Save the date!

Saturday, Sept 24 — 10 AM- 3 PM

Building an Effective Organization for Faculty and Staff

If you read Sifting and Winnowing then you recognize that the events of last semester underscore the need for a viable organization of University staff and faculty. The Wisconsin University Union (WUU) invites you to a planning discussion about what that might look like. We’d like to hear from campus employees what they’d like that organization to focus on and do.

What issues should this organization prioritize?

• Improve compensation?
• Protect academic freedoms?
• Secure employee protections on layoffs, promotion, etc?
• Re-gain right to collectively bargain?
• Retain rights of self-governing institutions?
• Other?

What function/activity should this organization prioritize?

• Provide accurate and timely information on issues affecting employees?
• Advocate for individual employees in workplace disputes?
• Conduit information to decision-makers at state and campus level?
• Develop political capacity to advocate for campus interests such as lobbying or organizing a PAC?
• Work with similar grassroots groups on other UW campuses?
• Other?

We intend this to be a wide-open/no-preconceptions meeting — a frank (and fun) discussion of what’s really needed and how best to organize getting it. Please join other individual and organizational activists to discuss and plan an effective organization designed to meet our real challenges.

• On-campus location
• Ample food and drink available throughout!
• (More precise agenda to follow shortly)
• RSVP: dmahrens@wisc.edu / 334-1156

Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education

In addition to the other issues raised, many of which have been well-covered, I find the following excerpt interesting:

As Gaye Tuchman explains in Wannabe U (2009), a case study in the sorrows of academic corporatization, deans, provosts and presidents are no longer professors who cycle through administrative duties and then return to teaching and research. Instead, they have become a separate stratum of managerial careerists, jumping from job to job and organization to organization like any other executive: isolated from the faculty and its values, loyal to an ethos of short-term expansion, and trading in the business blather of measurability, revenue streams, mission statements and the like. They do not have the long-term health of their institutions at heart. They want to pump up the stock price (i.e., U.S. News and World Report ranking) and move on to the next fat post.

Ideologically, Huebsch is (by his own admission) joined at the hip with Scott Walker, so we can safely take this as an authoritative statement of what the governor’s office really wants for UW-Madison.

The Public Authority may be legislatively dead (or at least on ice), but we would do well to keep Scott Walker’s ultimate objectives in mind as we contemplate any “gifts” offered to UW-Madison and/or the UW System by the GOP-controlled state government.

And we would do especially well to study the example of Texas, where the struggle for ideological control of two university systems is coming to a head, as described in an exceptionally disturbing report by the Chronicle of Higher Education

Conservative Group’s Influence on Texas Higher-Education Policy Takes Center Stage Again

In case you don’t have a Chronicle subscription, here’s just a taste of what we learn:

The influence of a conservative movement that would apply a greater business orientation to Texas higher education came into stark relief this week, when the chancellor of one of the state’s university systems [Michael D. McKinney, Texas A&M University] unexpectedly resigned and the other seemed to push back against regents who have embraced what some call a heavy-handed ideological agenda.

and

Dr. McKinney has provided no reasons for his retirement, but The Dallas Morning News, citing anonymous sources close to the chancellor, reported Wednesday that Dr. McKinney was forced out for not being “assertive” enough in carrying out the foundation’s ideas, which have been embraced by Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, and some of the regents he appointed.

In the current political climate in Wisconsin, the institutions and traditions that protect us from going the way of Texas are fragile indeed.

Complacency is not an option. Resignation is not an option. Wishful thinking is not an option.

Vigilance, and bold defense of academic freedom and of the unique Wisconsin tradition of true shared governance, are how we will preserve the qualities that make UW-Madison unique in the world.

Here’s the key passage:

… Mike Huebsch says he and Gov. Scott Walker remain hopeful that the guv’s proposed split of UW-Madison from the rest of the university system will pass.

