MSU faculty considers unionizing

By GAIL SCHONTZLER Chronicle Staff Writer, February 17, 2008

It looked like a class on Union Organizing 101. Yet it wasn't students but professors who clambered last week into the seats of a Reid Hall lecture classroom.

The weekly Faculty Senate meeting had attracted about 75 people, twice the usual crowd, eager to hear arguments for and against forming an MSU faculty union.

It's almost 20 years since the last attempt at unionization failed by a 2-to-1 vote. Similar efforts failed in the late 1970s and 1950s.

Today, MSU is the last Montana state campus without a faculty union. The MEA-MFT, the state's largest union, representing 17,000 teachers and state employees, is spending thousands of dollars to try to bring the Bozeman campus into its fold.
Union leaders are hoping that MSU's faculty, long known for a conservative bent, has finally reached a tipping point.

"Frankly, the bottom line for us in the room is we're almost at the bottom of the barrel nationally in how much we're paid," history professor Billy Smith, who was active in the last union effort, told the Faculty Senate.

MEA-MFT leaders made their pitch and talked about the benefits of a union at the cross-state rival University of Montana. An MSU economist presented a counter-argument.

Eric Burke, MEA-MFT executive director, said the union negotiates employee pay raises with the governor before each legislative session, and this spring will negotiate with the Board of Regents, so that "your pay is a first thought, not an afterthought."

The union, he said, has fought bills threatening academic freedom, last session won passage of a 1 percent increase in the state contribution to faculty retirement, and generally gives members a more powerful voice.

UM professor Mike Kupilik, head of the University Faculty Association union in Missoula, said the contract has widely distributed pay raises, spelled out promotion and tenure rules, won one-time raises for gender equity, given the Faculty Senate "more teeth" and even set aside $604,000 a year for regular upgrading of faculty computers.

MSU economics professor Doug Young presented evidence on the other side. National economic studies have concluded that unions achieved "at best" only a small percentage gain in salary, he said.

On an overhead projector, Young put up figures showing the average salary for a full professor is actually $2,300 higher at the Bozeman campus than at the Missoula campus ($76,200 vs. $73,900 in 2007, according to figures from the American Association of University Professors).

If a union is being sold based on the notion that it would increase the total money available for salaries, Young said, "It hasn't happened so far.

"There doesn't appear to be any advantage to being unionized."

Winners and losers

Union supporters were quick to argue that using averages doesn't show how the money is distributed. A union contact makes a big difference in how the two campuses hand out raises.

At UM, every faculty member evaluated by their bosses as having done a good job ("met expectations") gets what the union contract calls a "normal pay raise." This academic year, that meant a 3 percent raise.

In addition, UM's contract allows faculty members to apply for one of 80 merit raises ($2,250 a year added to base pay). Promotions bring pay raises of $2,500 for associate professor and $5,000 for full professors.

At MSU, there's no such thing as an automatic cost-of-living raise. Every MSU faculty member is evaluated according to individual job performance, the job market in that field, equity, promotion and the minimum salary "floor" for the job.

As a result, many Bozeman faculty members get more than the average raise, but a larger number get less. This year, MSU's raises ranged from less than 1 percent to 20.5 percent, according to a list of faculty salaries from the Montana commissioner of higher education's office.

Only about 26 MSU faculty members received a 3 percent raise, the same as UM's normal raise. About 200 MSU profs got more than 3 percent. Another 363 got less.

Another 446 MSU adjunct instructors, who teach on short-term contracts, and research faculty were listed as getting zero raises.

"We on this campus do try to reward professors who perform the best," said Shannon Taylor, a business professor and chair of MSU's Faculty Senate. "When we do that, some get relatively high (raises). It means somebody does not get as much."

Franke Wilmer, MSU political science professor, said at MSU professors who are doing their jobs cannot expect a cost-of-living raise.

"They have to compete with the rock stars," she said. A union would bring, Wilmer said, "more transparency, more fairness and improve morale."

One-third signed up

"This is why we're having a lot of success on campus," said Melissa Case, MEA-MFT organizing director. MSU faculty feel "they don't have a voice, they don't know what happened" to their raises.

