faculty Senate Contact Information:
Pilcher House 202
Athens, Ohio 45701
Phone: 740-593-2640

Unionized Faculty Visit OU

2009-04-21T16:42:00.000-07:00

Guest Speakers Discuss Faculty Unionization at Reception (The Post).

Many faculty have wondered how a union would affect our Faculty Senate. According to the article, "Faculty Senates on their (the guest speakers') campuses now focus on academic issues rather than salaries and benefits." The full story is below. Your comments, of course, are welcome.

A group of professors urging faculty unionization held a reception Friday for faculty in Ellis and Gordy halls to discuss the option.

The Ohio University chapter of the American Association of University Professors had wine and hors d'oeuvres available for faculty who came to hear four professors from unionized campuses in Ohio talk about unionization.

After the speakers - two from Wright State University and two from the University of Akron - discussed their own experiences on unionized campuses, they took questions from approximately 20 OU faculty who attended.

Questions ranged from how the union has affected Faculty Senate and non-tenure-track faculty, to how to sway anti-union or undecided faculty, how unions pick their leaders and the limits of a union.

The visitors said Faculty Senates on their campuses now focus on academic issues rather than salaries and benefits. They also recommended a lot of one-on-one interactions to convince undecided faculty to sign cards.

OU-AAUP is running a card drive to gauge interest in voting on a union. The president of OU-AAUP has said faculty who submit cards are calling for a vote, not voting for the union.

The answer to most questions, however, was that it depends on the campus. Each contract, union structure and negotiation process is slightly different.

Marsha Dutton, vice president of OU-AAUP, said she was pleased with the attendance and the event.

"(Turnout) was quite a lot better than I thought," she said, adding, "Every time I hear people come from other campuses, I get really revved up because they make it so clear that if you have bargaining power, you can make it happen."

AAUP will sponsor similar events in some of the other colleges in the coming weeks.

Unionize for Senate Control

2009-04-08T16:37:00.000-07:00

Collective Bargaining Needed to Restore Senate Control (The Post)

The following letter to the editor was written by Phyllis Bernt, Professor in the School of Information and Telecommunication Systems. Your comments are welcome.

As a former Faculty Senate chairwoman and advocate for shared governance, I was appalled (though not surprised) when the deans unveiled their plans for reorganizing departments and colleges. What I found appalling was the lack of faculty involvement in the deliberations that led to those plans. There were no broad-based meetings with faculty to discuss the critical issues concerning curriculum, program development and promotion/tenure involved in such important decisions. Indeed the faculty in the School of Human and Consumer Sciences (whose college will be disbanded) came to the Faculty Senate in order to publicly express their concerns to the provost and to complain that their dean had refused to talk with them at all. The provost has said that the faculty will be allowed to "refine" the deans' plans, but that is too little involvement, and it happens far too late.

Not only has this whole process shown amazing arrogance (are the deans the only people on campus who have good ideas about how to organize departments and colleges?), but it also exhibits an incredible lack of respect for the faculty, who know their disciplines, their students and what is needed for quality teaching and research.

The Human and Consumer Sciences faculty came to the Faculty Senate to talk with the provost, not to ask the senate for help. That is telling, but not surprising. Many of those who oppose collective bargaining say that the Faculty Senate by itself can represent faculty interests. I no longer agree. I served on the Faculty Senate for 10 years, interacting with three different presidents and four provosts. For three of those years I served as Senate chairwoman. What I learned from those experiences is that the Faculty Senate only has as much influence as any given administration allows, and, over the years, administrations have accorded the Senate less and less influence, especially concerning issues of salary, benefits and working conditions. Indeed, the current provost has repeatedly said that the Senate should restrict itself to issues of curriculum and not play an advocacy role for the faculty.

As universities become increasingly corporate and geared toward top-down management, the role of the Faculty Senate, which is based on the concept of shared governance, becomes more tenuous. The balance in the shared governance equation increasingly tilts toward the administration; without an enforceable contract, the Faculty Senate will have great difficulty in righting that balance. A collective bargaining agreement can clarify the role and influence of the Faculty Senate and can provide a framework for negotiations in which faculty interests are strongly represented.

If I had any doubts, the way in which the planned reorganization has been handled has convinced me that the faculty at Ohio University need both an effective Faculty Senate and collective bargaining to represent their interests. An enforceable contract, negotiated through collective bargaining, can strengthen the influence of the Senate and restore the voice of the faculty.

CIF Should Debate OU-AAUP

2009-04-02T12:36:00.000-07:00

Unionization Debate Persists Among Faculty (The Post)

According to The Post, the OU chapter of AAUP and the OU Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) both claim to be "gearing up for more debate this quarter." That's a good thing, as some faculty have yet to decide whether or not to support unionization. Although this blog provides a forum for those who support and those who oppose unionization to express their views, it would be helpful if the primary advocates of unionization (i.e., OU-AAUP) and the primary detractors of unionization (i.e., CIF) met in person to debate the advantages and disadvantages of collective bargaining.

According to The Post, Faculty Senate Chairman Sergio Lopez-Permouth volunteered to organize a forum for the two groups to discuss unionization. Although the OU-AAUP was willing to send a representative, Lopez-Permouth did not hear back from the CIF originally. According to The Post, the CIF is still discussing that option.

I encourage AAUP and CIF representatives to accept the Senate Chairman's offer to organize a forum (or two, or more) so that the issues can be discussed in detail and in a public venue. Should OU faculty unionize? That's a question that cannot be answered sufficiently via blog entries, email messages, and flyers. Let's resolve to debate this issue in good faith, and in a public forum.

As always, I encourage your comments.

The Post on Shared Gov.

2009-03-30T14:17:00.000-07:00

Editorial: Public puzzle (The Post)

In this editorial, The Post took OU to task for "Once again, ...attempting to withhold documents that should be public records." Apparently they were denied after requesting access to the reduction strategies that OU departments and offices submitted to the Budget Planning Council.

In the editorial, they offered the following view of shared governance: "The economy is weak, and cuts will need to be made. But the constituents of this university need to be a part of the decision making. Shared governance does not mean the university's top brass makes a decision and the students, faculty and staff discuss it afterward. It means that the people discuss every step, offering input and helping to shape solutions before the university makes its decisions - a closed council with "representatives" is not enough. Yes, it's messy. The pieces don't always fit together just right. But if OU is serious about transparency, the discussion needs to be carried out in the public forum."

The drive toward unionization focuses on shared governance, so I thought this editorial might generate some discussion.

Union Brings The Right to Participate

2009-03-20T14:05:00.000-07:00

On March 11th I blogged about the Provost's recent announcement regarding an administrative proposal to restructure some of the colleges. I mentioned that the proposal was created by the academic deans, although "faculty will be asked to assist in the refinement of the proposal." In other words, the important decisions have been made by the administration, but the faculty can work on the details.

Joe Bernt from OU-AAUP recently sent an email to faculty that included a flyer entitled "Why Were Faculty Excluded from Planning College Reorganizations and Eliminations?" The flyer discussed this mess in detail, and it asked, "Would collective bargaining have changed this situation?"

Would collective bargaining have changed this situation? Yes. The union contract negotiated by faculty at the University of Cincinnati stipulates in Article 27 that faculty shall "be entitled to share significantly in the responsibilities for program development, program review, department review, and department and college reorganization."

The faculty at the University of Cincinnati, represented by the AAUP, have an enforceable contractual right to participate--to have a voice and responsibilities--in decisions regarding restructuring.

Tired of being ignored? Claim your voice: sign an AAUP card today asking the State of Ohio for a vote on collective bargaining!

Download a card from http://www.ouaaup.org/card.html

Health Care Mess Avoided with Union

2009-03-15T09:41:00.000-07:00

President May Bypass Faculty Senate's Rejection of Health Benefit Cuts (Athens NEWS, 3/12/09)

OU President Offers Plan with Fewer Health Benefit Cuts (Athens NEWS, 3/14/09)

The news articles above are important reading to see a sampling of the messes we can AVOID by moving to collective bargaining. Here's a quick and dirty summary...Ohio University is in the midst of a budget crunch for a variety of reasons ranging from reductions in state funding to excessive increases in administrative salaries. That said, the administration is interested in shifting more health-care costs to faculty. OU's Budget Planning Council recommended a variety of cuts, but Faculty Senate rejected their plan and offered another. That's where the "negotiations" essentially ended. This past Friday, President McDavis unilaterally made sweeping changes (some positive, some negative) to health benefits for Ohio University employees. The new benefits will take effect July 1, 2009. End of discussion.

Had we been unionized, we would have avoided this mess altogether. Our collective bargaining agreement would have outlined our benefits and the associated costs. We wouldn't need to worry about any unilateral changes, because the agreement would lock our benefits in place for the duration of the contract. Then, several months before the contract expires, faculty representatives and university representatives would enter into honest negotiations. Regardless of whether we'd end up paying more or less for our benefits, we'd have a legitimate say in the final agreement, we'd vote on it, and then that agreement would lock our benefits in place for the duration of the contract.

Provost Announces Restructuring

2009-03-11T13:00:00.000-07:00

Today we all received a message from Provost Krendl. Although her message did not address collective bargaining, part of it was particularly relevant. Many faculty are pushing for unionization because they feel marginalized. Although shared governance is given lip service, the administration is making important decisions without adequate input from the faculty. In today's message, the Provost introduced a proposal for restructuring some colleges. The proposal was created by the academic deans, although "faculty will be asked to assist in the refinement of the proposal."

In other words, the important decisions have been made by the administration, but the faculty can work on the details. In my opinion, that's insulting, and it undermines the essence of shared governance. I would like our faculty to develop a collective bargaining agreement in which shared governance is operationally defined, using specific guidelines and concrete examples, so that when the administration believes restructuring is necessary, they will understand that faculty input is needed before important decisions are made. Below is the text of Provost Krendl's message. Your comments care welcome.

Dear Colleagues:

Thirty years after the last significant collegiate restructuring of the university, major shifts have taken place in the landscape of higher education. How we learn, what we learn, and why we learn have been transformed through the computers that sit on our desks, the degree to which boundaries between disciplines have changed or have been erased, and the host of challenges (most of them global in nature) that dominate our scholarship and teaching. The goal still remains to ensure that the "means of education shall forever be encouraged," but those means are changing in ways that even the most prescient could not have imagined thirty years ago.

In light of those changes, the academic deans of Ohio University are finishing a proposal outlining alternative means of structuring some colleges. That proposal grew out of discussions about how a new set of academic structures could capitalize on areas of existing strengths, promote emerging strengths, realize new revenue opportunities, and create administrative efficiencies. At the heart of the proposal is a conceptual framework that creates organizational structures to support the academic needs of the next generation of students and faculty. The framework was built on a set of goals that are listed below. I anticipate that the proposal will be finished early next week, and as soon as it is completed I will provide copies to the faculty.

As I indicated during a meeting held on March 5, 2009, with the chairs and directors, faculty will be asked to assist in the refinement of the proposal. To facilitate the gathering of input, deans will hold open forums in some colleges and departmental or school meetings in others. Our ultimate goal with academic restructuring is to move from proposal to implementation planning before the end of Spring Quarter.

Sincerely,

Kathy A. Krendl
Executive Vice President and Provost

ACADEMIC RESTRUCTURING GOALS

Proposed realignments, where applicable, must:

* Support emerging areas of academic strength.
* Allow colleges and academic programs to develop more fully their potential and their institutional missions.
* Create new opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration.
* Identify ways of more strategically allocating resources.
* Facilitate the creation or consolidation of academic programs needed to further the university's long-term academic aspirations.
* Offer new possibilities to enhance research and creative activities.
* Assist with the university's ability to enhance student performance.
* Confront and resolve issues that have been longstanding barriers to operating as one university.
* Offer the potential to help the university meet external mandates, particularly those associated with the University System of Ohio

AAUP Better Option for Faculty

2009-03-10T10:50:00.000-07:00

AAUP's Effective History Makes it Better Option for Faculty (The Post)

This letter to the editor was written by Katherine Jellison, Professor of History. It was in response to the CIF's suggestion that the AAUP is an ineffective organization.

The latest public statement from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (OUCIF) states that the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) is an "ineffectual" organization. Faculty certainly need to determine the effectiveness of anyone they might choose as their representative, but OUCIF's charge, which casts doubt on whether OU faculty can trust the AAUP to represent them competently, is erroneous.

OUCIF's assertions refer to a 6/8/2007 article in the Chronicle of Higher Education by Robin Wilson, who reported that the 92nd meeting of the "premier faculty association" of the U.S. focused on the organization's financial and membership problems, and that the AAUP's role in collective bargaining remained controversial among non-union members. The AAUP challenged Wilson's portrait as "rife with anonymous sources, misrepresentations and partial quotations that changed the meaning of what was actually both said and meant" (www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2008/MJ/Feat/warr.htm), but the key point to note today is that regardless of whether Wilson's characterization was accurate in 2007, this snapshot in time is not accurate now. A year after the original story, on 6/27/2008, Wilson told Chronicle readers that AAUP had a "restructuring plan in place" that represented "big steps on the path" to organizational health. In addition, membership had risen 7 percent that year, and deficits were erased.

AAUP is the only organization in the U.S. to work exclusively on behalf of university faculty. Local chapters and state conferences supplement the national organization. In its 93-year history, AAUP has provided the foundational statements on academic freedom, shared governance and the host of professional standards that guide the academic mission. Its collective bargaining chapters, which are locally controlled, empower faculty to protect these standards through legally binding negotiation procedures. The OU Faculty Handbook is based on AAUP principles.

Ohio has a strong AAUP conference and extremely successful AAUP chapters, some of which serve as collective bargaining representatives. Even as the national AAUP grappled with its managerial challenges two years ago, the faculty at the University of Akron entered into their first ever collective bargaining agreement. Nationally, too, important work proceeded despite the bumpy road. For example, AAUP was instrumental to the successful outcome of the most important court case concerning tenure in recent years. Otero-Burgos v. Inter-American University was a significant victory and will have major implications for the future (www.aaup.org/AAUP/newsroom/Highlights/otero.htm).

AAUP-led collective bargaining offers OU faculty a proven, effective, professional alternative to the conditions we currently find ourselves in: salary freezes, shifts in health care costs to faculty, limitations on health care options by removing Holzer Clinic from the PPO network, attempts to redefine the provost position as strictly administrative, displacement of Faculty Senate committees by administratively appointed groups and the sundry other measures that have eroded real faculty influence at OU for more than a decade and a half. Is there another, better option that, like collective bargaining, gives faculty legal powers to protect its livelihood and authority in matters of shared governance? The answer is likely to be no, and so I urge all faculty to consider signing the AAUP cards we have received in our boxes (or print one out from www.aaup-ou.org/card.html). By doing so, we are requesting an election to determine whether or not we should form a collective bargaining unit under OU-AAUP auspices. Let's seriously explore all options, especially collective bargaining, which can give us the legal resources we currently lack.

