University of Washington faculty members may be organized, but they’re not unionized, a circumstance that may change in the wake of deep budget and program cuts at our state’s premier university.
As you set about making drastic cuts to the programs you have worked so hard to build and maintain, the thought may cross your mind: However we are advocating for the UW in Olympia now, has failed. AAUP-UW invites you to consider whether and how a unionized UW faculty could be a stronger voice, not only for ourselves, but for the institution to which we are so committed.
That was from American Association of University Professors UW Chapter President Janelle Taylor, in an email inviting members to attend a panel discussion, “Faculty Unionization: Does It Make Sense for Us?”, next Tuesday, 4:30PM at the UW Club. Panelists will include Prof. Lisa Klein of Rutgers University, and Prof. William Lyne of Western Washington University, “both of whom have extensive experience with faculty unionization.”
The message I keep hearing from university faculty is that it takes years and years, and a substantial financial investment, to build a successful academic program… but it only takes a single stroke of a red ink to destroy it. No wonder resistance to unionization appears to be wearing thin in the face of unprecedented cuts.
Smart people, help me with the logic here. So if the faculty were unionized, the next time we experienced the greatest national economic meltdown since the great depression, the university wouldn’t need to make any cuts, like other state institutions have to do?
Troll–
Kind of sounds like Goldy believes if they unionize, more taxpayer money will miraculously appear! I suppose they can strike…or quit if they feel the system is so bad. None of them will quit those cushy jobs.
Goldy, what is it you are saying here?
How will unionizing create a more cost-effective higher ed system.
How will unionizing “help the young adults”?
(Can’t say kids cuz virtually all are over 18.)
I’m not saying anything. But I believe the argument is that unionization would enable faculty to better advocate for themselves, their students and their institution.
Isn’t, pretty much, everyone else at the U. union? I can’t see how adding faculty to the list would be the end of the world.
Of course, I sympathize with the U.W. faculty and students, and I’m all for unions, but every other public entity around here is taking cuts and I don’t see how they can expect the U.W. to be exempt. Their complaining has a certain amount of spoiled-brat-whining flavor to it, and it’s not very smart from a PR standpoint. The only thing such whining will accomplish is to turn the public against them.
It’s interesting to me that faculty at UW and at other 4 years can use the state computers to advocate for unionization, but current exempt staff at 4 year institutions cannot use state equipment for the same purpose.
By the way, faculty unionized become selfish and just use whatever contract they’ve mustered to tie the hands of the institution and claim that they have no room to “give” anything back.
Everyone else takes it in the shorts in these budget cuts. Ultimately it will be the students who notice a poorer campus.
It gives laid off workers a heck of a lot more time to campaign for completely different representatives besides the mindless party drones on both sides of the aisle we obviously have now in the state legislature.
re 1: “Smart people, help me with the logic here.”
Finally! An oblique admission that you are a dope!
Here, let me help you understand. The financial crises of 1896, 1929, and 2008 were caused by anti-union right wing cranks with more money than brains.
You see, unions enable people (all people) to get better wages so that they can afford to buy the goods that manufacturers make. When you have a business and government that actively destroys unions, you create a situation wherein wages stagnate, jobs move offshore to slave-labor countries, and they take their cheaply made foreign goods and sell them for top dollar.
But, low and behold, there comes a time when people can bo longer afford to buy things — so they don’t.
And the economy crashes.
@3 Would it? I mean the UW has lobbyists already and its not like they don’t really have the faculties interest in mind. Lots of staff at the UW are unionized and its not like they have fared better.
Unions don’t really make sense for professional type jobs.
@7 Are faculty really underpaid?
re 5: Perhaps, in addition to the swimming program, they could cut the chess and debating teams? This will save a ton!!
If they really want to save money, they should eliminate the football and basketball programs. And don’t give me the BS that those programs pay their own way. They don’t.
Not unless they are paying the bills for the construction and maintenance of the facilities taxpayers built for them.
@9 Those programs are the only ones that run a profit and they subsidize all the other sports. Football for example costs about 17 million a year and brings in 37 million. That extra 20 millions pays for other sports.
If each sport had to support itself that profit of 20 million could easily build a nice new stadium every now and then.
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/In.....343520504d
Isn’t UW a state funded university?
If the faculty there doesn’t trust the government to do the right thing and needs to form a union to protect themselves, why should non-government funded citizens trust the government.
Hey, here’s the right guy for the UW Elite to hire for raising extra money. This KLOWN can raise millions outta thin air!
Former Democratic Fundraiser to Plead Guilty in New York City
The 58-year-old Norman Hsu was indicted in 2007 on charges of cheating investors of at least $20 million in what prosecutors say was a huge Ponzi scheme
AP
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Hey SJ—visit this guy in prison. Bring him some smokes and he’ll probably give you his scheme recipe!
And Goldy–
This guy could be the answer to all the Washington State Budget problems!
oswald, AKA headless lucy is a racist.
Looking at a picture of the basketball team it’s obvious why headless picked the basketball program to scrap.
After all it’s not as if headless picked the lacrosse team or the water polo team.
@12
Talk about old news. How come you never mention all of those Repug congress critters who indicted/convicted during the Bush years?
