UA PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE: NEWS ABOUT FACT FINDING, A HAPPY HOUR, AND MORE

Dear colleagues,

This week I have few things to report, including news about fact finding, an announcement of a happy hour, and a few comments about budgets, numbers, and their interpretation.

The negotiation team is working very hard on preparing for fact finding, the first hearing being this Monday, Feb. 12th. Fact finding is a process under Vermont Labor Relations law where each sides presents information to an agreed upon neutral professional intermediary, a fact finder, who then writes a report suggesting solutions to the differences between the parties. Interestingly, close to a year after introducing it, last Friday the administration’s lawyer informed us that they no longer wished to pursue their proposal to modify the contract’s policy on faculty intellectual property in coursework. (They have not said why they dropped it, but UA has always taken the position that their proposal was draconian and unnecessary.) That means the only thing left to discuss in fact finding is salary.

On the other end of the formality spectrum, please Join your colleagues at another United Academics Happy Hour, this Friday, February 9 from 3:00-5:00 p.m. at Brennan’s on the first floor of the Davis Center. We will provide snacks, and your first drink is on us. We’d love to see you there. All are welcome. Meet colleagues from across campus, get to know you union and representatives, or just enjoy a beverage with friends. 

I also need to report that AAUP’s Jamie Daniels has had to postpone her visit with us, originally scheduled for this Thursday and Friday; she has a bad flu. We will try to reschedule for later in the semester so that she can visit to discuss with us how to better engage and be more responsive to faculty in these tough times for unions. She was originally scheduled to meet with the Delegates Assembly at this Friday’s meeting; that meeting will still take place.

Thanks to everyone who attended last Thursday’s “Open the Books” forum; it was smart, informative, well-attended, and stimulating. (We hope to have powerpoints and a transcript online before long.) The forum generated some media coverage and a number of responses from people around campus, for which I am always thankful.

Based on some of those responses, I do want to add a few points of clarification: First, just to be clear, UA has not taken a public stand against STEM or STEM buildings, and takes the general position that money that goes to faculty, research, and teaching in all fields is a good thing. We support STEM research and teaching. This was said at the forum, but perhaps could be said more often and more clearly.

Second, when we publish numbers about costs of various things at UVM, those numbers are intended as symptoms of underlying long term trends. (The long term trends were elaborated quite elegantly in some of the presentations at the forum.) I’m afraid some folks take numbers that we have put on posters and other places and then run with them in wrong directions, the two most common being 1) “UVM administrators are obviously corrupt and make constant self-serving and wasteful decisions,” and 2) “I know the story is more complicated than that and so therefore the union doesn’t know what it’s talking about.” Neither of those interpretations are accurate or fair, but I worry they happen too often. 

So for the record, the argument is not simply that the bridge to the library should not have been built, or that the university could simply take money from short term funds and spend them on salaries, which of course we understand are ongoing expenses. We generally use numbers to start a discussion, not as arguments in their own right. No single expense is necessarily a bad one, but the point is that in aggregate, over the years, these continued types of expenses whose necessity is not ironclad illustrate that the university is not poor, and suggest that a modest, thoughtful adjustment in priorities would gradually shift more of the money toward the core mission of teaching and research.

Please keep in contact. There’s always more to discuss.  

Best,

Tom Streeter

President, United Academics

thomas.streeter@uvm.edu

United Academics is the union of full- and part-time faculty at University of Vermont, with over 700 members from departments and colleges across the campus. We represent faculty in negotiating and upholding contracts, and we advocate for fair labor practices within and beyond our academic community. We are a member-led union­ committed to academic freedom, shared governance, social and environmental justice.

Get to know us at www.unitedacademics.org, and United Academics on Facebook

OPEN THE BOOKS FORUM, FEB. 1 AT 4:30 WATERMAN 413 (AND MORE)

Dear Colleagues,

When I was in graduate school, I never imagined for a minute that I would be spending time as a professor worrying about the cost of athletic facilities, or the differences between tuition and fees. I thought my life was going to be all about the life of the mind. I have since come to the conclusion, however, that for the life of the mind to flourish, it needs a home, and faculty like us sometimes need to put in a little time taking care of that home. From experience, I've seen that if faculty aren't keeping an eye on things, people who are further away from the real work of the institution make all the decisions, perspectives can get lost, and the whole institution can start to stray. 

So this week, as the Board of Trustees prepares to meet and UA prepares for fact finding, it's time for us all to learn about and discuss how we keep a roof over our collective heads, i.e., UVM's budget. Please consider one or more of the following opportunities to learn and make your concerns heard: 

As always, I'm eager to hear from any of you directly: thomas.streeter@uvm.edu. 

Best wishes,

Tom Streeter

President, United Academics

A NOTE REGARDING PROPOSED CUTBACKS IN CAS

Dear colleagues,

I apologize for sending out another message so close on the heels of my last one, but it has come to UA’s attention that a five year budget plan for the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) has been circulated that includes letting go lecturers. While we don’t want to fan the flames of the rumor mill, it is probably better to share what concrete information we have rather than let speculation circulate unchecked. (For ways to learn more and provide feedback, see below.) 

