UMass Union

The University of Massachusetts has refused to recognize a union as the official collective bargaining representative of its faculty, because of a disagreement over the union's composition.

The UMass faculty chose the Massachusetts Society of Professors (MSP) to be their official representative in an election last February by a vote of 865 to 680, with 380 not voting, Ralph Flynn, of the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA), said yesterday.

In hearings held last October, the Massachusetts Labor Relations Commission (MLRC) recognized the faculty's right to a "collective bargaining unit" and defined the new union's composition, Flynn said.

The university disagrees with the MLRC's inclusion of four groups in the union: department chairmen, part time faculty, visiting faculty and faculty funded by "soft money" or federal grants, Howard White, press secretary for UMass President Robert C. Wood, said yesterday.

Flynn said the administration's challenge to the union's composition was just a delaying tactic. He added that Wood was "out to bust the union."

However, Flynn said UMass would probably recognize the union if there was "wheeling and dealing" over its composition. Flynn said he did not feel that such a compromise with the administration would be fair to the excluded members.

The UMass Board of Trustees "accepts the concept of a faculty union," White said. The determination of the union's composition is a "critical decision" for the future of UMass, he added.

The Board of Trustees does not feel that department chairmen should be included in the union because of their managerial role, White said.

White added that the other groups which the administration wants to exclude do not share "a sufficient community of interest" with the full time faculty. A diverse union would make it difficult for the university to reach contract agreements that were satisfactory to all members, he added.

The MSP may file an unfair labor practices charge with MLRC, forcing a hearing on the matter, Flynn said. He added that, although the MLRC would probably side with the MSP, the UMass administration would challenge the ruling in court.

The MSP has not filed such a complaint because they feel the possible delay of one to two years is unacceptable, Flynn said. He added that the union is trying to change the administration's decision by putting "political pressure" on Wood.

"Wood is thinking of running for governor," and refusal to recognize the faculty union would hurt his position in the Democratic party, Flynn said. Union complaints have already caused Wood's removal from an important party committee, he added.

Flynn said he is also trying to convince the UMass board of trustees to reverse their decision because the Board acted without understanding the rationale for the MLRC's decision.

No transcripts of the October hearings were distributed to board members, Flynn said, but White said that extensive summaries of the hearings were. White said that the exact vote of the board is presently privileged information.

The 25 day hearings were the longest in state labor relations history, Flynn said. The union won many but not all of its demands for its composition, he added.

White said the issue of the faculty union's composition if brought to court has no precedent in Massachusetts. He added that precedents in other states "go both ways" and depend upon the structure of the university in question.

MSP officials said that the university has spent $100,000 in lawyers' fees by trying to delay approval of the union, and would spend considerably more money in a trial. Flynn said that the money would be better spent on increased faculty salaries.

White said "the $100,000 figure is exaggerated." He added that the trial would be worth the expense, because of the "long range harmful consequences" of having an "incorrect union composition."