Minutes of the SCU Student Senate Meeting May 10, 2018
Senate Chair Aly Motzel
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal
First Year Senators:
Parliamentarian Kayla Williams
Payton Dizney Swanson
1. CALL TO ORDER
Senate Chair Aly Motzel called the May 10th, 2018 meeting of the Santa Clara University Student Senate to order at 7:02 pm in the Williman Room of Benson.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel asked a member to read the invocation. Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell recited the invocation.
2. ROLL CALL
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal took roll at 7:03 pm.
3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Senate Chair Aly Motzel asked the Senate to consider the agenda for the current meeting. She requested questions and comments related to the agenda. Hearing none, she asked for a motion to approve the agenda. The agenda was approved by Junior Senator Victoria Linares and seconded by First Year Senator Kyle Andrews.
4. APPROVAL OF THE PREVIOUS MINUTES
Senate Chair Aly Motzel asked the Senate to consider the previous week’s Meeting Minutes and requested questions and comments related to the minutes. Hearing none, she asked for a motion to approve the Minutes. The motion was made by First Year Senator Sahill Sagar and seconded by Junior Senator Rachel Wiggins.
5. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS
Senate Speakers: Provost Jacobs and John Ottoboni
They both introduced themselves and spoke about their vision for the future of adjunct faculty and their views on the potential unionization. Their presentation is summarized below.
At its heart, SCU is an educational institution and our faculty is the most important part of that vision
We, as the administration, are listing to the concerns of lecturers and adjunct and individual faculty and they have spoke to us
We are changing our administrative timetable to remedy concerns about job stability and contract extension
We are also working towards helping to remedy housing costs, especially for quarterlies
Lecturers and adjuncts haven’t been a part of the faculty senate and we will change that to create a more sustained dialogue with administration
Chief Operating Officer of SCU and legal counsel
I myself have myself been a union member when I changed lights at the Kaiser building before I came to Santa Clara
I stand with unions and we have made mistakes in not listening to the faculty, but the question is whether now is the time to form one
If we have the time to institute the changes Jacobs laid out, do we need to form a union?
Each year we review our budget and net tuition payment covers about 70 percent of our revenue
Faculty are about 62 percent of our costs
As expenses go up, we have to take the money from somewhere
I cannot promise that tuition will not increase because we don’t know how our budget will be affected
I would like to see this worked out as a community because once the union is instituted, our relationships change
Senate Chair Aly Motzel thanked Provost Jacobs and John Ottoboni for their presentation and asked if there were any questions for them.
Sophomore Senator Helen Kassa: Could you elaborate on the right time to form a union?
Answer: We have a collaborative solution and we would like to solve the issues without a third party union
Sophomore Senator Helen Kassa: Were the concerns of the lecturers brought up to the administration before this year?
Answer: About seven year ago, we created the renewable term lecturer positions of three and six years and the senior lecturer contracts out of collaborative governance. Within our professional schools, there is an advantage to having working lecturers and they are part time by nature. Additionally, there are temporary needs when profs leave on sabbatical or other reasons and we hire fixed term lecturers. The third track, of renewable term lecturers, are the focus.
Junior Senator Rory Pannkuk: What are your estimates on the increase in tuition after a union is form and what revenue streams are you looking into cover those.
Answer: I can’t give you a number on an increase, but we would look for revenue from giving, the endowment or other sources. There is no guarantee that a union would cause a tuition increase.
First Year Senator Kyle Andrews: Do you have a timeline on the changes?
Answer: Some will go into place in the fall, some have to go through the collaborative governance, but everything I mentions here today would go into effect next year.
At-Large Senator Nithya Vemireddy: Are the faculty a part of this process?
Answer: Yes, they both came to us individually and they will be working with us along the way as a group. COLA has also been working with us and expressing concerns.
At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: What percentage of the faculty are non-tenure track?
Answer: We have six or seven types of faculty. We use full time equivalent to measure and that is about 50/50.
At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: To me the union would represent the interests of the group more cohesively, is that correct?
Answer: The union does become who we deal with and the relationships depend on the support of the union and the way that negotiations are handled by both groups.
Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: Could you touch on some of the other issues of unionization?
