The City University of New York Board of Trustees has been forced to concede that faculty, students and the public have a right to attend all the meetings at which the board sets policy. According to a settlement approved and ordered by the New York Supreme Court in August, the public is assured access and space to attend all board meetings.

Such a right has been at question--in the board's mind--for the past five years since a handful of CUNY faculty and (now former) students sued the board for violating the state's open meetings law.

In 1995, when CUNY was in the midst of program cancellations and faculty retrenchments, it was the board's practice to hold meetings in rooms that were too small to allow public participation, explains William Crain, a professor of psychology at City College of CUNY and a member of the Professional Staff Congress/AFT. At one meeting, for example, the boardroom was so filled with staff and administrators that only three additional people were allowed in. Another meeting that year attracted 250 people who wanted to speak but, instead, were forced to stand outside the building on the street.

Crain and a student named David Sukor were the lead plaintiffs in a lawsuit brought that year. "The principle of open meetings is something that almost every state in the union has a statute on," notes Ronald Minkoff, the litigator who pressed the suit. "Public bodies should make their decisions out in the open so the public can see what the officials are doing."

The case stayed wrapped up in legal proceedings for the next few years, while the board continued to limit public access to its meetings. In May 1998, however, the board voted to abolish remediation at CUNY's senior colleges, changing a mission that had been in place for decades. Once again, the meeting was held in a small room so packed with staff, the public could not enter. When a demonstration ensued outside the building, people were arrested.

Attorneys for Crain and his fellow plaintiffs sued again. A judge nullified the board's vote and ordered a new, public meeting. Of help to the plaintiffs was a memo to CUNY written by the university's director of security the day after the vote. He complained that the university's failure to heed his warnings about accommodating the crowds that were showing up for board meetings had resulted in an uncontrolled situation that could have been avoided.

Eight months later, in early 1999, in a large room with the public present, the board voted again to abolish remediation. This year, the board agreed to settle its dispute with the plaintiffs rather than go to trial. The provisions of the settlement are:

• The public is ensured a specific number of seats at meetings.
• If 68 people testify at a hearing before a board meeting, the meeting site will be moved to a larger auditorium.
• The board may hold no more than one meeting a year at a site outside Manhattan and not accessible by subway.

Minkoff noted that the settlement is a real vindication for Crain, Sukor and the other plaintiffs who stuck with it over the years. "They showed that the CUNY administration could eventually be brought to heel on this question." CUNY also must pay the plaintiffs' legal costs.

Crain sees the settlement as solid protection for whatever the future holds. Noting the political nature of the board, which is made up of mayoral and gubernatorial appointments, he says, "you never know when the next big issue will come up."

The 700 graduate employees at Oregon State University are holding classes this semester with a whole new attitude--one of relief. Less than a year ago, they voted in the union, the Council of Graduate Employees/AFT. Then they spent a tumultuous winter and spring negotiating their first contract. With an overwhelming June vote to ratify the agreement, the union "now has the stability to build a union culture and strengthen membership," says Claudia Pitzler, a field representative with AFT-Oregon, who helped negotiate the contract.

The four-year agreement, which expires June 30, 2004, provides health insurance guarantees that were a major issue in organizing the union. The employees will get $110 per term (including the summer session) until the university finishes putting together a mandatory health plan for all students. If that is not in place by winter 2002, the union will reopen negotiations on that benefit.

The union also will have a greater say about workload and bargaining unit issues. To determine who is eligible to be in the bargaining unit, the contract sets up a joint eligibility committee made up of two union and two management representatives. Committee stalemates will go to arbitration. Also, management is required to provide a written outline of duties and time expectations for carrying them out.

Other important measures in the contract include a strong grievance procedure, proper health and safety training, and healthy minimum salaries. They are set at $2,275 per term for full-time equivalent position and at $1,137 for one-half time equivalent.

Who wouldn't want a good reason to be in San Francisco for a weekend during springtime? Mark the dates April 20-22, 2001, on your calendar now and plan to join us for the AFT Higher Education Issues Conference. There, you and your fellow faculty unionists will explore the issues that hit home on campus. The program is yet to be announced, but you can bet distance education, tenure, accountability and part-time issues will be represented. Watch this newspaper for more information.