Health Care and OU-AAUP

2009-03-07T15:46:00.001-08:00

Today I have two email messages to post for posterity. One is another half-baked message from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF). They are questioning whether the AAUP is an "effectual organization." If interested, you can visit their site for the full text of their message. They refer to a 2007 article in the Chronicle that describes some problems the national AAUP had at the time. But as usual, the CIF has tried to mislead faculty by telling only a small part of the story. For example, the CIF failed to mention the AAUP's response to the article. Although the CIF would like faculty to believe otherwise, the AAUP is a strong, well-established organization. Since 1915, the AAUP's primary mission has been to advance academic freedom and shared governance. And don't forget, Ohio University has had a local chapter since 1935!

Let's move on to some information that is helpful to Ohio University. Kevin Uhalde, the President of OU-AAUP, has recently emailed faculty to clarify the AAUP's position on heath care issues soon to be discussed in Faculty Senate. The text of that message is below. Your comments are welcome!

Dear Colleagues:

I apologize in advance for sending another general email so soon. But I've been asked by a number of colleagues to clarify OU-AAUP's position on important health care matters soon to come up in Faculty Senate.

The health care discussion is important no matter where you stand with regard to unions. For me, it's also a clear cut reason why we should want a union sooner rather than later.

I started taking my son to Holzer Clinic when the pediatrician we'd seen before packed up and left. That's Athens, of course. Affordable houses, short commutes, wonderful people. But many professionals don't stay long. Seeking care for premature babies (or even ordinary childhood illnesses and allergies), for cancer treatment or heart problems, and especially on weekends or in the middle of the night, all quickly reveal the challenges of small town living.

It means having limited options and that means those options we have are precious for happiness and well-being.

The most important discussion to take place about health care in recent years is taking place now. Unfortunately, as so often at OU, the discussion is taking place after many potentially life-changing decisions have been made without our being involved.

The administration would like to take this year -- a year when the increased cost of health care is in fact much lower than in recent years, when our health care nonetheless continually runs a surplus, and a month after the president acknowledged breaking the rules by imposing a premium increase without seeking Faculty Senate approval -- in this year the administration would like to make health care worse and more expensive for us all.

On top of that, the administration wants many of us to take ourselves, our children, and our parents to new doctors whom they approve. Those would be the doctors that cost less, always a good sign of quality. Or stay with the ones we know and trust but pay more.

The administration has tried to guilt faculty out of protesting over such actions by pretending the alternative is layoffs but that is not the case. Meanwhile OUCIF faculty quiver at the "horrors" of unions and compare them to smoking cigarettes.

A collective bargaining agreement would prevent sudden drastic actions and require the administration to involve faculty in a meaningful way. The administration at University of Akron attempted similarly drastic reforms while the faculty was organizing after a successful election: the administration paid over a million dollars for what was ruled to be unfair labor practices. An AAUP officer and health care expert (currently Eastern Michigan Professor of Accounting, Dr. Howard Bensis) conducts workshops to educate faculty for negotiating health care benefits and does site specific analyses.

The bottom line for OU-AAUP is that if tough decisions must be made, the faculty is better off making them for ourselves. That can happen with collective bargaining. The only way to know whether other faculty feel the same is to have an election. So please consider clicking on this link now (http://www.aaup-ou.org/card.html) and sending in a signed card today.

Respectfully,

Kevin Uhalde
Associate Professor of History
President, OU-AAUP

Faculty Health Care Under Attack

2009-03-06T10:51:00.000-08:00

Shifting Cost: Faculty Expected to Foot Climbing Health Care Bills, Not Administrators (The Post)

This Post Editorial noted that the faculty will once again be forced to shoulder financial burdens while the university administration overlooks its own extravagance. According to a new plan for health care benefits, faculty premiums would increase from 9.85 to 12.15 percent. Co-pays would increase from $15 to $20, and co-insurance limits could increase by up to $2,000 per family or $1,000 per individual. Budget Planning Council member Dennis Irwin said, "It's essentially a shift in cost from the university to the faculty."

And to make matters worse, OU recently announced that Holzer Clinic will become an out-of-network health care provider as of July 1. This will force up to 20 percent of Ohio University employees to change physicians or face increased medical costs.

According to the Post editorial, "...the number of top-level administrators continues to increase, and those administrators often receive exorbitant salaries that rise even in the midst of a university-wide slump. The most obvious example? President Roderick McDavis received a controversial $85,000 raise this year. We're left with a bloated administration, bloated executive salaries and individual leaders who seem totally unwilling to make sacrifices for the good of the whole."

THAT SAID, today the university announced that President McDavis will give $50,000 to university scholarship programs. According to a news release, he and his wife will donate $10,000 a year for the next five years to OU's Urban and Appalachian Scholars programs. We should all appreciate this gesture, but we'll also need to put it in perspective. After receiving an $85,000 raise this year, McDavis will still enjoy an extra $75,000 in his wallet each year over the next 5 years. His raise is more than most of us make in an entire year, and it would go a long way in funding our financial crisis.

What is the CIF's Platform?

2009-03-05T10:36:00.000-08:00

It's Becoming Clearer What The Independent Faculty Group Wants (Athens NEWS)

This letter to the editor was written by Kevin Mattson, Professor of History.

I have read with interest the materials produced by the Ohio University Committee for an Independent Faculty. Here’s what I’ve learned so far: They don't want a faculty union, they've studied faculty pay at other institutions, and they enjoy printing their statements on lime-green paper.

But here’s what I don't understand: What exactly does the group want? Besides being critical of a union that has not yet established itself, what does the organization stand for?

Well, now I have learned. It didn't come from OU CIF itself; it came from news reports from the Post and The Athens NEWS. Here is the CIF’s de facto platform as I understand it, a logical extension of the idea that no change is for the better:

They are satisfied with a pay freeze for faculty in the same year that the president enjoys a $85,000 pay increase. Even if that seems to defeat some central aims of Vision Ohio about faculty compensation.

They are satisfied with a plan, to quote the Post, that pushes "greater costs onto employees," including faculty. They are satisfied with premiums that would increase from 9.85 percent to 12.15 percent, even though the university has run a surplus in our health care under current plans.

This is the meaning of independence on our campus. And I wish that instead of simply arguing against the formation of a union, that the CIF would start to use these as their talking points on the future course they would like to see faculty chart at OU. It sure is an impressive track record.

Kevin Mattson
Department of History
Ohio University

In contrast to the CIF, the OU-AAUP is committed "to work for the betterment of Ohio University through the protection of Faculty rights and responsibilities, thereby promoting the best possible learning environment for our students and best possible working environment for the faculty."

Interested in learning more about the OU-AAUP's platform? Click here.

Card Drive Slowly Moves Forward

2009-03-05T10:21:00.000-08:00

Faculty Union Drive Slowly Moves Forward (Athens NEWS)

The OU-AAUP card drive continues to "chug along," although OU-AAUP President Kevin Uhalde acknowledged that more signatures are needed before calling an election. Uhalde estimated that about 1200 faculty are eligible to sign cards, but that OU-AAUP will not seek an election until they receive cards from about 60% of them. "Uhalde explained that AAUP leaders, before they will seek a vote, want not only to feel that they would have a good shot at winning a union, but also to see evidence that unionization is truly something most faculty want, and that they’re willing to organize around the effort rather than relying on AAUP to do it."

Do you need a union card? If so, you can print one at http://www.ouaaup.org/card.html

Acad. Freedom vs. Corporatization

2009-03-04T16:53:00.000-08:00

Faculty Should Reflect on Which Governance Model is Best (The Post)

This provocative letter to the editor was written by Chuck Overby, Professor Emeritus of Engineering. According to Overby, faculty should carefully examine the type of governance model they think is best for Ohio University, because the AAUP and the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) offer significantly different models.

Overby states that "AAUP's model is based on their 1915 founding principle of protecting academic freedom and its intimately related constitutional 'first amendment' right-to-speak. As 'university corporatization' grows across America, the AAUP has found it necessary to build a collective bargaining tool on its solid 'academic freedom' foundation."

According to Overby, the "CIF's model is basically the corporate model with little room for free-speech ideals."

Overby concludes by asking, "Which model, the CIF's or the AAUP's, might be the better model for 'academic governance' at OU...?"

Great question. I'd love to hear your comments.

Safety From Budget Cuts

2009-03-04T16:26:00.000-08:00

Faculty Must Seek Unionization For Safety from Budget Cuts (The Post)

This letter to the editor was written by Joseph W. Slade, who is a professor in the School of Media Arts and Studies. According to Slade, the Budget Planning Council plans to recommend (a) "freezing salaries in fiscal 2010, with the exception of employees who are contractually obligated to receive raises;" (b) "postponing a $1.2 million investment in raising faculty salaries as called for in the Vision OHIO plan;" (c) "increas[ing] employee premiums, co-pays and co-insurance levels and add[ing] a deductible;" and (d) excluding Holzer Clinic physicians from "in-network" coverage beginning July 1 because they cost too much.

Slade acknowledges that these are tough times and that there is a need to cut expenses. However, he believes that the administration's proposed cuts reflect problems with their priorities. According to Slade, "OU's administration seems to have decided that the $85,000 raise for the president and the six-figure salaries of a bloated administrative staff should remain off the table. Instead, faculty members are the problem and they should be made to bear the brunt of the cuts. The administration cannot touch unionized employees (janitors, groundskeepers, and maintenance staff represented by AFSCME). These individuals have salary increases (3.5 percent for the coming year) and locked-in benefits guaranteed through the life of their contract. This contract is a multi-year agreement negotiated through collective bargaining. Faculty members, however, are an easy target for cuts in livelihood because they lack the protection of such a negotiated, binding, multi-year contract."

According to Slade, "Budget cuts invariably reflect the priorities of the people who wield the knife. The self-serving goals of OU's administration are crystal clear. But who's looking out for the university and its faculty - the core of the university and the guarantors of its academic mission?"

As you might expect, Slade urges faculty to sign and submit a union card. Slade reminds us that "sending in the card is not a vote for a union, nor is it a commitment to join the AAUP. It is simply a request that the AAUP hold an election to determine if we want to be represented by them."

Message From OU-AAUP

2009-03-02T05:46:00.000-08:00

This message was written by Kevin Uhalde, President of OU-AAUP.

Dear Colleagues:

Last summer, a Faculty Senate resolution sparked the first serious talk of collective bargaining on our campus in decades. During the fall that discussion moved from the senate to the campus as a whole. OU-AAUP's role has been to provide information and collect cards in support of an election. Within the last couple weeks, every full-time O.U. faculty member should have received a packet of information, including a card and stamped envelope.

Our primary concern right now is to provide information to all faculty members about how collective bargaining works at universities in Ohio and elsewhere. As more of you volunteer to help carry on these conversations in your own schools and departments, we'll be able to do this the best way possible: face to face, colleague to colleague.

Meanwhile, I want to draw your attention to our website (http://ouaaup.org/), which we've loaded up with a variety of information. Very soon you'll be able to send us your questions directly without revealing your name. You'll even be able to print cards on demand.

The website address is http://ouaaup.org/. As always, we welcome your questions and suggestions. For ideas on how to be involved see http://ouaaup.org/action.html. The best way to show your support is to sign a card, become a member, and start talking with your friends and colleagues. There will only be a faculty union if most of us want one. If you want one, let us know.

Sincerely,

Kevin Uhalde
--
Associate Professor of History
President, OU-AAUP
uhalde@ohio.edu / kevin.uhalde@gmail.com

Contracts Protect Salary/Benefits

2009-02-27T12:23:00.000-08:00

OU's Union Contracts Suggest the Benefits of Collective Bargaining (Athens NEWS)

This letter to the editor was written by Kenneth Brown, Professor Chemistry. It's short and sweet, so I've reproduced it in it's entirety. Your comments are welcome. (Based on recent comments, I'm particularly interested in hearing from those who have yet to make a decision about unionization. Do you find Brown's letter persuasive? What information would help you make a decision?)

To the Editor:

Last week at a budget forum, OU Vice President William Decatur informed the university community that while most university employees, including faculty, will see a $1 million to $5 million reduction in health-care benefits and get no raise, those in the AFSCME and FOP unions will get a 3.5 percent raise and suffer no change in their health-care benefits. That's because they have a contract with the university, and the rest of us do not. Now our "friends" who call themselves the Committee for an Independent Faculty have been trying to scare faculty out of unionizing by calculating the bazillions of dollars that would be paid as union dues over the next few millennia. But the truth is that if we had a contract with the university, we'd probably be getting a 3.5 percent raise (or thereabouts) next year and no cuts to our health-care benefits. So even after paying union dues of about 0.75 percent of salary, faculty would still be better off to the tune of about 2.75 percent, and their dues would be covered forever. Which option would you choose? A 2.75 percent raise with your union dues covered in perpetuity and no loss of benefits, or no raise and at least a $1 million cut in benefits? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Unionization Leads to Success

2009-02-27T11:48:00.000-08:00

Collective Bargaining Allows Peer Institutions to Succeed (The Post)

This letter to the editor was written by Tracy Leinbaugh, Associate Professor in the Department of Counseling and Higher Education. It was in response to the Committee for an Independent Faculty's message that I blogged about below (2/21/09). The CIF discussed the relationship between unionization and institutional quality, and they noted that unionized institutions tend to be ranked lower than non-unionized institutions. According to Leinbaugh, the CIF failed to share some important information.

For example, Dr. Leinbaugh reminded us that three of our aspirational peer institutions and many respected universities enjoy the benefits and protections of collective bargaining [e.g., University of Connecticut (OU peer institution), University of Delaware (OU peer institution), University of New Hampshire (OU peer institution), Rutgers University, University of Rhode Island, University of Vermont, New York Institute of Technology, Bard College, City University of New York (23 CUNY campuses), State University of New York (64 SUNY campuses), New Jersey Institute of Technology, Rider University, University of California (5 campuses: Berkeley-San Francisco, Davis, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Cruz), San Francisco Art Institute, and California State University (23 campuses)].

Dr. Leinbaugh also informed readers that our peer institutions with collective bargaining outperform Ohio University on numerous measures of quality, including freshman retention, student/faculty ratio, graduation rate, and U.S. News & World Report rankings.

