Eighty-one years of editorial freedom Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Should the U' faculty unionize? 4' 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone: 764-0552 Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers ur the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1972 NIGHT EDITOR: TAMMY JACOBS Regents: Defying, a research mandatet JT TOOK 11 months for the University community to arrive at a con- sensus on changing the current policy regarding campus classified research. Those months were filled with wide-ranging debates, delicate negotiations, careful compromises and painstaking refinements-all in an effort to present to the Regents the most accurate sentiment of the people on this campus. Yesterday, after no more than a few hours of discussion with President Fleming and the vice presidents, the Regents abruptly cast aside the proposals before them. In their view, a change in current clas- sified research policies was unnecessary; the 11 months of work had failed to produce anything worthy of their support. To simply label the Regents' action an affront to the community does not do it justice. It represents, unequivocally, the most blatant disregard for the views of the faculty members and students we have seen here in a good many years. Furthermore, it makes a mockery of the efforts of Senate Assembly, the Faculty Reform Coalition, and Student Government Council to bring about a change in University policy through calm, rational processes. MOREOVER, THE REASONS regents gave for their decision show they are far behind the rest of the University in understanding this com- plex issue. First, they contended that the current research policy has failed to prohibit objectionable research due to its unworkable enforce- ment mechanism. If that were to be improved, these regents argued, such projects would no longer be permitted. Second, they reiterated their commitment to transfer Willow Run Laboratories outside the framework of the University. Since Willow Run conducts 90 per cent of the University's classified projects they argued that its departure would diminish the need for a more restrictive re- search policy. Both points are as fallacious now as they were when students and faculty members discussed them last fall-and discarded them. The current policies, adopted in 1968, forbid the acceptance of classified contracts whose "specific purpose . . . is to destroy human life or to incapacitate human beings." Nevertheless, the chairman and members of Senate Assembly's Classified Research Committee, which reviews all projects, have com- plained that the policy is vague, and impossible to administer. As a result, only a few research proposals have been rejected. Consequently, University professors have continued to engage in research to bolster the government's new electronic battlefield, despite the 1968 guidelines. That seemed to convince the faculty representative body that the policy itself needed to be changed, and they labored long hours to draft a document which would accomplish this. Yet the regental statement issued yesterday ignorantly stated that the only change needed was the creation of a "simpler administrative mechanism" for the 1968 guidelines. This statement was not explained-although it challenged the basic conclusion of the University community's 11-month effort. SIMILA.RLY, the Regents' belief that removing Willow Run would remove virtually all objectionable classified research completely ignores pages of testimony to the contrary-testimony that did not escape the faculty's careful investigation. Completely aside from Willow Run, the engineering college continues to perform a significant amount of classified military research, much of which is intended for use by U.S. forces to better locate human targets for destruction. Nevertheless, the Regents chose to ignore the existence of this research. Through their fallacious reasoning, they were able to avoid squarely facing the issue: Should the University of Michigan engage in projects which significantly enhance the U.S. military's capability for destruction, and whose results are hidden from the academic com- munity? A GENERAL CONSENSUS had developed on campus that classified research should be restricted. Many students and faculty members worked hard toward this end. Despite these efforts, the University community faces further weeks of negotiation on the issue. We find this intolerable. We urge the assembly, SGC, and others involved in the consultation process to return to the Regents once again with the mandate of the University community and to insist on a policy that would rid the University of classified research. -THE SENIOR EDITORS Not et By WILFRED KAPLAN FOR THE LAST six years I have been increasingly concerned with collective bargaining as an officer ofhthe Michigan Confer- ence of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP). I have seen the issue grow from a small one, not clearly of signif- icance for higher education, to one of major importance affecting every college and university cam- pus in the state. Public Act 379 was passed by the. State Legislature in 1965. It per- mitted public employes to bar- gain collectively relative to wages and working conditions. The op- portunity offered was not 1 o s t , and soon essentially all teachers in elementary and high school edu- cation and many in community colleges were organized. Other, groups of public employes, such as policemen and firemen, also took., advantage of the law. The four-year colleges and uni- versities were initially uninterest- ed. But the presence of such a wave sweeping through the ranks of other teachers could not be ignored, and profesors soon be- gan to weigh the matter carefully. In 1967 the AAUP held a one-day conference at Eastern Michigan University on "Michigan's Public Employment Act and the State's Colleges." It became clear that AAUP fac- ed a dilemma. By a 50-year-old tradition, it espoused loose cooper- ation between faculty and admin- istration in decision processes at universities. The introduction of collective bargaining would set the two groups in opposition, in an ad- versary relationship. Hence the AAUP could hardly urge faculties to turn to bargaining. But onhcome campuses there was no hope of cooperation be- tween faculty and administration and the AAUP chapter itself was in the vanguard of a movement to organize