Answer: Walk outs can be a problem and strikes can be part of the negotiation. The biggest thing for me is the relationship and the community we have here can handle it. If we cannot, then it is on us.
First Year Senator Ciara Moezidis: Shouldn't the changes that are going on now have started earlier?
Answer: We did fail to address them. We used to not allow lecturers and adjuncts to be on the faculty and senate and we did not allow them to help write the policy and curriculum changes. We want to change the governance structures.
First Year Senator Sahill Sagar: Does administration support unionization?
Answer: Father Engh has been listening to concerns and he will announce his decision the week of may 21st.
First Year Senator Sahill Sagar: Why is the university hesitant to support the faculty’s vote to form a union?
Answer: We have to review the proposed agreement and it severely constrains the ability of the university to function during the voting. I think that the time is better spent on the solutions within our system.
Sophomore Senator Helen Kassa: Was it the demand for unionization that drive the changes?
Answer: Some of the concerns did precede this moment and that is where RTLs came from. Now we are recognizing the shortfalls of the past. At this point in time, we are saying that we can address most of the concerns.
Sophomore Senator Helen Kassa: If the concerns are not addressed in a certain amount of time, would the university then support the formation of the union?
Answer: What we are asking for is time to remedy the issues. If we do not, then that is on us and there are ways to move forward.
At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: if there was a union movement going on in the past, would there have been a different outcome?
Answer: The circumstances would have changed and we would have had to deal with a third party negotiator.
Sophomore Senator David Warne: Why does the faculty need the approval of the university to hold a vote?
Answer: National Labor Relations Board has laid out a procedure for forming a union and the faculty can follow that process. There is nothing that precludes them from following that.
Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: What does a vote from us say to you?
Answer: If the senate votes yes, then you are saying that the faculty have a right to unionize.
Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: What would a no vote mean?
Answer: It would mean a “no” on the resolution.
Senior Senator Mayron Mulugeta: What are the current avenues for faculty to address concerns? And how long have these same concerns been raised?
Answer: The current avenue is COLA and they report regularly to the faculty senate. COLA is made up more of RTLs than adjuncts and that is an issue. The cola committee has worked for about seven years on the issues.
Student Spencer: In terms of salaries and benefits, why do you think that the teachers need to unionize to address that concern?
Answer: If you are asking is we can address the concerns with our current system with adjustments to voices heard, then I believe we can.
Professor Cronin: In terms of how we talk about the process, what do you take the financial priorities of the university? I saw a chart that shows that 17 percent of the budget is on salaries on benefits. I see the unionization as a way to have a more clear conversation with the administration.
Answer: There are faculty members on the university budget committee and we have had measures for transparency on our priorities.
Professor Cronin: Why would it be the case that tuition could rise if the current planned measures and changes will not increase our costs?
Answer: The question is whether we can generate additional revenue and whether we have to make cuts elsewhere.
6. EXECUTIVE BRANCH UPDATES
Public Relations VP Maggie Hurlbut: We are working on EPP Shirts and a Judicial Newsletter. Reminder to run all advertising with ASG logo on it by PR branch!
Community Development VP Elena Radding: We have voter registration tabling next week. We are asking you guys to help us help the student body get civically engaged. Please sign up on Facebook after senate.
Finance VP Ben Rhoades: We are working on tons of reimbursements. $3,000 from operating budget moved to SAC’s RSO funding for clubs (CSO advisors stripped the other $540 from our budget and distributed to other CSOs). As always, email me with budget/reimbursement questions.Office hours are on Wednesday from 11:45-1:00 and on Friday from 11:45-2:00.
Chief Justice Rachel Brooke Herzog: We have our final bylaw change proposals for you later tonight.
Vice President Sam Perez: My projects are currently on hold as we move through transition. Projects: Sexual Assault Awareness video with PRxDigital, Contraception Distribution Policy, Can’t Thread a Moving Needle follow up, Broncomobile, Bias Incident Tracker, and Peer Health Education. Dates to know: 5/23 at 7:30 PM is the ASG Banquet.
