Two steps forward for faculty in Oregon

Oregon’s full- and part-time faculty are two-for-two in their quest to have the state look at how academic staffing patterns are affecting public higher education. In February, state Rep. Peter Buckley introduced House Bill 2578, the Faculty and College Excellence Act, and legislative hearings on the bill took place the next month.

Then, on Aug. 28, Gov. Ted Kulongski signed an executive order creating the Postsecondary Quality Education Commission to explore proactively "what a quality postsecondary education looks like for the global economy in which we live." He is seeking an education roadmap that he and state policymakers can use in putting together the higher education budget for the next funding cycle, 2009-2011.

Second on the list of seven charges for the commission is: "Study the impact of the use of part-time faculty and graduate student employees on program quality and student success, and recommend a consistent definition to describe adjunct, contingent and part-time faculty."

AFT-Oregon takes that as a major victory. The introduction of HB 2578 came after 15 years of trying to get the state to acknowledge a problem, says Michael Dembrow, president of the Portland Community College Faculty Federation, a local of full- and part-time faculty. At the hearings in March, he and others described unsuccessful efforts to reduce trends of increased reliance on contingent faculty and the decline of full-time faculty lines. The goal of the new legislation, he offered, is to take "a global approach and set benchmarks for improvement."

"AFT’s work on the Faculty and College Excellence Act was definitely a key consideration for development of the Post-Secondary Quality Education Model," Gov. Kulongski told AFT On Campus. "Building a quality post-secondary education in Oregon must include how we utilize and properly compensate faculty."

Canadian court protects bargaining

The Supreme Court of Canada this summer issued a landmark labor decision, ruling that the right to bargain collectively is protected as an exercise of freedom of association, which is guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Canadian Charter is the equivalent of the American Bill of Rights.

The court decision overturns an interpretation that had governed since 1987, when the court ruled that under the Canadian constitution, citizens have the right to form unions, but not the right to bargain or to strike.

The case before the court, called Health Services and Support-Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association v. British Columbia, involved public health sector unions in British Columbia that sued over a 2002 statute which changed provisions in their negotiated contracts in order to reduce employers’ labor costs. The provisions affected contracting out, and layoff and bumping procedures.

At the same time the health unions sued, the education sector began legal proceedings against the British Columbia government for a similar law, the Public Education Flexibility and Choice Act, says David Robinson, associate executive director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers.

The court ruled, first, that collective bargaining is protected under freedom of association and, second, that such protection obligates the employer to bargain in good faith—i.e., to meet, to commit time to the process and to engage in meaningful dialogue that is aimed at reaching an acceptable agreement.

"Recognizing that workers have the right to bargain collectively as part of their freedom to associate reaffirms the values of dignity, personal autonomy, equality and democracy that are inherent in the Charter," the court wrote.

The Canadian unions that sued are dropping their challenge to the education statute, says Robinson, because they believe the government will have to withdraw it. Not coincidentally, Robinson adds, the Ontario government announced that it would review its labor legislation and allow part-time faculty to unionize. "For us in higher ed and in the union movement as a whole, the court’s decision is a huge victory," he says.

"Three cheers for Canada," says David Strom, AFT general counsel. "Our Supreme Court rejected an extension of the right to association under the First Amendment to include collective bargaining in the 1970s. Constitutions are by definition broad and vague, which is why the orientation of the justices and the sense of natural law in the country is so important."