Faculty Collective Bargaining: Fact Sheet
Patrick B. Shaw, Esq., Associate Secretary
American Association of University Professors
I. The Numbers* and the Legal Landscape.
A. The Public Sector.
Regulated by state law. A few more than half the states have enacted laws enabling higher education
faculty to bargain collectively.
---About 325,000 faculty are represented in collective bargaining.
---Another 60,000 graduate student employees have union representation.
---About 125,000 faculty at public, four-year institutions are unionized.
B. The Private Sector.
Regulated by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and its administering agency the National Labor
Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB first asserted jurisdiction over not-for-profit institutions of higher education in
1970. Faculty unionization in private institutions proceeded apace until 1980 when the U.S. Supreme Court issued its
decision in NLRB v. Yeshiva University wherein it held that faculty who participate in institutional decisions (e.g.
academic policy; faculty personnel matters) are “managerial employees” and thus not covered by the NLRA. Less
than a handful of faculty unions have unionized under the NLRA since this decision.
---About 11,000 private sector faculty are represented in collective bargaining at about 60 institutions.
II. Partial List of Public Universities at Which Faculty are Represented in Collective Bargaining.
University of Alaska; California State University; UC-Santa Cruz; University of Delaware; University of
Florida; University of Hawaii; Southern Illinois University; Western Michigan University; Eastern Michigan
University; Wayne State University; University of Montana; the New England state universities (Connecticut; Maine;
Massachusetts; New Hampshire; Vermont; Rhode Island); State University of New York (including the medical
schools); City University of New York; Temple University; University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey;
Rutgers University. Ohio universities: University of Cincinnati; Kent State University; University of Toledo; Wright
State University; Cleveland State University; and University of Akron.
III. Common Misapprehensions about Faculty Bargaining.
Collective bargaining:
---will usurp faculty governance;
---levels salaries regardless of discipline;
---is inherently adversarial;
---is unprofessional;
---is characterized by inflexibility.
*
The most comprehensive and authoritative data regarding faculty bargaining, from which these statistics are drawn, are assembled and analyzed
by the National Center for the Study of Collective Bargaining in Higher Education and the Professions, Hunter College, City University of New
York (http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/ncscbhep/).
IV. Examples of Contract Language Pertaining to Faculty Professional Issues. **
A. Academic Freedom.
---University of Rhode Island (excerpt): “Academic freedom has been defined and codified in a statement of
principles that was prepared by representatives of the American Association of University Professors and the
Association of American Colleges. Adopted by both organizations in 1941 and later endorsed by many other
professional and learned societies, it is known as the "The 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and
Tenure. The Board and the University of Rhode Island unconditionally endorse the 1940 Statement, including the
following pertinent passages: [text from the AAUP’s 1940 Statement].”
---University of Cincinnati : AAUP’s 1940 Statement. See, Article 3 (Academic Safeguards and
Responsibilities) at http://www.aaupuc.org/0407contract.pdf.
B. Shared Governance.
---Kent State University: Governance rights, responsibilities, and procedures incorporated into the collective
bargaining agreement and enforceable through the contract grievance-arbitration procedure. See, Article 6
(Governance) at http://www.aaupksu.org/AAUP-KSU_TT_Folder/indexContent/2008_TT_CBA_Final.pdf.
---University of Delaware: The parties agree that the Board of Trustees, the University Administration, and the
University Faculty Senate upon approval by the Administration and the Board, have undiminished power and
authority to establish, change or eliminate policies. The parties also agree that the privileges of the faculty provided
in the Trustee Bylaws to advise upon proposed policy and to recommend policy also remain undiminished. In
pursuance of these powers and privileges the parties agree that all proposals by the University Administration to
establish, change or eliminate University-wide policies which govern the practices enumerated in section 17.1 of this
Article shall be submitted in advance to the Executive Committee of the University Faculty Senate for referral to the
appropriate faculty review committee and subsequent Senate action before final Administration action. The Faculty
Senate shall act upon each proposal within sixty (60) days following its submission to the Executive Committee of
the Faculty Senate. Failure to act within sixty (60) days shall be considered as Faculty Senate concurrence with the
proposal. The parties further agree that recommendations to establish, change or eliminate policies which are
initiated by the University Faculty Senate and require Trustee approval should be submitted by the University
Administration to the next scheduled meeting of the appropriate Trustee committee provided such recommendations
are submitted to the University Administration at least thirty (30) days prior to such Trustee Committee meeting.
The University Administration agrees to inform the President of the University Faculty Senate as to the action taken
on such recommendations within fifteen (15) days of the Board of Trustees meeting.
C. Promotion and Tenure
Invariably too detailed to present. Examples that can be found on-line include: Western Michigan University,
http://www.wmuaaup.net/files/2008-11_Contract.pdf, pp.37-51; University of Rhode Island,
http://www.ele.uri.edu/aaup/facultycontract2007-2010.pdf, pp. 22-29; University of Cincinnati, pp. 18-31; Kent State
University, http://www.aaupksu.org/AAUP-KSU_TT_Folder/indexContent/2008_TT_CBA_Final.pdf, pp. 48, 84120.
**
Caveat. Without knowing the context of negotiations, the relationship of the parties to the negotiations and their
respective priorities, one must be careful in drawing conclusions from an excerpt from a collective bargaining
agreement (although it is the case that certain provisions do stand on their own, typically including those regarding
professional matters, but not regarding salary and benefits).