|
Al-Arian Site Home
USF/UFF Site Home
Major Postings
The Issues
Contact Us
Site Map
|
An Overview of the Entire Controversy
Background: Before Sept. 11
The Year 2001 - 2002
The Year 2002 - 2003
Recent News
|
The year 2002 - 2003:
7 Days: 8/21/02 - 8/27/02
September: 8/21/02 - 9/26/02
Looming Clouds: 9/27/02 - 11/04/02
Anticipation: 11/05/02 - 12/31/02
Transitions: 1/1/03 - 2/19/03
Indictment: 2/20/03 - 2/21/03
Termination: 2/22/03 - 2/28/03
Reverberations: 3/1/03 - 3/19/03
A Greater Circle: 3/20/03 - 3/28/03
Recent News: 3/29/03 -
|
|
|
Anticipation
Links from November 5 to December 31, 2002
For decades, the relationship between USF faculty and the USF
Administration had been regulated by a contract.
But the USF Administration insisted that the reorganization
prevented them from agreeing to extend the contract, and also
from recognizing the union.
This was the contract which UFF contended that the university
was violating in its treatment of Al-Arian.
And now things were coming to a head.
USF had sued Al-Arian, asking for a declaratory ruling that its
proposed letter of termination did not violate Al-Arian's First
Amendment rights.
In December, a federal court dismissed the suit, leaving the
Administration with the choice of appealing or ... doing something
else.
Meanwhile, everyone prepared for Jan. 7, when the reorganization
had been supposed to be finalized, and when USF insisted that the
contract expired.
These links are in a very rough chronological order, and will be
updated as events develop.
Again, links marked with an asterisk (*) are to the LEXIS-NEXIS site: this
is restricted to on-campus users and requires that the user do a search;
two asterisks (**) apply to other restrictions.
WARNING ABOUT `LINK ROT':
Some websites take pages down, or restrict access to them, after some
time passes.
So unfortunately, some of the links on these pages will be inoperative.
However, most of the items can be found by searching
lexis-nexis.
Here are links back to
the site map, to
the main Al-Arian page of this site,
and to
the main UFF/USF page.
|
Either
the law exists
or
it does not.
- Andre Norton
|
|
|
|
|
Previous:
Looming
9/26/02 - 11/4/02
|
|
Next:
Transitions
1/1/03 - 2/19/03
|
|
|
The First Monday after the First Tuesday of November
Nov. 5, 2002, was an election day.
Several contests had some bearing on Al-Arian's case, and on the
position of UFF:
-
The gubernatorial campaign between incumbent Republican
Jeb Bush, Democrat Bill McBride, and independent
Robert Kunst.
Bush had a history of anti-union rhetoric and actions, and had
supported the dismissal of Al-Arian; he was regarded as a
very strong candidate.
McBride had been supported from the beginning by the
Florida Education Association, which saw him as the most
electable Democratic candidate; McBride had remained silent
on Al-Arian.
Kunst was a marginal candidate.
Bush won with 56.2 % of the vote versus McBride's 43.0 %,
with Kunst getting 0.8 %.
-
The race for attorney-general is important because of the
numerous legal issues that can appear in any collision
between union and management.
The race was between Republican Education Commissioner
Charlie Crist, and Democrat State Senator Buddy Dyer.
Crist had played a part in the reorganization of the Florida
State University System, and had expressed his skepticism
of academic freedom.
Dyer was seen as more reliable by the FEA, especially when
it came to dealing with retirement problems.
Crist won with 53.5 % of the vote.
-
U.S. Senator Bob Graham had been very critical of the reorganization
of the Florida SUS, and had launched a referendum to
insulate the Florida public universities from Tallahassee
politics.
The result was Amendment # 11, inspired by the governance system
in North Carolina.
This referendum would add to Florida Constitutional Article IX
a Section 7, which recreates the State University System (SUS),
with a single Board of Governors overseeing the SUS, and
a Boards of Trustees for each university.
Fourteen of the 17 governors would be appointed by the Governor
for staggered terms, the other three being the Commissioner of
Education, and a faculty member and a student selected by
their respective constituencies.
The Board of Governors would have considerable authority for
making policy and controlling the budget.
Each Board of Trustees would have thirteen members, six
appointed by the Governor for staggered terms, five
chosen by the Board of Governors, with the Faculty Senate and
Student Government presidents.