President Jack Herstam: We are working on transitioning. We are archiving and holding interviews for positions. Greek meeting produced plan for next year. Resources for mental health and violence prevention will be available for off-campus Greek life. Dates to know: Workers’ Appreciation Event Saturday June 2, 12-4 PM.
At-Large Senator Nithya Vemireddy: We need help making food and we want to connect with the Benson workers and their families.
7. COMMITTEE UPDATES
COMM - Our Senior Appreciation Event will be on the 16th of May from 12:30 to 3:00 PM. We are going to hand out t-shirts for seniors to sign and have food, popsicles, and music. We are also putting out a publicity video with PR for the event. Committee Member’s Projects: Junior Senator Victoria Linares: Working with Rachel in creating van/ride sharing for student safety. At-Large Senator Annie Martin: Working with the Wellness Center and PR in filming new Step Up video; please reach out to her if you would like to help. At-Large Senator Rahaima Choudhry: Helping SSA plan an event happening this quarter. Also planning Spirituality Day with Campus Ministry. Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: Met with Bon Appetit to fix Tapingo issues and went to dining operations meeting today. Please contact Duncan with any Benson/Tapingo. Dates to know: Senior appreciation day on Wednesday 5/16
Junior Senator Rory Pannkuk: Sahill and I are hosting a networking night for those interested in entrepreneurship on Tuesday of next week.
CUIC - The CSI Website will be updated next week. Committee Member’s Projects: Senior Senator Mayron Mulugeta: Went to Inclusive Excellence Committee meeting and is working on Countdown to Graduation event with Nithya Vemireddy. First Year Senator Ciara Moezidis: Working on “Earth Week” VTA Competition with Residence Halls and working with Peer Health Educators on Bronco Positivity event. Pictures were taken and working on creating the posters and covers. Please reach out to me if you can help me with graphic design and putting the posters together. At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: Working on drafting a proposal to give to administration to get QPR training for all first years. First Year Senator Robbie Nunes: Working on getting a commuter lounge resolution going. Dates to know: None.
FOC - Committee Member’s Projects: Sophomore Senator Helen Kassa: Working on getting backpack hangers for the library and is collaborating with CommDev to do a meet that candidates for county supervisor that will have Chick-fil-a. Junior Senator Alex Perlman: The hammock poles will be put in on the Swig Lawn. Meeting with administration to plan the pilot program for Nap Pods and to begin the implementation of the double-business major. First Year Senator Kyle Andrews: Working to get a photo printer for the students. Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal: Working on a new student involvement survey with Tedd Vanadilok and on a Contingent Faculty Union Resolution. At-Large Senator Kristin Godfrey: Working on a resolution to increase professor diversity with Rahaima Choudhry. Junior Senator Rachel Wiggins: Working on a safe ride home program with Victoria Linares through Campus Safety. Also working with At-Large Senator Payton Dizney Swanson to plan a faculty appreciation event. Sophomore Senator Avery James: Working on creating a way to beautify the construction fences on campus with art or informational posters and has now been approved by administration. Reach out to her if you have any ideas or would like to help. Dates to know: Faculty Appreciation Event May 23rd from 5:30 to 7:30 PM
SAC - We are working on RSO reform with Sam Kibbish to streamline the RSO approval process and the maintenance of RSO program. The +500 funding request bylaw is going well.
8. NEW BUSINESS
Senate Speaker: Alexander Mabanta from SC ALA
They both introduced themselves and spoke about their vision for the future of adjunct faculty and their views on the potential unionization. Their presentation is summarized below:
The City of Santa Clara is reforming its electoral system
The City of Santa Clara has had an all white city council since 1951
That is because it has an at large elections system which means that every single person votes for all six members
The current mayor and her father have held the position for decades
This system is also illegal because the California Voting Rights law prohibits at large elections
No one has challenged the system until 2001 and our non-profit filed a lawsuit in 2017 because this is a city with 37% asian american population and 19 percent latino
64% of the city is non-white and has never had a voice on the city council
Measure A would divide the city into two at large elections which won't evade the lawsuit
We proposed a six district system, but they chose to move forwards with measure a which packs the two districts with 55% white voters
It would also introduce ranked choice voting which requires that each voter ranks each candidate and if the person does not rank all candidates, their vote doesn't count
The City of Santa Clara does not have a plan to educate the voting population on this plan which especially hurts people of color and non-english speakers
We are backed by almost every minority advocacy group and the SCU MCC has endorsed us
The DeAnza College Student body has also endorsed us
Senate Chair Aly Motzel thanked Alexander Mabanta for his presentation and asked if there were any questions for hi .
