A. Estimates about the “union advantage” vary, but on average unionized workers earn about 10-15% more than non-unionized workers. In a 2020 report, the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute found the average wage difference to be about 11% in addition to improved benefits. This is an average and will vary according to specific workplaces and work sectors. Unions also help close gender and racial wage gaps at workplaces (read more at the U.S. Department of Labor website), suggesting that unions could help Washington College achieve some of the DEI objectives in our own strategic plan. Additionally, unionized workers are more likely to stay, creating a more stable workplace and reducing the costs associated with turnover and searches.

The college’s financial difficulties are real, and we should not expect that unionization will automatically bring a major jump in our pay or benefits. Nevertheless, a union can significantly strengthen our influence over priorities in the budget and, thus, keep us from falling farther behind in those areas. 

A. The message from administrators, unfortunately, has been that a faculty union would create or reinforce “factions” between different groups of workers at Washington College. There is no reason why a union should be divisive or exacerbate differences. The faculty strongly believe that the staff do important work to support student learning, student life, and the overall smooth operation of the college. We are not, and have never been, interested in advocating for faculty interests at the expense of staff. We would like to see all employees be supported and thriving. Unionization is simply a way to equip workers with strong legal means to protect their rights as employees. It’s only divisive because one side desperately wants to prevent it. They’re afraid that it threatens their “flexibility” with regard to wages, outsourcing, or similar moves. Of course it is true that sometimes institutions need to make tough decisions–unionization won’t necessarily stop that. But a union can make sure that workers get a stronger voice in how those tough decisions are made.

A. When workers unionize, it is important to remember that we – the workers – are the union. We care deeply about the college, we want the college to thrive, and we will not advocate for things that would cause harm. Remember, many faculty and staff work here for ten, twenty, or more years. We are here for the long haul. There are many ways that unions can improve transparency, accountability, and decision-making that are good for institutions and that also make them more fair and equitable workplaces.

We have endured many years of administrative turnover and top-down decisions that have harmed employees and the college – bloated salaries and large severance payouts to former top-level administrators, unrealistic enrollment projections, unfunded/underfunded initiatives, lack of investment in marketing and communication, and more. We believe that we are moving in a positive direction on some of these issues, but we also believe that unionization would stabilize and improve college governance over the long run.

A. First, not all employers oppose unions, but many do. The primary reason why many employers oppose unions is that unions require employers to share some control over workplace conditions. Unions give workers a seat at the negotiating table, make workplaces more democratic, and empower workers to advocate for salary equity, cost of living adjustments, and other benefits. Unions also hold employers accountable to violations of agreements.

This interview published in the Harvard Business Review with Thomas Kochan, professor of management at MIT, suggests that employers should see unionization as an opportunity to build stronger workplace partnerships. Here is some advice he gives to managers: 

“THOMAS KOCHAN: First advice is don’t take it personally. It’s not the fact that they’re just upset with you and that it’s a personal failure if workers organize. That’s I think a natural psychological reaction, but it’s the wrong one. We’re seeing this too widespread to view it as just going after failed managers. It’s what workers expect today and what good management needs to provide.

“Second thing is get over this silly notion, “Well, it’s just some outside third-party that’s coming in here as a union that’s going to get in the way of my interactions with individual employees.” That’s managerial, anti-union rhetoric that the consultants and the lawyers are spewing to try to suppress unionization. But it doesn’t work anymore. The workers are looking for their own voice, as we’ve said.

“So the third piece of advice then is learn how to manage. Ask how you manage collective groups. Shift from union avoidance to how do we build successful employment relationships with a union, or with some other collective group, or whatever is out there? But be more agile in the managerial approaches that we take. And if we do that, then we can help shape a new era of employee and labor management relations that works for all stakeholders in our society, and that we so badly need to model how we can overcome these deep, deep divisions we see in society. In our politics, in our civic interactions in the community, in our race relations, and in our workplaces. So that’s the job of the modern executives, the modern managers is to learn how to manage these kinds of tensions, these kinds of conflicts with respect. And to use them as a healing mechanism in their organizations and in society, but also as a way to build a more productive, resilient, and inclusive and equitable economy.” 

A. Unionization strengthens shared governance and supports shared governance structures. From AAUP: “The emphasis of AAUP unions on the primacy of members and local autonomy grows out of our basic commitment to the freedom and creativity that collegial self-governance makes possible. That is why local AAUP unions defend traditional forms of collective self-governance such as those embodied in faculty senates. Strong senates and strong union chapters can work together to establish the institutional terrain and precedents on which individual rights are defined, defended, and sometimes adjudicated. Contract articles that provide for individual rights, enforceable grievance procedures, and transparent compensation packages are desirable and necessary on the modern campus. But basing our efforts on a commitment to academic freedom also means that we view collective bargaining agreements as an effective means of protecting the faculty’s independence in governance—for example, by incorporating senate regulations.” 

