After repeated unsuccessful attempts by the Ohio State chapter of the American Association of University Professors to collectivize, the faculty union at OSU may be in jeopardy.
“A couple of years ago we explored organizing. There wasn’t enough interest to do so, which isn’t unusual at a large, research institution,” said Gerald Winer, president of the OSU chapter of the AAUP and a professor of psychology.
The Ohio conference of the AAUP has about 4,000 members, about 9 percent of the national total. OSU, the largest university in the state, makes up about 8.5 percent of the Ohio conference.
“Our membership is around 340 people,” said Anna Soter, member of the OSU AAUP chapter’s executive committee. That is about 11 percent of the faculty at OSU.
The faculty union situation at OSU is likely to take one of two paths: that of Kent State University, which has a strong union presence, or that of Miami University, which has no union presence.
Kent State traditionally has had a strong union.
“We were one of the first schools in Ohio to go union in the 1970s. We received our first contract in 1978,” said Cheryl Casper, president of the Kent State chapter of the AAUP.
Kent State membership sits at about 60 percent of the faculty.
“We do a good job representing our faculty. We have a strong contract, which puts us in a position to negotiate and maintain our strength,” Casper said.
The strength of Kent State’s union is a result of its contract, she said. Faculty are more likely to join a union if it has a strong bargaining ability.
Casper offered advice on how to get an effective union at OSU.
“I would have the chapter set up forums. I would go out to the individual colleges, survey the faculty and do focus groups. You need to get the faculty talking about the issues,” she said
The union presence at Kent State is only getting stronger.
“Ten years from now, I see us as still being unionized. Our membership will increase, hopefully to around 75 to 80 percent,” Casper said.
In striking contrast to Kent State is Miami. Miami’s AAUP chapter folded four years ago, and the only AAUP presence there is individual members.
“Basically, it was a lack of willingness to get involved,” said Jean Coakley, one of the last presidents of Miami’s chapter.
The lack of desire stemmed from apathy and the attitude among Miami’s faculty that unions aren’t part of the social and occupational stratum in which they reside.
One of the major issues affecting union membership at Miami and OSU is individual entrepreneurship among faculty.
“Many faculty at OSU are convinced their future here will be related to how many publications they have. They don’t understand the system and are discouraged by its actions,” said David Patton, Ohio AAUP Conference chairman on government relations and program leader for the OSU Extension. Casper said the same attitude is present at Miami.
The prospects for union relevance at Miami are slim.
“There’s not enough right now to form a union. If conditions change there might be. A number of our faculty feel they can do better on their own than through collective bargaining,” Coakley said.
OSU appears to reside in the middle ground between Miami and Kent State, and its future is up in the air. Many factors will determine whether the AAUP collectivizes or dies at OSU.
“In general, the faculty here is apathetic and passive. They accept what is handed down from the administration. I can’t understand it. There are many people here who are making less than local schoolteachers,” Winer said.
One of the major roadblocks for collectivization is getting the faculty motivated.
“People are reluctant to unionize unless there is a specific grievance,” Winer said.
Two possible situations are required to form a collective AAUP presence at OSU, he said.
“We must educate our faculty about why they need to go union, or some crisis needs to happen that would motivate them” such as a loss of tenure or unfairly increased workload, Winer said.
Others disagree.
“(Winer) and others think the faculty will see the benefit of collective bargaining; I don’t think the faculty will. When you agree to engage in collective bargaining, you lose autonomy. Things aren’t bad enough for that,” Patton said.
Winer said collective bargaining has two motivations. First, the union would be able to effectively negotiate salary. Second, it sets up a grievance procedure.
“But we’re not strong enough to move to collective bargaining at this point,” Winer said.
Winer said the administration could make the AAUP irrelevant by making a few simple changes.
“There is no need for this type of organization on this campus. If they set up a grievance procedure and made a few small changes, the administration could do away with the AAUP,” Winer said.
OSU seems to be experiencing the same type of problems that led to the Miami chapter’s folding. Apathy and lack of involvement are rampant among the majority of OSU faculty.
“If the organization loses its effectiveness and is seen as non-vocal, it will wither on the vine. At the same time, with our size, there will likely always be a group of people who will support a faculty union at OSU,” Winer said.
Patton doesn’t see a bright future for the AAUP at OSU.
“If things keep going like this, in 10 years I don’t think the AAUP will have any presence here,” Patton said.