At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: With the current lawsuit moving forward, how does Measure A affect that?
Answer: We will have to sue the City of Santa Clara the day after Measure A is approved because it still violates the California Voting Rights Act.
Sophomore Senator David Warne: How does political capital and living in a wealthy neighborhood contribute to dominance in an election?
Answer: It requires large amounts of money to send mailers and the current members have large amounts of money at their disposal to keep the current system in place.
President Jack Herstam: Can you explain how Measure A was formed?
Answer: The City of Santa Clara saw that they could lose in the courts and the create the charter review committee. The committee created measure a and it was put on the ballot and an organization helped to put ranked choice voting.
Discussion of Local Measure A
Senate Chair Aly Motzel asked for comments and concerns regarding Measure A and the prospect of writing a resolution to oppose it.
Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: Is there a way that we can hear from someone who supports Measure A?
President Jack Herstam: We could find someone to do that. I have literature that i can present that supports measure a.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel: We are discussing now if this is something we want. Tonight is the vote on whether we want to start the four week process to have an endorsement of this opposition.
At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: We should vote yes to further this discussion.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel, hearing no more concerns, she asked for a motion to vote. The motion was made by Senior Senator Amy Monzon and seconded by First Year Senator Ciara Moezidis. Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal took roll and the Senate voted to begin the process of writing a resolution to oppose Measure A.
RSO Status Voting on Odyssey
Senate Chair Aly Motzel asked for comments and concerns on granting Odyssey RSO status?
Sophomore Senator David Warne: SAC had no comments or concerns.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel, hearing no more concerns, she asked for a motion to vote. The motion was made by Sophomore Senator Avery James and seconded by First Year Senator Ciara Moezidis. Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal took roll and the Senate voted grant Odyssey RSO status.
Senator Outreach Bylaw Change
Chief Justice Rachel Brooke Herzog, First Year Senator Kyle Andrews, and Junior Senator Alex Perlman read the proposed bylaw change to office hours (attached).
Chief Justice Rachel Brooke Herzog: Instead of one hour per week, all senators are required to attend on campus organization meetings at least twice a month. The senator must meet with at least three different organizations and have five meetings a quarter.
First Year Senator Kyle Andrews: I see it as a way to help ASG relationships and hold RSOs accountable.
Junior Senator Rory Pannkuk: What does being a member of a club mean?
First Year Senator Kyle Andrews: Any part of the club because we want senators to meet more people outside of their friend groups.
Chief Justice Rachel Brooke Herzog: We can change it to read active member, but it is meant to encourage people to go outside of their own circle
First Year Senator Ciara Moezidis: When I was working with constituents and groups, people would like to see us more. I think this would be effective in the same way that we sometimes collaborate with groups on campus.
At-Large Senator Nithya Vemireddy: I worry that this could feel like us playing the RSO police. Could we add that the senators must get permission to visit an RSO?
At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: I think that we should be free to visit any RSO as students.
At-Large Senator Nithya Vemireddy: in this case though we are visiting as a member of ASG and we should notify them.
Junior Senator Alex Perlman: It should be very casual and more like a notification.
First Year Senator Sahill Sagar: I think we should notify students and RSOs if we pass this.
Sophomore Senator Helen Kassa: I like the email notification both because it helps the parliamentarian keep track of who is completing the requirement and helps senators connect with the clubs.
Senior Senator Amy Monzon: I think we should add tabling as another way to get office hours because it will further apathy to connecting with constituents.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel asked for a straw poll on designated tabling. The senate voted to add that requirement.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel: Please talk to each to each other and to constituents about this change before next week.
COMMDEV Material and Non-Material Bylaw Changes
Chief Justice Rachel Brooke Herzog read the bylaw changes to the CommDev branch (attached). She noted that the biggest change was the addition of the position of City and Neighborhood Relations Off-Campus Chair.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel: Please talk to each to each other and to constituents about these changes before next week.