In other words, the faculty would have broad leeway in deciding how best to work union governance structures into its existing committee structures. Faculty Council, for instance, could contain or indeed become AAUP leadership and its remit, as well as the process for selecting its members, would remain largely unchanged. Alternatively, we could create an AAUP Executive Committee that would be separate from, but would work closely with, Faculty Council and other relevant committees.

For more information, see “Protecting Shared Governance Through Collective Bargaining: Models Used by AAUP Chapters” (2016) by Michael Mauer, Esq., AAUP Senior Labor Advisor.

A. Because of a 1980 Supreme Court case known as NLRB v. Yeshiva University, tenure-line faculty and faculty librarians at private colleges face legal obstacles to unionization. The reason our unit includes this group is because this is the group that has barriers to unionization that we must contend with. There are fewer, less significant legal obstacles for staff, non-tenure line faculty, or contingent faculty. We encourage and support those groups to unionize if they wish to do so! 

A. There are (at least) two pathways to NTT/contingent faculty unionization: 1) if AAUP-WC succeeds in our unionization effort, the unit could be expanded to include NTT/contingent faculty, or 2) NTT/contingent faculty can organize their own bargaining unit. Under AAUP guidelines it is in NTT/contingent faculty’s best interests to be protected under their own bargaining unit. AAUP does provide guidelines for organizing NTT/contingent faculty and the faculty-led Union Working Group is fully committed to assisting NTT/contingent faculty in organizing. Several private colleges and universities in our region – including Maryland Institute College of Art (MICA) and American University – have staff and NTT unions with SEIU (Service Employees International Union). 

A. Because of the unique barriers to unionization that tenure-line faculty and faculty librarians face at private colleges like ours, it is best for staff to pursue unionization as a separate bargaining unit. Whether we succeed in our unionization effort or not, members of the faculty-led AAUP-WC chapter are willing to assist staff if they wish to explore unionization and help staff to organize. Several private colleges and universities in our region – including Maryland Institute College of Art (MICA) and American University – have staff unions with SEIU (Service Employees International Union). Please reach out to us anytime you’d like assistance or if you just want to talk more. The best way to reach us is at aaupwc@gmail.com.

A. Unionization does not impact the content (curriculum, course planning, etc.) of academic work life, it structures and protects the labor conditions of academic work life (mainly salaries and benefits). Unionism, in particular AAUP unionism, is predicated on four primary principles: 1) a commitment to academic freedom and shared governance; 2) local autonomy; 3) an emphasis on organizing; and 4) dedication to organizational democracy. 

A. The Yeshiva decision resulted in two major criteria for the determination of whether or not a faculty body has the right to unionize: religious affiliation and managerial status. Washington College, as a secular institution, does not need to worry about the first criteria. The second, however, might provide some obstacles. 

“Managerial status” is determined according to whether or not the faculty have substantial (“actual and effective”) control over five major criteria: (1) Academic programs; (2) Enrollment policies; (3) Financial policies; (4) Personnel policies; and (5) Academic policies. Substantial control is a bit vague but can mean, for example, that the major decision-making bodies affiliated with these criteria are staffed by a majority of faculty, that faculty decisions are final on matters of policy and cannot be challenged or overturned by senior administration or the Board, or that faculty can set policy for the entire College and not simply their department. The case that we are not management appears to be quite strong for criteria 2-5 (in the case of academic policy, there is no faculty body that sets e.g. syllabi for the whole college; these types of decisions are made by department), but the criterion “Academic programs” may provide a challenge for us. 

It is also true that organizing is challenging: not everyone will agree on everything, and the tactics used by administration to dissuade people from unionizing can be persuasive or frightening. If we unionize, we will need to be prepared to meet these challenges as a unified faculty and to be as transparent as we can with one another about our fears and about any retaliatory tactics used against individual faculty members or departments. 

A. It is illegal for an employer to retaliate against workers who are trying to unionize. Unfortunately, some employers retaliate anyway, but we have the right to expect that our college would not engage in such behavior, especially given our recent endorsements of campus free expression. We have also been informed that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is now imposing tougher sanctions and oversight on this issue. Since the passage of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) in 1935, workers have had the right to vote on whether or not to unionize. This right was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1937.