And here's another great point that Dr. Leinbaugh made...Many universities (including nearly all the rest of our aspirational peer institutions) are located in states that PROHIBIT faculty from collective bargaining, and thus it is impossible to know which institutions would opt for collective bargaining if they were legally able to do so.

In closing, Dr. Leinbaugh stated that collective bargaining does not tarnish or devalue an institution. The CIF knows this, as does the OU administration. That's why they selected three aspirational peers that enjoy the benefits and protections of collective bargaining.

Will Unionization Reduce Quality?

2009-02-21T15:35:00.000-08:00

Many faculty have received an email from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) that discusses the relationship between unionization and institutional quality (as measured by the U.S. News and World Reports annual rankings). Excerpts from that message are below. My comments follow, and your comments are welcome.

Hello _____:

This message is from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (OUCIF). We represent a grass-roots effort; a group of concerned faculty dedicated to maintaining shared governance, quality, and faculty independence at Ohio University.

What is the relationship between institutional quality and presence of a faculty union? Consider the latest annual U.S. News & World Report 2009 edition of America's Best Colleges. Correlating these rankings with faculty unionization produces the following results for various groupings of “National Universities”, as defined by the Carnegie Foundation’s 2006 Basic Classifications. A negative correlation score indicates that unionized schools tend to have lower ranking than non-unionized schools within the group. A perfect correlation score of -1.00 indicates that no unionized school is ranked higher than any non-unionized school in that category.

The message then displays two tables, each demonstrating that unionized institutions tend to be ranked lower that non-unionized institutions. You can view the tables at http://www.oufacultyindependence.blogspot.com/.

To their credit, the CIF acknowledges that correlation does not prove causation. After all, it would be a stretch to claim that unionization leads to reduced institutional quality. Instead, their primary point seems to be that "perceptions matter" and that unionization would lump us together with unsavory, low-quality schools. It's interesting that the Provost made this same point back in October when addressing Faculty Senate. She stated that "faculty unions are most popular at certain types of institutions" and that "an institution is judged in part by the company that it keeps." However, the Provost and the CIF keep forgetting that three of our "aspirational peer institutions" (University of Connecticut, University of Delaware, and University of New Hampshire) are unionized. If unionization is so troublesome, why were these three universities selected as a relative standard for our own future success?

Unionization will not reduce the quality of this great university. Under a collective bargaining agreement, we will still be the same teachers and scholars we've always been. Although our daily routine on campus will change very little, we will enjoy the security of a stable, transparent contract and the benefits we've negotiated. We'll no longer need to worry about the administration unilaterally attacking health care benefits and policies set forth in the Faculty Handbook, because our negotiated agreement will be backed by state law.

Remember, faculty have no reason to mistrust the AAUP. Since 1915, the AAUP's primary mission has been to advance academic freedom and shared governance. Ohio University has had a local chapter since 1935. Even our Faculty Handbook (Section I-A) pays homage to the incredibly influential 1940 Statement of Principles of the American Association of University Professors. These principles, which virtually all faculty embrace, are at the core of what it means to be a faculty member in a democratic society.

Concerns Go Beyond Salary

2009-02-18T15:11:00.000-08:00

AAUP's Faculty Employment Concerns Go Beyond Salary (The Post)

This letter to the editor was written by Judith Yaross Lee, Professor of Communication Studies. It was in response to an email from the Committee for an Independent Faculty. (I blogged about the email on 2/12/09.) The CIF stated that the cost of unionization isn't worth it (dues are estimated to be .75% of one's salary). According to Judith Yaross Lee, the CIF misrepresented the AAUP's position.

A recent e-mail from the Ohio U Committee for an Independent Faculty (OUCIF) misrepresented the positions of our local AAUP chapter and facts about academic unions. I'd like briefly to clarify both for the benefit of the Athens community.

First, OUCIF implies that the OU-AAUP campaign for collective bargaining is primarily about salaries, when in fact it is about ALL of the conditions of faculty employment, especially shared governance. A chief goal of OU-AAUP is to incorporate the provisions of the Faculty Handbook into a legally enforceable contract, both to ensure administrative compliance as a matter of principle and to maintain the rights and responsibilities of faculty in academic planning and oversight. Our concerns about faculty salaries arise in the context of overall university priorities; we note that faculty raise pools take a back seat to many other non-academic matters because the faculty voice in setting strategic priorities has been muted in recent years.

Second, OUCIF suggests that faculty get nothing of benefit from the payment of union dues, when in fact dues pay for legal assistance in collective bargaining (the university has its own attorney). In any event, projected AAUP dues are far less than anyone's annual raise, as negotiated through collective bargaining - less than 1 percent, typically about half that. One of my colleagues estimates that everyone's dues would be paid forever if collective bargaining improves our salary pool over the administrative offer by just 0.25 percent annually for the first three years.

Finally, the agency fee in lieu of dues reflects the reality that ALL faculty in the bargaining unit, even if they choose not to join the union, get the benefits of the contract. They are therefore asked to pay a roughly equivalent amount to that portion of dues dedicated to bargaining. Different unions and states have different policies about how agency fees are handled. I don't know the practice for agency fees in Ohio, but when I was at CUNY, this money went into a scholarship fund for students rather than to the union.

CIF Discusses Cost of Unionization

2009-02-12T16:44:00.000-08:00

Many faculty have received an email from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) that discusses the costs of unionization. The text of that message is below.

Any potential benefits of a union need to be weighed against the actual costs to faculty members. Faculty members who join AAUP would pay approximately .75% of their salary in union dues per year. At this dues rate, and assuming an annual raise of 3% (the average annual salary increase at OU over the past 6 years), a faculty member earning the average salary of $74,590 would pay the following dues:

Year 1 $559
Over 10 Years $6,414
Over 20 Years $15,033
Over 30 Years $26,616

Even faculty members who decline to join the union would incur a cost by paying an agency fee, which can be as high as the union dues. This financial cost represents just one cost of unionization. We don't think it’s worth it.

It's true that unionization will bring union dues, but the CIF isn't telling the complete story. For example, according to AAUP-OU, "On average, chapter members pay roughly 0.75%. But membership is voluntary. As a non-member, you might pay 0.55% of your salary as a 'fair share,' as at Akron, or nothing, as elsewhere." In other words, the faculty will decide whether non-members will pay a fair share or not, and if so, how much.

And wouldn't there be costs if we decided NOT to unionize? For example, it's likely that OU faculty will receive no raises, or raises that amount to chump-change, particularly after our health care costs are increased. But unionized campuses will enjoy the raises and the benefits they negotiated previously. For them, there will be no surprises, because their compensation will be treated by their administration as a fixed cost, which is backed by state law. Because our compensation is not backed by a legally binding agreement, it is constantly vulnerable to attack, as we all know too well (e.g., our health benefits are being attacked as I type). The bottom line is that we have little control over our own fate. That's just one indignity we suffer without collective bargaining.

I'd love to hear your opinions about this issue. Please consider posting an anonymous comment. No login is required.

Faculty Should Take Responsibility

2009-02-10T07:13:00.000-08:00

Time to Move Past Era of Trusting in Administrative Benevolence (Athens NEWS)

This letter to the editor was written by Marsha Dutton, Professor of English. It's worth reading if you're interested in knowing why some faculty are considering unionization. In fact, it would be helpful if more faculty spoke out, if only to share with others why they do or do not support collective bargaining.

Dutton wrote about her early days teaching at OU, when the administration decided her salary and benefits, and she had no reason to distrust those decisions. Like most faculty, she was busy with teaching, research, and service, but through the wisdom of hindsight, she now believes it is somewhat irresponsible for faculty to trust that the administration will treat them appropriately. According to Dutton, "It is time for us to stop relying on paternalism and to start speaking on our own behalf. It is time for us to create a bargaining unit with a contract and faculty handbook that the university cannot violate....It is simply too dangerous to rely on others instead of taking personal responsibility."

Laws Wouldn't Affect Faculty Union

2009-02-06T10:51:00.000-08:00

Union Discussions Should Stick to Reality and Facts (Athens NEWS)

This letter to the editor was written by Kevin Mattson, Professor of History. It was in response to Lee Ervin's letter to the editor that I blogged about below (2/2/09). Ervin stated that if the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) becomes law, it would be possible to enact union representation via a card drive and that a union vote would not be necessary. According to Mattson, Ervin is misinformed about this issue.

According to Mattson, the EFCA would apply to the private sector, not a state institution like OU. Mattson also reminded readers that the local chapter of AAUP and the OU administration are both on record stating that they desire/require an election, regardless of how many union cards are filed. Furthermore, Mattson reminded readers that contract negotiations would not begin at "level zero," as several fear mongers have suggested. State laws require that parties "bargain in good faith," and in this case that means an institution cannot punish a union by stripping its members of existing salaries, benefits, etc. (This basic issue keeps coming up. If any readers are expert in this area, please consider submitting a blog entry via email. I'd be happy to post a brief primer.)

Ervin trashed the idea of unionization in his letter, and he suggested that union representatives are more interested in collecting dues than in helping the university. As you might expect, Mattson found that insulting (and untrue, of course), so he set the record straight.

Will New Laws Affect Unionization?

2009-02-02T13:26:00.000-08:00

New Laws Could Change Playing Field of Faculty Union (Athens NEWS)

In this letter to the editor, Lee Ervin, a former OU student now living in SC, stated that political support for the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is growing and the legislation is likely to pass in the U.S. House and Senate. According to Ervin, EFCA would make it possible to enact union representation simply by presenting an employer with signed authorization cards from a majority of the employees.

This issue is relevant to Ohio University because the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) and the AAUP-OU have been debating whether "signing a card is in fact a vote for unionization" (for more background information, see blog entries from 1/20, 1/26, etc.). As it is now, I believe that reasonable people who have followed this discussion understand that Ohio University will not unionize without an election. But according to Ervin, federal laws may change, and that might change matters locally.

Ervin went on to trash the idea of unionization, suggesting that faculty may need to begin contract negotiations from scratch, giving up every right and benefit we now enjoy (hasn't this argument been discredited already?). He also suggested that union representatives are not necessarily interested in what is best for the university, but are indeed interested in collecting union dues. Seems like a very cynical point of view. Is there data to back it up? Are our local union organizers money grubbers interested only in exploiting the faculty and bringing the university to its knees?

I'd love to hear your opinions about these issues. Please consider posting an anonymous comment. No login is required.

AAUP-OU Responds to CIF

2009-02-01T18:14:00.000-08:00

The following message, written by Kevin Uhalde (President of AAUP-OU), is in response to the CIF's message that I blogged about below.

What was it that Mark Twain said about statistics?

OUCIF, already well known for spreading cheer and collegiality at OU, has more good news in its most recent circular: for 12 years you've enjoyed 1.2% bigger raises than your unionized colleagues at other Ohio universities (see the link below if you haven't yet received the good news). Try not to gloat!

Of course you probably aren't gloating, even if 1.2% impresses you more than it does me. That 1.2% isn't an advantage you're likely to have noticed, because it's the difference between two averages that themselves derive from cumulative raise percentages, not the kind of figures you use to plan a household budget.

Still, let's look at the data the OUCIF is using. Try it this way: if you're a full professor at OU, your cumulative raises over the past 12 years rank 9th out of the state (behind OSU, Miami, Bowling Green Toledo, Wright State, Akron, Cleveland, and Kent). If you're an associate professor at OU, 10 other universities in Ohio have given your peers more or higher raises. Cumulative raises for assistant profs rank 9th.

9th place, 11th place, and 9th place. Remind me why the data doesn't support unionization?

Oh, Group 2s and 4s. If you're not tenured or tenure-track faculty and want to know how your raises stack up, sorry. Since OU pretends many such faculty aren't really full time, it's not surprising there's no comparable data. And you also may have never received a raise. But it's worth noticing that unionized schools that do have data show cumulative raise percentages from 37.5% to 57%. Tell me again what's the downside?

OUCIF says OU-AAUP now is not only "misleading" faculty but making "errors" to boot. Akron and Wright State, they say, clearly shouldn't be included in salary studies of unionized schools because they weren't unionized the entire 12-year period. Uh, okay. Akron's raises had flatlined before its faculty unionized. As soon as a union looked like a possibility, the administration showered them with a mid-year raise, followed by a $1,000,000 market adjustment pool. Their first contract was for a 19.4% raise pool over four years. Wright State will get 5% next year and 5% the year after that. By the way, what's our raise pool for next year looking like?

Given the heavy representation of business and marketing faculty in the OUCIF, I shouldn't question its salary analysis. I'm a medieval historian, after all. But why remove OSU as a statistical outlier among non-unionized schools, yet include Shawnee State? Shawnee isn't even represented by the AAUP. Ah, but it pulls the unionized raise average down much further than OSU pulls the other group up.

I prefer one-to-one comparisons to see how we've been treated compared to our peers (9th place, 11th place, 9th place). And that's where I find that I'm in 11th place at a university that is supposed to be part of the "Ohio Ivy." If the averages are more important to you, that's fine. In the end, salary data can be sliced any which way to show what a person wants to show. But 12 years ago is also when our Board of Trustees vowed to move OU faculty pay into the top quartile of Ohio: it still hasn't happened.

OUCIF has offered to correct the "errors" we've made. I'd thank its members and then respectfully ask that they stop fretting over the AAUP long enough to do some work of their own, and then offer faculty a positive plan for improving OU and our place in it that doesn't involve collective bargaining.

(Oh, Mark Twain might have been the person to come up with the three types of lies, of which statistics are the third, but I'm not sure about that. Feel free to correct my error.)

Kevin Uhalde

CIF Challenges AAUP Salary Data

2009-02-01T14:30:00.000-08:00

Many faculty have received an email from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) that challenges a salary analysis conducted previously by AAUP. The text of that message is below. Comments, of course, are welcome.

Hello _____:

This message is from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (OUCIF). We represent a grass-roots effort; a group of concerned faculty dedicated to maintaining shared governance, quality, and faculty independence at Ohio University.

Some faculty are unhappy and frustrated with the current administration and are turning to unionization as a last resort. Clearly, AAUP would like salary data to favor unionization as well.

An analysis of AAUP’s own salary data does not support unionization on economic grounds. Indeed, the analysis shows that over 12 years non-unionized faculty in Ohio received on average 45.5% in cumulative salary increases, while unionized faculty received 40.0% in cumulative salary increases.

The non-unionized public universities in Ohio are a well-respected group comprised of OSU, OU, Miami, and Bowling Green. The AAUP FAQ states that after eliminating OSU as an outlier, the data favor unionization. But that is NOT true. Even removing OSU, one still comes out ahead WITHOUT a union: 41.2% vs. 40.0% in cumulative salary increases.

