Media Lie: Trump Called Klan Types “Good People”

Joe Biden announced his run for the presidency with a demonstrable lie--that President Trump called white supremacists in Charlottesville "very fine people." He didn't. He said the exact opposite. https://t.co/LqTHKUVVlv

— Dan O'Donnell (@DanODonnellShow) April 25, 2019

The Bunny Laid an Egg

Still More: Unionization at Marquette?

An e-mail, apparently sent to all faculty, from the SEIU:

Dear Marquette Community,

Today, non-tenure track faculty and grad workers, surrounded by tenure track and tenured faculty, undergrads, community allies, joined together to ask the Lovell administration for a fair process to form our respective unions. Just last week the administration said in a letter to non-tenure track faculty said they would respect “the lawful right of employees to decide whether they wish to be represented by a union.” Today we delivered letters signed by hundreds of contingent faculty and grad workers calling on the administration to live up to their words and Marquette’s Catholic social teachings by remaining neutral and by granting us a fair process.

Please add your name here to stand with us, as we move forwards towards improving teaching and research conditions.

Marquette Non-Tenure Track Faculty & Graduate Worker Organizing Committees

Clicking on the link to sign the petition does not allow one to see who has signed it, but does show the sort of rhetoric the union is using.

For example:

Despite Marquette's social justice mission and a massive endowment many grad assistants and non-tenure track faculty currently are on short term contracts, receive sub-standard wages, and lack quality lack health care.

Of course, what is “substandard wages” is a matter of opinion, and the notion that everybody should be on a long-term contract is absurd, given the need to add (or sometimes cancel) sections of classes on relatively short notice.

As for “quality health care:” it is absurd to think that somebody who is hired to teach a section or two of a course in a semester should get the very expensive health care plan that full-time Marquette employees do. These people can go to the Obamacare exchanges, or (if they are that poor) enroll in Badgercare.

The point about the massive endowment is a good one, although it’s not clear it should be used to pay adjuncts above the market wage, rather than to hire more faculty (including adjuncts) to support smaller classes, or to fund research at Marquette, which would have the effect of increasing the prestige of Marquette and thus the value of graduates diplomas.

Or, for example, devoting more money to scholarships, allowing either or both (1.) allowing more students from poorer families to attend, (2.) bidding for particularly bright and capable students.

But of course, it the choice is more money for adjuncts, or more bureaucratic bloat at Marquette, the choice is obvious.

No one — including professional academics at a top university — should lack basic job protections, healthcare or livable wages.

Sounds good, until you notice that “basic job protections” means you can’t be laid off even if they don’t need you anymore.

“Livable wages” sounds good, until you notice that if you pay them more, you are likely to hire fewer of them, increasing class sizes. Many adjuncts have other (full-time) jobs, and make a “livable wage” elsewhere. Graduate students typically borrow money to make it through graduate school. That’s fair enough, since they are getting training and a credential that will get them a higher income the rest of their lives.

. . . we ask Marquette University to adopt the high-road practices of Catholic social teachings, and not obstruct our contingent academics as they exercise their fundamental human right to organize, to better their work conditions, and raise educational standards for the entire community.

There is little reason to believe unionization will raise educational standards. By imposing rigidities on Marquette’s use of temporary and part time instructors, it’s likely to harm educational standards.

What it most likely will improve is the financial situation of the SEIU. But that, after all, is the point.

More: Unionization at Marquette

A tweet from the SEIU pushing the unionization cause at Marquette:

The Marquette non-tenure track faculty and graduate workers are asking for fair process and to form a union without interference. Today we had a rally and won a commitment to neutrality from the administration. Please sign this petition to stand with us! https://t.co/KqN4liYXdL pic.twitter.com/tJwxwEfpDJ

— Sarah Kizuk (@sarah_kizuk) April 12, 2019

Unionization at Marquette?

Yes, the Service Employees International Union is attempting to unionize non-tenure track teachers at Marquette.

“Non-tenure track” means people who are hired on a semester by semester basis to teach one or two courses. They are paid a few thousand dollars per course. They have the title “Adjunct.”

A few are hired as essentially full time faculty, but only for a semester or a year, with no promise of being rehired.

“Tenure track” people have a full time job, usually earning high five-figures or low six-figures to teach (typically) four courses per year.

If you are an old-time labor leftist, adjuncts are an oppressed proletariat. If you are a free market person, you note that nobody forces anybody to take an adjunct job. Adjuncts don’t have to attend committee meetings, or department meetings, or deal with advisees.

More importantly, they don’t have to face “publish or perish” as tenure-track faculty do. They generally have a Master’s degree, rather than a Ph.D. This means they have taken a bunch of graduate courses in their discipline, but not written a dissertation.

Marquette’s Response

Marquette has responded with an e-mail to all faculty from Acting Provost Kimo Ah Yun. It’s pretty negative on the whole business. Quoting:

Dear faculty:

Recently, several Marquette faculty members have notified university leadership about union solicitations they have received from Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 1. We understand that SEIU representatives have approached non‐tenure‐track faculty members as they exit their classrooms, seeking signatures for authorization cards. Please know that Marquette has not divulged the names, contact information or class schedules of our non‐tenure‐track faculty, and that no faculty member is under any obligation to speak with a union organizer or respond to their outreach if they do not wish to do so.