The Amendment passed with 60.2 % of the votes cast.
See the stories on Amendment # 11 in the Nov. 6
Chronicle of Higher Education, the
St. Petersburg Times, and the
Tampa Tribune.
Support from Colleagues out West
On Nov. 15, the Faculty Senate of the
Albuquerque Technical Vocational Institute
adopted a
Resolution by the Albuquerque TVI Faculty Senate
in Support of the Faculty at the
University of South Florida in Tampa
resolving ``that the Faculty Senate of the Albuquerque Technical
Vocational Institute in New Mexico, as proud citizens of the
United States, join in solidarity with the faculty organizations
of the University of South Florida in Tampa in their work for
preservation of academic freedom, due process, the just rule of
law, and our proud American heritage of free expression as
guaranteed by the Constitution of United States of America and
its Amendments.''
At the same
meeting
the Senate approved a
Statement in Support of Due Process, Academic Freedom and
Responsibility.
Miscellany
As of Nov. 11, this web-site was still # 3 out of ``about 6,880''
on ``al-arian,'' (where it has been fairly steadily for several
months) but also # 178 out of ``about 176,000'' on ``academic
freedom.''
-
The AAUP doesn't appear pleased about being used in USF's lawsuit
against Al-Arian.
On Nov. 2, Committee A issued a statement, quoted in a
Nov. 7 press release,
stating that the lawsuit's reference to the First Amendment was
inappropriate because the AAUP is not bound by legal precedents
on academic freedom, but instead the AAUP has its own professional
standards, which it will use to make its own determination.
-
On Wednesday, Nov. 13, about fifty people staged a mock funeral
of academic freedom in the courtyard of the Allen Administration
building.
On Nov. 14, the USF Oracle reported that
A funeral for freedom,
extensively quoting former USF employee Mary Poole on several
issues, including Al-Arian, and her own dismissal, which she
claimed was the result of her `strong views against the
administration and the war on terrorism.'
(See the Oct. 17 USF Oracle article
A job lost, but why?
A USF employee said she was laid off because of her opinions.
But USF President Judy Genshaft said that isn't so
for an account of Poole's dismissal.)
On Nov. 17, the Tampa Tribune ran a column by SUNY-Buffalo Professor
Emeritus of Sociology Lionel S. Lewis, who wondered what the late
Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes would have made of
Al-Arian Vs. USF: Probing A Great Legal Mind.
Professor Lewis contended that Holmes stood in the center of the
liberal tradition of American jurisprudence, and that he was a strong
defender of civil liberties.
Nevertheless, Lewis notes that in
*Schenck v. United States (1919),
that Holmes argued in his unanimously supported opinion that
``The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect
a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic''
and thus that during wartime, someone can be locked up for handing
out pamphlets that stridently condemn the war and call on
young men to resist the draft.
Lewis did not mention that Holmes's somewhat mixed record on civil
rights and liberties has led some observers to wonder exactly
how ``liberal'' Mr. Holmes was (see, e.g., H.L. Mencken's
Mr. Justice Holmes in the the May 1930 Mercury).
(And the act upheld, the Espionage Act, has made a number of civil
libertarians wonder about President Wilson ...)
-
On Nov. 18, the USF Oracle covered the Nov. 2 AAUP Press release:
AAUP says USF court case will have no effect.
USF Spokesman Michael Riech said that the USF Administration is
currently concerned with Al-Arian's constitutional rights, not
with the AAUP's concerns, even though the AAUP is prominently
mentioned in the lawsuit against Al-Arian.
USF General Counsel R. B. Friedlander said that the lawsuit could
last into 2003 or 2004.
-
On Nov. 19, the USF Oracle editorialized,
Take censure most seriously,
in which the editors say that ``Genshaft should be as concerned
with the possibility of a censure as she has been with kicking
the Al-Arian case around for more than a year.''
The Lawsuit is Federal
On Nov. 18, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bucklew agreed
with Al-Arian's lawyer that as the USF lawsuit against
Al-Arian asks for a ruling on federal (First Amendment)
constitutional issues, it should be heard in federal court.
Bucklew will hear Al-Arian's motion to dismiss the case on
Dec. 6.