Where did the AAUP data go wrong? They made two errors. First, they misclassified Shawnee State as a non-unionized school. In fact Shawnee State has been unionized with the NEA since 1989. Second, they included Wright State and Akron in the study, but those schools unionized during the 12-year study period! The error is particularly serious with regard to Akron, which unionized in 2005. For nine of the 12 years studied Akron was a non-union school and yet AAUP tries to count all 12 years as unionized! We have corrected this error by removing Wright State and Akron from the analysis.

You can access the table at oufacultyindependence.blogspot.com, or by opening the attached PDF file.

The AAUP FAQ's conclusion is inaccurate and misleading. Keep in mind that on top of the lower salary increases one would also have to pay union dues (or agency fees) at an estimated 0.75% of salary per faculty member per year (on average $559/year)—whether or not you join the union!

While it is obviously true that salary is not the only issue, nonetheless faculty voting on unionization have a right to know the truth about salaries and the fees due to a union.

Unionization Merits Consideration

2009-01-30T11:12:00.000-08:00

I recently visited the FutureOU.org Web site and found an intelligent, well-written editorial by Dr. Dave Drabold, Distinguished Professor of Physics. Dr. Drabold has given me permission to repost his original editorial on this site.

Recent experience shows that the Ohio University administration (Trustees, President, Provost) does not share faculty priorities. This is evident in allocations to intercollegiate athletics, hiring of administrators and consultants, limited faculty hiring, Senate resolutions going unsigned, and cuts to academic staff who help to deliver education and facilitate research. Repeated attempts of Faculty Senate, Distinguished Professors, other groups and individuals, have failed to bridge the faculty-administrator divide. The current grim budget scenarios make our need for meaningful influence urgent, and Collective Bargaining (CB) has the potential to advance faculty interests on salary, job security and medical care, all of which are at risk. Since CB is worth a close look, I advocate signing a card. By the way, I am perfectly convinced that arguments circulating about “signing a card is a vote to unionize” are specious for Ohio University.

This is not the same as an endorsement of CB. Indeed, there are downsides to a union. The greatest weakness is that CB does not dictate a change in priorities: there is no guarantee that CB will suppress further enrichment of intercollegiate sports or the hiring of several additional six-figure administrators. CB leads to an additional bureaucracy, and requires hard work, discussion, and consensus building to function effectively. I believe that the faculty was correct not to endorse CB under President Ping.

It is clear that the administration will express interest in meeting faculty concerns to avoid CB. I suspect that fear of CB is what led to the presence of two faculty senators attending some Trustee meetings. Whether we ultimately unionize or not, I want to publicly thank our AAUP colleagues for their efforts, which I believe have already advanced the interests of Ohio University faculty.

My vote on CB will be determined by answers to the following questions: Does intercollegiate athletics take a substantial hit? On what basis are decisions made about academic and administrative cuts? Do academic support staff in the departments receive some consideration after years of cuts? Do we make attempts to make “one time” savings by selling suitable assets? Will the composition of the Provost search committee conform to the specific guidelines of the Faculty Handbook for academic positions, or will the administration attempt to redefine the provost as a non-academic position? Does the administration publicly and officially acknowledge the Faculty Handbook as a legally binding document? Will OU continue to identify itself as a teaching institution that requires business functions, or will the administration redefine OU as a business whose revenues happen to come from education? These are some of the questions that confront us.

The administration’s response to questions like these will make my choice clear, one way or the other.

Dave Drabold

Defining Shared Governance

2009-01-28T20:09:00.000-08:00

Campus Officials Discuss Shared Governance (The Post)

Scholars Trade Ideas for Shared Governance (The Post)

OU, National Teaching Staffs Define Shared Governance (The Post)

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think most faculty would agree that our problems with the administration focus on shared governance. The three articles above discuss various ideas for defining what shared governance is. Although most academics have a sense of what shared governance is, or what they think it should be, the basic concept proves to be quite difficult to nail down. I wondered what the Faculty Handbook has to say about shared governance, so I visited the Faculty Senate Web site and searched for the phrase electronically--no hits! According to the search engine, the word "shared" doesn't exist in the Handbook, and the word "governance" produces just 4 hits. The most relevant is an elegant but vague sentence stating that "Professors accept their share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of their institution" (Section I-A-2-C). Exactly what that means is unclear.

In my opinion, we need to define shared governance both conceptually and (perhaps more importantly) operationally. Although a mutually-agreed-upon, conceptual definition will help put shared governance into perspective, an operational definition that identifies recommended procedures, guidelines, and examples will help us put shared governance into practice.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. In Article 27 of the University of Cincinnati's collective bargaining agreement, shared governance is defined conceptually. Part of the conceptual definition includes the following statements, "Joint effort and shared responsibility for governance will take a variety of forms, as situations require....Shared responsibility for governance is based upon mutual trust and respect for diverse interests and perspectives and is an iterative and consultative process." That sounds good, but the definition is too vague to do much good, and the language of the contract seems to recognize this problem. The conceptual definition continues by stating, "To be effective, shared governance clearly defines roles, scope of authority, and responsibility for decision-making among faculty governance bodies and university administrators." Then, in the sections that follow, shared governance is defined in more operational terms.

For example, the agreement states that the faculty shall make their own regulations governing the admission and exclusion of students, the courses of instruction to be offered, grading policy, recommendations for degrees, honors and prizes, other fundamental areas of curriculum, and such other matters as may be within their jurisdiction. They shall also be entitled to share significantly in the responsibilities for program development, program review, department review, and department and college reorganization.

The agreement also states that the faculty shall have the right to consider matters affecting the university and shall be given sufficient time to make available to the administration, to the board, and the AAUP, its aid, advice, and counsel in such matters.

The agreement also states that faculty shall have a voice through faculty representatives elected for that purpose at the unit, college, and university level in the formulation of long-range plans and in decisions relating to their implementation. Similarly, faculty representatives elected for that purpose shall have a voice at the unit, college, and university level where decisions relating to the use and creation of existing or prospective physical resources are being made.

The agreement also states that with respect to faculty priorities in those areas not specifically dealt with through the collective bargaining process, both parties to the agreement recognize the Faculty Senate as the primary governance body representing the faculty which shall have the right to advise the President and the Vice Presidents.

In some cases, the agreement is detailed enough to include timelines. For example, "Well in advance, but at least ninety (90) days before the final budget recommendation of the President to the Board, procedures shall be established by the administration in consultation with the Faculty Senate, for reviewing the existing budget and for reviewing requests of the individual Vice Presidents for changes in their budgets. Upon written request the Faculty Senate shall have access to financial information which is relevant and necessary and can reasonably be made available, including monthly budget summaries."

In general, the more we can define shared governance in detail, the better our relationship with the administration will be. The University of Cincinnati's contract proves that shared governance can be defined (at least partially) in some detail. If the OU faculty vote to unionize, we should define governance as clearly as possible in our collective bargaining agreement.

Faculty Handbook Attacked, Again

2009-01-26T15:20:00.000-08:00

Faculty Reacts to McDavis’ Concessions on Provost Search (Athens NEWS)

Faculty Should Decline Joining Illegitimate Search Committee (The Post)

According to the Faculty Handbook, academic search committees must have between 6 and 14 members, the majority of the members must be faculty, and the committee must be chaired by a faculty member. Although this sounds very straightforward, President McDavis has argued that the Executive Vice President and Provost is an administrative position, so the search committee need not conform to the standards of the Faculty Handbook. To their credit, Faculty Senate passed a resolution on January 12th criticizing the composition of the committee, stating that it violates the Faculty Handbook. Although President McDavis offered to revise the structure of the committee, it is not yet clear if the Senate will accept the revisions, as the proposed changes do not meet all the conditions set forth in the Senate's resolution.

Most Senators seem to agree that it is important to defend the Faculty Handbook and the principles on which it is based. As the administration continues to chip away at policies long established in the Handbook, some faculty worry that the Handbook could become irrelevant. Several times on this blog I've mentioned that one benefit of collective bargaining is that our agreements with the administration become backed by state law. Because the Faculty Handbook is not protected in this way, the administration seems quite willing to challenge it as they see fit. Although Faculty Senate will continue to fight the good fight, I'd prefer that they have the law on their side.

As I mentioned previously, President McDavis has argued that the Executive Vice President and Provost position is an administrative position, so the search committee need not conform to the standards of the Faculty Handbook. I wonder if he would have made the same argument with the Handbook protected under a collective bargaining agreement? I don't know the answer to that question, but I suspect Faculty Senate would have a more manageable fight on its hands if the Handbook was indeed backed by law.

Keep fighting Senators!

AAUP-OU Responds to CIF

2009-01-26T14:04:00.000-08:00

As I noted on January 20th (see below), the CIF once again is using unrealistic claims to scare faculty away from signing union cards, even though their arguments have been discredited (see the CIF's most recent letter). In the following letters to the editor, Kevin Uhalde, president of AAUP-OU, responded to the CIF and set the record straight. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if the CIF is interested in setting the record straight. Reasonable people who have followed this discussion understand that Ohio University will not unionize without an election. Others who perpetuate myths seem more interested in spreading lies to scare faculty away from signing cards.

CIF Once Again Spreading Fallacies (Athens NEWS)

Fear That Staff Will be Tricked Into Unionization Irrational (The Post)

Faculty on Board Committees

2009-01-23T09:03:00.000-08:00

Measure Would Add Faculty Reps to Committee

According to Outlook, the Board of Trustees’ Governance Committee will forward to the full board a resolution that would allow two non-voting faculty representatives to participate on board committees. However, the faculty members would not participate on the full board.

Specifically, the Governance Committee is recommending a resolution that extends ex-officio, non-voting board-committee representation to two Faculty Senate members. The Senate's Finance and Facilities Committee chair would serve on the board’s Resources Committee and the Senate’s University Curriculum Council chair would serve on the Academics Committee.

Although faculty need to be represented on the full board (as opposed to just a few committees) for meaningful shared governance to work, this is a step in the right direction. It seems as though the threat of unionization is making the Board of Trustees at least somewhat more responsive to faculty concerns. A unionized faculty would have even more clout.

Board May Gag Its Members

2009-01-22T09:52:00.000-08:00

Post Editorial: Trustees Consider Free Speech Issue

The Board of Trustees will review a "Statement of Expectations" this week. If adopted, the policy would gag individual trustees from voicing dissent about board decisions. According to The Post, the policy suggests "The Board must speak with a single voice...Board Members should refrain from publicly criticizing actions of the Board, the President or other members of the University Community." As you might expect, the proposed policy has been widely criticized as an assault to transparency, sound decision-making, and meaningful shared governance.

Most people would agree that meaningful shared governance is built upon cooperation, mutual trust, and respect between the faculty, the administration, and the Board of Trustees. It's difficult to see how gagging individual trustees would benefit relations between the faculty and the administration, particularly when you consider that FACULTY ARE NOT REPRESENTED on the Board.

Would a collective bargaining agreement change things? It might. The following language can be found in the agreement between the University of Cincinnati and the AAUP:

Faculty representation on the Board...shall include the chairperson of the University Faculty Senate and two elected representatives of the University Faculty. They shall have the right to suggest proposals for consideration by the Board and the President, and to attend with voice, all meetings of the Board, except executive sessions, and Board committees including academic affairs and finance. (Section M.2)

Discredited CIF at it Again

2009-01-20T16:12:00.000-08:00

Faculty Union’s Not Such a Great Idea (Athens NEWS)
This letter to the editor was written by Rebecca Thacker, from the College of Business and the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF). The CIF distributed similar information to several faculty today via email.

Even though their arguments have been discredited, the CIF once again is using unrealistic claims to scare faculty away from signing union cards. Their argument is essentially the same as it was before. According to the CIF, "signing a card is in fact a vote for unionization." As I (and others) have stated previously, it is possible to circumvent an election only if the union initiates it (which it would never do), and only if Ohio University also agrees to recognize the union without an election (and Ohio University would NEVER agree to do this).

According to Rebecca Watts, who is Chief of Staff to President McDavis, the administration would indeed request an election before recognizing a faculty union. In other words, the card drive is completely legitimate, faculty should not hesitate to sign cards if they support unionization, and the Committee for an Independent Faculty should stop trying to scare their colleagues.

If you need more evidence that the CIF is making disingenuous claims, consider reading the following Post article or the following blog written by Kevin Uhalde, President of the AAUP-OU

Claim That AAUP Could Bypass Union Election is Unrealistic (11/24/08, The Post)

Cards Really Aren't Scary -- Part 2 (1/20/09, AAUP-OU)

Unionization Locks-in Benefits

2009-01-17T10:19:00.000-08:00

When times are tight, it's reasonable to consider budgetary adjustments. For example, as health-care costs continue to rise, the university community must make tough decisions regarding who should shoulder additional financial burdens. Based on recent news, it's clear that faculty will be required to dig deeper into their pockets. According to Outlook, several health-plan adjustments are being explored, including higher premiums, higher copays, and for the first time ever at OU, a deductible that would need to be reached before insurance benefits would kick in. And although the administration has not yet decided if they will implement a pay freeze (OU Budget Group Delays Decision on Pay Freeze, Athens NEWS), it's unlikely that faculty salaries will keep pace with the cost of living next year.

One key strength of unionization is that employee benefits are locked into collective bargaining agreements, and then they become fixed costs that administrators are unable to alter unilaterally. According to Ken Brown, "All unionized campuses in Ohio have kept raises intact for next year," and I assume that's true for their health benefits as well. There's nothing wrong with wanting our salaries and benefits to be locked-in for the coming years. The administration clearly understands the benefits of that sort of security, as some of the university's highest paid officials (i.e., President McDavis and Coach Solich) have recently locked-in their salaries and benefits for several years.

Union is Taking Over Senate?

2009-01-15T15:47:00.000-08:00

So Much for Shared Governance; The Union is Taking Over (Athens NEWS)

In this letter to the editor, Don Flournoy (Professor in the School of Media Arts and Studies) claimed that Faculty Senate is being taken over by the union. He stated that he sees a small group of faculty "wanting to be the ultimate decider on everything that goes on at OU, showing not the slightest concern for its effect on collegiality and shared participation of students, deans, civil service and administrative staff, community, and yes, trustees."

Furthermore, he suggested that "faculty have more important things to do" rather than spend their time running the university, and that our university can't afford a unionized Faculty Senate that is at odds with the rest of the community.

I'd love to read your comments...

