We have
frequently expressed concern here about the intemperate rhetoric used in public
statements by some campus advocates of faculty unionization, a rhetoric that assumes
an adversarial division between The Faculty and The Administration. Repeatedly,
university leadership is portrayed as a clueless, insensitive, untrustworthy entity
that cannot understand, much less support, the rights of faculty. Hence faculty
need a union that will “fight” the evil administrators to protect them; “an
independent voice” to protest their inevitable ill-treatment at the hands of the
bosses.
There is
always a need to question and to hold leaders accountable – and no one knows
this better than we do. But this dichotomous Us/Them picture of the university
is inaccurate and unfair. Even more than that, it is self-perpetuating: it
actually creates a hostile,
suspicious campus climate, by encouraging knee-jerk reactions based on the assumption
that the motives of administrators are base and self-serving, and those of
their faculty critics pure and selfless.
How anyone
could claim that this attitude is compatible with “shared governance” is a
mystery. You can’t share responsibility with people you fundamentally despise
and mistrust – and you can’t expect people you speak about that way to be
willing to share responsibility with you.
The latest
example of this tendency is the CFA’s all-out, ad hominem assault on “the arrogant, ignorant, narrow-minded, authoritarian chairman of our Board of Trustees, Mr. Christopher Kennedy,” including a declaration in the CFA
spinoff blog “Learning and Labor” that he is “Unfit for Office.”
And just in
case that is too subtle, this slander is reinforced by a cartoonish CFA-authored caricature of a monster who doesn’t care about “shared governance,
due process, or academic freedom.” (None of which Kennedy ever said.)
It is
entirely legitimate to correct misstatements and to challenge positions that one
finds objectionable. But the venomous hatred expressed in these portrayals suggests
something more than simply a desire to correct misstatements, representing them
not as mistakes to be corrected but as evidence of a fundamental ignorance
about the university and of hostility toward faculty (especially
non-tenure-track faculty), which no one who has actually interacted with Chris
Kennedy could ever imagine to be true.
Apparently,
it is easy to forget that it was this same Chris Kennedy who recently pointed out the dire circumstances of many non-tenure-track faculty and the need to
remedy them. No recognition is given of any achievements
of the current Board, and its Chair, nor of its laudable overall record (especially
compared with some predecessors) for integrity and aggressive advocacy for the
university.
There is
always room for fair criticism and disagreement. But when you look at the tone
and hostility in this latest round of CFA comments, you have to wonder what a
campus would look like in which these people were the main spokespeople and representatives
of the faculty in regularly dealing with the administration.
CFA
representatives keep saying they don’t desire or expect that unionization would create an adversarial relationship between faculty and administrators. And
they keep proving that untrue.
***This blog is a jointly authored project by two people who believe that the campaign for tenure-track faculty unionization has damaged morale and divided our campus, and that a faculty union, if ever established, would erode academic quality and undermine our highly successful system of campus shared governance, which has earned nationwide praise.
We speak for ourselves. We have no organization behind us, we don’t ask for funding, we don’t pay national hired guns to come in and make the case for us.
We want to start a different campus conversation about faculty unionization, which we believe will be more thoughtful and substantive when people have all the facts.
We welcome and will consider postings from others expressing issues and concerns about faculty unionization. We know that many faculty are very upset about the possibility of working on a unionized campus.
If you see any information here that is inaccurate, please tell us and we will correct it.
If you share our concerns and want to help, please forward these postings to your friends and colleagues, and urge them to do the same.***
***This blog is a jointly authored project by two people who believe that the campaign for tenure-track faculty unionization has damaged morale and divided our campus, and that a faculty union, if ever established, would erode academic quality and undermine our highly successful system of campus shared governance, which has earned nationwide praise.
We speak for ourselves. We have no organization behind us, we don’t ask for funding, we don’t pay national hired guns to come in and make the case for us.
We want to start a different campus conversation about faculty unionization, which we believe will be more thoughtful and substantive when people have all the facts.
We welcome and will consider postings from others expressing issues and concerns about faculty unionization. We know that many faculty are very upset about the possibility of working on a unionized campus.
If you see any information here that is inaccurate, please tell us and we will correct it.
If you share our concerns and want to help, please forward these postings to your friends and colleagues, and urge them to do the same.***
