Neutrality in the Face of Evil: An Open Letter to Western Michigan University’s Leaders


by Andrew Hennlich, President of the WMU-AAUP, and Cathryn Bailey, Vice President of the WMU-AAUP

As leaders of Western Michigan University’s chapter of the WMU-AAUP, as professors, and as engaged citizens, we read your campus wide email message of February 6 with concern. In it, you state that Western’s leadership has decided to adopt a position of institutional neutrality, explaining that your goal is to “provide assurance to our entire community that we take seriously the trust conferred to us as leaders to care for the voice, mission and reputation of this University.” With the democratic checks and balances of our nation under daily attack by a presidential administration that has openly declared universities to be the enemy, we are far from reassured by the suggestion that WMU now aims to avoid controversy by remaining on the sidelines.

Far from regarding this neutrality policy as “thoughtful stewardship” of Western’s voice, as you described it, we share the position of the National AAUP: “urg[ing] universities not to hide behind the pretense of remaining neutral in times of conflict or crisis. As the second Trump administration continues its assaults on academic freedom—and on critical research that saves lives, advances science and innovation, and benefits communities in the United States and around the world—neutrality is neither possible nor viable.”

We will not summarize the AAUP’s full statement—you can find it here—but instead will highlight a few especially salient points. The first is that the impact of institutional neutrality “on academic freedom and shared governance can vary based not only on what institutional neutrality is taken to mean but also on the circumstances in which it is adopted or imposed.” We note that, at a time of historic uncertainty and instability for universities and for academic freedom, WMU’s highest leadership did not choose to issue a public statement affirming their ongoing commitment to such substantive core values, including: diversity, equity, and inclusion; and global engagement. Instead, it chose to publicly announce a new policy, that Western’s default position will now be one of “neutrality.” At a time when many other colleges and universities are stepping forward to affirm their longstanding commitments to the basic humanistic values that underlie democratic, inclusive universities, WMU appears to be receding from its value commitments.

While it may be technically correct to claim as your FAQ does, that this “neutrality policy” is not necessarily inconsistent with academic freedom—a point also acknowledged by the AAUP statement—this provides little comfort for those anxious about its real world application. As the AAUP emphasizes in its statement, “Universities inescapably act in a myriad of ways that express their values and commitments without stifling academic freedom.” Students, staff, and faculty are not operating in a vacuum. Many are already negotiating a tense campus environment that includes fears of gun violence, immigration-related harassment, epidemic diseases, economic insecurity, sexual assault, and more. We now ask you to consider whether your “neutrality statement”—together with WMU’s unhelpful recent statement about interfacing with ICE—has reassured these members of our campus community or made them feel even more vulnerable? 

With all this in mind, we urge you to closely consider the AAUP’s full statement about institutional neutrality, noting its nuanced and historical handling of the subject, as well as its cautions and advice. If our university’s leadership chooses to hide behind “neutrality” as a chilling pall falls over our classrooms and our most vulnerable campus members are targeted for harm, WMU will carry a stain of moral and intellectual failure into its future. As so many have pointed out, to remain “neutral” while oppressive forces attack is effectively to ally oneself with injustice.

In addition, we ask that you clarify and enhance Western’s substantive commitment to align its practices with its core humanistic values—among them, again, academic freedom and shared governance; diversity, equity and inclusion; and global engagement. As the AAUP statement notes: “A commitment to neutrality….is not some magic wand that conjures freedom. Calls for neutrality instead provide an opportunity to consider how various practices of an institution—not only its speech or silence but also its actions and policies— might promote a more robust freedom of teaching, research, and intramural and extramural speech.”

In closing, we believe that your recent affirmation of “institutional neutrality,” raises concerns rather than addressing them. Further, we share the position implied by the AAUP statement that, having endorsed the morally and practically problematic position of “neutrality,” Western’s leaders now carry a great responsibility to clarify and invest in their commitment to substantive core values. As the AAUP statement points out, there are times when action is required to defend “the very mission of the university and its values of free inquiry.” Now is such a time.

WMU-AAUP reaches Tentative Agreement in negotiations

a message from WMU-AAUP Chief Negotiator Andrew Hennlich and WMU-AAUP President Cathryn Bailey

After a grueling fight extending a month beyond the negotiation deadline, the WMU-AAUP Executive Committee has approved a complete tentative agreement (TA) on the 2024-26 Contract reopener of Articles 32 and 33. Critical details have been provided directly to members to help prepare for an upcoming ratification vote. While the WMU-AAUP did not get everything proposed, the overall results are very good. It is evident that members’ powerful demonstrations of solidarity have had impacts both on these negotiations, and, we anticipate, on future negotiations and WMU labor dynamics in general. The fact that our entire contract—including both of these Articles—will be up for renegotiation in less than two years from now may serve as helpful context as you consider where we’ve landed now.