-
The Nov. 20 AP reported that
Lawsuit against professor to stay in federal court
which the St. Petersburg Times ran.
-
The Nov. 20 USF Oracle reported that
Al-Arian case moves to Federal court,
and quoted from the decision:
``It appears from the complaint that the Court will be unable to
resolve the issues in the Plaintiff's complaint without addressing
the Defendant's potential First Amendment claim, a claim that
would unquestionably fall within this Court's federal question
jurisdiction.''
Incidentally, it was the plaintiff (ie, the USF Administration)
that brought up the First Amendment in this case.
-
The Nov. 20 Tampa Tribune reported that
Al-Arian To Get Hearing In Federal Court.
Al-Arian's attorney and one of USF's attorney agreed that
this was not a big deal, but Bruce Jacob, a former dean
at Stetson University's law school, said that:
``Federal judges are ... more independent ... .
[If] a state judge ... hands down a decision that upholds
Al-Arian and goes against USF, [he] might face public outrage.
If I were USF, I would want to go where you knew the judge was
going to be under a lot of pressure.''
Some of the legal documents are available from the
FSU Law School site on the lawsuit.
Wolf at the Door
Once again, a reminder that the dispute over Al-Arian is but one
facet of the dispute over the contract which protects Al-Arian's
rights.
If the contract between USF faculty and the (agent of) the State of
Florida expires on Jan. 7, 2003, what will replace it?
The first concrete indication was a proposal for a revision of section
6C-10 (on personnel) of the
USF Rules:
the proposed revisions extend the rules into areas historically
covered by the
Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA),
even though the CBA is supposed to preempt all rules.
UFF is very protective of the contract ...
-
Copies of the rules could be obtained from the
General Counsel's Office,
and as a result, there were rumors floating around all October.
Nevertheless, niether UFF nor the Faculty Senate were ever
informed (much less asked for input).
An
electronic draft
was given to a senior faculty member in mid-November.
-
The UFF responded on Nov. 18 by issuing a
press release
condemning both the rules and the process by which they
were developed, and announcing a press conference on Nov. 19.
Even before the press conference, the press got interested.
-
The Nov. 19 USF Oracle reported that
UFF concerned as trustees' decision looms.
UFF/USF Chapter President Weatherford is quoted saying, ``Evidently,
the board is charging ahead with the assumption that (the faculty
will be) governed by rules instead of a contract.''
USF Spokesman Michael Reich is quoted: ``...the university fully
hopes and expects we will have an amicable collective bargaining
process.''
-
The Nov. 19 Tampa Tribune reported that
USF Faculty Worry Trustees Will Weaken Worker Rights
Weatherford is quoted saying, ``...if this is a clear sign that
they intend to break the contract, then everything that is
guaranteed by that contract is legally at risk.''
To Weatherford's suggestion that USF agree that the contract be
extended (so that the immediate need for any new rules is reduced),
USF Board of Trustees chair Dick Beard said, ``We're not going to
do anything like that.''
On Nov. 19, Weatherford delivered a letter to USF President Judy
Genshaft asking to start collective bargaining, and held a press
conference in front of the Allen Administration building.
-
The Nov. 20 USF Oracle reported that UFF has
Grave Concerns, and quoted Weatherford saying,
``It now appears that this managerial reorganization will be used
against the faculty.
It seems to be their intention to break the collective bargaining
agreement ...,''
and
``The board apparently wants us to be less like Harvard and more
like Wal-Mart.''
USF Spokesman Michael Reich said that the new rules were only
supposed to last 90 days until a new contract could be negotiated,
saying, ``The board's intentions are to do what's in the best
interest of the university, to support the research, teaching and
service missions of the university.''
On Nov. 20, the new rules were the leading topic in the Faculty Senate
meeting.
Provost David Stamps and other senior administrators presented the
USF Administration's point of view.
-
USF General Counsel R. B. Friedlander said that as of Jan. 7, under
the School Code, the Board of Trustees becomes the employer of USF
faculty.
She said that the old personnel rules will no longer be enforceable,
so new rules are necessary, and that it the process of generating
the new rules were the responsibility of her office.
She said that on September 5, her office sent notices to 98 interested
parties (including AFSCME, but not including UFF or the Faculty
Senate), and sent out another notice on Nov. 14: hence her office
followed the law.