In Old Days, Faculty Had Clout

2009-01-15T14:35:00.000-08:00

In The Old Days, OU Faculty Had Much More Clout Than Now (Athens NEWS)

In this letter to the editor, Chuck Overby (OU Emeritus Engineering Professor) takes issue with The Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) for "suggesting that a faculty union might reduce the Faculty Senate's clout within the university, compared to what it had enjoyed during Charles Ping's 1975-1994 presidency."

Overby reminded us that in 1978, the Ping administration "finessed" the Faculty Senate out of considerable clout when it stripped faculty of the right to remove college deans by a democratic vote. According to Overby, "A faculty removal vote required the President and Provost to comply with the faculty's wishes." Overby stated that this right was exercised a couple of times in his early years at OU. According to Overby, our right to vote was replaced with the current dean's evaluation procedure, which transferred removal rights to the Provost and President.

Perhaps a faculty union could help us regain the right to vote on the deans?

FutureOU.org

2009-01-14T13:05:00.000-08:00

http://www.FutureOU.org/

Today I received an email announcing a new Web site, FutureOU.org, that "aspires to provide a neutral venue for thoughtful, serious discussions that will lead to a brighter future for Ohio University."

Question: Is the site designed to promote the AAUP collective bargaining drive?

Answer: From the FutureOU.org FAQ page..."No. We are not a one-issue site. Collective bargaining is, of course, an important current issue, and we welcome discussion of it on this site. The editors, however, urge contributors not to let their stance on this one current topic become a lens through which to view the larger questions about OU's future. Instead, our broad sense of institutional values and direction should inform our thinking and attitudes to specific issues--including collective bargaining."

Because the editors welcome discussions of collective bargaining, I wanted to make sure you're all aware of its existence. Below is a welcome message from Steve Hays, who is one of the Web site's editors.

Wage Freeze?

2009-01-13T15:47:00.000-08:00

In yesterday's blog, I wondered if faculty would receive a raise next year, and I suggested that without a bargaining agent, we really have no say in the matter. According to The Post, ("Emergency Meeting Held to Discuss Wage Freeze"), "The Budget Planning Council is considering a recommendation for a university-wide raise freeze for next year to help ease budget woes."

I guess we all saw this coming, including the administration (of course). That's probably why over the last few months we've heard that President McDavis received an $85,000 raise, the new Executive Director of Communications and Marketing will receive $157,500, Coach Solich will receive $400,000 through 2013, and the new VP for Diversity will receive $137,000. It's no wonder we have budget woes!

Money Available For Admin (II)

2009-01-12T15:28:00.000-08:00

Again I ask, When times are so tight, why is the university continuing to spend so much money on administrative costs?

Today's Post was kind enough to remind us that in addition to his base salary of about $380,000, President McDavis enjoys several lavish benefits ("Finalized Contract Raises Salary by $85,000").

$45,600 in deferred compensation, to be awarded at the completion or termination of his contract

A home at 29 Park Place and a residence budget of $78,242

A car allowance of $12,000, with insurance provided by the university

One quarter/semester of paid professional leave during his contract

Up to 25 days of paid vacation each year

Full access to the university's airplane

$2,200 cell phone allowance

I wonder if faculty will receive a raise this year? I guess we'll simply accept whatever the administration offers. We have no other choice without a union.

Defending Handbook/Health Care

2009-01-09T17:10:00.000-08:00

According Faculty Senate Chairman Sergio Lopez-Permouth, Faculty Senate will discuss several resolutions Monday night (1/12), one of which will focus on employee contributions to health care. According to the resolution, the Faculty Handbook states that changes to employee contributions must be submitted to the Faculty Senate for approval. However, in violation of the Handbook, employee contributions were raised on July 1, 2007 without consideration nor approval by the Senate. The resolution demands that contributions roll back to the prior rate and that excess contributions be returned via a premium holiday.

Several months ago, I posted a blog that asked, Is the Faculty Handbook legally binding? Back in the days when faculty physically signed contracts, it was clear that our employment was based on the terms and conditions set forth in the Handbook. But things are much less clear nowadays, and according to John Biancamano, OU's Director of Legal Affairs, the Faculty Handbook is "in a general sense" still part of the faculty contract. We should all be deeply concerned when our legal rights are only "generally" protected by a "contract" we no longer have a right to sign, particularly when we realize that the administration has failed to honor the procedures set forth in the Faculty Handbook.

By negotiating a collective bargaining agreement with the university, faculty will no longer need to worry about these matters. The agreement will list our benefits plainly, and because the agreement will be backed by state law, the administration will be unable to force unilateral changes.

Union Help Wanted!

2009-01-07T20:33:00.000-08:00

A colleague forwarded the following email to me. I've edited it to remove the sender's identity.

Dear Colleagues,

I ...have also been involved with OU's chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) in the effort to establish collective bargaining (unionization) at our campus. Our chapter president, Kevin Uhalde, supplied me with your names and contact information.

I write because in one form or another, perhaps on the card you signed and submitted stating your desire to decide through secret ballot whether or not we should have collective bargaining at OU, you indicated a willingness to get involved in the campaign. We now need your help.

We are laying the groundwork for a sustained communications and outreach effort to the wider faculty in the lead up to a mass distribution of cards. Our goal is to produce a series of "white papers" (around 500 words each) that address issues and grievances of central concern to the faculty. These white papers will provide serious and documented analyses of the issues and explain how collective bargaining can help resolve them. The white papers will be placed on our website and distributed in other ways, as well. We also wish to develop a series of flyers that we will begin distributing weekly as soon as possible. We want to accomplish all this by the end of this month.

We need your help in researching and writing this material. If we have enough people involved, the work required will be manageable. We are all extremely busy people. But, we also have an opportunity now, at this moment, to restore an effective faculty voice through the instrument of collective bargaining. We need your help, whatever you can give, and we need it especially this month.

If enough of you write back saying you want to pitch in, then I will call a meeting to discuss the range of issues we need to address and divvy up the work. Again, if enough of us are on board, we can make quick and relatively easy work of this task. Along the way, you will learn what it is involved with collective bargaining and become important resources for your friends and colleagues as we move forward.

Please let me know as soon as you can if you'd like to get involved. We need you.

(For more info, contact aaupou@gmail.com)

Money Available For Administrators

2009-01-07T16:45:00.000-08:00

During lean times, we expect to see belt-tightening. For example, as I mentioned below, administrative workgroups are exploring a variety of options for reducing costs, including "savings that could be realized through...changes to employee and dependent benefits." That's right, the university might decide to contribute less to our health care.

When times are so tight, why is the university continuing to spend so much money on administrative costs? According to The Post ("New Director No Stranger to Business"), the university recently hired a new Executive Director of Communications and Marketing. She'll earn $157,500 per year, more than twice the salary of a typical faculty member.

AND THAT'S NOT ALL...According to The Post ("Semester Transition Budget Rises with More Costs Expected"), the university's transition to semesters is $324,000 over budget and still rising. But it's unlikely the extra money will help alleviate the burden the transition will have on most faculty, as only a select few who lead the transition will receive "buyout" funding. According to Faculty Senate Chairman Sergio Lopez-Permouth, all faculty should be compensated, as all faculty will be forced to convert their courses to a semester format. I assume most faculty would agree, but without a bargaining agent, the faculty is in no position to negotiate a fair deal. We'll be forced to accept whatever the administration offers, which for most faculty will be absolutely nothing.

Without a union, the faculty will continue to get steamrolled by the administration.

Students Dissatisfied w/Admin

2009-01-05T14:43:00.000-08:00

Today's Athens NEWS contained two articles describing student dissatisfaction with OU's administration. It's interesting that many students share the same concerns as faculty, and that many students support faculty unionization.

Student Activists Meet at OU (Athens NEWS)

This article reported that OU's chapter of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) hosted a national retreat over the weekend. During the spring 2007 Student Senate elections, the OU SDS chapter organized a "no-confidence" vote against OU President Roderick McDavis. In that election, 78 percent of student voters said they had "no confidence" in the President's ability to run OU. According to the article,

SDS members at OU have recently leaked plans of a new 'student union' being formed among a coalition of student groups seeking to challenge the OU administration, and to ally with university faculty members who are pushing for a faculty union.

Many Students Know Little About OU’s Board of Trustees (Athens NEWS)

This article provides some basic information about OU's Board of Trustees. It reminds us that faculty have no representation on the Board and that students are represented by two non-voting members. According to the article, both of the student trustees are in favor of voting rights. One student trustee stated that full enfranchisement is necessary to lend true legitimacy to the Board. That's a great idea, but OU's Board of Trustees cannot even approach true legitimacy until faculty are represented as well. But don't hold your breath. According to Board Secretary Tom Davis, "higher education is comparable to a major corporation." Unfortunately for us, most high-ranking corporate officers treat faculty as pawns.

Protect Health Benefits

2008-12-29T14:53:00.000-08:00

Budget Cuts Hit University Outreach (Athens NEWS)

According to this article, Gov. Strickland has spared "core education funding" in his fourth round of state budget reductions, although some OU programs that provide outreach to southeast Ohio will sustain further cuts. To address budget reductions, the Budget Planning Council is examining major expenditures and revenue sources to develop financial recommendations.

In addition, administrative workgroups are searching for new ways to generate revenue and reduce costs. The administrative workgroups are exploring a variety of options, including "savings that could be realized through...changes to employee and dependent benefits."

It's not as if we didn't see this coming. Back in November, Ken Brown (Professor of Chemistry) suggested that the university may be preparing to shift additional health care costs to its employees "Budget Scare May Be Pretext to Get Your Health Benefits (Athens NEWS)". According to Brown, "It’s a tactic we've seen used or attempted more than once during this long period of fiscal trouble. So we know what to expect just around the corner: higher monthly contributions, higher out-of-pocket maximum costs, and, for the first time ever at OU, a health-care deductible."

And without the right to negotiate benefits with the administration, he claims there's not much we can do about it, except form a collective-bargaining unit. "As long as we lack the right to negotiate benefits with the administration, we can expect to be the scapegoats when budget deficits loom and when administrators are prowling for ways to pare the budget."

According to Brown, the message is clear..."Protect your health-care benefits. Vote for collective bargaining. And join the AAUP today!"

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

OU Breaks Records Law

2008-12-18T14:34:00.000-08:00

OU Admits to Breaking Open Records Law (The Post)

Ohio University is an honorable institution, but from time to time, honorable institutions get themselves into hot water. According to The Post, Ohio University has admitted to three violations of Ohio's public records law. In August 2006, two IT administrators were fired following security breeches and a report that recommended their dismissals. Although OU maintains that the report was not the basis for their termination, the fired administrators filed suit to gain access to notes and documents of the report.

Following a court hearing, both sides of the suit agreed that OU’s inability to produce the records violated Ohio’s public records law. The fine for violating Ohio’s public records law is $1,000 per record.

What can we learn from this case (and others like it)? One lesson is that the administration controls a group of lawyers who are willing to play hardball. That's their job. But faculty need to understand that these lawyers are not their lawyers--they are attorneys for the administration. So if some unfortunate incident were to arise (ask around, I've heard about several situations), you'd quickly learn that you'll be needing a lawyer yourself. Ohio University is an honorable institution, but its lawyers will fight vigorously, even against current and former employees, faculty included.

According to AAUP-OU, most of the money paid in union dues goes to legal fees for protecting individuals and negotiating contracts. The administration has protected themselves. Faculty should protect themselves too. It's the smart thing to do.

CIF Mocked by Former Student

2008-12-18T12:57:00.000-08:00

CIF Does Rhetorical Backflips in Arguing Against Union (Athens NEWS)

In this Reader's Forum, Dominic Barbato, past president of the OU Graduate Student Senate, essentially mocked the Committee for an Independent Faculty for suggesting that unionization may reduce faculty clout.

(FYI...I blogged about this issue on December 11th. See below.)

According to Barbato,

[The CIF does] not seem to know (or even care to learn) the nuances of labor law. After a successful union election, the law generally requires that terms of employment are frozen. This prevents management from retaliating against employees for unionizing by stripping benefits from them before negotiations start. The only way faculty would "give up" anything is if they would vote to do so when they ratified a contract, something I see as very unlikely.

OU Discusses Administrative Layoffs

2008-12-14T10:15:00.000-08:00

OU Discusses Cutting Administrative Positions, Suspends Dean Searches (The Post)

In general, the more people we have working on behalf of the students (that includes faculty, staff, and administrators), the better. That said, lean times force universities to trim the fat, so OU is considering combining or eliminating administrative and other non-academic jobs as well as combining colleges. The university would combine colleges by integrating one college into others, thereby eliminating "unnecessary" jobs. According to Ann Fidler, interim Associate Provost for Strategic Initiatives, "Everything needs to be on the table at this point in time." According to Fidler, "[Gov. Strickland] may not be able to continue to protect us. We need to protect ourselves."

Well said! And as administrators in Cutler Hall are considering "all options," we faculty need to protect ourselves as well. To date, I have not heard any serious discussion about laying off faculty, but it's reasonable to assume that layoffs are one possible option, particularly as the university considers restructuring the colleges. Consequently, it makes sense to protect ourselves, just to be safe. Every collective bargaining agreement that I have read includes a section on "retrenchment." For example, Article 28 of the University of Cincinnati contract discusses "RETRENCHMENT UNDER CONDITIONS OF FINANCIAL EXIGENCY." In that section, specific guidelines and procedures are established for dealing with financial emergencies and potential faculty layoffs. I encourage you to spend a few minutes reading that section, and then ask yourself if you'd like to be protected by a similar policy.

CIF and AAUP-OU Bicker Via Email

2008-12-12T19:51:00.000-08:00

Today I (and others) received email messages from the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF) and from AAUP-OU.

Among other things, the CIF restated some of their recent fear appeals and they "applauded" AAUP-OU for their pledge to hold an election only after 60% of faculty have signed unionization cards. The AAUP-OU email recognized the CIF's message and called for them to provide "concrete suggestions" regarding specific issues, such as faculty participation in administrative hiring, faculty benefit guarantees, etc. (As I mentioned yesterday, it's common for critics to disparage unionization without providing clear alternatives.)

For your reading enjoyment, I pasted each email message into a comment.

Possibility of Faculty Trustee?

2008-12-12T19:29:00.000-08:00

Governance Committee Discusses Possible Faculty Trustee (The Post)

According to The Post, the Ohio University Board of Trustees is examining how other universities handle communication between faculty and "top governing bodies" in academic settings that include and exclude faculty representation on those Boards. During the Board's October meeting, a team of faculty and administrators presented evidence suggesting that faculty representation fosters communication and broadens the Board's awareness of various university-related issues. During that meeting, faculty members recommended that the Board add a faculty representative, an idea backed by Faculty Senate Chairman Sergio Lopez-Permouth, and an idea backed by evidence that communication is "lacking" or "minimal" in academic settings that exclude faculty representation.