For additional context about the unusual nature of the fight we’ve been engaged in during this incredibly challenging “wage reopener,” please see the post linked here and that was separately sent by email to the full membership on Sept. 9. In short, after the negotiation deadline passed on August 30th, the WMU Administration no longer had any clear obligation to provide the faculty with a salary raise. As Article 49 of the WMU/WMU-AAUP Agreement states, the Administration could simply choose to implement its last official offer once negotiations continued past the August 30th deadline (subject to continued bargaining by both sides), but, again, had no obligation to do so. As we had previously noted, this helps explain why they were so willing to drag their feet about salary raises as the deadline approached.

In short, after that deadline passed, and with the Administration’s generally dismissive attitude to faculty concerns consistently on display, the threat loomed that the faculty might get no raise at all. Indeed, we are confident that it is only due to intense pressure from WMU-AAUP members and allies that the Administration has now agreed to a higher number than its previous last official offer (as of August 30), even if this higher figure is still not as high as we would like. Indeed, if the Administration had felt it could get away with agreeing to no raise at all, we don’t doubt that that is what they would have done. In any case, the salary increase figure in this approved tentative agreement is as follows: A total increase of 7.25%, that is, 4% in 2024-25 (retroactively applied), and 3.25% in 2025-26, with an additional one-time lump-sum-payment of $1000 in 2025-26.

Although the WMU-AAUP did not get everything we had proposed, and that the faculty deserve, we have taken some strong steps forward. For one thing, some revised negotiation approaches, including the Chapter’s use of a healthcare analyst, has helped empower the WMU-AAUP in ways that should impact future negotiations and labor relations more generally. In addition, the historically impressive turnout of members and allies at rallies and demonstrations has sent a clear message of strength and determination that will be felt well into the future and in multiple arenas. While WMU employees have many remaining fights to reclaim and restore our university’s academic heart, the energy and solidarity of the past few months will propel us forward.

Following WMU-AAUP procedures, the next steps regarding negotiations are as follows:

-The WMU-AAUP will present the tentative agreements on Article 32 and 33 and will field questions from members at the 11 October all-member Chapter meeting. 

-In the days following the October 11 meeting, the full tentative agreement will be put to a ratification vote of the full membership.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Negotiation standoff at Western Michigan University: News roundup

a partial recap of the news coverage of the ongoing negotiations between the Western Michigan University Administration and the WMU-AAUP. Additional background and information can be found on our official blog

Interview with WMU-AAUP President Cathryn Bailey on Media Matters

From the Western Herald: WMU faculty union speaks on contract negotiations outside of Student Center

WMUK Radio: Faculty Union Negotiations at WMU Head to Mediation

From MLive: WMU professors threaten first strike in decades as pay negotiations sour

From Higher Ed Dive: Two Michigan Universities Face Potential Faculty Strikes

From WWMT News: Negotiations Continue as WMU Professors Threaten Strike

WMUK Radio: Western Michigan University academic unions vote “no confidence” in WMU president

MLive: WMU Unions vote ‘no confidence’ in university president

From the Western Herald: Three Labor Unions Vote “No Confidence” in WMU President

WOOD TV: Teaching Unions Vote No Confidence in Western Michigan University President

Allies and members are invited to attend our next action on Thursday, Sept 26, starting at noon in WMU’s Student Center

Western Michigan University withholds faculty raises to force its lowball offer

A negotiation message from WMU-AAUP President Cathryn Bailey and Vice President Christopher Nagle

As we shared in a previous message, it appears that the Western Michigan University Administration may have intended all along to stonewall under the guise of “ongoing negotiations” in order to force the faculty into accepting a lowball compensation offer. In short, while the Administration has gone through the motions of negotiating on compensation—and continues to do so—the Administration’s lackluster efforts at compromise suggest a plan to force the faculty into accepting a skimpy increase or risk getting no raise at all. 

As a reminder that, this summer the WMU-AAUP has been focused, not on its entire contract with Western, but, rather, a “reopener” of compensation and healthcare. This means that the contract as a whole remains in force while these two critical articles are renegotiated. While the process more or less functioned with healthcare negotiations—due to open enrollment deadlines, the Administration was eager to get a tentative agreement in place—they seem to feel no such urgency about across-the-board raises. And, as per Article 49 of the WMU/WMU-AAUP Agreement, the Administration may simply choose to implement its last offer if negotiations continue past the deadline, although this is subject to continued bargaining by both sides.