Successive drafts were developed after receiving input from
administrators and trustees.
When asked if it might just be simpler for UFF and the Board to agree
to extend the contract (as UFF is willing), Friedlander said that
because the Board does not have the authority to declare itself
the successor employer (i.e., that in becoming the employer of
USF faculty the Board assumes all the rights and obligations that
the prior employer --- the Florida Board of Education --- had),
that the Board therefore could not commit to extending the contract.
-
USF Vice Provost Phil Smith said that both the contract and major
components of the State Rules both expire on Jan. 7, 2003, and
therefore new personnel rules are required.
He said that the issue between the Board of Trustees and UFF is
whether the Board of Trustees will be the successor employer,
and that that question is now before the Public Employee's Relations
Commission.
Smith also asserted that the language in the new rules for academic
freedom had been lifted from the contract, while the language for
misconduct had been so vague as to require definition, and thus
new language had been added.
He also said that some of the language was different from that in
the contract because the contract reflected ``compromises'' made
in the negotiating process.
When a senator observed that the contractual language (in
Section 5.1) that
An employee engaged in such activities shall be free to cultivate
a spirit of inquiry and scholarly criticism and to examine ideas in
an atmosphere of freedom and confidence
had effectively been replaced by (in
proposed Rule 6C-4-10.109 (1)(a .doc file) by an extended
statement of faculty responsibilities, Smith asserted that the
essence of the contractual language was present in the proposed
rule, an apparent reference to:
Faculty must be free to ... [c]ultivate a spirit of inquiry and
scholarly criticism, and present and examine their own
academic subjects and ideas frankly and forthrightly, with freedom
and confidence without fear of censorship (bolds added).
-
Associate Vice President Trudie Frecker reiterated the ephemerality
of the proposed rules, saying that there will be feedback hearings,
committees, etc., to work on permanent rules: work on permanent
rules would start by January, but effective immediately, feedback
on the rules would be read by her office if sent to
cfsurvey@admin.usf.edu.
After the Provost and associates had made their presentations, USF/UFF
Chapter President Roy Weatherford made a strong statement in which he
asserted:
-
That the Board of Trustees could agree to extend the life of the
current contract if they want to.
He noted that Board of Trustees Chairman Richard Beard was quoted
saying that the Board would not agree to recognize UFF as the
bargaining agent and, in effect, that the Board would not agree
to extend the contract.
-
That if the Board succeeds in having the contract expire on Jan. 7,
they will have greatly strengthened their position in subsequent
negotiations.
He strongly stated that that was a major motivation in refusing to
extend the contract, and in proposing rules inconsistent with
the contract.
-
He concluded by stating that the reassurances of the USF Administration
were insincere, stating, ``They're deceiving us, they're lying to
us, and they're trying to screw us.''
After quickly agreeing to ask USF President Genshaft to replace USF
Board of Trustee member Patrick Swygert (who has resigned) with USF
Faculty Senate President Gregory Paveza (who would be on the Board
anyway by Amendment # 11), the Senate had a more difficult time with
A resolution requesting that USF administration postpone its
decision to seek BOT approval of new rules affecting faculty
conditions of employment.
The Senate was divided between two positions:
-
Those that supported the amendment said that the Senate cannot remain
silent on this issue.
-
Those that opposed it said that if the USF Administration refused to
extend the contract, the Board would only consider a different
alternative to the proposed rules, and there was less than 24 hours
to compose such an alternative.
Perhaps unhappy about being presented with a fait accompli, the Senate
passed the motion.
The story dominated that Nov. 21 USF Oracle.
-
The lead story was
'They're going to screw us'
Union president warns forthcoming rule changes could mean 25 years of
bargaining down the drain.
The Oracle quoted Friedlander saying,
``If we don't have rules in place, we don't have the authority to do
any of the positive things as well as what some people would perceive
as the negative things.''
-
The accompanying analysis was
Who knows what will happen next,
in which the writer said that many senators wondered why the precise
language of the contract could not have been used for the rules,
many wondered why the rules had to be rushed into place, and why
they weren't consulted.
-
Then there was an editorial,
USF is failing academics,
which laid the blame at USF President Genshaft's feet, complaining
that the controversy seems to be Beard v. Weatherford, and that
Genshaft ``has made it quite clear that she prefers to stay
barricaded in her office.''
