After officially forming a union on Feb. 12 and joining the part-time faculty in collaborating withService Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 509 through its Faculty Forward project, Tufts full-time, non-tenured faculty are now preparing to begin negotiating as a union with the university, according to Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning Lecturer Penn Loh.
“We have already started an online survey of full-time lecturers to gather input on our priorities for negotiating a contract,” Loh told the Daily in an email. “We want this process to be democratic and open, as our process has been so far. We believe the part-time lecturers union provides a good model for us, with a bargaining committee that was open to all but that also sought representation from as many departments as possible.”
The decision, which followed a similar vote to unionize among part-time adjunct faculty last fall, passed with a two-to-one margin in favor of unionization, with over 80 percent of full-time faculty casting a vote.
Discussions about unionization for full-time faculty began in the spring of 2014, according to Loh. Initial meetings were held to gather information and learn from the experiences of part-time lecturers, who formed their union in the fall of 2014, he explained.
“I believe that we have a right to collectively bargain and that if we exercise this right, we can come to the fairest and most effective solutions for making Tufts the best it can be, while respecting the dignity and rights of those of us who work here,” Loh said.
According to Michelle Gaudette a biology lecturer, who was also involved in discussions about organization, a union will allow faculty members to more effectively discuss their needs with administrators, particularly in relation to workload and equal treatment across departments.
“As far as I knew there was no mechanism in place to collectively bring [issues] to the administration,” Gaudette said. “We felt that collective voices are much stronger and louder than single voices and if enough of us felt that we weren’t being treated the way we should be treated, then if enough of us got together perhaps we could make a case for ourselves ... Unionization seemed to be the most logical step in that direction.”
The decision for unionization was not unanimous, however. At least one-third of full-time faculty who voted do not feel that joining the union will increase benefits for themselves or students.
Anne Mahoney, a classics lecturer, said that she feared a decrease in opportunities for adjuncts due to the demands of the union.
“It’s almost as if every progressive person on campus hears 'union' and assumes it must be an unmitigated Good Thing,” Mahoney told the Daily in an email. “I fear that … if union members insist on compensation for ordinary faculty activities … then the logical thing for the administration to do is ask us ‘not’ to take on those activities.”
According to Mahoney, advising and sitting on committees could be possible responsibilities the administration would take away from adjuncts if the union were to bargain for higher wages based on workload.
Currently, sitting on committees is a way for adjuncts to participate in Tufts community, but if lecturers were to demand extra wages to sit on committees, it would be less expensive for administration if committees were made up entirely of tenured faculty, Mahoney explained.
“This would have the effect, not of paying us for our extra work, but of taking away our voice,” Mahoney said.
David Proctor, a history lecturer, added that now that the faculty has voted to unionize, the union's negotiations will determine outcomes for all full-time adjunct faculty regardless of whether they want to join the union or not.
“The reality is that full-time lecturers have the voice, if they choose to use it,” Proctor said. “We are fully enfranchised members of faculty … My own concern is that the coming of the union will damage that. I hope that the union will not interfere with the ability of those of us who are actively engaged in the full scope of the life of the university -- teaching, advising, serving on committees, chairing committees -- that this won’t interfere with our abilities to do our jobs.”
According to Gaudette, however, rather than break up all faculty responsibilities into jobs that need compensation, negotiating a contract that will still have room for advising and sitting on committees while creating a reasonable expectation of course load and fair compensation for the work as a whole is a realistic expectation.
“We are not saying we are against the administration -- we’re not -- we want to work with the administration to make our working conditions more tenable for us so that we can focus on our job, which is teaching our students,” Gaudette said.
Proctor also feared the union would have the unintended effect of marginalizing the full-time lecturers by taking away their voice and changing their position in the eyes of tenured faculty, rather than helping them strengthen their positions in the Tufts community.
Despite potential changes in full-time faculty positions due to unionization, Gaudette said she was not worried about relationships with other faculty.
“I think that Tufts is a very collegial place,” Gaudette said. “I think that whether you are part-time, full-time, or tenure-track faculty, we all have the same goal in mind, which is making the university a top notch institution, educating our students [and] having the best interests of our students in mind. I’m hoping that unionization is not a road block in relationships with any of our colleagues.”
Proctor expressed additional concerns that unionization efforts were not sufficiently discussed among the affected faculty.
“For any decision as important as this, information is critical,” Proctor said. “I have not received during this entire process any communication from the union. Anything I know about what they are looking for has been the result of my own research so I could cast an informed vote.”
Proctor praised the Tufts administration for circulating detailed information about organizing efforts without presenting any bias.
According to Loh, several meetings were held throughout the process to keep appropriate faculty updated on any progress being made.
An Organizing Committee was created in June 2014 to further explore the possibility of unionization and to gather support for forming a union represented by SEIU Local 509, Loh said. After early conversations, the Organizing Committee held strategic meetings to discuss moving towards organization; meetings were open to lecturers who had signed a union authorization card, and public information sessions were also held to make sure all lecturers were aware of the progress being made, he explained.
SEIU Local 509 was involved in supporting the Organizing Committee, according to Gaudette.
“SEIU was a very supportive organization … SEIU representatives were there to inform us of what our legal options were … I think the process [went] smoothly,”she said.
Gaudette explained that despite the concerns expressed, she expects the union will bring representation to all faculty.
“I know that there are some people not in favor of the union and I’m hoping that we can address their concerns,” Gaudette said. “Their concerns are very important. We don’t want to move forward with a union that seems to be neglecting part of the membership or potential membership so I think … that we need to listen, we need to have our ears open, as much as we wanted the administration to have their ears open, in order to move forward.
