Uncommon Sense
The Newsletter of the United Faculty of
(an FEA [AFT & NEA] affiliate)
Volume 12, Number 4 Spring, 2005
The Voice
of the University Professional
About Membership
Only UFF members may run or vote, but UFF represents everyone in the bargaining unit. What’s going on here?
Many contracts – leases, sales, loans –
are presented by a landlord, car salesman, or bank to sign or not sign. A renter, buyer or debtor who wants a
different contract must go to the competition down the street, which often
offers a rather similar deal.
So workers bargain their contracts. When they can. But while a movie star or CEO can afford a
personal bargaining agent, most workers must unite to form a collective agent,
a union, to bargain a contract.
And a union is better able to enforce a
contract than one employee alone.
A union provides something closer to equal
footing. But since employers prefer a position
of advantage, they lobby legislatures to pass laws limiting union effectiveness. One such law is a “right-to-work” law. Such a law forbids labor contracts from
requiring that employees be dues-paying members of a union. As
This law sounds high-minded, but it really
is a calculated exploitation of a weakness in human nature that economic game
theorists call the “Tragedy of the Commons.”
In Medieval Europe, a village held land “in
common” for use by all the villagers.
The problem was maintaining it.
Each villager knew that any contribution that an individual made would
not make too much of a difference, so each benefited little from their own
contribution. But if everyone thought
this way, no one would maintain the common and it would decline. The village dealt with this problem by using
shame, guilt, and praise: if a village
had a hundred residents, it wasn't hard to tell who did their fair share, and
who did not.
Nowadays, there are a lot more than a
hundred people involved in any “common” like the blood supply, public
television, or a union. The economic
part of the calculation remains the same, so only some people are actually
supporting efforts from which all benefit.
But while the blood supply and public television need only enough
supporters to supply blood or to pay the bills, unions are in an adversarial
position, and need more and more active support. They cannot be effective if only a small
minority actually pays dues.
Part of the reason is tangible: running a union involves money. And from (dues-paying) supporters come
activists who are willing to put their time and energy into doing the work of
the union.
Part of it is intangible. If the union has a lot of members, each
committing 1 % of their salary annually, the administration takes a very
different posture from the one it assumes if the union has only a few
members. Of course, “support” of the bargaining
unit helps, but it doesn’t provide the clout that paying membership does.
The union tries to dilute the calculation
of the Tragedy by getting benefits for members, notably special insurance
packages, financial programs, free access to legal advice, etc. And some of us who are good with money can
actually save more money from the benefits than they pay in dues. But for most people, perhaps the most
important appeal is to civic duty.
That appeal is represented by the union’s
electoral practice. The right to run and
to vote requires a commitment to the union’s mission. It requires membership. So we call on everyone who wants a say in the
union: come and join the movement.
Court & the Contract
While USF has a
contract, many universities do not. But
they may soon. There is progress in
bargaining...and in the courts.
On January 7, 2003, the 2001-2003 Collective Bargaining Agreement expired, and boards of trustees announced that there was no union and no contract. Now all but one board recognizes the union, and there are three contracts (congratulations to UCF, which has just ratified a contract!). Most other universities are nearing agreement.
Legal recognition and contracts are won by political pressure, hard bargaining,...and legal action. The legal action is also near resolution, and it looks good.
When some administrations flatly refused to recognize the union in 2001, we filed several “unfair labor practice” complaints with the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC), which oversees labor disputes for state and public employees. By 2003, all members of the commission had been appointed by Governor Bush, and by some coincidence, PERC’s recent decisions are often inconsistent with precedent.
UFF and the
university staff union AFSCME together complained that UWF and FSU refused to
recognize the unions and their contracts.
Those administrations made the usual argument: the reorganization ended all contractual
obligations. The unions’ response was:
reorganization does not end
contractual obligations.
PERC ruled that the unions’ position was
“illogical.” Faculty at UWF and FSU had
to petition for certification elections (which UFF won by 91 % and 96 %,
respectively) to compel their administrations to recognize UFF. And faculty at UF-Gainesville have been
fighting a protracted battle with their administration over setting up a
certification election.
On February 14, the First District Court
ruled that, “State government cannot ...
unilaterally terminate its obligations ... simply by reorganizing its executive
branch,” and thus that the UWF and FSU boards should have recognized UWF and
FSU. Furthermore, the court remarked
that, "PERC must itself comply with statutes it administers.” In other words, PERC should have ordered the
boards to recognize UFF and the contract.
It looks very much like the terms and
conditions of the old contract stayed in force after the contract expired. The point is: what goes for UWF and FSU goes
for everyone else.
For USF, this means that the old contract
was in force until December 2, 2004, and thus that our administration has committed
many violations, and missed many deadlines for acting on those violations. But since we have a new contract, the effect
on us is not as great. (FAU and UCF also
have new contracts.)
The effect is greatest at
UF-Gainesville. No more stalling on
certification: the board must recognize the union, period. The other universities, where the
administrations recognize the union but not the old contract, now must
(retroactively) recognize a contract whose terms and conditions those
administrations have been continuously violating for over two years.
It is not clear what the administrations
will do next. FSU and UWF can appeal to
the state Supreme Court, but there is little hope for them there. They may flounder a bit, but there is little
choice: they must obey the law. The
terms and conditions of the old contract were and are in force until a new
contract is bargained.
This did not fall out of the sky. We fought for over two years. And we had help. We had support from Florida Education Association
lawyers, and we were joined by AFSCME, which represents the secretaries, physical
plant workers, and other staff at the universities. If we did not hang together, we would surely
have been hanged, separately.
And remember, there will be a next time...