ATHENS, Ohio — In a major milestone for organized labor at Ohio University, faculty formally filed for a union election last Friday. OU, meanwhile, declined organizers’ request to remain neutral in the process.
OU Chief of Staff Carly Leatherwood confirmed that the university received formal notice of organizers’ filing with the Ohio State Employment Relations Board. She declined to comment further.
“We are very excited,” said OU American Association of University Professors President John O’Keefe. “That is all that hard work, all those one on one conversations, right? We’re really proud to have an enormous number of cards that … represent a super majority of faculty.”
If everything proceeds as union organizers hope, United Academics of Ohio University will represent about 850 non-supervisory faculty members across OU’s six campuses through an association of the AAUP and American Federation of Teachers, according to records obtained from the SERB.
UAOU organizers previously told the Independent that nearly 70% of faculty members across OU campuses signed cards to file for the election. Faculty concerns previously shared with the Independent include pay, staffing cuts, workloads and a lack of faculty input in decisions that affect them.
The day before UAOU’s filing, the university declined organizers’ request for neutrality in the process, because OU leadership hadn’t had “adequate time” to consider the request, according to a letter from OU that union organizers shared with the Independent.
OU’s letter was a response to one submitted by organizers of United Academics of Ohio University during a rally last Tuesday. UAOU’s letter announced the faculty’s efforts to unionize and asked OU to commit to neutrality, requesting the university’s response by that Thursday.
“We ask that the University agree to remain neutral by (1) not making any statements against unionization or the Union, (2) by affirmatively instructing supervisors not to make any statements against unionization or the Union, (3) by agreeing to not hold any captive audience meetings with members of the proposed bargaining unit, and (4) by committing to maintain the current status quo regarding terms and conditions of employment,” the UAOU letter stated.
While OU didn’t agree to these requests, the university said in its response that it “will pledge that it will comply with regulations in the Ohio Revised Code and reserves its rights and privileges afforded therein.”
O’Keefe said Ohio law represents a “very low bar” and that OU’s response “opens up the possibility of a counter campaign by the university.”
“We anticipate a lot of misleading information in that instance,” O’Keefe said. “We’re very disappointed with the administration’s choice.”
“We’ve been working really hard for the university, and our wages have been declining, and we’ve been seeing a number of problems,” O’Keefe said. “I anticipate that [unionization] will improve relations between faculty administration, because there’s more formal negotiation.”
Julie White, a UAOU organizer, political science professor and Women’s Gender and Sexuality Studies core faculty member, said that although she understands the university had limited time to review UAOU’s request, “There was probably ways that they could have expressed goodwill” in the portion of the letter regarding the request for neutrality.
White said she remains “cautiously optimistic” about the path forward in working with the administration.
“We’re in a really good position to work well with the administration, if it’s their will to do so,” she said. “We have really representative support across colleges, across the regionals. And I think that’s the way you want a union to be structured — as deeply representative of all the constituents.”
UAOU’s letter also requested “that Ohio University respect the wishes of its employees to organize together and have UAOU AFT-AAUP as their exclusive representative.” The university apparently interpreted that as a request for voluntary recognition of the union. In its response, OU explained that it didn’t have necessary evidence to consider voluntary recognition at this point.
At the time the letter was submitted, OU hadn’t received the formal filing through the SERB.
White, and a national organizer with the American Federation of Teachers who requested to remain anonymous out of concerns for personal safety, both told the Independent that their letter focused on the request for neutrality, and was not intended as a request for immediate voluntary recognition from the university.
OU’s letter to the organizers didn’t rule out voluntarily recognizing the union in the future.
UAOU’s filing with the State Employment Relations Board initiates a legal process that lays the groundwork for a union election, however. A letter from the board to OU requested a list of all OU employees by March 26 so the board can determine if UAOU’s filing demonstrates that at least 30% of employees want UAOU’s representation.
If the university intends to dispute UAOU’s proposed construction of its bargaining unit, it must also do so by March 26. OU must also post notices of UAOU’s filing by next Tuesday, March 19.
White said she’s relieved the process is officially in the SERB’s hands.
“I think there were a lot of us that until those cards were in the hands of this SERB, we were just imagining every painful scenario where, like, there’s a car accident, and the cards don’t make it,” White said. “I feel a tremendous sense of relief, that they’re now in the hands of SERB, and I think the administration will be impressed with the level of support UAOU has demonstrated in the card drive.”
O’Keefe expressed confidence that faculty will vote for unionization.
“We have overwhelming majority support — super majority support — so there’s going to be a union,” he said.