ASG Advisor Tedd Vanadilok presented the CSO 2018-19 Budget Proposals and Recommendations:
Dedicated annual budget to cover operating expenses and student staff stipends
Dedicated office space and storage
Dedicated capital assets and regular replacement at no cost to the CSO (i.e. equipment, furniture, etc. valued at $1,000 or more)
Dedicated advisor through the Center for Student Involvement or approved faculty
Approval and renewal
Approving a new CSO takes at least a year as opposed to approving a new RSO which occurs quarterly
CSOs recharter every 7 years (1-2 CSOs per year, year-long process) as opposed to annual renewal for RSOs (renewal can be done in 10 minutes)
Student Activities Fee Committee (SAFC)
3-5 students appointed by ASG Vice President and approved by Student Senate
Advisor: Matt Cameron, Assistant Vice Provost for Student Life
Formal presentation + Q&A
Conversations and negotiations
SAFC recommendations to Student Senate
Student Senate recommendations
Both sets of recommendations submitted to Jeanne Rosenberger, Vice Provost for Student Life
Starts in early April, ends late June
Each CSO reviews its current year’s budget allocation for operating expenses, student staff stipends, and revenue generation.
Each CSO prepares its budget proposal for the next year by proposing any changes to operating expenses, student staff stipends, and revenue generation.
A funding board (SAFC in prior years; CSO advisors this year) reviews all CSO budget proposals and develops a set of recommendations for each proposal by approving, not approving, and/or modifying proposed changes.
Student Senate reviews the funding board’s set of recommendation and develops its own set of recommendations for each proposal.
Both the funding board’s set of recommendations and Student Senate’s set of recommendations are submitted to the Vice Provost for Student Life for review and initial approval.
The Vice Provost for Student Life distributes initial budget allocations to the CSOs for their review.
CSOs have the opportunity to negotiate any additional changes that they want to make to their initial budget allocations.
The Vice Provost for Student Life reviews these requested changes before distributing final budget allocations to the CSOs.
April 25: budget proposal due to Tedd Vanadilok
April 26-May 7: review by the CSO advisors and any necessary meetings and/or email conversations between the CSO advisors and CSOs requesting changes from the prior year in order to understand reasoning behind changes, clarify proposal details, etc
May 8-9: drafting of budget recommendations by the CSO advisors to present to the Student Senate
May 10: presentation of recommendations by the CSO advisors to the Student Senate which will develop its own set of recommendations
May 11: both sets of recommendations submitted to Jeanne Rosenberger
May 14-24: review of budget proposals and recommendations by Jeanne
May 25: initial budget allocations submitted by Jeanne to CSOs for review
May 28-June 8: necessary conversations and meetings between Jeanne, CSOs, and CSO advisors to finalize budget allocations
June 11-15: final review by Jeanne
June 18: final budget allocations submitted by Jeanne to CSOs
CSOs are able to interchange operating funds for student staff funds.
CSOs are given more choices for stipend amounts per position.
CSOs are now able to have a co-director model.
CSOs are no longer required to generate revenue if there is no natural method to do so.
CSOs are given more responsibility to make internal budget allocation choices without impacting other CSOs.
The prior CSO budgeting process had a “robbing Peter to pay Paul” feeling to it where one CSO had to lose funding in order for another CSO to gain funding.
Instead, the focus is now on each CSO controlling its own financial situation.
There are some CSOs that willfully decided that they need less funding, in which case, these funds may now be reallocated to CSOs or RSOs that demonstrate need for more funding.