The USF Board of Trustees met on Nov. 21, and passed the rules unanimously.
-
At the beginning of the meeting, USF Faculty President Greg Paveza
presented the Senate Resolution on the rules to the Board and asked
the Board to postpone action on the rules so that faculty could be
consulted on them.
``My concern is not around the fact that these rules and rule changes
are needed, because they clearly are, but rather because of the lack
of faculty involvement.''
-
USF/UFF Membership co-chair Sherman Dorn, standing in for Roy Weatherford,
said that adopting these rules could constitute a violation of the
contract, and that there were serious differences between the language
of the proposed rules and that of the contract, and he handed out a
table
of discrepancies.
-
In subsequent discussion, Trustee John Ramil asked if the new rules
would put USF at a disadvantage in recruitment, and Friedlander
assured him that they would not.
Friedlander also reiterated that the process of composing the new rules
had been consistent with Florida State Law.
Afterwards, Dorn said to reporters:
``I am disappointed that the Board of Trustees has voted for these rules
against the clear wishes of faculty.''
One curious sideline: while the Florida Sunshine Law requires that
Board meetings be in public, it turns out that a substantial part of the
debate consisted of Friedlander ferrying messages from member to member.
This turned up because a draft of the rules contained a non-discrimination
(based on sexual orientation) clause: because of concerns from some
trustee(s), this language was removed during the composition process.
Video clips of the meeting are available on the
Netcast page of the Nov. 21 BOT meeting.
On Nov. 22, the USF Oracle reported that
BOT votes to change faculty rules,
reporting that Board Chairman Richard Beard said that the rules were
necessary to operate the university in the absence of a contract.
However, the Times and the Tribune found the new rules, the strategic plan,
and other major initiatives less newsworthy than a recommendation
presented to the Board that USF President Genshaft get a substantial
pay raise:
However, the Nov. 27 Weekly Planet reported in a story entitled
Absent-minded of Professors:
USF's faculty union is uneasy about rule changes
that Sherman Dorn warned at the Board of Trustees meeting that the
proposed rules may permit the USF Administration to fire any
tenured professor arbitrarily, and remarked that
``If you [the Board of Trustees] can make personnel rules today,
you can recognize the UFF as the bargaining agent today,''
to which Friedlander responded, ``We don't have the legal authority
to do that,'' adding ``They say they have majority support, but
they have to prove it.''
Various
Back at the front ...
-
On Nov. 21, the Israeli newspaper
Ha'aretz
reported that ``FBI seeks Israeli help in prosecuting
Islamic Jihad men.''
The story was picked up in the Nov. 25 Tampa Tribune,
which reported that
FBI Follows Tampa Case To Israel.
Since the article mentioned Palestinian Islamic Jihad
without mentioning Al-Arian, the Tampa Tribune
reminded readers that on Nov. 21, in the story
``Ashcroft Defends New Wiretap Powers,'' USF Attorney
General John Ashcroft responded to a question about
interim US Attorney Mac Cauley's February statement that
Al-Arian was the subject of a ``active and ongoing
investigation'' FBI investigation, by saying that
it ``was true and is true.''
-
On Saturday, Dec. 14, Al-Arian spoke at a rally covered by AP,
which reported (via the Gainesville Sun) that
Muslims say they've been under attack in Florida.
His case was one of the examples listed of recent hostility
actions towards Muslims.
Case Dismissed
On Thursday, Dec. 12, Al-Arian's attorney Robert McKee and
USF's external counsel Bruce Rogow argued before U.S.
District Court Judge Susan Bucklew over whether the court
should throw out USF's lawsuit against Al-Arian.
The lawyers argued over whether the U.S. court should
rule on whether the letter of termination violates Al-Arian's
First Amendment rights; both sides seemed to believe that
such a ruling in USF's favor would compromise Al-Arian's
ability to subsequently sue USF for such a violation.
-
The Dec. 12 AP reported that
*Professor argues university's lawsuit against him be
dismissed,
and that Al-Arian's attorney Robert McKee said that the
USF counsel is trying to circumvent Al-Arian's right to
a jury trial should he sue for violation of his First
Amendment rights.
-
On Dec. 12, McKee appeared on the
*O'Reilly Factor, and predicted that the suit would
be dismissed.
