An alert EMUTalk.org reader sent me this link late last night: from the Detroit News, “Oakland University professors OK strike.” It is hard for me to tell from the article if this is just part of the annual Kabuki dance of contract negotiations (the faculty always authorize a strike if things are still not resolved, and they are never resolved early, unfortunately) or if it really means a strike at Oakland U is imminent. The Oakland U president of the AAUP chapter, Joel Russell, is quoted as saying “It’s never looked worse in the entire time we’ve been bargaining since 1972,” but again, that’s part of the genre of negotiation talks, too.
Here’s a quote that seems to summarize the issues on the table:
Among the issues on the bargaining table are details of how the medical school will be integrated into the contract, cuts in summer pay, no new increases in salary, elimination of some health insurance plans, hiring of non-tenure track faculty and elimination of research leaves, according to the union.
Let’s hope it all works out for our colleagues slightly to the north, and let’s keep an eye on how this turns out for them.
Update: It looks like the OU faculty walked out. Here’s a message EMU-AAUP president Susan Moeller forwarded on from Howard Bunsis, who is the chair of the Collective Bargaining Congress of the National AAUP and the EMU-AAUP Treasurer.
Oakland University AAUP is on Strike
At 7:30 AM this morning, September 3, 2009, the AAUP chapter at Oakland University in Michigan officially went on strike. We at the CBC strongly support their action. In fact, there were AAUP faculty members from Eastern Michigan University, Western Michigan University, and Wayne State University supporting the Oakland AAUP at last night’s chapter meeting, where a strike authorization vote was overwhelmingly supported by the Oakland University faculty.
The Oakland University AAUP fully understands that even though the State of Michigan is struggling economically, Oakland University is in extremely strong financial position. Rudy Fichtenbaum, the treasurer of the CBC, made a presentation yesterday concerning the financial situation of Oakland, which clearly demonstrated that Oakland is striving in the current economic environment.
The issues that led to the strike are as follows:
• The administration’s desire to gut or even completely eliminate all governance provisions from the contract
• The administration’s desire to hire significant numbers of faculty on a fixed term, non-tenure track basis
• A refusal to disclose information regarding a proposed medical school
• On health care, the imposition of what is called “healthy living choices,” where faculty who are deemed obese, smokers, or drinkers have to submit to certain conditions or face significantly higher health care costs.
• A salary freeze proposed by the administration, which, when combined with the health care provisions, leads to a significant pay cut being offered to the facultyWe will continue to monitor the situation at Oakland University. For now, lets all make sure we support the faculty as they stand up for the rights and interest of the AAUP. You can check out the Oakland AAUP website at http://www.oaklandaaup.org/default.asp for updates.
If I had a child in Oakland I’d pull them out. Doesn’t the “professors” take the time to read the newspapers? They remind me of the politicians in Washington. They evidently have crossed over from highly educated to the dumbest of the dumb.
Well, two things to keep in mind, C. Lewis:
* Of the issues at hand, pay raises seem to be one of the more minor issues.
* With enrollments up, keep in mind that the “business” of higher education is not the same as what’s going on in auto manufacturing.
I am quite sure that many EMU folks– administrators, EMU-AAUP negotiators, regents, etc.– will keep an eye on the events at Oakland U. It’ll be interesting to see how it turns out.
Eastern is still able to admit students for fall… in case any frustrated OU students are reading this…
I think the healthy living insurance is a good idea. If you’re going to be dependent on your employer to pay for your insurance, you should pay more to have that insurance if you don’t live a healthy lifestyle. If you don’t like that, then get private insurance and pay for it entirely out of pocket……or go on a diet and stop smoking.
It’s a tough call, Math Geek. It’s kind of hard to define “healthy living.” Depending on how you define it (BMI, for example), I’m “obese;” but I work out four or five days a week (just got back from a 11.5 mile bike ride). Would I get dinged for being fat? How much drinking is “too much” according to the insurance people? I mean, there’s lots of studies that say a couple glasses of red wine a day are quite good for you, but there are others that say if you drink every day and/or if you drink more than 6 drinks in a week you may have a “problem.” And on and on.
So IMO, a better strategy would be something like incentives to be healthy instead of penalties. Instead of charging more for insurance for being fat, how about paying people something to join a gym, a weight loss program, and/or if they lose weight? How about paying for programs to help people to quit smoking? And so forth.
I agree. I think it’s hard to define what “healthy” is. I think moderate expectations could be set, though. It’s been well established that smoking isn’t good for your health and if you weigh 350lbs, it’s probably not that great either.
I think incentives are a good alternative, but what about people who already live a “healthy” lifestyle? Do they get a bounce back for never starting smoking or already having a gym membership?
Be very worried Math Geek that your employer may go well beyond asking you to step on a scale or give up those smokes. There is a very slippery slope you are heading towards, just because you are satisfied that your habits are healthier than those of your colleagues. How would you like EMU to start making inquiries into where you may be traveling this year? There are some very unhealthy parts of the world, very unhealthy parts of the US. How about EMU making inquiries about who your sexual partners are–and who their sexual partners were? Chaste faculty and staff shouldn’t be worrying about your getting an STD. Would it be ok for EMU to investigate how you drive? No one wants to pay for the injuries you might incur driving recklessly. Yes smoking and cookies are very bad. I suspect that you may do some things that are bad for you as well. Even if you don’t. Are you willing to risk all of your privacy to prove your virtue?
I think there is a difference between unhealthy lifestyles and taking a trip to an “unhealthy” part of the world. All I’m saying is, be prepared to pay a higher price, submit to what they are asking or get private insurance. I recently had to take a physical to lower my health insurance deductible. I wasn’t thrilled about taking time off of work for it, or having to give a blood sample (I hate needles), but it was do that, or shell out an extra $1,000 if I have an emergency.
I don’t think weight and cigarette use are an invasion of privacy. I can walk down the hallway and point out who’s overweight and I can walk outside the back door at PH and tell you who the smokers are. If someone wants to follow me around everywhere I drive, go ahead, I could use a lower deductible on my auto insurance.