Response

[Richard Nettell]

from John Wendell, with his kind permission:

HGEA gave up its right to strike and opted for binding arbitration.  By doing that they ended up with a poor settlement because they were afraid of the arbitration outcome. While it is true that HSTA had the right to strike and still settled with furloughs they did it in such a way that the Governor and the legislature are having to deal with the public outrage caused by the cutting of funding for education which would not have happened if the Governor and the BOE had been able to force teachers to give up their preparation days and take a pay cut, which probably would have been the outcome if they didn't have the right to strike (no arbitrator would have put forth cutting the teaching days to 163) so I think it is fair to say that they got more than HGEA because they had the right to strike and it looks like HSTA will be getting a lot of their lost pay back too.     

I think the administration has paused in trying to force the LBFO on us because they were shocked by the 83% rejection vote.  If it had been close they would have started the legal proceedings right after the vote ... the 83% told them even if they win in court they might still have to face a strike. Right now we don't have the right to strike because the contract is still in effect and Article XXIX prevents us from striking.  If they win in court it is truly a double edged sword for them because we win the right to strike.  If we lose in court we will have to decide whether to accept the LBFO or to strike.  Those will be our choices.    UHPA didn't decide on this plan B - this is the only possible plan B if we lose in court.  I thought this was made clear to the members when we were considering the LBFO - that if we accepted the LBFO we were giving up our right to strike but if we rejected it and they win in court, we still have our right to strike.  Our real power is not the evergreen clause - it is the right to strike.  With the economic resources at stake in the University, external grants and tuition money, our strike threat has a lot of force behind it and that force is stronger in the current fiscal situation, not weaker.  The administration will be facing a fiscal disaster that pales in comparison to what they are facing now if they have to refund tuition because we strike in the middle of the semester and the grant money stops coming in.

It is nice to have the evergreen clause but our strength does not come from the courts, it comes exclusively from our resolve to defend our right to be treated fairly and equitably and our ability to express that resolve on the picket line.  I think it is important that the faculty understand that and I think it is important that they start planning for financially surviving a strike.  There is a lot they can do now to make sure they can weather a strike and it is worth planning for.  For example, I already have set up a line of credit that I will tap if a strike looks imminent (better to take the money out before the strike).  It might be worth preparing some material for the faculty on financial planning for a strike now.  I would think this would, more than anything else we can do right now, make the administration realize there are consequences for them if they continue to play the bully.  

In solidarity, - John  

Richard Westbury Nettell, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor

English Department

University of Hawaii at Manoa

Honolulu, HI 96822

(808) 956-3036