After asking if that was wishful thinking, O'Reilly
concentrated on a letter Al-Arian wrote but did not
send in 1995, asking someone for a donation to ``...
support to the jihad effort ....''
Like all previous discussions of this letter, the results
were unconclusive.
-
The Dec. 13 St. Petersburg Times reported that
Judge to decide next step for Al-Arian:
She will decide when the court should rule on the
constitutionality of firing him,
and that Bucklew would issue her ruling early next week.
Nevertheless, McKee said that he expected the case to
take a long time.
-
The Dec. 13 Tampa Tribune reported that
Judge Set To Decide On Court's Role In USF's Al-Arian Suit,
and that McKee warned that this suit would lead to employers
suing employees:
``Talk about the proverbial floodgates of litigation ... You will
have to set up another branch of government to deal with all
those cases.''
Admitting that the case is unusual, Rogow said ``Is it unique?
Yes ... But it doesn't open the floodgates.
It shows there's a public employer who is sensitive to
First Amendment rights.''
The Tribune also ran a Q & A article
Al-Arian History: A USF Connection Since 1986.
Important note: contrary to what was said in the article,
UFF is not on Al-Arian's side; UFF is on the contract's
side.
Then on Monday, Dec. 16, Judge Bucklew
dismissed USF's suit against Al-Arian,
ruling that:
-
The court should hear the case only if USF has no alternative
route for relief.
Then the court noted that there were alternatives.
-
The court should hear the case only if a declaratory judgement
would resolve the issues brought to the court.
Then the court noted that a declaratory ruling would not resolve
the issues.
(In particular, the court could not help USF with the AAUP.)
-
Since Al-Arian is accused of violating the Collective Bargaining
Agreement, the appropriate route if USF fires Al-Arian is to
go through the grievance process.
In particular, ``A party to a contract may generally not turn to
litigation to circumvent the arbitration clause of the contract.''
Some of the legal documents are available from the
FSU Law School site on the lawsuit.
The media had been waiting for this story.
-
The Dec. 16 AP reported (via The Ledger) that
Federal Judge Rejects USF Professor Lawsuit,
and quoted Al-Arian's attorney Robert McKee saying, ``The ball's
in their court ... If USF is, as they represented to the court,
uncertain whether firing Dr. Al-Arian violates his constitutional
rights, then we suggest they shouldn't fire him.''
-
The Dec. 16 UPI reported that
*Judge declines to hear university case,
and quoted Judge Bucklew saying,
``This court finds that a declaratory judgment in this case would
not be a wise and practical use of judicial resources.''
Defending the use of a lawsuit to deal with a First Amendment
issue, USF external counsel Bruce Rogow said, ``This is different.
This is the most sensitive area of the law, the most sensitive
area of constitutional law.''
-
The Dec. 17 Agence France Presse reported that
*US judge dismisses lawsuit against Palestinian professor,
and quoted Al-Arian's attorney Robert McKee saying,
``What is significant here is that the university itself has
admitted in open court that it really doesn't have a case.''
-
The Dec. 17 Chronicle of Higher Education reported that
**Federal Judge Declines to Rule on University's Plan to Fire
Professor It Accuses of Terrorism,
and quoted UFF Chapter President Roy Weatherford saying,
``We're back where we started a couple hundred thousand dollars
ago,'' and noted Weatherford's comment that UFF is not defending
Al-Arian: UFF is defending Al-Arian's contractual rights.
-
The Dec. 17 St. Petersburg Times reported that
Judge: Don't ask advice on Al-Arian;
USF asked if firing the professor would violate his rights.
A judge says giving advice isn't the court's job.
USF Spokesman Michael Riech said, ``We do not believe that
terminating him would violate his rights, but this was an effort
to make absolutely sure,'' and that he did not know how long it
would take the USF Administration to decide what to do next.
-
The Dec. 17 Tampa Tribune reported that
Judge Tosses USF Suit Against Al-Arian,
and quoted BOT Chairman Dick Beard on AL-Arian returning to the
classroom: ``I'm not even sure that's an option ... It's not
an option in my view.''
They also quoted Al-Arian saying, ``Today's ruling confirms our
deep conviction that the system does work for the little guy.''