Speaking in Brookfield Wednesday at a gathering of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, he told the group it would bring a free-market approach to the university system similar to that of a corporate business. [emphasis added]

I now have two burning questions for Chancellor Biddy Martin, for our Faculty Senate,  and for other prominent and enthusiastic supporters of the public authority plan:

1. Do you have any plausible basis whatsoever for doubting Huebsch’s characterization of the public authority plan as regards the actual intentions of those who inserted it into the budget bill?
2. Do you support this vision for UW-Madison?

If you answer “no” to both questions, then the most obvious interpretation is that your endorsement of Scott Walker’s public authority plan reflected a grave lapse in judgment and due diligence on your part.

I look forward to hearing the arguments for a more generous interpretation.

-GP

But who knew that the first branch campus of Koch University already opened in Tallahassee, Florida, way back in 2008?  Only now, in May 10th’s St. Petersburg Times, is the arrangement finally getting wider attention:

A foundation bankrolled by Libertarian businessman Charles G. Koch has pledged $1.5 million for positions in Florida State University’s economics department. In return, his representatives get to screen and sign off on any hires for a new program promoting “political economy and free enterprise.”

Traditionally, university donors have little official input into choosing the person who fills a chair they’ve funded. The power of university faculty and officials to choose professors without outside interference is considered a hallmark of academic freedom.

Under the agreement with the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, however, faculty only retain the illusion of control. The contract specifies that an advisory committee appointed by Koch decides which candidates should be considered. The foundation can also withdraw its funding if it’s not happy with the faculty’s choice or if the hires don’t meet “objectives” set by Koch during annual evaluations.

If the scenario described above alarms you, then you should (1) sit down, and (2) read the entire article.  And then you should ask yourself (and others) what safeguards, if any, exist to prevent similar deals from being concluded here.   Not “assurances”, mind you, safeguards.

May I work any time during FTO?
No. You must not work any time during FTO. Such work includes being physically present in the work place, work at home, work online, e-mail, work on the telephone, “working lunches,” work on Blackberry, or work on a cell phone.    All such unscheduled, unapproved work on a furlough day is prohibited.

In short, by the very act of accessing the FAQ page in connection with my job at the University, I was in unambiguous violation of the policies it described!  Thank goodness I checked.

Well, I am always grateful for such clear guidance when it is available, but it occurred to me that some gray areas remained.   Having now waited until an ordinary holiday (when it is apparently legal again for me to use my home computer in connection with my University employment), I herewith propose the following additional questions in the hope that the Provost will helpfully append them, and their answers, to a future edition of the above FAQ:

B.11. The word “prohibited” carries an implicit threat of disciplinary action.  What form would that disciplinary action take?  What would be the formal charge?  “Voluntarily working without pay?”

B.12. I am a salaried employee, and I  normally work 60 hours a week on research, scholarship, writing,  and administrative responsibilities.  But according to this memo,  I am not allowed to work more than 32 hours in a week in which I take a scheduled furlough day.  This implies a 28 hour shortfall relative to normal weeks.  May I work 88 hours the following week so as to not fall behind?  Or must I stop at 80?

B.13. As a faculty member, I engage in a wide variety of activities directly related to research and scholarship, all of which are prohibited on furlough days.  These include

a) Thinking about an important and difficult theoretical problem I’ve been struggling with for the past year.  Should I force myself think about baseball instead? Or should I just arrange to be put into a drug-induced coma?

b) Continuing to run a computer simulation that requires many weeks to complete and that requires daily monitoring.  If my furlough day is on Friday, when can I restart the program after interrupting it at midnight on Thursday night — at midnight on Friday night?  Or not until Monday morning at 9:00 AM?

c) Answering phone calls, and reading emails and text messages from colleagues, editors, program managers, and students who don’t realize I’m not allowed to speak with them.  Must I turn off every communication device I use in my day-to-day life?  Or may I merely avert my eyes or close my ears as soon as I recognize a prohibited communication?