What we have learned is that CAS Dean Williams Falls circulated a proposed five year budget scenario for dealing with the roughly $2 million deficit imposed by central administration under IBB. The plan explores different scenarios, but the most optimistic one foresees letting go 26 FT instructors and a 40% reduction in PT instructors over the five years. 

None of this is written in stone. We saw last November how central administration, shortly after claiming nothing could be done about the then-larger CAS deficit, suddenly found an extra $2 million, cutting the deficit in half. We hope similar changes can be made before these draconian and short-sighted measures have to be enacted.

But United Academics finds this proposal disturbing. Letting go lecturers to save money too often happens because is its easy, not because any deliberative process has determined that it is wise. UA does not take a stand on what programs are more or less deserving of funds, but we do advocate for decision making that is guided by principles of academic quality and that adheres to the principles of faculty governance. Lecturers typically do more teaching for less pay, often in academically essential programs. We fear that letting them go as their contracts come up for renewal, if that’s what eventually happens, may turn out to be penny wise and pound foolish, not to mention an assault on the careers of valued professionals and colleagues. 

To learn more about UVM’s finances, please come if you can to our “Open the Books at UVM” event on Feb. 1 at 4:30 in Waterman in 413. If we learn more about this situation, we should be able to share it then. And also please remember to fill out the survey regarding the IBB model, intended to be used for the next version of IBB. The survey, due this Friday Jan. 19th at noon, is here: https://survey.uvm.edu/index.php/573865?lang=en

You can also learn more and voice your concerns by joining United Academics Delegates and Department Representatives for coffee or lunch: for Coffee and bagels, Wednesday 1/24,  9-11am: Drop-in anytime at Old Mill, GSWS Conference Room on the ground floor. Or pick up some Lunch, Friday 1/26, 12-2pm: Drop-in anytime, in Waterman 427A.

Finally, if you have current concerns about your job status or fair treatment, you can always email our Contract Administration Committee at contract@unitedacademics.org. 

In solidarity,

Tom Streeter

President, United Academics

thomas.streeter@uvm.edu

WELCOME BACK TO CAMPUS: A MESSAGE FROM UNITED ACADEMICS PRESIDENT TOM STREETER

Dear UVM Colleagues,

Welcome Spring 2018 semester. I hope you had a great break and that your first week of classes is going smoothly. This month I have 1) another invitation, 2) a call to participate in the IBB 2.0 process, and 3) some thoughts about budgets.

First, we still want to hear from you. If you have questions, concerns, or complaints, feel free to send me an email. Even better, join United Academics Delegates and Department Representatives for coffee or lunch: for Coffee and bagels, Wednesday 1/24,  9-11am: Drop-in anytime at Old Mill, GSWS Conference Room on the ground floor. Or pick up some Lunch, Friday 1/26, 12-2pm: Drop-in anytime, in Waterman 427A. These will be informal gatherings, with a chance to talk with department delegates, ask any questions about the contract process, and enjoy lunch or coffee! Come by in any case, but if you can, an RSVP to long time DA member, part time lecturer and VT AFT staffer Katlyn.Morris@aftvermont.org would be appreciated. 

Second, you most likely received an invitation from the Provost’s Office to participate in a survey regarding the IBB model, intended to be used for the next version of IBB. UA has had no input into this survey, but please respond. The survey, due this Friday Jan. 19th, is here: https://survey.uvm.edu/index.php/573865?lang=en

If you are like me, you hate surveys and generally assume they are a waste of time. But this might be a different case. There are people involved in the process in the Faculty Senate and elsewhere who would like to use these responses to pursue real reform. The survey is not designed to be quick or easy – it feels a bit hostile, actually – and it demands concrete examples, real evidence of claims, not generalized impressions. And it is not anonymous. (If you feel responding might make you vulnerable, then that’s a reason not to respond.) But, precisely because response rates will no doubt be low, your voice will likely matter more, particularly if you offer details about issues you may have with IBB, about its consequences and effects.

Sometimes faculty governance is hard work, and often it proceeds through less-than-perfect means. But sitting back and kvetching gets old after a while. Give speaking up a try.

Third, about budgets. Please plan to come if you can to our “Open the Books at UVM” event on Feb. 1 at 4:30 in Waterman in 413.

As we prepare for that event (and for fact-finding), I often get conflicting advice about what to emphasize. Some tell me UA should be more emphatic in criticizing high administrative salaries and lavish spending on non-academic things like marketing. Others tell me we should do less of that, because administrators are not evil people and most of what they do is reasonable given the constraints they work under. After giving it some thought, I think part of the issue is about whether one is talking about the forest or the trees, about long-term national trends or more immediate local issues.