After the ruling, the USF Administration weighed its options as
Al-Arian's attorney called on USF to abandon its attempt to
fire Al-Arian.
-
The Dec. 18 St. Petersburg Times reported that
Al-Arian vows to fight until he wins:
If USF fires him, the tenured computer science professor might
keep his appeal alive for a year or more.
The Times quoted Al-Arian saying,
``Nobody is going to force me to leave because somehow they
don't like me or like my politics,''
and mentioned that no one seems to know what effect the Jan. 7
transition will have on the case.
The Times also ran an editorial on
USF's judicial rebuff,
claiming that the lawsuit had ``revealed her [Genshaft's] own
misgivings about the case,'' contending that
``If Genshaft believed her own party line ... then ... [she]
simply would have fired Al-Arian and trusted the outcome to
the courts.''
-
The Dec. 18 Tampa Tribune reported that
Al-Arian Pressures USF To Back Down,
quoting Al-Arian attorney McKee saying that if USF appeals,
it would show ``... disrespect to the taxpayers.
These hundreds of thousands of dollars could be better put to
use for scholarships or research projects, or even to help
pay for President Genshaft's pay increase.''
The Tribune also quoted BOT Chair Beard saying,
``It's not a matter of money. It's a matter of what this
guy's been doing to the university.''
Then came a lot of opinions, many involving the juxtaposition of
USF's legal problems with Genshaft's pay raise.
-
On Dec. 19, St. Petersburg Times columnist Mary Jo Melone wrote
in her column
USF president's new contract: an outrageous fortune, indeed
that ``Genshaft is being rewarded for threatening academic
freedom and for failing to make hard decisions in the case of
professor Sami Al-Arian.''
-
On Dec. 20, the Tampa Tribune editorialized that
*USF Should Now Drop The Hammer On Al-Arian,
stating that despited Al-Arian's claims to innocence and the
fact that Al-Arian has not been charged with any crime,
``...he has not been cleared, and early this year federal
authorities acknowledged that an investigation of his activities
is ongoing.''
-
On Dec. 23, St. Petersburg Times columnist Howard Troxler wrote that
Maybe now is the time to reassess Judy Genshaft's score card,
and suggested that Genshaft's problem was that she was serving
on a sequence of one-year contracts, and that nos that she is
going on a five-year contract, she will be able to act more
decisively: ``The yardstick is not how her predecessor Betty
Castor (a hardened insider in Florida politics) would have fared,
but how any other newcomer would have fared in her place.''
On Dec. 29, Lionel Lewis, whom we last heard describing Justice
Holmes as a liberal, published in the St. Petersburg Times a
column
Beyond dissent: the limits of faculty freedom describing
the magazine Inquiry, published by Al-Arian's Islamic
Committee for Palestine in the early 1990s.
He quotes several passages (example: `put ``U.S. warmongers on
trial for one of the most barbaric, genocidal wars ever waged,
... the imperialist (and) bloody Gulf War.''') and some ferocious
poetry (that Al-Arian did not write).
For such language, Lewis proposes ``in propagating the culture
of terrorism in the pages of INQUIRY ..., Al-Arian has ...
forfeited his right to a permanent academic appointment.''
The Contract
The administrations of Florida's public universities have been
preparing for the transition on Jan. 7, 2003, when the Boards
of Trustees were to assume full authority over the universities.
But the passage of Amendment # 11 raises several questions.
-
There is a new question:
On Jan. 7, who will will be the employer of the faculty and
staff of the universities: the local Boards of Trustees,
or the Board of Governors?
Who has the power to sign contracts?
-
This led to an old question:
Is the new employer bound by the obligations assumed by the
old Board of Regents (and subsequently by the Board of
Education)?
Specifically, did the new employer have to negotiate with
the union?
(The technical phrase is: ``successor employer.''
If a new employer takes over a longstanding operation, the
general view is that this new employer succeeds the
old employer, and is thus bound by the same collective
bargaining requirements that the old one was bound by.)
The university administrations and the unions disagreed on these
questions.
-
The administration of USF argued that it could not negotiate
a contract with faculty, nor make any commitments or even
exploratory steps towards a contract with employees before
Jan. 7.
(This did not prevent several boards -- including USF's --
from preparing a lucrative contracts for their presidents.)