Activities Planning Board (APB)
Total budget for FY18 = $210,100
Total requested for FY19 = $213,100
Difference = increase of $3,000
Student staff budget increased by $3,000 and revenue was at first reduced by $3,000 from $71,000 to $68,000 then revised to remain the same at $71,000
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
Approval to increase student staff budget by $3,000
Recommendation to increase revenue by $3,000 from $71,000 to $74,000 or decrease operating budget by $3,000 or combination of the two
Associated Student Government
Total budget for FY18 = $56,900
Total requested for FY19 = $51,360
Difference = decrease of $5,540
Operating budget and student staff budget decreased by $5,540 and revenue was reduced from $2,000 to $0
Net result is $3,540 which ASG proposes to reallocate to RSOs
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
Total budget for FY18 = $87,600
Total requested for FY19 = $91,140
Difference = increase of $3,540
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
Into the Wild (ITW)
Total budget for FY18 = $90,600
Total requested for FY19 = $90,600
Difference = no change
Initially, operating budget increased and student staff budget decreased by the same amounts and revenue remained the same at $37,500 which resulted in no net change
Then, ITW requested additional funds to help cover fees to pay professional guides for certain trips that would benefit more from professional guides rather than student guides (i.e. in terms of experience level and risk management)
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
KSCU 103.3 FM
Total budget for FY18 = $35,075
Total requested for FY19 = $40,000
Difference = increase of $4,925
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
Recommendation to not increase operating budget and student staff budget by $4,925 since $3,000 for website fees was a one-time expense in 2017-18 (not an annual expense) and KSCU historically underspends its student staff budget by at least $2,000 since a majority of staff are not needed during the summer
Total budget for FY18 = $62,000
Total requested for FY19 = $61,550
Difference = decrease of $450
Operating budget decreased by $4,880, student staff budget increased by $4,430, and revenue was reduced by $450 from $5,700 to $5,250
No net change
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
Santa Clara Community Action Program (SCCAP)
Total budget for FY18 = $70,700
Total requested for FY19 = $70,100
Difference = decrease of $600
Operating budget decreased by $4,250, student staff budget increased by $3,650, and revenue was reduced by $300 from $600 to $300
Net result is $300 left to allocate to SCCAP or reallocate to other CSOs or RSOs
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
Santa Clara Review (SCR)
Total budget for FY18 = $48,805
Total requested for FY19 = $48,805
Difference = no change
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
The Redwood (RDWD)
Total budget for FY18 = $34,800
Total requested for FY19 = $33,775
Difference = decrease of $1,025
No change to operating budget, student staff budget decreased by $1,025, and revenue was reduced by $1,000 from $20,000 to $19,000
Net result is $25 left to allocate to RDWD or reallocate to other CSOs or RSOs
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
The Santa Clara (TSC)
Total budget for FY18 = $58,500
Total requested for FY19 = $58,500
Difference = no change
Initially, no changes to operating budget, student staff budget, and revenue which resulted in no net change
Then, TSC requested additional funds to help cover printing costs due to decreasing ad revenue coming in to the newspaper each year
Recommendations by CSO advisors:
$3,540 from ASG
$25 from RDWD
$300 from SCCAP
Total = $3,865
$3,000 to RSOs for SAC discretionary funding process
$400 from ITW for professional guides
$465 from TSC for printing costs
Total = $3,865
Senate Chair Aly Motzel thanked Tedd Vandilok for his presentation and asked if there were any questions for him.
ASG Advisor Tedd Vanadilok: You don’t vote on anything, but you give a recommendation to Jeanne.
Sophomore Senator David Warne: SAC agrees with this.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel: Why does this seem less contentious than last year?
ASG Advisor Tedd Vanadilok: last year there was a 20k to be distributed so people wanted that money.
President Jack Herstam: We received an 18 percent increase to allocate to RSOs that year.
Finance Chair Ben Rhoades: We are dropping money to set a precedent because we like to collaborate with other groups.
Senate Chair Aly Motzel: Please talk to constituents and send your comments to me.
9. OLD BUSINESS
Adjunct Faculty Resolution Discussion and Voting
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal read the resolution (attached).
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal: What I wanted to talk about is some data on universities who have unionized and what that has done. The schools we looked into are; Saint Mary's College, University of San Francisco, Dominican University, Notre Dame de Namur. Institutions that have recently entered into agreements with SEIU 1021 have not
drastically increased their tuitions after agreeing to provide their instructors and lecturers with good, family-supporting jobs. Indeed, those colleges and universities that recently entered into agreements with SEIU 1021 have had lower tuition increases when compared to Santa Clara University’s recent hikes. Also, the reason we brought it forth is that a no vote means we don’t support the faculty’s right to unionize. Since these issues have been coming up for a long time and haven’t been addressed, we are trying to affirm the right to have them vote and asking administration to help them hold that vote in a collaborative way.
Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: So does a yes vote mean that unionization will occur as fast as possible. It seemed that the speaker was being quite unclear, but what I got from them is that they would appreciate more time to have negotiations with the faculty. Will voting no lead to that?
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal: We want the vote to be held within the school and not have an outside negotiator. We are asking for that right to vote to be honored.
Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: So they don’t need the vote to happen?
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal: Correct. They are asking for it because they want the vote and support from the administration.
Sophomore Senator Duncan McDonell: Why is it preferred?
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal We don’t want to bring an outside person and create a divide. The administration is currently going over the proposal that the faculty has submitted.
At-Large Senator Nithya Vemireddy: Just to clarify, it is illegal to say that that they do or do not support unionization? Can you please talk about what a no vote means?
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal: I can answer that. That’s what the National Labor Act is - it prohibits an employer to try to stop unionization.That’s why they can’t say they don’t support it. A no vote would mean that we do not want the adjunct faculty to hold a vote and we do not support their right to do that.
Sophomore Senator David Warne: Adjuncts can threaten to unionize and once they do it they can threaten to walk out. It seems to me that since changes are underway, maybe it’s better that they don’t unionize because in a sense they are already a union. Just by saying that they want to unionize they have gotten what they wanted.
Professor Kusanovich: Unionization to us seems completely different than you just heard. They are missing some of the point. We prefer to have a voice and be at the table. Lecturers and adjuncts are not a walking out group; walk outs and strikes are a last resort.
Professor Cronin: I agree that we don’t want it to be forced. I really want to have this collaboration. At the faculty senate, I wouldn’t be able to have this debate with colleagues that are hiring me
Professor Kusanovich: Even though it seems like all this is happening, we don’t have negotiation power and to threaten organizing a union is really hard. Getting to this point to have a conversation took a lot of work and took a union talking to us for months saying that they can support us. It takes a lot of work and we have spent hours talking to each other and voicing our needs.
Senior Senator Amy Monzon: I’m confused why the definition is different between the two parties. Why does one think there will be a third party to help them communicate?
Professor Kusanovich: We would be working with SEIU to help us with legal information. We don’t currently have what they have like Ottoboni and his legal counsel. We are looking for a clergy member from a different university or parish priest or nun to come in and count the votes of the election.
Junior Senator Rory Pannkuk: How do we keep a check that tuition doesn't go to. What does it mean that we are supporting those who are in need at the cost of another. The tuition at this school is going up higher than other schools. How do we ensure tuition won’t go up? We need check and balances
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal: None of nour resolutions have a check; they are recommendations and they are a way for the administration to hear the voice of the students. I added the stipulation about tuition to let the administration know that the student body is concerned about tuition increases.
Student and SCCAP Member Marissa: I am almost fully on scholarship and I don’t want tuition to go up, but tuition is going up and professors aren’t even unionized.
Professor Kusanovich: This is a desire to do our job better. A lot of us have to work two jobs in order to work here. That’s not what we want to teach effectively. We want to have health care and have a good living situation. We want more on-one-on time with you so we don’t need a second job.
At-Large Senator Bjorn Thyrring: First, I want to make it clear for you any worker has the right to form a union. The difference is that they want to have a more collaborative process. If we say no, that doesn’t change anything. If Fr. Engh doesnt want it then they can bring in a third party and do it that way. It’s just us doing this to make it more collaborative. Also, as the only senator who has been in a union, forming a union would be everyone's voice instead of a panel which isn't collaborative and founded on the ideas of a collaboration of power which goes against what they said.
First Year Senator Kyle Andrews: It looks like they are really trying hard to make improvements. Is there a way that the vote can be put on hold for a year to let the administration try to fix the issues.
Pro-Tempore Sam McNeal: I don’t think we’re going do that tonight and we should discuss the resolution, not try to provide solutions for the university.
Junior Senator Rachel Wiggins: Will we have a chance to talk to the union as the process goes on?
Professor Cronin: The short answer is that even if there was a vote there is a whole other