PrintMany faculty in Florida will start fall classes this year with two certainties: (1) Their union contracts are tailored more specifically to their local concerns than ever before, and (2) the state Constitution trumps the whims of politicians bent on denying faculty their rights. That knowledge is particularly comforting; until last spring, they were unsure they’d have contracts at all.
During two years of turmoil, in which the governor eliminated the state board of regents (the body with which United Faculty of Florida/AFT/NEA negotiated for faculty at all 11 state institutions), negotiations were handled by individual boards of trustees, and faculty contracts were up in the air. The board of governors, which replaced the board of regents, argued that as the new employer it was not bound by the UFF contract. The UFF protested to the Florida labor board, which ruled in favor of the state.
But in February, in what UFF executive director Steve Weinberger calls a “ferocious” decision, the district court of appeals wrote, “State government cannot ... unilaterally terminate its obligations under a collective bargaining agreement simply by reorganizing the Executive Branch, where the employees affected perform the same work, in the same jobs, under the same supervisors, by operating the same facilities, carrying on the same enterprise, providing the same service.”
Then on July 27, the Florida Supreme Court officially restored collective bargaining rights by refusing to hear an appeal of the district court’s unanimous decision. This action has “real significance for faculty,” says UFF president Tom Auxter. “It means that their rights have a legal foundation that cannot be altered capriciously by politicians.”
In many ways, the upheaval has strengthened the union. More than 70 percent of the faculty at all 11 campuses signed cards to reauthorize UFF as their local bargaining agent. In a forced election at Florida State University, approval for the union soared to 96 percent. Localized negotiations have engaged more members and served them more directly, and membership has increased by one-third across the state. “Now we are negotiating strong contracts on each campus and have no desire to turn back,” says Auxter.
On the other hand, “we expect full compensation for what faculty have been through,” he adds. “We intend to find a remedy of every right that was illegally denied to faculty during this period and to collect on every resource that was illegally withheld.”
“For the long term, we’re actually better off with local agreements,” Weinberger points out. “The master contract we had with the board of regents was one-size-fits-all, and it did not reflect issues both operational and cultural that existed at local campuses.”
The University of Florida is the only campus that had refused to recognize the union, despite a 72 percent card signing. That’s one loose end that the high court decision should tie up.
Librarians prevail on Patriot Act
Librarians cheered a series of congressional votes this summer that will limit FBI access to library lending records. The votes came in July as Congress extended most of the expiring provisions of the USA Patriot Act.
One amendment to the U.S. Justice Department spending bill for FY 2006 was offered by Rep. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) and passed the U.S. House of Representatives 238 to 167. The amendment is modeled after the Freedom To Read Protection Act and will limit FBI access to library records for one year.
Another amendment to H.R. 3199, the House bill extending the Patriot Act, will limit FBI access to bookstore as well as library records and requires the FBI director’s personal approval. The U.S. Senate’s equivalent bill, S. 1389, includes these limitations and also requires the FBI director’s approval of requests to look at medical and firearms records.
Noting the “chilling effect” that Patriot Act measures have had on patrons interested in borrowing controversial material from libraries, many college and university librarians have become key players in this issue. Among them is Patty Bentley, chapter president of United University Professions/AFT and a board member of the New York State United Teachers. A reference instruction librarian at the State University of New York-Plattsburgh, she was instrumental in organizing the “We the People” campaign through the unions of NYSUT, UUP, the Professional Staff Congress/AFT (at the City University of New York) and the state community colleges. The campaign had schools and colleges statewide hosting panel discussions and displays about protecting the First Amendment and privacy rights, as well as questioning the Patriot Act.
Rep.Sanders was in part prompted to offer his amendment after reading a letter from Vermont librarians, initiated by United Academics/AAUP/AFT member Trina Magi, a reference librarian at the University of Vermont.
The AFT has kept a close vigil to guard against Patriot Act violations of civil liberties, and the union passed a resolution at the 2004 AFT convention to protest the invasion of privacy wrought by broad federal access to personal records.
“Although the amendments to S. 1389 and H.R. 3199 do not go as far as the Freedom To Read Protection Act by banning all access to these records, they represent movement toward that objective,” says AFT department of legislation assistant director Matthew Morrison.The AFT lobbied senators and representatives to ensure that our policy resolution was taken into account as the legislation was drafted.