The USF Board of Trustees also said that it did not know if it
was the successor employer, and would await a decision on the
issue by the Public Employees Relations Commission.
-
The United Faculty of Florida argued that just as university
boards were working on contracts for presidents, they could
certainly work on a contract with the union.
All it would require is a commmitment to recognize the union
and commit to collective bargaining as of Jan. 7.
The union also suggested that the administration's refusal to
recognize the union was part of a legal ploy: if the
administration could establish that the Board of Trustees
was never bound by the current Collective Bargaining Agreement,
then in subsequent negotiations, the Board could force
negotiations into impasse and then (under one interpretation
of the law) impose whatever contract they liked.
As Jan. 7 approached, tensions and tempers rose as the universities
prepared for the contract to disappear, while the unions fought
to prepare their contracts.
(Yes, ``unions'' plural: the
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME), which represented staff, was also in the fray.)
Meanwhile, the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC) avoided
the issue by saying --- twice --- that it was too early to make
such decisions (in Fall, 2002).
-
The Dec. 20 Tallahassee Democrat reported that
AFSCME sues over campus contracts,
and that the AFSCME lawsuit says that the new Board of
Governors will be ultimately responsible for employee contracts,
so in trying to eliminate the contracts, ``Should the boards of
trustees and board of education continue to move forward in this
unlawful, unconstitutional manner, it would be the biggest waste
of resources ... It will all be for naught and it will all be
undone.''
UFF has joined the suit.
-
On Dec. 23, the Governor's Office announced that
Governor Bush Appoints Florida Board Of Governors.
Bush was to appoint 14 of the 17 governors.
Of the fourteen new appointees, eight are businesspeople, three
are attorneys, one is a financial trustee, one is an academic
administrator, and one is a physician.
As AP observed on Dec. 24 in
Gov. Bush appoints 14 to university board,
most of the appointees were from the local Boards of Trustees.
On Dec. 23, Weatherford held a press conference.
The issue was a direct if technical attack on the union leadership.
Many years ago, the union had won the the right to have some faculty
be assigned time to work on union duties.
In effect, a faculty member would be given a ``course relief,'' and
teach one less course, and instead work on some union work (e.g.,
helping faculty grievants with their cases).
This is not a hot issue for most faculty, but it does reflect the
reality that some union positions are time-consuming.
In addition, as there are only 34 course reliefs in the entire
university system, the primary effect of eliminating the practice would be
to hobble the union, while making a personal attack on the union
leadership.
-
On Dec. 18, USF Vice Provost Phil Smith informed UFF that USF would
discontinue the practice, stating that ``...we have been
informed that section 447.501(1)(e), Florida Statutes, prevents
the University from granting release time for union activity after
the current collective bargaining agreement expires. This is because
after the contract expires, there will be no certified bargaining
agent acting on behalf of the faculty.''
Notice the explicit refusal to recognize UFF as the faculty union:
this rationale could be used in many other issues as well.
-
On Dec. 24, the St. Petersburg Times reported that
Union assails USF over ending contract:
The faculty union says the pact that USF has decided to stop
honoring Jan. 7 is valid until the academic year ends.
Addressing the rationale that USF is acting because, in the
Administration's opinion, UFF will not represent the faculty,
Weatherford said, ``This is not the way things work in labor
law ... People don't lose their rights, their protection,
just because the employer refuses to negotiate.''
|
|
|
Previous:
Looming
9/26/02 - 11/4/02
|
|
Next:
Transitions
1/1/03 - 2/19/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Al-Arian Site Home
USF/UFF Site Home
Major Postings
The Issues
Contact Us
Site Map
|
An Overview of the Entire Controversy
Background: Before Sept. 11
The Year 2001 - 2002
The Year 2002 - 2003
Recent News
|
The year 2002 - 2003:
7 Days: 8/21/02 - 8/27/02
September: 8/21/02 - 9/26/02
Looming Clouds: 9/26/02 - 11/04/02
Anticipation: 11/05/02 - 12/31/02
Transitions: 1/1/03 - 2/19/03
Indictment: 2/20/03 - 2/21/03
Termination: 2/22/03 - 2/28/03
Reverberations: 3/1/03 - 3/19/03
A Greater Circle: 3/20/03 - 3/28/03
Recent News: 3/29/03 -
|
|
|
|
|
|