As of now, the Administration’s last offer was, roughly, three percent in each year, representing just 1/4 of one percent increase over their initial offer of 2.75. Why has the Administration barely budged from its low number? One explanation is that they have been planning all along to simply force a low salary onto employees, i.e, their final best offer. Consequently, rather than making an effort to compromise, they have been going through the motions of salary negotiation but failing to budge. 

At the same time, the WMU-AAUP proposal has gone from 11.25/11.25 (with additional annual research supplements), to 8/8, and we have urged the Administration to provide a genuine counteroffer. Crucially, however, while the Administration “may” implement that last offer—a 3/3 they have emphasized the fact that they need not do so. One potential result is that employees could get no raise at all if the WMU-AAUP refuses formally agree to a lowball raise that many of our members have identified as unacceptable. If this process were to continue to unfold, then the Administration would likely attempt to the blame the faculty union for refusing to agree to that lowball offer.

Concern grows when one further considers that the Administration has refused to make itself reasonably available to negotiate at key times. They were not available to negotiate on the crucial last day (August 30) and now seem to be settling on occasional availability. In addition, the process of “negotiation” is one in which our team—including an attorney whom we must pay by the hour—is mostly left to languish in a conference room all day while the Administration authorizes the mediator to reiterate its position to us from time to time. While maintaining this shallow performance of negotiations may not be a big deal for WMU—they seem untroubled at spending hundreds of thousands of dollars —perhaps millions—on an anti-union attorney—this wasteful process is, as they know, a hardship for the WMU-AAUP. This is because of attorney fees and because our team members are busy faculty members and not administrative bureaucrats. 

We reiterate this message to you now because we will not be surprised if the Administration begins to suggest that the faculty union is to blame for the Administration’s failure to implement that “last offer” raise while it continues to engage in its unconvincing performance of negotiating. If so, please keep in mind that they are willfully refusing to provide the faculty with meaningful compensation increases despite the fact that they Western can afford it and that faculty deserve it. Please further note that nothing prohibits the Administration from providing you with that minimal “last offer” 3/3 increase while negotiations continue. In fact, each day that goes by that you see no such increase on your paycheck is cause for concern. Does President Montgomery plan to hold even this small compensation increase hostage by threatening us with a zero increase?

As you consider all this, please also keep in mind that the Administration’s manipulative, disingenuous “negotiating” strategy only works if they continue to believe they can get away with ignoring employee dissatisfaction and solidarity. To that end, the Chapter will continue to help focus the faculty’s ongoing determination to restore investment in Western’s academic mission. See below for ongoing suggestions about how you can participate.

How you can get involved:

  • plan to attend our rally at the next WMU Board of Trustees meeting on Thursday, Sept. 26th at the Student Center (scheduled to begin at noon). Wear your WMU-AAUP t-shirt if you have one or a black shirt if you don’t
  • subscribe to the official WMU-AAUP blog to be notified by email of new posts, and be sure to review past posts; partly due to concerns about reliance on the Administration’s email system, it is important that we have multiple ways of providing information to members and allies
  • stop by Montague House, grab some posters/fliers, and we’ll provide you with some suggestions about what to do with them; order a WMU-AAUP t-shirt today so you’re ready to participate in ongoing actions 
  • reach out to members of the Board of Trustees, and to local and state elected officials, and ask for their support in our efforts to get WMU to renew its commitment to its academic mission; here’s an example of letter sent to each Board member from WMU-AAUP president, Cathryn Bailey 
  • follow the WMU-AAUP on Facebook and Twitter (X) and share our posts widely; again, having multiple methods of quickly connecting with members and allies has become increasingly important 
  • stand ready to participate in ongoing actions, and be sure to share WMU-AAUP communications with colleagues to ensure that this ongoing matter remains on their radar 

 

A modest proposal for employee raises at Western Michigan University

a message from WMU-AAUP President Cathryn Bailey and Vice President Christopher Nagle