Non‐tenure‐track faculty who sign the SEIU authorization cards are not just showing support for the union. In fact, they are giving the union the right to represent them in negotiations with the university. The goal of the SEIU – which typically represents health care, cleaning and security employees, not academics – is to secure signatures from 30 percent of our non‐tenure‐track faculty members so that the National Labor Relations Board is required to conduct an election. It is important to note that if the SEIU secures signatures from more than 50 percent of our non‐tenure‐track faculty, then all non‐tenure‐track faculty at Marquette will be unionized without an election. We encourage all nontenure‐ track faculty to read the SEIU authorization cards carefully and know what you are agreeing to.

As a leading Jesuit, Catholic university, Marquette affirms the Catholic belief, echoed by Pope Francis, that the dignity of each person includes the right to fulfilling and life‐sustaining work. Our strong preference is to maintain a direct working relationship with our faculty—without a third party intermediary that may not understand our university, our mission, or our guiding values. This direct working relationship — one built on a long history of mutual respect and direct dialogue — is one of the many reasons Marquette is such a unique and rewarding place to work. [emphasis in original]

Given that Catholic Social Teaching has always strongly supported unionization, it’s a bit amusing to watch the chief academic bureaucrat at this supposed Catholic university squirm when faced with an actual attempt at unionization.

As for the “long history of mutual respect and direct dialogue:” this is patent nonsense. Adjuncts are hired when needed, and let go when needed. The only “dialogue” is when a department chair calls them up and offers them a job, with some room for negotiating schedule and (maybe a little) room for negotiating compensation.

Just as with any business hiring part-time or temporary employees.

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

But the sanctimonious rhetoric grates. In fact, it nauseates. As does the pious rhetoric about “mission” and “guiding values.”

More From Marquette

Our current operating model of utilizing a mix of tenure‐track and non‐tenure‐track faculty helps control costs, maintain flexibility and offer our students unique perspectives, while at the same time ensuring we are providing the highest quality transformational education at a price that is competitive with our peer universities.

Translation: we don’t want to have to pay more for the services of adjuncts. This from an administration that has produced a massive amount of bureaucratic bloat.

Having a union would mean that wages, hours and working conditions for non‐tenure‐track faculty would be determined through collective bargaining between the SEIU and the university administration, rather than handled through our shared governance system. If the union succeeds, our faculty will be legally divided into two separate groups.

Of course, faculty are divided into two separate groups. This is another statement that borders on the bizarre.

“Fact Sheet”

At the bottom of the e-mail is a “Fact Sheet” making more anti-union arguments. Some examples:

If the SEIU gains the right to hold an election and prevails, non‐tenure‐track faculty members who are eligible to vote cannot opt out of union representation. Non‐tenure‐track faculty would be subject to whatever terms may be agreed upon for the entire bargaining unit of non‐tenure‐track faculty members, regardless of whether or not they voted in an election to organize a union, or how they voted. Individuals cannot choose whether to be a part of the bargaining unit represented by the union. [emphasis in original]

And:

There is no way to know whether the wages, hours and conditions of employment for the non‐tenure‐track faculty bargaining unit would change or remain the same, because everything would be subject to the negotiation process. If non‐tenure‐track faculty members elect to have the SEIU represent them, SEIU is free to trade away existing benefits enjoyed by the faculty in exchange for terms important only to the SEIU. For example, unions often want a Dues Check‐Off Clause, which requires an employer to deduct authorized dues from an employee’s paycheck and remit them directly to the union. In fact, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has specifically stated, “In the give‐and‐take of bargaining a union is free to give up items important to employees in exchange for dues check‐off clauses.” (La‐Z‐Boy, 281 NLRB 338 (1986)) [emphasis in original]

These, in fact, are good arguments. But then:

If SEIU is elected to represent non‐tenure‐track faculty, shared governance will be replaced by collective bargaining. The SEIU would become the sole representative for everyone in the designated bargaining unit. There are currently many avenues available today for non‐tenure‐track faculty to enhance their experience at Marquette by communicating with and working directly alongside senior leadership. If the SEIU is representing non‐tenure‐track faculty, however, Marquette would not be able to vary from the terms of the union contract to address a non‐tenure‐track faculty member’s particular circumstances or preferences.

The notion of “shared governance” is a big joke. It just means that a self-selected bunch of activist faculty in the Academic Senate mostly do what the Administration wants. Adjuncts are not a part of it.

But rarely, the Academic Senate will take an action adverse to the campus bureaucrats.

Proposal Before the Academia Senate

The following is up for consideration of the Academic Senate:

Proposed UAS Statement on Faculty Unionization Efforts

“In keeping with Catholic social teachings, the members of the University Academic Senate ask that the president, our university administration, and tenure track faculty refrain from sending emails either discouraging or encouraging unionization or initiating joint action either discouraging or encouraging unionization. Our non-tenure track faculty colleagues should be allowed to freely and fairly decide on unionization without coercion in either direction. The members of the University Academic Senate are pleased that Dr. Kimo Ah Yun recently communicated with the university that Marquette will recognize Marquette’s non-tenure track faculty union if they should win an election or hit majority support. We echo that and in keeping with Catholic social teachings, call on the administration to bargain a fair contract in good faith if our non-tenure track colleagues proceed with unionization.”

How will all this turn out? We don’t know. But given that we have a very low opinion both of labor unions and of the Marquette Administration, we aren’t rooting for either side.

They pretty much deserve each other.