Union or not, the threat of collective bargaining has helped the administration understand that things must change and that shared governance must be taken more seriously.

CIF Warns Faculty, Again

2008-12-11T14:56:00.000-08:00

According to a group calling themselves the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF), a collective bargaining agreement could result in the faculty losing some rights they now enjoy (Faculty Faction Warns Unionizing May Reduce Profs’ Clout--Athens NEWS). According to the CIF, "If you have a collective bargaining agreement, you have to negotiate contracts. And in those negotiations, you're going to have to give up things. I am certainly not interested in going down that road."

I'm not sure that I follow the CIF's logic. It is true that collective bargaining involves negotiating a contract. But that's a good thing, because the administration will be forced to listen to the faculty and to arrive at a mutually acceptable agreement that will be backed by state law. As a thought experiment, let's explore the CIF's primary fear that contract negotiations could go so far south that the final agreement would provide even less than we "enjoy" now. If that were the case, who among us would vote to ratify the contract? C'mon people...let's be reasonable!

According to the CIF, existing university policies and procedures can provide faculty with "more weight in shared governance." Exactly what policies and procedures is the CIF talking about? Do they honestly think Faculty Senate is unaware of how to navigate the existing structure of governance? Unfortunately, it's common for critics to disparage unionization without providing clear alternatives.

You might recall that the CIF has used scare tactics in the past. For example, as this blog stated on November 25th, the CIF made unrealistic and disingenuous claims to scare people away from signing cards. The CIF should be ashamed of their behavior, and they should stop trying to mislead faculty.

Why Do YOU Support/Oppose Unionization?

2008-12-10T17:26:00.000-08:00

This blog is intended to be informative. One way to inform the faculty about unionization is to share why YOU support or oppose it. Thus, I encourage you to contribute an anonymous blog entry to this site. Please send all contributions to OUunion@yahoo.com

Here is my promise to you...

1) Your contribution will be posted anonymously, regardless of whether you sign it or not. I have not made my identify known, and I am not interested in making your identify known. I am a faculty member, and I hope that designation buys me some of your trust.

2) I will post ALL submissions, regardless of content, as long as they are reasonably well-thought-out, respectful, and focused on why YOU support or oppose unionization.

3) I will NOT save your email address, nor will I share it with anyone, nor will I ever send you spam or any other correspondence.

4) I will delete your email message immediately after I post your contribution to the blog.

So please, share your thoughts on this important issue: Why do you support or oppose unionization?

Card Drive Going Well

2008-12-08T12:25:00.000-08:00

Union Card Drive Going Well (Athens NEWS).

Although AAUP officials aren't releasing specific numbers, they reported that faculty response to the "card drive" has been good, even though cards have not yet been distributed to all faculty.

According to Joe Bernt, Professor of journalism and Secretary of AAUP-OU, "Overall, we're pretty pleased, even surprised by the number of cards that have already been signed without the AAUP chapter putting out much effort. We will have a better sense of how close we are to 60 percent of the faculty once we actually send out a mass mailing with cards following an extensive educational campaign during winter and early spring quarters."

Letter From AAUP-OU

2008-12-05T13:09:00.000-08:00

Below is a letter I (and others) received from AAUP-OU.

December 1, 2008

To the Ohio University Faculty:

This fall, the Ohio University Faculty Senate voted to support collective bargaining. Since then, we in the AAUP-OU have tried to share information about collective bargaining and lay the groundwork necessary for a successful card drive and election. Many of you will put a lot of thought into your decision, not because you’re satisfied with the status quo, but because you care deeply about the university and your own professional life. We feel the same.

Even the quickest glance at the financial and administrative challenges facing Ohio University shows that the faculty needs the capacity to develop, express, and act meaningfully upon our shared interests and commitments. That is why we are working for a collective bargaining agreement.

Our campus has a unique character marked by a commitment to tolerance, autonomy, democracy, and civility. That’s why we think that a locally controlled and democratic AAUP chapter is preferable to more centrally controlled labor organizations. In the coming months, we'll be sharing more information about all of these concerns.

Now we want to share some good news, update you on developments, and ask for your support.

First, good news that can save you money. Through December, you can join the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) at a substantial discount (these introductory dues are only $60 for those earning less than $60,000, and $120 for those earning more). Your membership supports the nation’s leading organization for our profession, gets a subscription to the bimonthly magazine, Academe, and empowers you to participate fully in the OU chapter, which includes choosing or running for offices. Please join us!
Go to http://www.aaup.org/forms/membership/duesoffer.htm

On the organizational front, the OU chapter and the national AAUP have defined the Ohio University Collective Bargaining Unit (CBU) to be as inclusive as possible. All OU faculty members who work the real-life equivalent of full time are covered: this includes roughly 1150 people in Groups I, II, and IV, the regional campus faculty, and the non-clinical faculty at the College of Osteopathic Medicine.

Before we call for a full vote, we would like to have 60% of the faculty in the CBU sign cards supporting the election and expressing their desire for collective bargaining, represented by the AAUP. Some of your colleagues may have requested and signed cards already. If you haven't, don't worry, we'll eventually send cards out to everyone at their home address.

Why not just send the cards now? We are engaged in a process that involves much more than just getting the cards signed. We’re working to build a campus-wide, democratically governed organization of OU faculty. With a broad membership, AAUP-OU will have the strength to effectively partner with the Faculty Senate on issues like governance, health care, compensation, family leave, and giving legal authority to the many important provisions of the faculty handbook.

Please visit our website (http://www.aaup-ou.org/) and direct any questions you have to aaupou@gmail.com or any AAUP member. If you would like to get involved, even better. What kind of help are we looking for?

Here are some possibilities:

Serve as a liaison--that is, someone who acts as a communication link between AAUP-OU and our colleagues around the university (this is the most important and rewarding role, and we can never have enough!)

Participate in a phone bank when there’s a good reason to try reaching faculty members directly.

Serve on one of our fun committees, such as membership, communications, or events planning.

Build contacts between campuses or with other Ohio AAUP chapters.

Volunteer your web design expertise so our information stays fresh and clear.

But the most helpful thing of all is to join the AAUP and let us know that your support collective bargaining.

Happy Holidays,

Kevin Uhalde
President, OU-AAUP
kevin.uhalde@gmail.com

Krendl Leaving OU

2008-12-05T12:27:00.000-08:00

As I've mentioned a few times over the past few weeks, administrators come and go, and today OU announced that Provost Krendl will step down as Ohio University's Executive Vice President and Provost June 30, 2009 to assume the presidency of Otterbein College (Otterbein College Names Krendl President).

Until July 1, Krendl will continue to be chief academic officer, the primary administrator of VisionOhio, and she will continue to lead the transition from quarters to semesters (and to our inclusion in the University System of Ohio).

Do the faculty have a solid back-up plan? Or is our future now left to some to-be-named administrator that we'll have little or no say in hiring?

We can't leave our future and the future of this great institution to the whims of transient administrators who are preoccupied with their next promotions. During this period of intense change, the faculty needs to ensure that its collective voice is heard. As I've mentioned before, a collective bargaining agreement would help ensure that the changes we embrace are measured, in the best interest of all stakeholders, and that they are implemented via due process that includes appropriate faculty input.

As today's news proves, university administrators will come and go, but a collective bargaining agreement will remain in place regardless of the administration, and it will be backed by law.

Unionization Boosts Power!

2008-12-03T13:24:00.000-08:00

Unions are all about strength and power.
But I'm not talking about that kind of strength and power.

We need to shake the idea that the desire for power is somehow uncouth, or even sinister. Power is a critical factor in any relationship, whether it be personal or professional. That said, healthy relationships feature an equitable distribution of power. In terms of relative strength and power, how healthy is the relationship between the faculty and the administration?

Consider two recent events, and ask yourself if the faculty enjoy even a small piece of the power structure.

1) According to data published Monday in the Athens NEWS, the average 2007-08 total compensation package for a pubic university President was valued at $427,400. At that time, President McDavis was earning only $378,732 (Survey Suggests McDavis Was Being Underpaid). But don't feel sorry for McDavis, because university administrators and Board Members enjoy considerable power, and they have the freedom to award raises as they see fit. They also have the freedom to ignore two consecutive no-confidence votes from the faculty, and the luxury of conducting a "comprehensive review" of the President after deciding to award him a 5-year contract extension and an $85,336 raise. While administrators are getting rich, faculty enjoy the pleasure of fighting over table scraps, leaving most of us lucky if we keep pace with inflation--many of us don't.

2) Earlier today, a colleague sent me an email from Ben Ogles, who is the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. After consulting with other administrators, Dean Ogles decided to suspend all faculty searches immediately, expressing disappointment and citing budgetary issues as the culprit. Given the discouraging state of our global economy and the budgetary challenges that Ohio University faces, it's not surprising that the administration is suspending faculty searches. But as I mentioned previously, university administrators enjoy considerable power, so when they believe a new administrative position is necessary, it's unlikely that budgetary problems will stand in their way. For example, it was just three weeks ago that Ohio University announced its first Vice Provost for Diversity, Access and Equity. This new administrator will earn $137,000 annually (an amount easily twice as much as two new assistant professors would have likely earned).

These are just two examples, based on news within the past two days. If you pay even just a little attention, you'll discover that these are not isolated instances, but that they represent a troubling trend that reflects Ohio University's status quo.

Through unionization, faculty will speak with one voice. And when faculty speak collectively, they become powerful, because the administration will have no choice but to listen. Isn't it obvious folks? They certainly aren't listening to us now.

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Union Debate Welcome

2008-12-01T08:14:00.000-08:00

Union Debate Welcome; Misrepresentation, Scare Tactics Not (Athens NEWS)

In this Reader's Forum, Bernhard Debatin, Associate Professor of Journalism, notes that the Committee for an Independent Faculty is not living up to the standards of a truthful and honest debate.

In times of severe economic crisis, I would like to see an honest debate that focuses on how to maintain shared governance, academic quality and faculty independence at OU. So far, the debate about unionization has mostly revolved around salary increases--a red herring in my opinion (statistics are inconclusive and hard to compare) and also a nearly moot point in a recession.

He also raises some great questions...

During lean economic times, will we be able to maintain our workload? Will we be able to protect faculty from layoffs? Will we be able to maintain our health benefits? Will we be able to preserve academic quality? Will faculty have the strength, unity, and perseverance to ensure their voices are heard?

According to Debatin, a unionized faculty will no longer be ignored, because unionization will balance the distribution of power and make shared governance possible.

Giving Thanks

2008-11-27T06:17:00.000-08:00

University professors have lots to be thankful for. We are paid to explore our interests and to spark interests in others. We have autonomy over our research and our classrooms. Our schedules are relatively flexible and allow us considerable time off. Many of us have job security. And although most of us aren't getting rich, university professors typically earn a decent salary with reasonable benefits. Overall, we lead good lives, and for that, we should be thankful.

That said, I'm willing to fight to maintain what we have, and to try to make things better. Ohio University is a great institution, one that I've called my home for many years, but it is not without its problems. Those of us who speak out about OU's problems are no less loyal to the institution than those who stay silent, choosing instead to accept things as they are. Reasonable people are going to disagree about unionization. As academicians, we can deal with that. As academicians, we know that people on both sides of the issue are going to exert their influence to persuade others and to gain supporters. No problems there, as long as we all agree to play nice.

Let's continue to do that. Let's agree to play nice and to further our discussion of unionization so that those who have yet to decide have enough information to do so. Let's agree to speak up and to be tolerant so that our discussions are friendly and informative. Let's agree that it's in our best interest to unite, whether or not that involves collective bargaining.

Happy Thanksgiving, my friends.

Administrators Come and Go

2008-11-26T15:09:00.000-08:00

This is an update of a previous blog regarding Provost Krendl searching for employment elsewhere...

According to The Post, Provost Krendl is now one of two finalists for president at Otterbein College ("Krendl One of Two Candidates for Otterbein Presidency"). You might recall that back in February, she was among three finalists for the presidency at Elmhurst College. Although Provost Krendl is chief academic officer, a primary architect of VisionOhio, and leading the transition from quarters to semesters (and to our inclusion in the University System of Ohio), it's clear that she's interested in moving on.

If you haven't noticed, the times are a changin' at Ohio University, and as they continue to change, the faculty needs to ensure that its collective voice is heard. A collective bargaining agreement would help ensure that the changes we embrace are measured, in the best interest of all stakeholders, and that they are implemented via due process that includes appropriate faculty input. University administrators will come and go, but a collective bargaining agreement will remain in place, and it will be backed by law.

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Scare Tactics by Union Opposition

2008-11-25T15:11:00.000-08:00

If you need more evidence that the Committee for an Independent Faculty is trying to scare people away from signing cards, consider reading the following article:

Claim That AAUP Could Bypass Union Election is Unrealistic (The Post)

As I (and others) have stated previously, it is possible to circumvent an election only if the union initiates it (which it would never do), and only if Ohio University also agrees to recognize the union without an election (and Ohio University would NEVER agree to do this). University administrators are trained never to say never, but according to Rebecca Watts, who is Chief of Staff to President McDavis, the administration would indeed request an election before recognizing a faculty union.

In other words, the card drive is completely legitimate, faculty should not hesitate to sign cards if they support unionization, and the Committee for an Independent Faculty should stop trying to scare people.

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Do Not Hesitate to Sign Cards

2008-11-24T11:56:00.000-08:00

As I mention yesterday, many faculty have received a bizarre email from a group calling themselves the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF). The CIF warned that faculty should "be careful" before signing unionization cards, because "signing a card is in fact a vote for unionization."

The following article and letter to the editor help set the record straight. In essence, they state that the card drive is legitimate, completely transparent, and that if the card drive is successful, Ohio's State Employment Relations Board (SERB) will coordinate a vote on unionization. In other words, the card drive is completely legitimate, so faculty should not hesitate to sign cards if they support unionization.

Faculty Group Alleges Union Card Drive Deceptive (Athens NEWS)

The Truth about Ohio Law and Collective Bargaining (Athens NEWS)

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Card Drive is NOT a Union Election

2008-11-23T16:46:00.000-08:00

Many faculty have received a bizarre email from a group calling themselves the Committee for an Independent Faculty (CIF). The CIF warns that faculty should "be careful" before signing unionization cards, because "signing a card is in fact a vote for unionization."