As the WMU-AAUP’s “negotiations” with the WMU Administration drag on well past the Aug 30 deadline, it’s important to reiterate the context in which the WMU-AAUP initially proposed 11.25/11.25 (first and second years) across-the-board raises for faculty. In part, this was a reflection of wage value lost over the years to cost of living increases. As WMU-AAUP Chief Negotiator Andrew Hennlich has noted, even with such double-digit increases—a proposal the President’s negotiation team thought was a joke—the value of our salaries would only reach 2016 levels. But as the WMU-AAUP has also been insisting, there is a much larger story here, one that includes the Administration’s years-long disinvestment in its core academic mission, together with its increased eagerness to spend exorbitantly on all sorts of other things. Since these weird administrative spending priorities help explain why so many Western employees are now pushing back with such determination, we offer here a new negotiation proposal, one that we believe many in the Western community could support. In a nutshell, we are both willing to encourage our faculty colleagues to accept the President’s utterly unimpressive 3/3 compensation increase offer if the Administration agrees to radically alter its current spending priorities as described below. 

Specifically, we propose that the following areas be marked for meaningful and ongoing scrutiny and action by campus and community constituents, a process we are confident will lead to such expenses being eliminated or radically scaled down: anti-union private attorneys and corporate consultants, Division I sports, fancy new buildings, hoarded “reserve” money, and elite administrative salaries and “perks.” Although our proposal here is merely informal and tentative, we are happy to go ahead and suggest a few details: 

⁃the entire campus community would be consulted and heard before any additional commitments would be made to anti-union private attorneys or corporate consultants. As part of the process, the Administration would openly share all past expenses—rather than requiring us to FOIA them and then dragging its feet—and campus constituents, including faculty and developing student experts—would have a meaningful opportunity to weigh in on whether any additional such expenses were appropriate and ethical.

⁃an employee and student-driven body, including faculty financial experts—yes, we have those, President Montgomery!—to make a binding recommendation about Western’s current Division I football commitment. This body would review the financial viability and overall value of Western’s current athletic situation, including that the subsidies the university provides have been jawdropping and ever-growing (even by peer university standards). The student/employee body could also determine whether WMU as a whole might be better served by dropping down a division or some other scenario. In any case, Division I football would no longer be a sacred cow at WMU to which all other interests—including the university’s academic mission—would be expected to be happily subservient.

⁃the university would make no further commitment to construct new buildings unless and until Western’s key employee groups were meaningfully consulted. For example, the university could not build a new dining hall unless it first ensured that the frontline employee group tasked with running and maintaining the facility already had the baseline resources and working conditions these employees needed to thrive. The university could not commission any additional new residence halls or classroom buildings without first getting assurance from relevant employees that they too were properly resourced and prepared to serve the students these buildings are meant to attract and retain. This would include, for example, advisors, instructors, professors, teaching assistants, administrative assistants and more. The general principle here: a university is not primarily its buildings but its people, and it is foolish to invest in the former while alienating, disrespecting and starving the latter.

⁃the university would bring its addiction to hoarding profits under control, what it misleadingly refers to as “reserves.” According to the Administration’s wildly conservative claims, it needs nine months of reserves to be financially responsible. However, our independent financial analyst cites three months as the responsible amount, and the Administration’s own professional organization cites only six. In any case, our initial compensation proposal would barely impact even their most conservative number. To put this in perspective, in essence, the proposed WMU-AAUP compensation package would only come to about half of what athletics gets as a matter of course. In short, the Administration must agree to begin investing irresponsibly hoarded reserves back into its core mission, i.e., its students and frontline employees. 

⁃the president, provost, and handful of other elite WMU administrators would immediately agree to slash their shockingly high salaries. For example, the president’s $600,000+ compensation package could be modestly reduced by 1/3 and he could volunteer to start paying for his own housing, phone, and country club membership. He would also agree to donate all of his past WMU bonuses—including the one he was awarded the day before the faculty voted No Confidence in him (!)—to pay for free student parking. While we’re at it, the provost, too, could take a salary cut of 1/3–still putting him at the top end of WMU employee salaries—and  receive travel funds equal to what WMU is agreeing it is obligated to provide to professors through its Faculty Research Travel Fund: no more than one trip of $700 per year. In addition, in honor of the Administration’s increasing shifting of expenses onto employees and students, if any of these elite administrators needs a new laptop, travel to other WMU-campuses, or other work tools, they will pay for this out of pocket and also be subjected to lectures about how greedy they are and how poor the university is. 

In addition to the financial elements of our proposal, there is one other point on which we would insist: that the Administration agree to kill and bury its constant rationalization that it should gauge its spending priorities based on what “everyone else is doing.” How often do we all hear the same explanation from Western Michigan University leaders that, for example, we need a millionaire president because “other schools are doing it” or that WMU doesn’t have to pay its employees better because “there are other universities with salaries that are even lower.” Not only are such Administrative claims of “normalcy” frequently false or misleading—Western actually is falling short in a number of respects—it’s also just embarrassing to hear our own leaders boast about how our once-great university’s goal is to be mediocre. 