for bargaining. H o w should the national organization respond? AT FIRST the response Rv a s timid - under certain conditions, chapters might be permitted to of- fer themselves as bargaining agents. As the years passed and the pressure from chapters, b e- cause of inflation and the compe- tition of other groups, became ir- resistable, the AAUP gradually changed its position to one of much more positive support. On October 30, 1971, the national council adopted the following re- Wilfred Kaplan is a mathe- matics professor and past pres- ident of the Michigan Confer- ence of the American Associa- tion of University Professors. The possibility of faculty unionization on the university level has become a source of controversy during the past several years. Professors at Eastern -Michigan University and Wayne State University are Presently in the process of voting on collective bargaining units. Senate Assembly members will discuss a pro- posal for "consultative negotiations" at their meeting Monday. Today, we have asked tivo University professors to present their views on this issue. Yes By MEYER RYDER IN THE LIMITED space allowed, let me say the following: The University faculty will find itself inevitably backing into some form of association amounting to professional unionization in about five years - give or take a couple of years. It will make a good faith try to comport with administration proposed measures for joint considering, planning, and even administer- ing the vast educational and economic affairs of the University enter- prise. It would equally do so should the administration and faculty parties embrace a form of "consultative negotiations." This faculty, except for a few, is one that clearly seeks not to take an adverse course to any part of the University community from the Regents through the students. Nevertheless, when an administration truly tries to give first prior- ity to garnering funds for salaries and benefits - as this one has - the faculty will learn, as it participates in the experimenting, that only as an honestly independent body can it effect legislative: regard for its fair needs. In this connection, the administration has annually gone at it with the governor and the State Legislature more than several times and has had to report full or partial failure each time. SO WHERE can a faculty stand? Where can it go when it compares its economic diminishment with the economic enhancement experienced by employes, professional and otherwise, in unionized parts of the public sector including some small universities - and, of course, the private sector? Then again there is the propitious reality that some years ago the state legislated public policy supporting collective bargaining for public employes - and our faculty is surely so covered. Then must not the University and, of course, the Legislature give heed to what may result? How can both escape the bargaining process? A faculty should not image itself as a teamsters, auto workers, steelworkers, or airline pilots union when it associates for collective bargaining purposes. (Though faculty ought to know about the annual salaries and benefits a well-established pilot receives - about twice that of the ordinary full professor; and that an over the road full- time truck driver annually receives approximately what the average literary college full professor gets. The time on job perquisites are dif- ferent but it is the annual wage on which you feed the kiddies.) A FACULTY can create any kind of independent association it wants to form. It can affiliate with a professional teachers organiza- tion or higher education asociation or not affiliate. In bargaining it can enhance communication with the administra- tion and with the Regents. In economic matters has SACUA engaged in effective communicating? And certainly SACUA does try, does it not? In bargaining a faculty can eschew or embrace any "common rule' it believes to be fitting the peculiar, involved nature of the university form. Speaking solely for the faculty it can, with the administration, bargain out and tailor the commonality and rarity aspects of university professional economic existence. Set-offs can be negotiated to fair accommodation whereas now they will be inevitably imposed. It can innovate by seeking realistic salary minimums for various university schools and units with studied allowance for teacher subject markets. And it certainly must allow for personal annual salary rates befitting inputs of teachers of reputation, who really teach and re- searchers who really research. THE FACULTY has a great deal to give in these areas. With recognition for its independence of domination in so giving, its con- tribution can be much toward a rationalization of salary structure. (Have you seen the horrendous faculty salary structure at Michigan State University? pne hopes this is not true of the University struc- ture.) Timidity and fear sometimes spawn prideful but genteel poverty. The gentle pretenses of a higher calling most tines are sadly rubbed away by the abrasive realities of dollar paucity. 40 solution: 'The AAUP will pursue collective bargaining as a major additional way of realizing t h e Association's goals in higher edu- cation, and will allocate such re- sources and staff as are necessary for a vigorous selective develop- ment of this activity beyond pre- sent levels." The AAUP is thus now support- ing strongly many chapters vig- orously moving towards collective bargaining. It is not seeking to stir up such activity where none exists, and there are many cam- puses on which there is little in- terest - in particular, because many statesdo not have a law such as Michigan's encouraging bargaining by public employes. The AAUP has taken a frther step of major importance in the whole development. It has re- cognized that collective bargain- ing can take many forms and that throughskillful shaping of its form, bargaining can in fact achieve the basic goals of AAUP - academic freedom, fair pro- cedures for appointment, promo- tion and tenure, meaningful fa- culty role in decision making.' WHAT SHOULD the University faculty do? My own view is that collective bargaining is not now called for here. We have had an excellent framework for working with the administration and re- cent modifications give promise of an even more effective faculty role in leadership of our institution. We shall come