This is not true, and it's troubling that this group would suggest that our AAUP-OU colleagues are intentionally trying to mislead us. According to a recent blog entry on the AAUP-OU's Web site, "The AAUP will not, under any circumstances, ask SERB to recognize AAUP as the exclusive bargaining agent without an election. Just as importantly, the AAUP will not call for an election until a strong majority (60%) of the faculty have asked for it by signing cards."

Why is the Committee for an Independent Faculty trying to scare us? Unfortunately, it is common for those who oppose unionization to spread misinformation and to use fear to scare people away from signing cards. Below are the facts, based on the following Ohio laws that you can read for yourself:

Ohio Revised Code 4117.05
Ohio Administrative Code 4117-3

FACT: It is possible to circumvent an election only if the union initiates it. As I mentioned previously, the AAUP will not, under any circumstances, seek collective bargaining without an election conducted by the State Employment Relations Board (SERB). The unionization cards clearly state that faculty who sign cards "wish...to vote in an election to be conducted by the Ohio State Employment Relations Board..."

FACT: Even if the union initiated alternative procedures (and it won't), it is possible to circumvent an election only if Ohio University also agrees to recognize the union without an election, and Ohio University would NEVER agree to this. During the October Faculty Senate meeting, the Provost stated very clearly her opinion that unionization would be "disastrous." NEVER in Ohio has a university recognized a union without an election.

FACT: Faculty have no reason to mistrust the AAUP. Since 1915, the AAUP's primary mission has been to advance academic freedom and shared governance. Even our Faculty Handbook (Section I-A) pays homage to the incredibly influential 1940 Statement of Principles of the American Association of University Professors.

The Committee for an Independent Faculty is correct that you should be careful what you sign, BUT YOU SHOULD SIGN A UNION CARD.

The Language of "The Card"

2008-11-23T13:08:00.000-08:00

Faculty have had some questions about the AAUP's card drive. Immediately below is a brief summary of the intent behind a card drive, and below that is the actual language of the card, which I found on the AAUP-OU Web site.

What exactly is a card drive? A card drive authorizes Ohio's State Employment Relations Board (SERB) to coordinate a vote on unionization. To initiate such a vote, 30% of eligible faculty must sign and return union cards. However, to ensure that an election will result in majority support for unionization, both AAUP-National and AAUP-OU insist that 60% of eligible faculty sign and return union cards before SERB coordinates a vote.

According to AAUP-OU, unionization cards include the following language:

I, [printed name] ____________________, wish to be represented in collective bargaining by the Ohio University Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (OU-AAUP) and to vote in an election to be conducted by the Ohio State Employment Relations Board to achieve this objective. I subscribe to and support the OU-AAUP's efforts to advance the principles and standards of my profession of teaching and research in higher education and its commitment to support and advance strong faculty governance.

My understanding is that the card drive will soon be fully underway and that all faculty will receive a card and some basic information. For more information about the card drive, consider contacting one of the AAUP-OU officers listed below and on their Web site.

President
Kevin Uhalde
Associate Professor, History Department

Vice President
Marsha Dutton
Professor, English Department

Treasurer
John Gilliom
Professor and Chair, Political Science

Secretary
Joseph Bernt
Professor, School of Journalism

At-Large Members

Glenn Matlack
Assistant Professor, Environmental and Plant Biology

Ken Brown
Professor, Chemistry

Gene Ammarell
Associate Professor, Department of Sociology and Anthropology

Branch Campus Liaison

Michael Nern
Associate Professor, English, Zanesville Campus

Protect Health Benefits

2008-11-20T10:34:00.000-08:00

"Budget Scare May Be Pretext to Get Your Health Benefits (Athens NEWS)"

Letter to the editor by Ken Brown, Professor of Chemistry and member of the OU AAUP chapter. Brown suggests that the university may be preparing to shift additional health care costs to its employees. He claims, "It’s a tactic we’ve seen used or attempted more than once during this long period of fiscal trouble. So we know what to expect just around the corner: higher monthly contributions, higher out-of-pocket maximum costs, and, for the first time ever at OU, a health-care deductible.

And without the right to negotiate benefits with the administration, he claims there's not much we can do about it, except form a collective-bargaining unit. "As long as we lack the right to negotiate benefits with the administration, we can expect to be the scapegoats when budget deficits loom and when administrators are prowling for ways to pare the budget."

According to Brown, the message is clear..."Protect Your Health-Care Benefits. Vote for Collective Bargaining. And join the AAUP today!"

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Faculty Handbook Legally Binding?

2008-11-19T15:00:00.000-08:00

Back in the good old days, faculty signed a contract each year. It was a fascinating document that noted one's name, address, tenure status, salary, FTE, etc., and at the very bottom, the following language...

By signing below you are accepting appointment under the terms and conditions of this contact and agreeing that questions regarding this contract shall be resolved according to the principles and regulations set forth, where applicable, in the Faculty Handbook, Administrator's Handbook, Ohio University Policy and Procedure Manual, and the laws of Ohio.

But several years ago, the administration stopped issuing these contracts and opted to send faculty "letters of appointment" instead. Faculty have been arguing with administrators ever since, debating whether the Faculty Handbook, which was clearly part of a professor's contract, is still a legally binding part of our "agreement" with the university ("Senate Re-examines Faculty Handbook (The Post)").

According to John Biancamano, OU's Director of Legal Affairs, the Faculty Handbook is "in a general sense" still part of the faculty contract.

Excuse me? I don't know about the rest of the faculty, but I'm deeply concerned when my legal rights are only "generally" protected by a "contract" I no longer have a right to sign.

By negotiating a collective bargaining agreement with the university, faculty will no longer need to be concerned about the terms and conditions of their employment, because the agreement will codify what's in the Faculty Handbook, and the agreement will be backed by state law.

Evaluating President McDavis

2008-11-13T16:32:00.000-08:00

As you know, the Board of Trustees recently agreed to pay Terry MacTaggart of AGB (Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges) $35,000 to meet with campus representatives to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of President McDavis. According to The Post ("Consultant Begins McDavis Review"), "MacTaggart meets with individual groups and asks them to give a candid assessment of the president’s performance. Then he just listens."

According to today's Athens News, faculty representatives don't believe he listened nearly enough ("Faculty Not Thrilled With Review"). According to Faculty Senate Chairman Sergio Lopez-Permouth, very little "real communication" occurred between Senate leaders and MacTaggart. Lopez-Permouth complained that MacTaggart asked leading questions (e.g., "Why would you criticize McDavis when all outside indicators show he's doing a good job?"), and that there was very little time for faculty to voice their concerns.

And let's be honest...Did anyone really expect this evaluation to be fair? How valid is a comprehensive review that follows (rather than precedes) a 5-year contract extension and an $85,336 raise? How can any reasonable person view this evaluation as meaningful or impartial?

Can unionization change things? Possibly. After all, anything can be negotiated into a contract, and over the past few years, who has conducted meaningful evaluations (i.e., evaluations based on faculty input) of top administrators? That's right, OU's local chapter of AAUP.

Irresponsible Administrative Spending

2008-11-12T15:46:00.000-08:00

According to university administrators, Ohio University could face a deficit of up to $38 million in the next two years if a “perfect storm” of key economic factors blows through the state ("‘Perfect Storm’ Could Cause Budget Deficit"). Although we have little control over global finances, Ohio University does indeed control how it prioritizes its spending. As you might expect, the university community is becoming increasingly frustrated with administrative decisions (decisions that often lack adequate faculty input).

For example, Chuck Overby, Professor Emeritus of Engineering, recently chastised the administration's ability to prioritize spending ("Straightening Priorities Involves Spending Money Differently"). In his letter to the editor, he noted that while the administration chose to cut the library's hours of operation, it instead chose to invest ever-dwindling financial resources into huge pay raises for both the President ("OU President Gets $85,336 Raise with New Contract") and the Football Coach ("Solich Annual Salary $400,000 Through 2013"). Furthermore, as the library sat dark, the university worked to fill new "six-figure" administrative positions ("Vice Provost for Diversity Will Earn $137,000"). Overby noted that as the administration feasts, "Alden Library and other 'essences' of a first-class university go on starvation rations."

When unionized, we won't be able to force good judgment on the administration, but a contract will give us a legally binding tool to limit the damage they can do.

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

"Contingent Faculty" in the News

2008-11-11T15:16:00.000-08:00

The following was posted today on the AAUP-OU Web site.

The AAUP has dedicated the November-December issue of its magazine, Academe, to the topic of contingent faculty. That's the term commonly used for all those who teach in positions that don't have the possibility of tenure, including what O.U. calls Group 2 faculty.

A variety of topics and perspectives are offered, descriptive and prognostic, objective and opinionated. What's most worth our notice is that the AAUP talks openly about how best to protect the interests of all faculty, regardless of the groups to which administrations assign us. Please consider taking a look. While you're on the national website, also consider joining the AAUP if you haven't already.

University Presidents Earn $$$

2008-11-09T18:19:00.000-08:00

As state funding for higher education continues to erode, Ohio's public universities continue to brace themselves for shortfalls by creating budget contingency plans. For example, during the September Faculty Senate Meeting, President McDavis noted that state revenues are falling short of projections, and he acknowledged that economic indicators are not moving in the direction everyone had hoped. Although he stated that he is "cautiously optimistic," he announced that he is developing a budget contingency plan and that he is "concerned about the overall numbers." Faculty are concerned about the numbers too, and as team players they have tightened their departmental belts, and they have collectively endured modest pay raises.

Why haven't our team leaders followed suit? Although funding for our state universities is limited, Ohio State recently announced that President Gee will receive a 3.5% base raise and a 40% performance bonus ("Ohio State Gives President Pay Increase, Bonus"). You might recall that President McDavis recently accepted a huge raise as well ("OU President Gets $85,336 Raise with New Contract"). Even after two votes of no confidence, the Board of Trustees awarded McDavis a new 5-year contract and an $85,336 pay raise. Meanwhile, many faculty failed to keep pace with inflation after splitting a 3% raise pool.

Collective bargaining will not prevent university presidents from becoming rich, but it will provide faculty with more say in how university funds are used, and it will help faculty from falling deeper and deeper into a financial hole.

Why Unionize Now?

2008-11-05T15:50:00.000-08:00

According to The Post, Provost Krendl is one of three finalists for president at Otterbein College, and back in February, she was among three finalists for the presidency at Elmhurst College ("Krendl Finalist for Otterbein Presidency"). Although Provost Krendl is chief academic officer, a primary architect of VisionOhio, and leading the transition from quarters to semesters (and to our inclusion in the University System of Ohio), it seems clear that she's interested in moving on. A recent Post editorial stated (quite reasonably) that OU needs a contingency plan, and it needs to share that plan with people who have a stake in the University ("Post Editorial: What's the Plan?").

Faculty need to think about contingency plans as well. If you haven't noticed, the times are a changin' at Ohio University, and as they continue to change, the faculty needs to ensure that its collective voice is heard. A collective bargaining agreement would help ensure that the changes we embrace are measured, in the best interest of all stakeholders, and that they are implemented via due process that includes appropriate faculty input.

** Consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Strong Opinions Across Campuses

2008-11-04T14:41:00.000-08:00

Unionization: Talk Reveals Strong Faculty Opinions Across OU Campuses (The Post)

This article mentions that Athens faculty continue to discuss unionization issues, and that organizers are planning to hold additional forums that will reach out to regional campus faculty. That sounds like a good idea, because organizers are likely to find quite a bit of support on the regionals. According to the article, Zanesville faculty have been ready to unionize for some time, and an informal survey of faculty in Chillicothe discovered strong support.

That said, most faculty seem to agree that the AAUP needs to begin a comprehensive informational campaign for the card drive to be successful. Simply stated, faculty need much more information to make informed decisions about unionization.

As much as possible, this blog will track OU's organizational efforts and will post information as it becomes available. You can help! If you have unionization information to share, consider contributing a brief blog entry to this site. All contributions will be posted anonymously. Contributions should be well-thought-out, respectful, and written with the intent of furthering an intelligent discussion of collective bargaining at OU. Send all contributions to OUunion@yahoo.com

** And consider sharing your comments! This blog allows readers to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Advice for Administrators

2008-11-03T16:02:00.000-08:00

According to the AAUP, federal and state laws govern what is lawful and unlawful conduct for university administrators during a union organizing campaign. For example, the following is generally LAWFUL conduct: Administrators may respond to questions, they may conduct informational meetings, and they may distribute information.

However, it is generally UNLAWFUL for administrators to do the following:

Administrators may not intimidate, threaten, or coerce potential bargaining unit members.

Administrators may not interrogate, survey, or poll potential bargaining unit members.

Administrators may not retaliate against anyone participating in union organizing efforts.

Administrators may not promise benefits if the union is defeated.

With this in mind, I was very interested in an article that a Zanesville faculty member sent to my attention. In the article ("OU Faculty Close to Unionizing"), Zanesville faculty describe OU's unionization efforts. Although the faculty state their campus heavily supports unionization, an administrator is quoted as saying "some are very strongly union, others are very anti-union," as if he had polled the faculty himself. According to the AAUP, administrators should think carefully before surveying or polling potential bargaining unit members, as that generally constitutes unlawful behavior.

Article on Unionization Forum

2008-10-30T12:12:00.000-07:00

OU Faculty Members Address Unionization Concerns at Forum (Athens News)

This article describes an informational forum held on 10/28 by AAUP-OU. Leading the discussion was AAUP Associate Secretary Pat Shaw, OU AAUP chapter Vice President Marsha Dutton, and two head negotiators from Wright State University’s collective-bargaining chapter of the AAUP. The article addresses issues such as Group II inclusion in the bargaining unit, union dues, and details about the card drive.

Evaluating Shared Governance

2008-10-29T15:57:00.000-07:00

On September 8th, Faculty Senate called upon the faculty to organize themselves into a collective bargaining unit for the purpose of instituting meaningful shared governance. Most people would agree that meaningful shared governance is built upon cooperation, mutual trust, and respect between the faculty, the administration, and the Board of Trustees.

Just how dysfunctional is shared governance at Ohio University? The following questions (adapted from a monograph entitled "Assessing the Faculty's Role in Shared Governance") can help us decide. Each question can be answered with a "yes" or "no." Several "no" answers should be cause for serious concern.

Are negotiations and communications among the faculty and the administration open and carried out in good faith and in an atmosphere of trust?

Does the faculty have timely access to information necessary for faculty members to give input into governance processes?

Does the Board of Trustees respect and support the faculty's traditional role in institutional governance?

Does the President seek meaningful faculty input on those issues (such as budgeting) in which the faculty has an appropriate interest but not primary responsibility?

Does the President effectively advocate the principles of shared governance to the Board of Trustees?