Unrest at Western Michigan University as academic employees fight back

While the most dramatic story unfolding at Western Michigan University may be the ongoing negotiation battle between professors and the Administration—with the possibility of a strike and Vote of No Confidence still on the table—the context for the recent and ongoing unrest is actually much broader. After many years of what is coming to be known as a “disinvestment by the Administration in its core mission,” employees from across campus have shown up in force at protest rallies. As the president of WMU’s Chapter of the American Association of University Professors, Cathryn Bailey, put it: “Yes, my colleagues are battling for meaningful salary increases for professors, but this is also part of a larger fight to get Western to start investing in teaching and learning again. We’re advocating for ourselves, but also for our students’ education and the value of their WMU degrees.” 

Against this backdrop, it may not be surprising that the “disinvestment” problem is being felt all over campus and in various ways. For example, graduate student Mel Robins (not his real name) shares that when he got his acceptance letter from Western Michigan University, he was thrilled. “I’d turned down much better financial packages from other schools because some of the best faculty in my field were at Western,” he says. Unfortunately, although Robins has loved working with his professors and student cohort, he quickly discovered chronic logistical challenges associated with his role as a teaching assistant, including shifting assignments, untenable teaching loads, and problems related to money owed to him by WMU, all of which were attributed by the Administration to its supposedly shrinking budget. “TAU (WMU’s Teaching Assistants Union) has been great, but I just can’t get over how uninterested the Administration seems to be in attracting and keeping its graduate students.”

According to TAU President Thomas Fisher, as negative as Robins’ experience has been, there’s been an even more worrisome reality unfolding behind the scenes at Western, what Fisher refers to as the Administration’s “fundamental and growing disrespect for its labor unions.” As Fisher puts it, “I’m talking about really basic things here: Administrators who treat employees like underlings or enemies [including at the negotiation table]” and “a knee jerk desire to escalate conflict rather than course correct when we point out contract violations.” Although Fisher is now one of WMU’s longest serving TAU presidents, he did not arrive in Kalamazoo planning to be a union activist graduate student. “The more I’ve seen of the Administration’s disinvestment in academics and its increasingly brazen disregard for its employee unions—including student workers—the more active and determined I have become,” he says. 

As the Administration’s apparent anti-unionism has escalated, Western’s three academic unions, all now united under the powerful AFT umbrella (American Federation of Teachers), have been closely collaborating, both to diagnose and address the problem. Among the causes and symptoms they’re pointing to has been President Montgomery’s and Provost Vasquez Heilig’s commitment to use a notoriously anti-union, aggressive law firm to “deal with” its academic employees, including at the negotiation table. “We used to have an actual office of Academic Labor Relations on campus,” explains Tim Bober, president of WMU-PIO (Professional Instructors Organization). “It wasn’t perfect by any means, but at least there was someone there who understood academic values and didn’t just immediately try to beat us into submission.” And while, as a chronically underpaid, highly experienced WMU instructor, Bober has many concerns about the Administration’s priorities, its naked disdain for its own employees has taken a toll on him. “Basically, they treat us like we’re nothing,” he says. 

All three of Western’s academic labor presidents point to WMU’s once-robust ALR (Academic Labor Relations) office to help explain the university’s burgeoning labor crisis. Now entering a second academic year led by an interim director for whom this is just one administrative gig among many, that office has become more of an obstacle than a place to resolve disputes. Bailey notes the “fundamental shift” that occurred when the Administration hired an external attorney a few years ago to direct its ALR office rather than appoint a faculty member as had always been the case. “Suddenly, we were forced to deal with aggressive professional attorneys right off the bat, with no reliable mechanism to resolve the kinds of issues that are just bound to come up on any campus.” As a result, Bailey explains, the WMU-AAUP has been forced to file a record number of grievances and arbitrations. “President Montgomery apparently has no limit when it comes to the student tuition dollars he’s willing to spend on anti-union attorneys,” Bailey says, estimating that “we may now be talking millions of dollars. And it’s obvious that the Administration is trying to force us to choose between protecting employees’ rights and expensive litigation.” 