under great pres- sure to "unionize," but I would not advocate doing so unless our procedures have - clearly failed. Those procedures are going to be very severely tried in this period of economic stress. However, I am optimistic that they will not fail. THE SENATE ASSEMBLY Com- mittee on Faculty Rights and Re- sponsibilities, commissioned to re- port on present and future faculty input into University financial- and organizational policies, has pro- posed that the Economic Status Committee serve as a quasi-bar- gaining committee on certain is- sues, without legal status as a bar- gaining agent. I am skeptical about the suc- ces of such "consultative negotia- tions," but they have worked (for example, in Ontario) and, if pro- perly designed. may serve as one additional means of strengthening the faculty's role. Meyer Ryder is a professor of industrial relations of Senate Assembly. He has served as an arbitrator disputes. and a mem&.t in many tabor --- (grassroots 4 Blacks and whites by mark dillen __ _ Don't be fooled-all is not well D ON'T WORRY. The University tells us via the University Record that everything is going just fine with the enrollment of black students here. The latest issue of the administration mouth- piece heralds the recruitment of the 1,700 black students on campus right now, one-half of the Uni- versity's ten per cent black en- rollment "goal." Well, don't let it fool you. The University may be meeting its liberal commitment by getting more blacks here physically, but most people - including students - are failing to build any sense of community between the races. This in itself, considering t h e scope of the task, would not be so great a cause for fault-finding. After all, no one should expect this institution surrounding us to magically reform the orientation that made this a'lily-white status factory in the first place. Even the most idealistic white k i d s should not have been expected to divest themselves overnight of the racism and ignorance they by institutionalized attempts to make them a part of a society which is alien to them. In t h e dorms, blacks congregate w i t h friends - those with whom they share an identity. And, naturally, a suburban white kid has little in common with an urban black. In this larger context, the pro- posal for black corridors within dormitories which seems headed for final approval by the Univer- sity, does not further separatism, but is ierely an acknowledge- ment of the separatism which al- ready exists. It won't "solve things by a long shot, but it will enable blacks to relate to the University environment in a more comfortable and consistent way. . Luckily, John FeldkaMp, direc- tor of housing, seems to have re- cognized this. Other officials and students are hung up over whether it means segregation. If they were really concerned with more than the word, the University w o u I d have been changed long ago. Old Ladies don't rate A FEW DAYS ago, it was a rather wet, dismal day in Ann Arbor. An old lady was sitting on the 'sidewalk near the Huron Va4- ley National Bank on N o r t h University. On the hour, as class- es changed, students and their pro- fessors would fill the sidewalk, sometimes turning to take a quick glance as they passed by. A sign said "Here shoes shines." No one stopped. It seems that old ladies j u s t don't rate anymore. Especially if they're immigrants. And too young for Social Security. And live in Ann Arbor. Tmy 040% ON OSN AM6 WL dWOWN,IUJ x FAVOR L.OAL (;NW0L O F 5 600 0 0$'' probably brought with them. BUT THE LOW degree of aware- ness 'and high degree of fear in every segment of the campus community right now is sufficient testimony that many have not even been trying to construct a community with blacks and whites living and learning among each other. The University - and thus this community - inherited and has perpetuated this problem and has done little beyond making it more possible for disadvantaged blacks and other minorities to come here. As long as those coming here shar- ed the prevalent attitudes tow- ard the University as an insti- tution - reflecting values of white middle class youth - no more was necessary. BUT NOW that is not the case and blacks rightly feel intimidated ' ' , 4 I Anniversaries o By TAMMY JACOBS Y'ESTERDAY AND today were anniversaries. Of sorts. On Feb. 18, 1970, 12 people were arrested as a General Electric job recruiter was locked in the West Engineering Bldg., 2,000 marchers confronted police at City Hall to protest the Chicago Conspiracy trial convictions and black students were preparing the demands which were to virtually shut down the University in March. A year ago today ,two people were arrested trying to enter a locked Administration Bldg., several hun- dred persons marched aiound campus, and there was a brief sit-in in the LSA Bldg in protest of regental rejection of an Office of Student Services of actions past with no fanfare, no outcry, they voted it down. WOULD IT HAVE made any difference to the Regents if opponents of the research had flocked to yesterday's meeting, chanting and waving signs. The violence, the arrests, sit-ins and demonstra- tions didn't help last year or the year before, one might say with relative accuracy. Why complain about a lack of action now? But, while the blood and thunder of one and two years ago might not have helped, it did focus at- tention-it was alive, it showed a caring for the issues involved. And the deadness yesterday when the most recent of student-faculty dreams went down to the drain was stifling. And indicative of the times.. Letters to The Datly* A14 ~ SI OTd8Ui A 6H Iwo PUimse OF 1r4E16 Ate fM4H'IEW5 WHIICH HAVE Oak 41AiW ON M A4 1~~oNS. ,{ Ashamed of city, To The Daily: AS A CITIZEN of Ann Arbor and mother of four school-age children, one of whom is black, I am ashamed of and saddened by the school board's decision Wednesdayto reject Dr. McPher- son's plan for effective greater equality at the beginning level of school experience in one section of +e-ta +nn whprp. it nr a i it is well to work for equality in Selma and Little Rock but not in Ann Arbor. I am ashamed that this is so. i But the decision also saddens the because I thought that we, every person white and American, had over the last ten. years had our' racist ,fears, ambivalences, and emotions sufficiently exposed and examined so that we would be able to recognize them when they ap- I I