Not old at all.
He just admitted he was guilty guilty guilty guilty guilty guilty guilty guilty guilty guilty.
Ex-Democratic fundraiser pleads guilty in NYC
By LARRY NEUMEISTER – 3 hours ago
NEW YORK (AP) — Former top Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu pleaded guilty in federal court Thursday to charges he cheated investors out of at least $20 million in a massive Ponzi scheme.
The 58-year-old Hsu (SHOO) pleaded guilty to 10 counts of wire and mail fraud before U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero.
re 13: Are you saying black people can’t swim?
I managed a swimming team for the city of Phoenix at Coronado Pool in ’78. The black kids could swim as well as anyone.
I think that the black aversion to bodies of water runs psychologically deeper than the fluff that you refer to.
@6
I was an exempt staff at one of our colleges briefly. That shit’s fucked up.
re 10: Do the basketball and football programs pay for the upkeep, utilities and the ‘mortgage’ payments on their facilities?
No. They don’t. I anticipated your argument and defanged it before you made it — yet you made it anyway. What kind of bullet headed retard are you?
That’s not what I’m saying headless.
I’m saying that it’s not surprising that a racist would pick 2 sports that are predominantly black instead of the sports predominantly white.
Black or white, it’s probably more to do with the area of the country they grew up in. Someone growing up in harlem has a lot less opportunities to swim than someone growing up in the san fernando valley where backyard pools are commonplace.
Stating FACTS
1. The cut is 26%! This is the largest cut to a state university in the US!
2. The cut affects the parts of campus most that do the real teaching … basic stuff like writing, Spanish, math. These things get the worst cuts because they get the least non State funding.
In other parts of campus, e.g. the med school or business school, the cuts will be largely in those things that are discretionary because they are ONLY funded by the State .. . yep, teaching, will be most affected.
BTW, as a graduate level teacher the writing centers have been a MAJOR asset for my students. Every part of camopus will be weaker because these “discretionary” parts of campus are being cut.
3. To (partly) make up for this huge cut, the UW is expected to RAISE tuition by 14%. Assuming this happens, the UW will now get more income from tuition than from the State.
Can you spell PRIVATE?
4. I wish folks here would stop the MYTH that the football team makes money. It does not. On the other hand, athletes do choose schools for their education as well as for the faint hope of a pro career. Who do you think pays for the writing centers athletes use now?
5. For those who need a metric for how the PAST cuts have affected the UW, we used to be number 1 or 2 in research funding (from the NIH) amongst medical schools. We are now about #6 … BEFORE these cuts in state support
Since federal research dollars generate many other jobs, this is comparable to Airbus selling tankers instead of Boeing!
Moreover, assuming Obamacare passes, there is predicted to be a huge need for more primary care physicians .. the UW is possibly the best school in the US at producing that kind of doctor. At least we have been.
@3 Goldy
David,
You are wrong. The main reason there is talk of a Union is not to make a better UW, it is because a LOT of our faculty cannot make a living at their current level of pay.
There is an increasing use of instructors, lecturers, and others who are not full time. These folks are really getting screwed now.
WA State simply does not understand the difference between a trade school and a university. The Tacoma and Bothell campuses are staffed on the cheap, meaning that neither campus can provide the kind of intellectual activity that is needed id UW students are to get an education that is competitive with the education their peers get at such competitive campuses as Beijing, Czech Republic, Stockholm, Seoul, or … I suspect .. Hanoi.
Of course after we screw up our kids education we will demand that Microsoft hire only American workers!
@5 Roger Rabbit
The cuts at the UW affect the students. They are going to be permanently harmed by not beiong able to learn Spanish or write English.
Who cares?
I can’t make a living as a professional basketball player. Where the hell is my union.
I wonder if the UW union will insist on a walkout so the students can’t learn. Nothing like punishing children for the sins of professors that can’t make a living.
The unions should make sure part time employees get a living wage. How screwed up is a system that expects people to work fulltime to make a living.
It’s not just the people here that are spreading that myth…
The Husky football program, which brings in 85 percent of the department’s revenue
And…
The University of Washington Athletic Department is one of only a handful of Division I college athletic programs that is fully self-supporting.
…
The football program is the primary revenue generating sport at the University of Washington, supplying almost 85% of the department’s total revenue. Other than football and men’s basketball, all other sports at the University of Washington operate at a loss.
Got any links to prove your point?
Stamm
I suggest you read what you posted.
1. At MOST this says the program is ‘self supporting” … or at least 85% of that. Actually, everything on campus is self supporting if you do not count indirect costs … facilities, police, libraries, the president, etc etc.
Hell, I would betcha that GM would be making a LOT of money if it did not have to pay the interest ion its loans, rent on its buildings, healthcare, etc etc.
2. It claims the AD is self supporting, NOT that it makes $$ that supports anything else. A huge part of the campus is self supporting by this definition from food service to parking, By the same criteria, many parts of campus are profitable … the med school for one.
3. The AD gets service for its students .. including “scholarships” that do cost money. Who do you suppose pays for these?
Maybe you need to take one of those discontinued writing courses? They usually include elementary logic.