As compensation negotiations between WMU-AAUP employees and the Administration proceed past last Friday’s negotiation deadline, Bailey is not optimistic about the Administration’s willingness to make meaningful compromises at the table. “The WMU-AAUP’s team has already made significant compromises in its proposals, she explains, “while President Montgomery’s team has only come up by minuscule fractions after endless stonewalling and foot dragging.” At the same time, she says, she is “heartened” by the determination of colleagues in multiple employee groups urging the WMU-AAUP to continue fighting for as long as it takes.

“The fact that employees are increasingly willing to disrupt campus to draw attention to this problem tells you how urgent we think it is,” says Fisher. He adds somberly that “WMU’s reputation as a great place to learn and work can’t possibly survive if things continue as they have.”

WMU-PIO President Tim Bober and WMU-AAUP President Cathryn Bailey

Stolen wages at Western Michigan University: The nickel and diming of WMU-AAUP employees

a negotiation message from WMU-AAUP president, Dr. Cathryn Bailey and vice president, Dr. Christopher Nagle

With wage-reopener negotiations between the Western Michigan University Administration and the WMU-American Association of University Professors now continuing on past the Friday deadline*, there’s another element to the compensation story that deserves attention. Because it lacks the drama of radically eroded salary figures, and because its impact is cumulative, this aspect of the university’s whittling away of employee income threatens to get lost in the shuffle. 

But there is no better time to talk about the hidden, growing costs of simply doing one’s job as a professor—a trend rationalized at Western by its supposed “responsibility-centered,” SRM budget model—than during negotiations, and as the Western Administration implies that the faculty are greedy and out of touch. Many of us, however, are well aware that, when we are under-resourced—starved of supplies, travel funds, work space, equipment, and more—it effectively reduces our take-home pay and often negatively impacts students.

Here are a just a few examples: 

⁃ the erosion and erratic supply of professional travel funds: professors, quite simply, need to travel to attend conferences, perform research, collaborate with other faculty, and the like. For most, this is necessary both to earn promotion and tenure, to develop students as scholars, and to remain competent in our fields and classrooms. 

Nonetheless, although Western markets itself as a research-intensive university, it has spent tens of thousands of dollars this past year alone on legal fees to ensure that it has no concrete financial obligation in this area. This is, to be clear, merely one area in which WMU has been disinvesting in its research mission, but it is high on the list of nickel-and-diming, with numerous faculty reporting that they now pay out of pocket or have been forced to stop engaging in these baseline professional activities. 

⁃ the chipping away at reimbursements for other sorts of professional travel, for example, between WMU regional sites for professional purposes related to teaching, research, or service. Increasingly, faculty are being told they must personally pay for fuel to teach a course at a satellite WMU campus or to come to Kalamazoo even to perform assigned work or service, including that which is necessary to directly support students. 

⁃ a refusal by the university to supply necessary “work tools” in a reasonable fashion. To take one example, there have now been a number of reported cases where faculty have been expected to pay for their own work laptops or monitors because the equipment they had been assigned broke or wore out. In one case, a faculty member was stripped of network access—which she needed to teach her classes and communicate with students— when she failed to return a loaner machine on time after the university insisted that she pay for a new machine out of pocket. 

In addition, there are reports of faculty being expected to buy lab supplies, safety wear, photocopies, awards for students, software, studio art space, and, with the near decimation of the library’s budget—access to journals and databases and books. One faculty member reported borrowing from a friend at Grand Valley State—not a research-intensive school, by the way—because our own research-intensive university claimed it couldn’t afford databases or books.

Again, these are just a few examples of how professional expenses are being shifted onto faculty. An ancillary expense has been that WMU’s disinvestment in students, both graduate and undergraduate, has created a situation in which employees across the university feel compelled to step up to fill in critical financial gaps. For example, our campus now abounds with stories of employees—in various employee groups—who have provided books, lodging, meals, and even emergency tuition payments for desperate students. 

The fact that Western Michigan University has permanent charity opportunities for employees to fund students’ basic needs points to a normalization of the fact that the university now effectively expects employees to shore up such deficits. While faculty love our students, and such generosity is to be lauded and supported—indeed, we both participate— the institutional reliance on them further shifts the financial burden of supporting students from the university and onto employees. What does it say about Western Michigan University that it chooses to spend millions on its elite administrators, Division I football, fancy new buildings, and corporate attorneys and consultants, but accepts that food scarcity will be a basic condition for many of its students, both graduate and undergraduate?

We are perhaps all used to this sort of thing with respect to public school teachers, where radical political forces have long suggested that it is a favor to them to pay them at all—let alone to supply them with the supplies and continuing education they need to do their jobs—but this tendency has also been spilling over into higher education. And if third grade teachers can be painted as uppity for daring to request raises and money to buy glue sticks, of course it will be easy enough to portray university professors as selfish elitists. 

