Unities
|
February 2001
|
Table of Contents
Lobbyist Report
Mark Your Calendar
Now!!
Bennington
College Settles Faculty "Wrongful Dismissal Case" for $1,885,500
Wake Up Faculty!!
Fair Share
vs. Full Membership: The Difference Explained
by Virginia Butler, PSU-AAUP Councilor
You are all probably aware by now that the Governor's budget for higher education is awful. In a nutshell, his budget is about 96 million dollars short of what is needed (805 million) to meet the University System's obligations at current service levels. The latest budget proposal by the co-chairs of the House Ways & Means committee adds about 29 million to higher education, but this still leaves us with what amounts to a 67 million cut in budget. Besides the budget cut, the Governor has also proposed a 4 % increase in student tuition; significantly, these tuition dollars go to the General Fund and not directly to higher ed.
All of this is disturbing and perplexing. In 1999, the legislature and governor decided to increase funds to higher education. Funding was allocated to high demand programs like engineering and teacher education. Faculty and academic professionals got raises. These investments have "paid off" --- enrollments state-wide are up and at PSU, we are teaching 11% more students than we were two years ago. We're serving more students and trying to develop new programs and maintain old ones. With this new budget, we're being told to do more with less.
So what can we do? One option is to accept what we are dealt--suck it in, tighten the belt and be the good foot soldiers that we know how to be. Another option suggests that we come together, rally in Salem and try to convince our state leaders that this budget is not acceptable. I urge you to consider the latter option. AAUP is part of a state-wide network of higher education advocates that is pushing for adequate funding for higher education during the 2001 legislative session. The network is organizing a March 6th rally on the steps of the capitol and wants busloads of faculty, staff, students, and alumni to come and support the cause. Experience from the 1999 legislative session suggests such a rally does make a difference to state leaders in Salem. Then, over 700 people from PSU rallied in Salem and the budget for higher ed received a substantial boost. This March, we want 1200 people from PSU to join the rally and show support for higher ed in Oregon.
The Alumni Office on campus is arranging transportation and refreshments for the event. The rally is scheduled between 10:30 and noon. Buses will depart from campus between 8:30 and 9:00 then will start returning from Salem after 12 o'clock. After the rally, you are encouraged to meet with your legislator and personally convey your concerns about higher education funding. The Alumni Office will also be coordinating carpools for people if the bus schedule is not convenient. If you want to sign up for the rally or have questions, contact Carissa Simon (725-8943) at the Alumni Office. Also, that office will be mailing out more information about the event and ways you can get involved.
So make plans to attend the rally and urge colleagues and students to join you on the journey to Salem. With a united voice, we can make a difference. I look forward to seeing you there!
by Sarah Andrews-Collier, PSU-AAUP President
After an all too brief hiatus of about 6 months, Martha Hickey will lead her team very shortly into the next round of collective bargaining. This is my wish list for the next contract.
o That the Portland State Faculty gain equal pay for unequal work. Our colleagues to the south have recently taken up the campaign that they are paid at 82.1% of our national comparators. We at PSU have been historically paid less than our colleagues to the south; currently that figure is about ___ %. To compound the inequity, the PSU Faculty experience a higher cost of living than Eugene or Corvallis. Currently, that figure is about ___%, and doesn't include differentials in parking/transportation costs, relocation expenses incurred by new faculty, etc. To compound the inequity further, the PSU Faculty are asked to swallow their indignation over salary inequities for the good of the OUS "party line." The System strategy for the last two biennia is that we present a public picture of one big happy family. In the past, the administration was aligned with the PSU Faculty, and they acknowledged OUS salary disparities in a contractual "letter of agreement." That letter disappeared in ____, and the current administration appears disinclined to work for parity. Certainly, scant rationale to the contrary has been presented to the PSU Faculty. It has been suggested that AAUP had to bargain for 18 months, including Mediation, because hardly anyone at the top of the administration has any responsibility to our past. That is harsh criticism. As an alternative, I suggest a review of the relative benefits for PSU of a System strategy developed to appeal to a governor who hasn't met his commitments, and a legislature swept away by term limits.
