5/25/2012: The union has issued a call for volunteers for various committees, here. Very good, a big step forward for transparency. It’s not clear if everyone who volunteers can participate, I assume so. Apparently the by-laws committee is already stacked with insiders – the post says they only want three new members:
Serve on the Bylaws and Constitution Committee. The Organizing Committee is looking for three additional volunteers to help research options and develop recommendations for our union’s formal structure.
Notably absent from the list of committees looking for new members is the all important central Organizing Committee which is currently running the show. From what I can tell no one is allowed to attend this committee’s meetings unless they demonstrate a willingness to work for interests of the union, as the current committee members see those interests.
On the other hand Bob Berdahl will not let *any* faculty member sit on his “Executive Leadership Council.” Though of course Duck athletics director Rob Mullens does. So I’d say it’s a Johnson Hall / Union Hall tie on muck, at the moment.
5/11/2012: Union posts names of organizing committee members, here. Apparently a few have asked to stay anonymous for fear of retaliation.
5/10/2012: At least *they* aren’t charging us $200 to read their newsletter, here. They have a long way to go on transparency – their organizing committee meetings are closed, etc. There will be a drive by the anti’s faculty opposed to unionization in fall to get the 30% of signatures needed to call a secret ballot election. I expect that will pass barely, and that the outcome of the election will be determined by people’s impressions of the effectiveness and transparency of the union at that point. It’s early days:
… Finally, we are beginning the work of building our union’s internal structure and organization. When faculty return for the fall term, we will begin a United Academics membership drive: the cards signed in the winter only registered support for the formation of a collective bargaining unit, but did not commit anyone to active membership in it. Joining the union is not mandatory for those in the bargaining unit, but those who choose to join the union will be eligible to vote on key decisions, such as a constitution and bylaws, election of officers, the dues structure, and ratification of the contract that is negotiated.
Dear UO-matter! To your information, there are many people on campus who feel very strongly that they were forced into the union. The casual name “anti’s” is not going to work very well to build a respect you’re supposed to be fighting for. For those of us who feel that we are forced into this unwanted relationship with the union, it will take lots of effort on the side of union, administration and, sorry, you as well for us to learn how to relax and try to enjoy the process. So far, there is no hope in sight
suggestions for a better short name?
dog says
if anyone does feel strongly then they should sign on to the 30% effort.
Right to works??
healthy forests?
noinu’s ?
Only a single person from natural sciences……… (on the committee).
three, actually:
Julian Catchen, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Institute of Ecology and Evolution
Jeffrey Cina, Professor, Chemistry
Wayne Manselle, Research Assistant, Human Physiology
Let’s see, three from the natural sciences, three from Romance languages, two from German, five from political science… that reflects the composition of faculty on campus, right?
also:
Mary Baxter, Adjunct Instructor, Geological Sciences
I can understand getting confused about the person-hood of NTTF, but I hope we can all agree on 3/5ths as a minimum.
Right… I missed her after just skimming the list. Well, if there are 4 sciences and 3 romance languages then that does seem better balanced!
I’m confused. Is Jeff Cina no longer in the natural sciences?
And only one (Peter Keyes) from a professional school. No one from School of Journalism and Communications or Lundquist College of Business. No economics. Definitely representative.
Well, obviously, its only representative of the kinds of folks who favored unionization. My sense was that the union wasn’t really popular in LCB, or among the scientists (who heavily include the excluded PIs).
Aren’t there many officers of research in the sciences?
the barnyard animals and household pets are believe their goose is being cooked.
seriously, reaching out to those who opposed is critical if the union is to win hearts and minds.
—wilbur