Neither characterization is accurate, of course, but with the bully pulpit of institutional authority, communications, and PR smoke-screens to support them, the WMU Administration seems committed to justifying its “starvation-as-management” approach, according to which cutting away at expenditures is desirable regardless of the impact on key services or Western’s academic reputation. And while this chronic disinvestment in Western’s core mission is unlikely to make the news, it helps explain why so many employees are so frustrated and willing to fight on for as long as necessary.

*see Article 49, page 136 of the current WMU/WMU-AAUP Agreement

Got an experience to share about how professional expenses have been shifted onto you at Western? Reach out to staff@wmuaaup.net, or to the WMU-AAUP president or vice president.

to be notified of new posts by email, subscribe to this blog here

Destruction at union headquarters as WMU ramps up its campaign against its own employees

The Western Michigan University Administration’s recent, unprecedented abuse of its campus-wide email system is a classic, anti-union propaganda effort to divide and pit employee groups against one another. In a series of campus-wide emails—full of false and misleading claims about the university’s own faculty members—the Administration has painted itself as generous and benevolent during tense compensation negotiations (deadline tomorrow). It is WMU’s faculty who are greedy and entitled, the messages suggest, providing manipulated self-serving numbers to “prove” its case. 

What’s going on here? President Montgomery knows that if he can get employees to bicker with, and even attack, one another, we’ll stop focusing on him. The result of his campaign so far? A few appalling, vicious anonymous emails to WMU-AAUP leaders, and some willful destruction of union fliers at the WMU-AAUP headquarters. But another result, one surely not intended by our labor scholar president, has been a flood of solidarity from Western employees all across campus. Indeed, each of our recent, wildly successful demonstrations has included folks from no fewer than FOUR Western Michigan University employee groups, some appearing in public with us despite their fear of retaliation.

Again, President Edward Montgomery is a labor scholar, and he knows better than most that “United We Bargain, Divided We Beg.” Not surprisingly, he would rather have employees focused on one another rather than his own exorbitant compensation, weird financial priorities, and lack of vision for our beloved university. Does the fact that his propaganda seems to be leading to attacks on his own faculty—putting students too in the firing line—make any difference to him? Is the Western Administration—with its private anti-union lawyer riding shotgun for the president—so committed to beating its professors into submission that it will destroy our campus climate in the process? 

Oh, and if you want a look at some data provided by an actual qualified, external analyst of academic financial data rather than the Administration’s propaganda machine, here you go. And for more detailed rebuttals of the Administration’s false and misleading propaganda, see here and here. Please share this message far and wide. Remember, Western’s president has the might of the university’s communication system (and ample coffers) at his fingertips, while we must rely on our member and allies. And while we are working with our attorney to build an Unfair Labor Practices complaint against the Administration regarding these actions, we do still need to ensure that employees’ voices are not drowned out by management.

What can you do?

  • Stop by Montague House to pick up fliers and posters in support of our ongoing visibility campaign
  • Reach out to members of WMU’s Board of Trustees—President Montgomery reports to them—and urge them to fix this now!
  • subscribe to this blog, share this post, and keep abreast of ongoing communications from our leadership, including this recent interview with our president
  • order a WMU-AAUP t-shirt today and wear it to show your solidarity for all the frontline Western Michigan University employees who actually do the work that makes WMU work!

Western employees occupy the Admin Building: Negotiation update and urgent call for action

a message from WMU-AAUP president, Dr. Cathryn Bailey

With the negotiation deadline just TWO DAYS away, the WMU Administration continues to insist that Western still can’t afford meaningful raises for employees. Even after two long days of mediation—prematurely initiated by the WMU Administration for self-interested reasons—there has been little change in their position. As you may recall, the Administration proudly made an initial raise offer of 2.75/2.5 (first and second year) and then refused to budge during countless hours of negotiations, despite the fact that the WMU-AAUP had compromised significantly—our offer at that point had been an 8/8. 

The Administration’s latest offer—after days of intense public action and other forms of pressure by the WMU-AAUP and allies—is sort of (but not really) a 3/3. The WMU-AAUP has, for its part, continued to bargain diligently and in good faith—for strategic reasons, we cannot share more details here—recognizing that all negotiations require compromise. However, as you have probably noted, the Administration has, yet again, come up by an itty bitty baby step—¼ of A SINGLE PERCENTAGE point—making it clear that President Montgomery, his anti-union attorney, and his negotiation team have not yet been persuaded of our love for Western or our determination. Our public actions are making a difference—see a few photos below from Move-In Day and Bronco Bash—but we must keep up the pressure.

