Ithaca College

What is the source of the salary data? A quick search revealed that Georgetown University's adjunct pay ranges from the 3000s upwards to around 8000 per course. I'm not an expert on faculty salaries, but this is an excerpt from one source (citation follows).

"When Soltes negotiated his contract with the University, he was paid $42,000 for six courses, an equivalent of $7,000 per course. This year, he received his first pay raise. His annual salary is now $42,280. At Georgetown, adjuncts make up almost half of the total faculty employed on Main Campus at 43 percent, and teach over 1200 courses per academic year. Their salaries range from $3,000 per three-credit course in the English department to $8,500 per three-credit course in the Communications department, according to the Adjunct Project, a database of adjunct salary data from universities across the country compiled by the Chronicle of Higher Education." As cited in http://georgetownvoice.com/2013/10/17/second-class-faculty-hidden-struggles-georgetowns-adjunct-professors/

Yes, once again, the information provided by the IC administration to "inform" the union vote is partial and misleading. The “comparative salary data" President Rochon links to only compares the current adjunct salary at IC to salaries at institutions with unionized part-time faculty (and highlights that the other salary amounts do not yet reflect union dues). The message implied: IC's part-time faculty make more than faculty at unionized institutions, so why form a union--only to see part of one’s “high" IC salary go towards union dues?

The Administration's selective presentation of data begs the question of the effect that unionizing had on salaries at these other institutions. If the goal is truly to create the conditions for a more informed vote on unionizing, information about pre-union salaries and (lack of) benefits at these other institutions is necessary to have a better sense of what adjuncts might expect from unionizing.

Just to add to the previous comment’s example of George Washington University, the figures given by IC’s administration imply that $3,500-$4,030 is what all adjuncts at GW make per course after unionizing. According to GW's newspaper, after unionizing adjunct salaries increased to a MINIMUM of $3,500-$4,030 per 3-credit course (http://www.gwhatchet.com/2014/08/25/city-wide-adjunct-professor-union-waits-for-last-schools-to-join/).

According to the Washington Post, “union contracts have as much as tripled pay for some at George Washington University" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/03/06/i-was-a-professor-at-four-unive...make-ends-meet/).

According to Inside HigherEd, before unionizing at American University, “pay rates varied widely, but some adjuncts were paid significantly below the levels outlined in the new contract,” and “adjuncts with union representation also were more likely to have access to certain health and retirement benefits and had greater access to institutional support” (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/07/26/adjunct-union-contracts-ensure-real-gains-including-better-pay).

This information is from a quick online search, so I have no doubt that IC's adjuncts are aware of it. But it illustrates that broader and more accurate pre- and post-unionizing data on salaries and benefits is the kind of information needed to gain a more informed understanding of the potential outcomes of collective bargaining.

Instead, President Rochon’s link to "important information on what [adjuncts] might expect as part of a 'collective bargaining process’” is reduced to couched warnings about outcomes such as the following (in a Q&A format):

--"The union cannot guarantee any outcomes. Collective bargaining is an unpredictable, interactive process...the College would bargain in good faith and employees could end up with more, the same, or less in wages and benefits.”

--“...it is a common misperception that wages, benefits, and other terms of employment always get better as a result of bargaining."

--"Collective bargaining is a process with uncertain outcomes. The union has to be willing to offer up something of value (possibly concessions in some areas)..."

--"It is difficult to predict how long a negotiation for a first contract can take to complete. In many cases there is still no agreement after one year of bargaining. Sometimes, the parties cannot reach agreement on a contract.”

--"If the union cannot get the College to agree to its priorities, it may call a strike. Strikes hurt everyone-–the employees, who do not get paid and may be replaced, might have to face picket line confrontations...other employees, who have their work lives disrupted and face a difficult choice about whether to cross a picket line; the College; and the community. Strikes are incredibly destructive.”

--"It is highly likely that the union will propose some of its own priorities during bargaining, including issues regarding mandatory union membership and whether or not to have the College automatically deduct union dues from paychecks."

None of the Administration’s anti-union strategies are surprising or novel, and they certainly won’t get by the critical eyes of our excellent adjuncts, no matter how each of them ultimately decides to vote. However, the Administration’s continued and deliberate misrepresentation of its highly selective information as an effort to provide IC adjuncts with “access to all the facts” to help them make an “informed choice” is simply shameful.