@18 Did you read what I wrote? If football didn’t have to share its revenue it would be more than able to build its own stadium. They are only asking for 150 million from the state for the new stadium. It would take them 6 whole years to save that up.
Now its a good thing that all the sports pool money. Just because things like golf or fencing don’t support themselves doesn’t mean they shouldn’t exist. But the reason the program can’t built its own stadium is because the money generated from it is shared with other sports.
But don;t pretend they are a net drag.
@23 …
FWIW, I am not in favor of a Union. Unions are best at workplaces where elitism is not needed. that is not true of a research university.
The reason part time workers are used as faculty … whether that is at Tacoma or a community college, is because they are not paid for the time involved outside of actual teaching.
Tom use your example, it would cost money to hire an NBA level coach if you wanted to learn NBA level basketball.
So, instead of being able to work with a prof who makes art or actually develops new accounting tools or works out VLSI for computers, the students at such places get to go to classes where they are taught at a much lower level.
In my own field, the going rate for people in private practice is as high as $1,000,000 a year and in industry we get 200 to 300k/yr. My salary is no where near either of those numbers. What I get in return is the time and freedom to learn more so I can be a better scientists and teacher. Cut the salaries enough and you will not only get a Union, you will get teachers willing to work fora buck because who can not make the grade in molecular biology.
The UW offers our kids an education that is in many ways competitive with Harvard … except the price is lower and a lot more kids can go here.
So, now, we the people of this state will short change our best students, kids who have worked hard to get an education. Great deal, hunh?
@18, @26 Football does NOT pay its own way.
First of all, the UW is not a professional sports entity and would not be allowed in the NCAA if it only ran football to make a profit.
Second, although I have not seen recent numbers, there have been several studies published over many years showing that only one or two NCAA div 1 programs break even. Even at those schools (last time I read abuot this the money makers were in Fla), the only way football programs could be considered to make money is if one does not include the costs of their facilities or other overhead and credits the team with having a positive effect on support form alumni and legislators for the rest of campus.
Third, three things about the UW football team disturb me a lot. The first is reverse racism. We have a small black population in this state but a football team full of out of state black kids. This greatly distorts UW efforts at achieving diversity. Second, because the football team is nationally competitive and because we are a small state, there are very limited opportunities for WA state kids to play varsity football here. Third, I fear that we fires Coach Wllingham BECAUSE he was devoted to the concept of the student athlete more than to getting into bowl games.
Finally, I LIKE having a big time college team here, BUT I do not think the AD is being run for the benefit of WA state kids. If we value athletics as part of a college experience, then we ought not to be cutting the swim team instead of spending a bit less on our semi pro ball kickers.
@28 I gave you a link to the uw athletic department budget. In 07 they had a profit of 20 million. Cut football and you figure out how to restore that to the that money.
Giffy–
You are right.
Without football, ALL the other Athletic Programs are GONE!
Why?
Because the football program all pays it’s own overhead and most of the Athletic Dept.
Look at it this way SJ…take out 85% of the Athletic Dept. Revenue football generates and see where you are at.
First,
No, the AD does not pay overhead.
Look at it this way, if Merck wants to fund me to do an assay for them, they pay my costs PLUS an overhead of about 65%. That 65% is their share of the costs of running the place (rent, cops, phones, the president’s time, assorted compliance folks, etc.)
By that standard, the football team would need to make a “profit” of 65% to break even.
There is another standard. If I run a meeting using UW facilities, pay the real costs of those facilities .. e.g. renting rooms for visitors in student housing and paying for AV services, then UW charges me 35% for overhead!
Third, as I said before, under the rules of the NCAA, the UW cannot run football without its other sports. Women’s track IS a real cost of running a fotball team ..as well as a benefit of being part of the NCAA.
BTW, students PAY a fee for use of hec Ed, so .. as far as I know, the AD does nto pay for any of the non varsity sports on campus yet takes advantage of facilities built with student fees and state funds.
Finally, as I said, there have been numerous national studies of this issue. With very rare exceptions, one or two in the USA, there is no operating profit for NCAA sports do not make money or supprt themselves unless you accept the difficult to test hypothesis that the teams engender support for other programs from alumns and the states.
As I have said many times, I like having varsity sports. However, I believe ALL UW activities should serve the students or our state. I guess the Huskies do that but only if you include the relatively rare WA state kid who can compete for a position on a national team. As a parent AND a UW fan, I would very much prefer to see us compete in a league other than the PAC 10 that reflects the talent of our own kids! GO HUSKIES!
Sj–
I meant that football pays the Athletic Dept. overhead…not the University overhead.
Sorry I wasn’t clear on that.
Frankly, I think you have hit the biggest cost issue…UW OVERHEAD. They tack on 35%??
It seems outrageous. Have you disected this sj?
“overhead” is the term for administrative and institutional cost … the AD is no different than any other Dept on campus inn this regard.
I am also quite sure that costs in the AD include funding from the rest of the campus.
As for whether these numbers are reasonable, they are actually among the lowest in the US. Private entities typically charge 10% for the same thing.
OOPs .. I emant 100% … that is a fairkly typical estimate of overhead by private companies.