State university faculty may strike in July

The faculty of 14 of Pennsylvania’s public universities might be ditching class for the… The faculty of 14 of Pennsylvania’s public universities might be ditching class for the picket lines this summer if contract negotiations fail to reach a compromise by the end of this month.

The Association of Pennsylvania State College and University Faculty and the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education have been engaged in talks concerning amendments to faculty and coaches’ contracts for several months now, but as the June 30 deadline approaches, neither side is prepared to accept the other’s proposal.

“They’re doing everything they can to cause a strike, and we’re doing everything we can to prevent it,” Kevin Yenerall, a political science professor and strike chair at Clarion University, said of the PASSHE.

“We do not want a strike, but we’re at a stalemate,” he said. “It is our view that the state system has not negotiated substantially.”

Yenerall said that all attempts at an open dialogue between the APSCUF, of which Clarion is part, and the PASSHE have fallen short of actual negotiation and have yet to satisfactorily address APSCUF’s main concerns.

According to Yenerall, APSCUF is most concerned with keeping salaries, benefits and the working environment at such a level that Pennsylvania’s state-owned schools remain competitive with other higher education institutions so as to attract and retain the best faculty and coaches for their students.

“We have lost 25 percent of all new faculty that have come into the state system since 2003,” Yenerall said. “And that doesn’t include people who were fired or didn’t make tenure – that’s only those who left for greener pastures.”

As of now, APSCUF believes that PASSHE is either unwilling or unable to modify its proposals to keep Pennsylvania state schools competitive.

If this stalemate is not breached before the start of the second half of the summer term, PASSHE will face the first faculty strike since its inception in 1982.

“Their [PASSHE’s] proposals on benefits, health care and equity so far we believe to be very damaging to the state system if it hopes to remain competitive,” Yenerall said.

Although it appears that it will take quite a bit of discussion to iron out a compromise, Yenerall said APSCUF has been ready to talk for some time.

“We’ve been prepared to negotiate for over a year now, but the state system has really only begun negotiating in the last few months,” Yenerall said.

Ken Marshall of PASSHE sees the situation differently.

Far from being ready to talk anytime, Marshall said that, “The biggest problem we’re running into now is getting the APSCUF to the bargaining table.”

“They’ve actually cancelled four of the last five negotiating sessions,” he said.

APSCUF and PASSHE have similar priorities for the ultimate outcome of negotiations, but they don’t see eye to eye on the direction that the current contract is leading state-owned schools.

“We need a contract that is fair to everyone involved – especially the students – and that ensures that we maintain quality faculty,” Marshall said, agreeing with Yenerall and APSCUF’s position.

“But as far as their salaries [are concerned], they are very competitive as they are now,” Marshall said. “Our faculty’s salaries continually rank in the 90th percentile of public institutions.”

Marshall also responded to Yenerall’s claim that APSCUF schools have lost 25 percent of new faculty since 2003 saying, “It’s very disappointing that they’re still using that number.”

He says that Yenerall’s statistic was a result of misinterpreted data sent to APSCUF by PASSHE and that PASSHE members had since alerted APSCUF to the misunderstanding.

“The actual number of faculty that have left since 2002 is closer to nine percent,” Marshall said. “And that includes people who have left because they didn’t make tenure.”

Still, as tensions mount between APSCUF schools and PASSHE, Pitt and other non-union public schools in the state remain outside the fray.

Philip Wion, an English professor and the president of United Faculty at Pitt, played a major role in past movements to unionize Pitt faculty.

Wion said that in 1976 the University was divided into a number of separate bargaining units which were then asked to vote on whether or not they would like representation from the American Association of University Professors, the American Federation of Teachers or the National Education Federation.

In the initial election, the AFT won more votes than the other two unions but did not earn a majority. A runoff vote was held to determine if more faculty were in favor of AFT representation or remaining nonunion.

The majority voted against a union.

The process began again in the early 1980s when the AFT and AAUP joined to form the United Faculty union. But even though the United Faculty polled the necessary majority in favor of unionization, several loopholes again stalled the process at Pitt.

After back-and-forth discussions between Pitt faculty and University administrators and two court decisions, Pitt faculty finally won the battle for representation but no longer possessed a majority in favor of it.

“A lot of faculty don’t feel that unions are appropriate for professionals,” Wion said.

“We reminded them that many other professionals like musicians have a union, and it’s never done the Pittsburgh Symphony any harm.”

Wion believes that the benefit of unionization comes from collective bargaining and possessing the “collectivity and solidarity” necessary to produce a united front if faculty feel their interests are not being honored.

Wion said he feels that at the time of the negotiations, unionization was a more pressing issue at Pitt than it is now.

“Back in the 1970s and 1980s the administration was very secretive and there were many instances of individuals being treated unfairly without much recourse, so we felt there was a need to take a legal stand,” Wion said.

However, even without establishing union membership, Wion said both Pitt faculty and administrators benefited from the effort to organize.

“Things are much more open these days, so the effort to unionize did contribute to the better behavior of the University in the past 15 years as well as to further cooperation between faculty and administration,” Wion said.

According to Wion, Pitt has no plans to unionize in the future.

APSCUF and PASSHE are scheduled to meet this Friday and Saturday to attempt to resolve their contractual issues and prevent the potential strike.