Does the University recognize joint responsibility for decision making in the areas of long range planning, necessary resources, and budgeting?

** Share your answers to these questions! This blog allows users to respond ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Creative Incentives in KSU Contract

2008-10-27T14:51:00.000-07:00

Who says collective bargaining agreements need to be boring? Kent State has proven that creative agreements can be reached between universities and unions. For example, according to their contract,

"Starting in the 2009-2010 academic year, an additional bonus pool, designed to allow faculty to share in University success, will be established. The Success Pool may provide faculty with annual bonuses based upon the University’s ability to achieve certain goals. Three measures will contribute to the Success Pool: funded research, student retention, and funds raised in institutional development."

That's right...Kent State Faculty have negotiated an agreement in which they will share in the success of the University. If the University reaches its goals, faculty will receive cash bonuses. Here's an example based on funded research. For FY2008, KSU generated $32 million in grant funds. If during FY2009 KSU generates $35 million in grant funds, the University will pay $300,000 into a Bonus Pool (i.e., 10% of the $3 million increase). Those funds would be distributed evenly among each continuing member of the bargaining unit. Check out KSU's contract for more information. The "Success Pool" program is described in Article XII (Section 4-D), and Addendum E provides examples of how the bonus pool is calculated.

So what's the take-home message? Our contract can be creative, it can extend well beyond our Faculty Handbook, and it can include new programs that the faculty and the administration will find interesting.

** This blog allows users to comment ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Must Everyone Join the Union?

2008-10-23T14:21:00.000-07:00

No, but it's likely that everyone covered under the agreement will pay their "fair share" of the costs.

From what I understand, fair share arrangements must be negotiated by the union and the university, and the final agreement must be ratified by the members of the bargaining unit. Fair share agreements require that all members of the bargaining unit (whether they join the union or not) pay their fair share of dues to the union.

Here's the basic premise...A negotiated agreement covers everyone in a bargaining unit, so everyone in the unit will enjoy the benefits of union representation. For example, if a non-union professor is fired and requests union representation in a grievance, the union must represent the professor as it would a union member. That said, all in the unit should pay their fair share to help defray the costs associated with collective bargaining and union representation.

According to the AAUP-OU Web site, it's likely that union members would pay roughly 0.75% of their salary in union dues, while non-members would likely pay 0.55% as a fair share.

** This blog allows users to comment ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns. Post an ANONYMOUS comment today!

Open Forum on Unionization

2008-10-22T13:34:00.000-07:00

According the Ken Brown, "The OU AAUP chapter will sponsor an open forum on unionization next Tuesday, Oct. 28, from 2:00 to 4:00 in Baker 242. Representatives from AAUP organized campuses in Ohio will be present to answer questions regarding the unionization process, contract negotiation, life after unionization, etc." According to a flyer distributed by Joe Bernt, the forum will focus "...on what changes occur on Ohio university campuses when faculty choose collective bargaining under the auspices of their local chapter of the American Association of University Professors"

In other news...

BGSU Faculty Look Into Forming Union (The BG News)
What a strange coincidence. According to an AAUP-OU Collective Bargaining FAQ sheet, faculty at 9 out of the 13 state universities in Ohio have moved to collective bargaining. Maybe OU and BGSU will be numbers 10 and 11. Why are the majority of state universities in Ohio unionized? Why should OU move to collective bargaining? If you can help the rest of us better understand the benefits of unionization, please post a comment and share your insight.

This blog allows users to comment ANONYMOUSLY. No login is required. Please share your insight as well as your questions, comments, and concerns.

Who's Included in the Bargaining Unit?

2008-10-21T12:02:00.000-07:00

Good question. The State Employment Relations Board (SERB) administers the Ohio Public Employees’ Collective Bargaining Act, which appears to be defined via the Ohio Revised Code Chapter 4117 and the Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 4117. According to ORC 4117.06,

(A) The state employment relations board (SERB) shall decide in each case the unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. The determination is final and conclusive and not appealable to the court.

(B) The board shall determine the appropriateness of each bargaining unit and shall consider among other relevant factors: the desires of the employees; the community of interest; wages, hours, and other working conditions of the public employees; the effect of over-fragmentation; the efficiency of operations of the public employer; the administrative structure of the public employer; and the history of collective bargaining.

To read the rest of this section, visit http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4117.06

For additional information about the Ohio Public Employees’ Collective Bargaining Act, visit...
ORC Chapter 4117: Public Employees' Collective Bargaining
OAC Chapter 4117: State Employment Relations Board

If you have more information about this topic, or if you have questions/concerns, please post a comment!

Unions Don't Change Workloads

2008-10-20T09:59:00.000-07:00

Existing Ohio Colleges Show Unions Don’t Change Workloads (The Post)
Letter to the editor by Tom Daniels, Professor of Communication Studies. Joe Bernt and Tom Daniels have been trading comments regarding how collective bargaining agreements affect faculty workloads.

Where Would My Union Dues Go?

2008-10-19T21:08:00.000-07:00

Good question. According the the AAUP, "The lion’s share of members’ dollars stays on campus..." Below is more info, quoted from the AAUP's national Web site.

In union affairs, as in purely academic matters, the site for academic freedom is the local campus (and in some states, a system made up of local campuses). In the context of the American labor movement, the AAUP’s local collective bargaining chapters are unusual in their autonomy. Members of each AAUP chapter decide their priorities for themselves. They determine what is best under their particular circumstances. The AAUP strives to avoid a model of “service unionism,” where the union becomes essentially an outside grievance agent or a third-party provider hired to do things for the members.

The AAUP encourages an alternative model in which local union members do as much as possible for themselves. While the national AAUP staff provides training and support, most of the day-to-day work of our unions is performed by chapter employees or by members serving as volunteers or during release time won in the collective bargaining agreement. If there is a staff, it is hired directly by the chapter. The AAUP’s commitment to local autonomy is reflected in our dues structure and governs our allocation of resources. AAUP collective bargaining chapters enjoy the benefits of a local retention of dues. The lion’s share of members’ dollars stays on campus; a small portion supports the national Association’s work in extending academic freedom throughout the nation. The national Association’s reputation in this arena is a vital contribution to all local chapters.

Trustees Propose Limiting Public Speech

2008-10-17T13:06:00.000-07:00

Proposal Limits Trustees From Speaking Publicly (The Post)
A new Board of Trustees proposal would prohibit individual members from speaking for the board and criticizing the president publicly.

FYI...The Board of Trustees is comprised of nine voting members, two ex-officio National Trustees, two ex-officio Student Trustees, and a representative of the Alumni Association Board. FACULTY ARE NOT REPRESENTED. Would a collective bargaining agreement change things? It might. The following language can be found in the agreement between the University of Cincinnati and the AAUP:

Faculty representation on the Board...shall include the chairperson of the University Faculty Senate and two elected representatives of the University Faculty. They shall have the right to suggest proposals for consideration by the Board and the President, and to attend with voice, all meetings of the Board, except executive sessions, and Board committees including academic affairs and finance. (Section M.2)

If you have questions/concerns, please post a comment!

Post Editorial Endorses Union

2008-10-17T12:29:00.000-07:00

Post Editorial: Union Needed (The Post)
This editorial endorses unionization efforts, stating that "unionization would be a healthy step forward from the current ineffectual system of shared governance...Administrators have distanced faculty from the real decision-making for too long. If faculty members are not granted some influence in important proceedings then they must unionize and seize it for themselves."

AAUP Secretary Rebuts Naysayers (The Post)
Letter to the editor by Joseph Bernt, professor of journalism and secretary of the OU AAUP chapter. Bernt addresses the comments/criticisms raised by Robert Shelly and Tom Daniels in recent letters to the editor published in The Post.

If you have questions/concerns, please post a comment!

Searching for Shared Governance

2008-10-16T16:54:00.000-07:00

In Search of Self-Governance, Unionization? (Inside Higher Ed)
This article, written by Elizabeth Redden, touches upon several issues regarding OU's unionization efforts. However, I believe the quote it contains from Faculty Senate chair, Sergio López-Permouth, sums up OU's situation pretty well, "I’m hearing strong voices on both sides of the issue {of collective bargaining}...{yet}nobody has said things are fine.... Nobody’s happy with the status quo."

Faculty Senate Takes Big Step Toward Forming Union (The Athens NEWS)
Article discusses OU's unionization efforts, including departments that tend to support or oppose the idea.

Trustees Plan to Spend $35,000 on an Evaluation That’s Too Late (The Post)
Post Editorial that discusses the "disguise of shared governance" at OU.

Union Would Not Determine Workload (The Post)
Letter to the editor by Tom Daniels, Professor of Communication Studies.

Faculty Salaries Depend on Age (The Post)
Letter to the editor by Robert Shelly, Professor of Sociology.

If you have questions/concerns, please post a comment!

Education About Unionization Begins

2008-10-16T16:38:00.000-07:00

The following memo was sent to all Group I and Group II faculty via email on 10/16/08. It was written by Marsha L. Dutton, Professor of English and VP of OU-AAUP.

Dear Colleagues,

As you probably know, on Monday night the Faculty Senate voted to support the resolution calling for the OU faculty to begin the process of organizing into a collective bargaining unit. Here is the language of the approved resolution:

Be it resolved that the Faculty Senate of Ohio University calls upon the faculty to begin the process of organizing themselves into a collective bargaining unit for the purpose of negotiating a contractual agreement with the university, instituting meaningful shared governance, to which the university administration would be bound by law.

Faculty Senators' discussion before their Monday vote indicated our faculty does not unanimously support collecting bargaining. Much of this hesitance surely arises because, as some Senators noted, right now everyone knows too little about what it might mean—how the process would work, how the bargaining unit would be constituted, what kinds of things could be negotiated, and how collective bargaining would concretely affect the lives of faculty members.

During the next month and a half, before the end of fall quarter, the OU-AAUP chapter will host several public meetings to allow such questions to be posed and discussed. Faculty members from other Ohio campuses with collective bargaining will be present to discuss their experience and to answer specific questions. We will announce these meetings widely.

If it is not possible to attend one of the meetings, or if you have questions or comments before then, members of the OU-AAUP executive committee would be happy to hear from you and talk with you. Our president, Prof. Kevin Uhalde (kevin.uhalde@gmail.com), is teaching an undergraduate history class in Rome this quarter but will respond to emails. Besides me (mdmldutton@gmail.com), the other members of the executive committee are Prof. Mike Nern (nern@ohio.edu), (Prof. Joe Bernt (joseph.bernt@gmail.com) and Prof. John Gilliom (gilliom@ohio.edu).

The first step in the process leading toward collective bargaining involves faculty members signing cards that indicate the desire to hold a vote on the question. Those who sign cards can mail them to a post office box rented by Prof. Ken Brown, the only person who will know that a faculty member supports an election. When 50 to 60 percent of Group I and Group II faculty members on the Athens and regional campuses have signed cards, Prof. Brown will forward them to the State Employment Relations Board (SERB), which will validate the signatures. If at least 30 percent of those who signed are indeed Group I and Group II faculty, SERB will conduct an election at which faculty may vote for or against collective bargaining. If 50 percent plus one of those who vote cast yes votes, collective bargaining will take effect.

Clearly we are a long way from all of that at this point, but we are planning to mail the cards to Group I and Group II faculty in a month or so—after there has been more opportunity for people to think about the question, to talk with one another about it, to research the effect of university collective bargaining at other Ohio campuses, and to attend the meetings we are hosting. In the meantime, however, I have cards available for anyone who wishes to sign at once. If you contact me, I will get a card to you, along with the address for mailing it to the secure post office box. I also want to assure you that every step preceding and, if approved, following establishment of a collective bargaining unit is based on democratic principles; this includes signing cards, voting on the question, electing representatives, determining the content of any collective bargaining agreement, and approving that contract and future agreements.

In response to Monday's vote, President McDavis has pledged his commitment to collegiality. That commitment was welcome and encouraging, for collegiality is the goal of all of us who have devoted our lives to teaching and learning. Collective bargaining offers one avenue to collegiality among members of the faculty, administration, and board of trustees—a collegiality many of us believe has been missing for some time. We invite you to join us in learning more about the process during the next few months.

Sincerely yours,

Marsha L. Dutton
Professor of English
Vice President, Ohio University Chapter
American Association of University Professors

Business Faculty Don't Dig Unions

2008-10-15T14:02:00.000-07:00

I hate to stereotype, but it seems as if business people genuinely dislike unions. These two guys asked some reasonable questions, though. How much will I pay in dues? How will the funds be spent? What value will I get for my dues? To what extent can shared governance be covered by a collective bargaining agreement? Some of their questions/concerns are addressed in AAUP-OU's Collective Bargaining FAQ
sheet.

Questions about the Benefits of a Union (The Athens NEWS)
Letter to the editor by Chris Moberg, Chair of the Marketing Department.

Union Will Cost $$$ Over Next 20 Years (The Athens NEWS)
Letter to the editor by Raymond Frost, Professor of Management Information Systems.

If you can address their questions/concerns, please post a comment!

Collective Bargaining Can Bring Social Change

2008-10-15T13:52:00.000-07:00

Union Could be Tool for Social Change (The Post)
This letter, signed by 30+ students, argues that the administration and the Board see themselves as unchallenged dictators over the campus hierarchy. They argue that a union can bring social democracy to campus.

Unionization Process Begins

2008-10-14T14:56:00.000-07:00

Senate Supports Collective Bargaining (The Columbus Dispatch)
While Ohio University's Faculty Senate threw its support behind an effort to unionize the school's professors, school leadership downplayed the vote last night.

Faculty Senate: Unionization Urged But Nothing Finalized (The Post)
Faculty Senate called on Ohio University faculty to "begin the process of organizing themselves" into a union to negotiate with the university.

OU Faculty Senate Authorizes Union Drive (The Athens NEWS)
Ohio University’s Faculty Senate Monday night voted 23 to 18 in favor of a resolution authorizing faculty to begin unionizing.

Faculty Senate Passes Resolution on Unionization (Outlook)
Faculty Senate narrowly approved a resolution that opens the door to a campaign for a collective bargaining agreement for faculty members at Ohio University.

Perks of Unionization Depend on Data (The Post)
Letter to the editor by Joseph Bernt, professor of journalism and secretary of the OU AAUP chapter.

Krendl to Senate: Unionization Would be Distrous
Executive Vice President and Provost Kathy Krendl remarks to Faculty Senate regarding collective bargaining.

President McDavis: Commitment to Collegiality
President McDavis writes that this (unionization) debate should be conducted in a respectful manner and on the basis of accurate factual information.