“We have already started an online survey of full-time lecturers to gather input on our priorities for negotiating a contract,” Loh told the Daily in an email. “We want this process to be democratic and open, as our process has been so far. We believe the part-time lecturers union provides a good model for us, with a bargaining committee that was open to all but that also sought representation from as many departments as possible.”
The decision, which followed a similar vote to unionize among part-time adjunct faculty last fall, passed with a two-to-one margin in favor of unionization, with over 80 percent of full-time faculty casting a vote.
Discussions about unionization for full-time faculty began in the spring of 2014, according to Loh. Initial meetings were held to gather information and learn from the experiences of part-time lecturers, who formed their union in the fall of 2014, he explained.
“I believe that we have a right to collectively bargain and that if we exercise this right, we can come to the fairest and most effective solutions for making Tufts the best it can be, while respecting the dignity and rights of those of us who work here,” Loh said.
According to Michelle Gaudette a biology lecturer, who was also involved in discussions about organization, a union will allow faculty members to more effectively discuss their needs with administrators, particularly in relation to workload and equal treatment across departments.
“As far as I knew there was no mechanism in place to collectively bring [issues] to the administration,” Gaudette said. “We felt that collective voices are much stronger and louder than single voices and if enough of us felt that we weren’t being treated the way we should be treated, then if enough of us got together perhaps we could make a case for ourselves ... Unionization seemed to be the most logical step in that direction.”
The decision for unionization was not unanimous, however. At least one-third of full-time faculty who voted do not feel that joining the union will increase benefits for themselves or students.
Anne Mahoney, a classics lecturer, said that she feared a decrease in opportunities for adjuncts due to the demands of the union.
“It’s almost as if every progressive person on campus hears 'union' and assumes it must be an unmitigated Good Thing,” Mahoney told the Daily in an email. “I fear that … if union members insist on compensation for ordinary faculty activities … then the logical thing for the administration to do is ask us ‘not’ to take on those activities.”
According to Mahoney, advising and sitting on committees could be possible responsibilities the administration would take away from adjuncts if the union were to bargain for higher wages based on workload.
Currently, sitting on committees is a way for adjuncts to participate in Tufts community, but if lecturers were to demand extra wages to sit on committees, it would be less expensive for administration if committees were made up entirely of tenured faculty, Mahoney explained.
“This would have the effect, not of paying us for our extra work, but of taking away our voice,” Mahoney said.
David Proctor, a history lecturer, added that now that the faculty has voted to unionize, the union's negotiations will determine outcomes for all full-time adjunct faculty regardless of whether they want to join the union or not.
"My choice is that I can join the union [or] I can not join the union but still pay the agency, and regardless of whether I join the union or don’t join, the union will impact me and will effectively direct what my salary is going to be [and] what my work load will be," Proctor said. "My only choice now is to agree to join the union so that I can hopefully have some voice in my own future."
Proctor echoed Mahoney's sentiments as well, saying he was concerned the union would impede adjuncts’ ability to fully participate in the Tufts community.“The reality is that full-time lecturers have the voice, if they choose to use it,” Proctor said. “We are fully enfranchised members of faculty … My own concern is that the coming of the union will damage that. I hope that the union will not interfere with the ability of those of us who are actively engaged in the full scope of the life of the university -- teaching, advising, serving on committees, chairing committees -- that this won’t interfere with our abilities to do our jobs.”
According to Gaudette, however, rather than break up all faculty responsibilities into jobs that need compensation, negotiating a contract that will still have room for advising and sitting on committees while creating a reasonable expectation of course load and fair compensation for the work as a whole is a realistic expectation.
“We are not saying we are against the administration -- we’re not -- we want to work with the administration to make our working conditions more tenable for us so that we can focus on our job, which is teaching our students,” Gaudette said.
Proctor also feared the union would have the unintended effect of marginalizing the full-time lecturers by taking away their voice and changing their position in the eyes of tenured faculty, rather than helping them strengthen their positions in the Tufts community.
Despite potential changes in full-time faculty positions due to unionization, Gaudette said she was not worried about relationships with other faculty.
“I think that Tufts is a very collegial place,” Gaudette said. “I think that whether you are part-time, full-time, or tenure-track faculty, we all have the same goal in mind, which is making the university a top notch institution, educating our students [and] having the best interests of our students in mind. I’m hoping that unionization is not a road block in relationships with any of our colleagues.”
Proctor expressed additional concerns that unionization efforts were not sufficiently discussed among the affected faculty.
“For any decision as important as this, information is critical,” Proctor said. “I have not received during this entire process any communication from the union. Anything I know about what they are looking for has been the result of my own research so I could cast an informed vote.”
Proctor praised the Tufts administration for circulating detailed information about organizing efforts without presenting any bias.
According to Loh, several meetings were held throughout the process to keep appropriate faculty updated on any progress being made.
An Organizing Committee was created in June 2014 to further explore the possibility of unionization and to gather support for forming a union represented by SEIU Local 509, Loh said. After early conversations, the Organizing Committee held strategic meetings to discuss moving towards organization; meetings were open to lecturers who had signed a union authorization card, and public information sessions were also held to make sure all lecturers were aware of the progress being made, he explained.
SEIU Local 509 was involved in supporting the Organizing Committee, according to Gaudette.
“SEIU was a very supportive organization … SEIU representatives were there to inform us of what our legal options were … I think the process [went] smoothly,”she said.
Gaudette explained that despite the concerns expressed, she expects the union will bring representation to all faculty.
“I know that there are some people not in favor of the union and I’m hoping that we can address their concerns,” Gaudette said. “Their concerns are very important. We don’t want to move forward with a union that seems to be neglecting part of the membership or potential membership so I think … that we need to listen, we need to have our ears open, as much as we wanted the administration to have their ears open, in order to move forward.
