AUFA member’s open letter to AU Research Office about Elsevier’s PURE

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boycott_Elsevier_2.png

From: Mark McCutcheon  
Sent: February 1, 2023 9:27 AM 

Subject: Re: Researcher Profile Data Request (Stage 2)  

I’m writing to reiterate my considered and principled refusal to provide any data, personal or professional, to any Elsevier service or platform, including PURE. I have several reasons for standing by this decision. 

First, AU’s intellectual property policy recognizes that intellectual property rights (e.g. copyright) in research belong not to the university but to the individual researcher. (See 4.3.c at https://www.athabascau.ca/university-secretariat/_documents/policy/intellectual-property-policy.pdf). That policy empowers me to manage my research activity and products as I best see fit. The university has no claim to my intellectual property. That said, I do allow the university to host or represent my research in appropriate forums and spaces – meaning those aligned with Open Access and, indeed, with our own university’s open mission. For example, the AU library’s “AU Space” open access repository now includes most of my published work. But beyond what I decide to permit the university to license, the university has no claim on my research. 

Second, my commitment to open access research and publishing is squarely opposed to Elsevier as a massive corporation that, for years, has attacked and worked against the open access movement. I have published work that openly criticizes Elsevier. I deliberately publish in journals and books that are not Elsevier-owned. Since 2018 I have served AU Press as Chair of its editorial board; AU Press only published in open access. And for a decade I have been my Faculty’s academic rep on the office of the president’s ad hoc copyright committee (CC’d). Our work in that committee has focused on promoting and developing open access, and on organizing and lobbying scholars across Canada against repeated legislative attempts to toughen copyright law. My name is on several petitions and scholarly mobilizations against Elsevier. In light of that principled opposition, I categorically will not contribute anything to Elsevier, because I refuse to help the business, reputation, or profitability of a firm that has so persistently attacked AU’s mission for so long. 

Third, I understand this situation as a question of academic freedom, per Article 11 of the AUFA collective agreement (see https://aufa.ca/collective-agreement). That article includes this language: “Members of the University community are entitled, regardless of prescribed doctrine, to freedom in carrying out research and in publishing the results thereof” (p. 52). That language entitles me to conduct and share my research as I see fit. Since my research publication record has dealt extensively with the issue of open access, I consider it an infringement on my academic freedom to be obliged to provide free data to an organization I resolutely oppose and have published my opposition to. To participate in an Elsevier platform would for me pose a risk of reputational harm. In this context I must point out that there is a risk of reputational harm to AU, not only because becoming an Elsevier client would make a mockery of our hard-earned position as “Canada’s open university,” but also because our copyright committee has, for decades, taken a leadership role among Canadian universities in lobbying the federal government for fairer copyright and in organizing research universities across the country in such mobilizing efforts.  

Fourth, I note that PURE has been used at other universities for performance assessment purposes. AU’s administration has not yet spoken about that potential function, to my knowledge. I would, however, point out that performance assessment at AU for AUFA members is a negotiated matter of annual reporting, detailed in Article 3.3.4 of our collective agreement. If AU intends to use PURE for assessing the performance of faculty members, doing so could run afoul of that Article if the process is not properly negotiated in bargaining. 

For these reasons, I am refusing to provide any data to an Elsevier platform. With this notice, I would also ask the university not to list or name me on the PURE platform, even in a placeholder capacity.  

Thank you for hearing me on this matter. 

best 

Mark A. McCutcheon (he/him) 

Chair, Centre for Humanities 

Professor, Literary Studies 

Past president, CAFA (2015-17 

Past president, AUFA (2013-14) 

Athabasca University 

AU’s promised research lockout is an illegal attack upon students (see update)

UPDATE April 7th: Within an hour of the blog going out, we received word that the AVP Research is now working on a way to pay tricouncil-funded research assistants in a potential work stoppage. Other issues related to distribution of research funds are as of yet unresolved.

On April 1st, the Associate Vice President of Research, Andrew Perrin, sent an email to staff stating that research activities would cease during a strike. This also includes paid Research Assistant (RA) work. AUFA Executive is currently investigating ways to support RAs who lack union protection, should AU lay them off in any potential work stoppage.

The email reads as follows:

“All research activities will be paused during a labour disruption.

This includes most paid research assistant and trainee work supervised by an AUFA member, as well as administrative functions such as grant reviews and internal submission and approval of applications. AU is unable to provide any support services for research activities to AUFA members while on strike. We will not process any reimbursements for research activities or travel undertaken during a labour disruption. Access to AU’s digital and physical research infrastructure would also not be permitted during a disruption.

AUFA members on Research and Study Leave will have their leave paused in the event of a strike. They will not be compensated during a strike or reimbursed for research expenses normally paid by AU.”

AUFA specifically exempted research activities from a potential strike due to the nature of research, indirect relationship to core university operations, and impact on both researchers and students.

Notably this email was not circulated to students and no clarity has been provided to Research Assistants. During AUFA’s strike authorization vote last Monday, the employer also applied for the right to lock us out.

RAs are our students, and this is a unnecessary attempt to punish students during a work stoppage. A similar research lockout was tried at the University of Lethbridge. Their administration was forced to backtrack because it is illegal.

The Social Sciences and Humanites Research Council (SSHRC) provided the following written statement to CAUT.

In the event of a strike at the institution, the agencies would maintain grant and award funding to researchers, students and fellows for existing research projects. Funds for grants, fellowships, and scholarships must continue to be used for the eligible expenses for which they were awarded. During this time, in keeping with the Tri-Agency Guide on Financial Administration (TAGFA), the institution must ensure that the research project and/or the grantee's signing authority is not compromised. As such, a grantee may choose to delegate signing authority to one or more person at the university for the purpose of approving research expenditures directly related to the funded research.

As indicated in the “Authorization of grant expenditures” section of the TAGFA: “The grant recipient holds the authority to use the grant funds.  Only the grant recipient can delegate authority to use the grant funds. The delegate should possess the skills and knowledge necessary to exercise the role effectively. Approval of the delegated authority must be formally documented using an appropriate delegation instrument and in accordance with the administering institution’s relevant policies and requirements.”  Therefore unless otherwise pre-authorized, only the grantee or authorized delegate should have access to the funds. 

In short, the grant money is not Athabasca University’s to halt. 

AU’s attack on Research Assistants

There are approximately 70 research assistants at Athabasca University who are paid through grant monies. They are distributed between AUPE, AUGSA, and a large pool of excluded RAs. AU’s unilateral decision to cease their employment pay during a potential strike is an extraordinary act of cruelty against the most vulnerable employees at Athabasca University. This is particularly true for the large number of excluded RAs who do not have union protections.

We stand in solidarity with the RAs who have been unfairly targeted by AVP Research Andrew Perrin. AUFA Executive are looking in to how to provide supports for RAs who will be without jobs or union protections.

We are calling about the Associate Vice President Research to retract his statement, and instead promise to reverse course on this illegal attack upon students and faculty.

Solidarity,

David Powell

AUFA President