Letter: Why Vote No on Issue 2

By this time, much has been written and said about Issue 2/Senate Bill 5 and which way you should vote. Rather than try to respond to everything I have read, I prefer to simply share why I will vote no on Issue 2. 

There are many questions to be answered about this issue, but these are the ones I focused on, ones dealing with state universities – since that is where I work. 

They say that no one will completely lose collective bargaining rights under SB5.  Is that true for university faculty?

NO – language in SB5 makes it clear that university faculty are to be deemed “managerial” employees and thus ineligible to collectively bargain. It is clear from our current Collective Bargaining Agreement that in the vast majority of cases: we do not make decisions, we give advice. The only thing that the administration is required to do with regard to the advice of faculty is to allow us the opportunity to give it prior to a decision being made. That is clearly not acting as a “manager,” yet under the language of SB5 the mere fact that faculty have an opportunity to make non-binding recommendations about who to hire, about whether or not to tenure or promote, about what direction an academic program should move in to best serve our students and community, we are deemed managers and cannot bargain to preserve our ability to be heard.

Will restricting collective bargaining for faculty and university staff reduce tuition?

NO – pay and benefits for unionized faculty and staff is not the major cause for large increases in tuition costs. Lack of state support, increases in the number of administrators and administrative professionals (who are not unionized and receive higher compensation than all university staff and a majority of faculty), and choices made by the administration regarding how to spend the university’s money are the drivers of tuition increases. 

Will university faculty pay more for their benefits?

NO – at Kent State, almost every faculty member already pays more than the 15 percent required by Senate Bill 5. The individuals at Kent State who will be most affected by the implementation of the benefits provision of SB5 are the civil service employees (who are not unionized) and the members of the AFSCME collective bargaining unit. Currently benefit costs are calculated on a progressive scale, negotiated by the Tenured/Tenure Track Collective bargaining unit in its agreement, which provides relief to the lowest paid employees of the university by charging a higher rate to those who are higher paid – faculty and administrators. SB5 would prevent the continuation of that practice and those employees least able to absorb the increase will be the losers.

Will SB5 change what university faculty pay into their pensions?

NO – the faculty at Kent State University have always paid the employee contribution set by the state legislature into their pension. Nothing about SB5 changes that. And nothing about SB5 changes how much an employee contributes to their pension fund – currently it is 10%. 

Other questions exist, but the answers to these four were enough to convince me that a "No" vote was the right vote for me. If you are still undecided, please take these four “no's" into consideration and join me in voting NO on Issue 2.

Kara L. Robinson
Chapter and Tenured/Tenure-Track Bargaining Unit President
American Association of University Professors – Kent State University Chapter