On the local level (the trees): We don’t think administrators are evil. UA leadership has included folks who have been or have gone on to be provost, vice provost, associate deans, and more. But more to the point, specific policies at UVM, like non-academic spending trends, are experienced by administrators as normal and perhaps necessary to maintain competitiveness. When the UVM administration notes that they are “within norms” in terms of administrative spending – which they are likely to do when they present matters to the fact finder – they will not be lying. Administrative salaries here are not dramatically different from most public universities around the country. Last year’s study of UVM’s finances commissioned by UA found that UVM recently spent about three percent more than its self-identified peers on non-academic matters – which amounts to $12 million – but that does not make us an outlier nationally, and that particular number could change. Our negotiating team understands those local complexities, and our specific contract proposals, including salaries, take all that into account, often artfully. 

On the broad long term level (the forest) the story is different. I was reminded of this when the AAUP (the organization which supports academic freedom and the tenure system at all universities in the U.S.), recently filed an amicus brief with the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit regarding a case about faculty bargaining rights. The brief noted that,

between 1976 and 2015, the number of full-time executives and managers in higher education grew by 140 percent, while the number of full-time and tenure-track positions has plummeted, with lower-wage non-tenure track faculty making up 70 percent of all faculty positions. This is nearly the reverse of the proportions in 1969, when 78 percent of faculty positions were tenured and tenure-track. From 1976 to 2011, the number of full-time non-faculty professional positions increased by 366 percent overall, with growth of 558 percent in that category at private institutions.

These are long-term trends, they are nationwide, and they are evident at UVM. The forest is one in which non-academic spending has grown and spending on tenure-track faculty has become an ever-smaller percentage of spending nationwide. That’s a key part of the big picture. 

Can United Academics change those long-term trends overnight? No. But the union, as a representative of all faculty, is in a unique position to speak to the big picture while addressing local policies. We are not omniscient, but by bringing together the experiences and insights of faculty, large numbers of whom have been contributing to UVM for decades, we can contribute to the governance of UVM while taking account of long-term trends, of the big picture. And I for one think UA's contribution has made and will continue to make UVM a better university. 

Good luck with your semester, and keep warm.

Best,

Tom Streeter

President, United Academics

thomas.streeter@uvm.edu

 

 

 

RALLY AT NOON, THURSDAY, NOV. 2 AT BAILEY HOWE LIBRARY ON UVM CAMPUS

Dear colleagues,

The following press release was sent to the media today. 

Tom Streeter

President, United Academics

thomas.streeter@uvm.edu

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Nov. 1, 2017
CONTACT: Tom Streeter – (802) 598-9348 

UVM faculty rally in support of a better contract, as health care premiums cut into salaries

Rally at noon, Thursday, Nov. 2 at Bailey Howe Library on UVM campus

BURLINGTON, VT – As contract negotiations between faculty and the administration enter mediation at Vermont’s largest university, faculty wearing academic regalia will rally on the steps of UVM’s library at noon on Nov. 2nd, to support a contract that keeps wages competitive and UVM’s budget focused on teaching and research. Faculty will be marching from Bailey Howe through the Davis student center to the Jeffords building, where the mediation session is being held.

“Only one out of every three dollars of UVM’s budget for compensation goes to funding faculty engaged in teaching and research,” says union president Tom Streeter. "Only a slight adjustment of the university’s priorities away from amenities and highly paid administrators toward the things that really matter — the classroom and the research lab — would allow UVM to pay competitive salaries and keep student tuition from rising. Between 2003 and 2016, spending on faculty salaries has increased more slowly than tuition, whereas administrative salary increases have grown faster than tuition.” 

United Academics, the faculty union at the University of Vermont (UVM), says that the increase in health care premiums is emerging as a key variable. The university’s recent announcement that health care premiums would climb 5.8% next year means the University’s proposed 2% raise would actually keep salary growth for some faculty below the rate of inflation.

“A 5.8% hike in premiums means that, for a faculty member on the family plan with a median salary, about 20% of the proposed 2% raise will go to cover health care increases, leaving net raises under cost of living increases,” says Streeter. 

Streeter, a professor of Sociology, was hired in 1989 and recalls a period where the University was spiraling into decline. He worries the same thing could happen again. “The effect in the 1990s on campus was enervating,” said Streeter. “Young faculty often left, and those who stayed behind felt little motivation to throw themselves into their jobs. It wasn’t just that there was no financial incentive; it was that the administration’s attitude told us that nobody cared about our work.”

Streeter worries a sub-inflation raise will hurt UVMs competitiveness and national ranking. “Union members are fighting to keep the University’s reputation intact and are prepared to “speak up and bargain resolutely,” says Streeter.

Streeter and his colleagues say UVM could pay for reasonable faculty salaries without raising tuition by bringing non-instructional spending into line with its peer universities. “UVM has money,” he continued. “In 2016 and 2017 it ran multimillion dollar surpluses. It just needs to stop shortchanging academics.” 

###