As I urge you to show up today at noon in front of the Student Center—wearing black or red if you don’t have a WMU-AAUP t-shirt—I’ll underscore a point I’ve been shouting from the rooftops (including in this radio interview yesterday): The battle President Montgomery has been waging on WMU employees at the table is only the latest assault in a long series of attacks over many years. This Administration does not merely aim to save some pennies now, but to break the back of Western’s powerhouse faculty union once and for all. President Montgomery, a labor scholar himself, understands perfectly well that if he can drive the WMU-AAUP to its knees—to make one of the oldest, proudest faculty unions in the country beg for scraps—then he will clear the way to further exploit other Western employee groups as well. So, again, for WMU employees, what’s happening now is partly about securing decent raises, but it’s also about refusing to cede to abusive bureaucrats who seem determined to starve WMU’s core mission while enriching themselves. 

If you both want decent raises and are willing to fight for the soul of our university, please: 

  • stop by Montague House now, grab some posters/fliers, and we’ll provide you with some especially strategic suggestions about what to do with them (key locations will be changing daily)
  • attend our rally TODAY, Aug 28 (also open to allies, students, and community members) at noon in front of the Student Center. Wear black or red if you don’t have one of our t-shirts
  • subscribe to the official WMU-AAUP blog for the latest updates and calls to action, and follow us on Facebook
  • self-nominate to serve on the strike preparation working group if you’re a member by emailing staff@wmuaaup.net
  • reach out to members of the Board of Trustees, and to local and state elected officials, and ask for their support in our efforts to get WMU to renew its commitment to its academic mission, to its employees, and to our students and their families (here’s an example of letter sent to each Board member from WMU-AAUP president, Cathryn Bailey) 
  • share our message widely, by email, social media, and in conversation. Remember, the Administration has been using its all-campus email to discredit employees while we must rely on one another to get the word out

Got questions? Reach out to staff@wmuaaup.net, or to the Chapter president or Vice President. Additional info at www.wmuaaup.or

Participants from FOUR different employee groups showed up to both Move-In Day and Bronco Bash to stand with the WMU-AAUP
On a steamy hot day, scores of faculty and allies rallied in the heart of Bronco Bash to shout our determination to fight for our students and ourselves
Making their way through Bronco Bash, the group shouted support for WMU’s academic mission and then continued to rally inside the Administration Building, including sharing their hopes for a new future for Western
President Montgomery and Provost Vasquez Heilig were absent, but signs and fliers were left for them outside their offices
In addition to the Bronco Bash action, scores of faculty and allies rallied at Student Move-In Day, sharing treats with students and providing information about the escalating tensions on campus
Another scene from Move-In Day where many students and their parents cheered on WMU-AAUP members and allies

The WMU Admin stands by its lowball salary offer to faculty

a negotiation update from WMU-AAUP president, Dr. Cathryn Bailey

Dear Western Michigan University Colleagues,

Unfortunately, today’s long day of mediation, which had been prematurely initiated by the WMU Administration, has resulted in almost no change in their compensation position. As you may recall, the Administration proudly made an initial raise offer to WMU-AAUP faculty of 2.75/2.5 (first and second year) and then refused to budge during days of negotiations, despite the fact that the WMU-AAUP has compromised—our last offer was an 8/8. 

The Administration’s current offer is 2.75/2.75. Yes, that’s correct, after weeks of grueling back and forth with our team, the Administration has come up by 1/4 of one percentage point. Their dogged determination to stand by their insulting offer—and, most likely, enlist the support of the mediator to validate it—is a reminder to us that we have more work to do to persuade them that we mean business. And, as a reminder, the deadline to come to a deal is this Friday.

With this in mind, I urge you to: 

  • stop by Montague House to pick up fliers to distribute
  • meet up at Bronco Bash tomorrow in your WMU-AAUP t-shirt if you have one (initial meetup is in the lobby of Sangren Hall at 3:00; if you arrive later, we will be moving, so look for the WMU-AAUP t-shirts in the crowd to join up)
  • come to the Wednesday gathering at noon between the Student Center and Sangren Hall 
  • subscribe to/check out the blog http://www.thewmuaaup.com daily to find more ways to get involved and to stay updated; follow the WMU-AAUP on Facebook 

In solidarity and with determination,

Cathryn