Case has been working with union representative Annie Glover since September to organize an MSU faculty union and persuade MSU faculty members to sign cards saying they want to be represented by the MEA-MFT. Once 30 percent have signed, the union can file for an election.

"We have over one-third of the faculty," Case said. "We're putting more boots on the ground" to increase the organizing effort. "Our goal is 60 percent. ... We won't file unless we have a real clear indication it will be successful."

Burke said he wants an election by the end of spring semester.

One key to the outcome could be who gets to vote n specifically, whether adjuncts can vote.

Adjuncts include everyone from the local attorney who moonlights teaching an occasional sociology class to instructors who have taught full-time for decades and fill vital roles at MSU, yet have no chance at tenure and little job security.

MSU's 229 adjuncts make up 35.5 percent of the teaching faculty, according to the university planning and analysis office.

The UM faculty union's Kupilik said Missoula's contract covers adjunct instructors who teach at least half-time for two semesters. They received this year's 3 percent raise.

Marvin Lansverk, MSU professor, said the last time the Bozeman campus held a union vote, adjuncts weren't allowed to vote. This time, they can, he said, "which changes everything."

Provost Dave Dooley, MSU's No. 2 administrator after President Geoff Gamble, attended the Faculty Senate meeting.

"The actual composition of the bargaining unit is subject to challenge," Dooley said. "MSU reserves the right (to challenge) if it thinks it is not in the best interests of the university or faculty."

Whether the administration would fight efforts to include adjuncts, Dooley said, is not certain.

Gamble, asked before the meeting if he would recommend against a union, said, "It's a matter for the faculty to decide."

Gamble has always stressed "shared governance," including faculty, other employees and students in decision-making. Every year, he said, there's a "rich discussion" between the provost and faculty leaders about the best approach to distributing raises.

"I hear some grumbling n not very much, actually," Gamble said.

The Faculty Senate meeting was civil, although Dooley did seem irked when union leader Burke stated that the MEA-MFT was the only group that stood up before legislators to fight for the retirement increase. Dooley protested that administrators were constrained (by the University System agreement with the governor not to raise student tuition) from seeking more funds.

"We did a lot behind the scenes," Dooley said.

Are things bad enough?

Emotions, philosophy and the high cost of housing could play a big role in the success or failure of the union effort.

Young said most of the research on faculty unions has found that the main cause of unionization is low morale.

"People are pissed," Young said, typically at the administration.

A classic example is Missoula. Kupilik said in 1977, in the midst of a severe financial crisis, administrators went to the faculty, said "We're in trouble," and asked for ideas. The faculty came back with a proposal. It was ignored, and 61 newer faculty members were laid off, he said. The next year they formed a union.

MSU doesn't seem to have that level of anger.

"Are things bad enough it's going to change?" Lansverk asked. "In a lot of ways, shared governance has improved."

"People are more satisfied now than in '89," Smith agreed.

But, he added, many faculty members still see the union as a change to increase the quality of education, faculty empowerment and possibly salaries.

Some professors dislike unions. In answer to several skeptical questions at the Faculty Senate, union representatives said that union dues are typically 1 percent of salary. If people don't want to join the union, they may have to pay a "representation fee" if it's bargained into the contract, and that fee typically costs 90 percent of regular dues.

It's illegal for the union to spend dues money on candidates or political action, Burke said. But it does ask members for contributions to a separate fund for political work.

Maureen Weiland, an ASMSU student senator, asked what impact a faculty union would have on students. Kupilik said the contract gives students power and guarantees they serve on committees, even including the administration's contract bargaining team.

In answer to a question from one scientist, Kupilik said the contract had "absolutely" no effect on faculty pay from grants. It doesn't keep faculty from using a job offer from another university to negotiate higher pay at MSU, and does allow market pay adjustments, he said.

No one would predict whether this union effort would succeed or fail.

"I think there is frustration among a lot of faculty," Taylor said. "It's difficult getting into real estate in the valley" especially for younger faculty. "(But) I'm not so sure a union would solve it."

"This is the most positive (reaction) we've ever seen," Burke said.