o That the Portland State Faculty gain equal pay for unequal work. The ratio of fixed-term instructional faculty has steadily increased over the last decade. In the past, the PSU administration acknowledged the negative impact on academic excellence caused by an over-reliance on fixed-term faculty appointments. Not only was there a "letter of agreement" to that effect, but there were actual examples in certain years of their good faith. For those faculty who were not eligible for tenure lines, there was also once a good faith effort to award longer contracts, although that commitment has dissolved as well. Recently, a group of instructional fixed-term faculty who have been instrumental in securing the university's newly achieved national reputation, no less, endured the affront of being ordered to increase their teaching loads, regardless of research or service commitments in place at the time. These folks, as evidenced by the body of their collective departmental commitments, committee service, scholarly activities, etc., are just as committed and hard working any of us, if not more so. Given this new climate, we can only surmise they will be followed close behind by others such as those in historically under-funded disciplines like foreign languages and writing.
o That the Portland State Faculty secure equal pay for unequal work. A commitment to excellence in the form of honoring academic freedom and supporting financial security with secure and fairly administered tenure lines, also appears to have atrophied abruptly. Nationally recruited faculty in tenure-line appointments, employed in the last five-to-ten years, find themselves feeling under siege, as evidenced in recent P&T outcomes. There was a sense in the past that we found common agreement concerning standards for succeeding generations of PSU Faculty even if we never got the procedural part quite right. Recently, the most extreme example in my 20 years has occurred, and has led to the case of a tenure-line faculty member's abruptly severance from the university in mid-December. I'm not sure if this begs the question of the administration's commitment to the principle of tenure itself. However, many PSU Faculty are acutely aware that most of our leaders above the rank of dean came to PSU after the Faculty Senate approved the current P&T Guidelines in June 1996. Whatever the reasons, they need to be clarified. The resultant lack of trust is becoming risky.
o That the Portland State Faculty gain equal pay for unequal work. To my mind, a major reason that PSU went to "Mediation" in the last bargaining cycle, is that some do not grasp the total commitment the PSU Faculty makes to the university. After decades of struggle, the PSU Faculty was asked to make enormous sacrifices in the early 1990's and, true-to-form, they pulled it off and came through. Not only did we get leaner where there was no fat to be cut, but we simultaneously took on the "change agenda" of the previous leadership. In spite of those achievements, recent salary gains were almost grudgingly conceded after protracted negotiations. (To make things worse, our two comparator campuses were awarded the same increases retroactively, and another campus in the system will be held harmless for budget increases incurred in collective bargaining by supplemental funding in the governor's proposed budget.) In spite of those achievements, fixed-term instructional faculty have been directed to increase teaching loads and abandon research. In spite of those achievements, academic professionals continue to endure less job security, lower wages, and more restricted career paths than local community colleges can offer. In spite of that achievement, faculty consultation, a classic collaborative model, appears to be yielding to corporate, hierarchical, management models. We all know that things happen much faster these days, and we are all aware of "bumbling" leadership, or of the somebody who thinks s/he can get the job done better and faster if you don't ask, but just do it. However, it is paramount to the health of the organism, that the right people pay attention to the burps and sneezes, the trips and the bumps. The PSU Faculty must not be treated as the gift that goes on giving.
I have only scratched the surface here. There are other exceedingly important issues at stake that are having a profound impact on the PSU Faculty's ability to positively contribute to the institution and collaborate with the administration for a meaningful and productive outcome. Primary, are issues of faculty work life. Are basic working conditions of all PSU employees meeting minimum standards of safety? Are certain classroom/office physical conditions so poor that faculty are unable to effectively execute basic teaching/advisement responsibilities? Are faculty being accorded the basic courtesies of fair and collegial administration by peer committees, department chairs, deans, etc., or are they being subjected to ostensible, procedural activities that merely serve to protect the university from litigation? Are faculty being included in planning and the vision-making process in meaningful ways? Is the diversity of the faculty, as it exists right now, being respected?
As president of the AAUP and secretary to the Faculty Senate, I wear two hats and I see both sides. I don't think the two parties involved have lost the ability to communicate with each other or the old common purpose, but I am somewhat uncertain as to our common future. We are approaching crossroads more and more frequently these days, and I muse whether the future will be like the film "Groundhog Day" and we are stuck perpetually in the crossroads. I worry that members of the administration, like the great king Oedipus, are more likely to display hubris at the crossroads when they are the ones who can least affort it. Both parties are sincere, which is exactly what Aristotle tell us makes for tragedy. We are also reminded that everyone, the players and the audience included, is forced to take a position. What I observe is a faculty who have worked too hard and too long for under-appreciation and underestimation to prevail.
If Martha is to do the job you want her to, she needs a wish list from every last member of the PSU Faculty. I have attempted to give her my most serious consideration. I hope you will also.