B.14. I am an astrophysicist and have spent many months and thousands of dollars of Federal research dollars preparing an expedition to Outer Mongolia to observe a total solar eclipse.  But I just learned that a mandatory furlough day has been scheduled for the date of the eclipse. Should I cancel the expedition altogether?  Or should I simply reschedule it for three years later, when another total eclipse can be observed from the middle of the South Pacific Ocean?

B.15. I’m hosting a fellow researcher during Spring Break to observe UW-Madison’s world-famous cow cloning operation.   On the mandatory furlough day,  must I tell him he’s on is own and that he should take a 12-hour self-guided tour of State Street, or am I allowed to take him to dinner if I promise not to talk about cows? Or research? Or the University?

B.16. I’m attending the week-long annual meeting of my professional society, and I just learned that my keynote oral presentation has been scheduled for a mandatory furlough day.   Am I allowed to fabricate an excuse as to why I have to cancel, or am I required to admit that I and my colleagues at UW-Madison have, through our acquiescence, lent legitimacy to a policy so bizarrely out of touch with the way faculty actually work that it would make Franz Kafka blush?

And finally,

B.17. What if a mandatory furlough day were declared and everyone just quietly went on doing their necessary work anyway?  Would riot police show up and chase everyone out of their labs and offices with tear gas and fire hoses?

Today, in the article “Free speech constraints spark criticism, concern”, the Daily Cardinal has reported that  Prof. Donald Downs (Political Science) is taking up that issue with our University Committee. That article, and the background information from the AAUP, is essential reading for anyone who might ever disagree with an administration decision.

The issue of free speech is of course of particular concern to the editors and contributors of this forum, which came into existence precisely to facilitate commentary on all matters of importance to the university community, including Administration policies.  In particular, during the Graduate School restructuring controversy over the past several weeks, many of us have been torn between a desire to take an unabashed public stand and genuine uncertainty over how vulnerable we might be if the Administration ever became truly annoyed with us.   For non-tenured staff, the concerns were of course even greater.

During that time, those of us who chose to post here anonymously were sometimes criticized for doing so.  In light of what we have now learned about the current legal status of free speech on campus, our caution seems vindicated.

Sifting and Winnowing applauds Prof. Down’s initiative and urges the University Committee to support policy revisions that unambiguously protect the right of university faculty and staff to speak openly and, if necessary, critically of administration policies without fear of retribution.

- the Editors

The right of faculty members at public colleges and universities to speak freely without fear of retribution is endangered as never before.

In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the government can restrict the speech of public employees when they comment on issues related to their “official duties.” Although the decision specifically set aside academic speech, recognizing that additional constitutional interests were at stake, several lower courts have ruled recently that faculty members who speak out on matters affecting their institutions are not protected under the First Amendment.

To protect free speech on campus, AAUP has launched a campaign to raise awareness of this threat to faculty speech and to provide faculty, administrators and others with the tools to preserve academic freedom on campus.

“Speak Up, Speak Out: Protect the Faculty Voice on Campus” launches November 10 with the release of an AAUP report on the Supreme Court case and its implications. The report recommends a number of action steps, including adoption of specific policy language designed to protect academic freedom and shared governance.

In conjunction with the report, the AAUP is making available on our Web site a series of opinion columns and other materials that we encourage supporters of free speech at public colleges and universities to republish and disseminate.

Here’s what you can do. Find out whether your college or university has written policies that protect the full range of academic freedom. If not, urge your faculty senate and administration to work together to develop them. And if so, use the AAUP materials to reinforce their strength; collaborate with other groups on and off campus to conduct governance workshops, monitor emerging cases, and publicize successful actions; and support fellow faculty around the country in protecting academic freedom and shared governance.

See the full report for model policy language.

Read suggestions for other actions that faculty can pursue.

Hear Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression director Bob O’Neil, AAUP senior counsel Rachel Levinson, and Virginia AAUP Conference president-elect Craig Vasey explain why faculty should be concerned about this issue (video).

The AAUP Online is an electronic newsletter of the American Association of University Professors.