This post is the third in a series of blog posts providing more detailed analyses of both AUFA’s and AU’s proposals. Today, we’ll examine both AUFA’s and AU’s proposed changes to our academic and professional freedom language.
Under the contract and in this context, “academics” refers to assistant, associate, and full professors and academic coordinators while “professionals” refers to all other AUFA members, including administrative, course production, library, facility, and IT staff.
Current Language
At present, Article 11 of the collective agreement protects academic and professional freedom. The protections for each group are slightly different.
Article 11.2 ensures that AU cannot interfere in the teaching, research, or service work of professors and academic coordinators. It also protects the right of academic staff to criticize Athabasca University. The freedom to criticize AU is an important aspect of collegial governance.
11.2 The common good of society depends upon the search for knowledge and its free exposition. Academic freedom in universities is essential to both these purposes in the teaching function of the university as well as in its scholarship and research. The parties agree that they will not infringe or abridge the academic freedom of any member of the academic community. Members of the University community are entitled, regardless of prescribed doctrine, to freedom in carrying out research and in publishing the results thereof, freedom of teaching and of discussion, freedom to criticize Athabasca University and the Association, and freedom from institutional censorship. Academic freedom does not require neutrality on the part of the individual. Rather, academic freedom makes commitment possible. Academic freedom carries with it the duty to use that freedom in a manner consistent with the scholarly obligation to basic research and teaching, course development and delivery in an honest search for knowledge.
At present, Article 11.3 offers only modest protections for professional staff in the conduct of their duties.
11.3 Each Professional Staff Member must be free to pursue excellence in the professional’s field of competence, must be encouraged to contribute to the intellectual life of the University community, and must be encouraged to contribute to the intellectual life of the professional groups to which the Professional Staff Member belongs.
The duties of professionals are wildly varied but frequently include making important contributions to teaching, undertaking or supporting research, and performing service activities, including participating in institutional governance.
AUFA’s Proposal
Following broad consultations in the spring of 2020, AUFA members strongly supported providing full academic freedom to professional staff members. This proposal was ratified by 91% of AUFA members.
Consequently, AUFA’s proposal insists that academic freedom applies to all AUFA members. AUFA’s proposal reflects the fact that professional staff engage in many of the duties traditionally associated with academic work at AU and deserve the same protections presently enjoyed by professors and academic coordinators.
AU’s Proposal
AU, on the other hand, has proposed completely removing professional freedom (Article 11.3) from the collective agreement. This would strip professional staff members of even the modest protections that they presently enjoy. This is a cynical effort to divide AUFA’s professional and academic members.
AU proposal also narrows academic freedom to simply teaching and research. Institutional criticism would not be protected under AU’s proposal. This proposal would substantially reduce the ability of academics to be critical of the university in either our collegial governance bodies or public forums.
AU’s proposal does not contain any clear prohibition on the university violating our academic freedom. Indeed, AU’s proposal would also give the university the right to limit teaching and research if, in AU’s view, an individual’s academic freedom is not being exercised in “a reasonable and responsible manner.” The employer, of course, would decide what ‘reasonable and responsible’ means. AU’s proposal also contextualizes academic freedom within the university’s ability to set institutional “research and education priorities”.
Analysis
Academic freedom acts as a guarantee of our freedom of thought, belief, and expression as it relates to our jobs. It allows AUFA members to pursue and speak truth in their teaching, research, and service work (including debates in collegial governance bodies and public spheres) without fear of losing our jobs or other forms of reprisal. This freedom, as you know, is a long-standing one in most post-secondary institutions. It’s also a crucial one.
AUFA’s proposal would extend full academic freedom to all AUFA members. This would be a significant gain in rights for AUFA professional members. It would entail no material cost for AU.
By contrast, AU’s proposal would strip professional members of the few protections they have presently, thereby making AU a less attractive place to work and, again, cynically trying to divide AUFA members between professionals and academics.
AU’s proposal would also diminish the academic freedom of professors and academic coordinators by both allowing AU to discipline us for (1) teaching and research that AU disapproves of and (2) any institutional criticism.
It is reasonable to see AU’s proposal also as an effort to limit our ability to exert reputational pressure on AU over collective bargaining matters and for members to fully communicate among themselves and with others (e.g., social media posts). But, it’s also a proposal designed to try to divide our membership, with (moldy) carrots for the academics and sticks for the professionals.
Your Views
AUFA’s bargaining team is interested in hearing the views of the AUFA membership about these proposals. To that end, we have created a short survey.
Bob Barnetson, Chair
Job Action Committee