More News
Dear FSU Colleagues,
At our June 4 bargaining session, we continued to discuss intellectual property rights for faculty. The Board of Trustees team responded to our counter of Article 18, Inventions and Works, and as explained below, in a win for faculty, they offered to trade status quo language in Article 19, Conflict of Interest, for status quo language in Article 1, Recognition.
More on bargaining details below, but first … If you value your rights as a faculty member that are guaranteed in our Collective Bargaining Agreement, we need you as a union member. Your union must reach 60% membership or else it will be decertified. We are close; we need 43 new members by June 27, and we need all current members to sign their Membership Authorization Form. If you haven’t joined already, please do not wait; join today and protect our right to collectively bargain and enforce contracts that protect faculty rights, including academic freedom and intellectual property rights.
In Article 18, Inventions and Works, the BOT team appeared to listen to our arguments from the previous week, as they changed their claim to faculty-created databases that are intended to be publicly available for the scientific community and to Open-Source Software as long as doing so “is consistent with the terms of any related contract and/or grant.” And though the BOT team deleted reference to a faculty member’s “field or discipline,” they added “faculty member’s institutional expertise” instead, which unfortunately means that the university could still claim ownership of work completed during the faculty member’s own time and at the faculty member’s own expense. This article is still under discussion, and we are exploring language that is better for faculty.
Additionally, during the previous bargaining session, the UFF-FSU team objected to the University claiming ownership of instructional materials. The BOT’s latest proposal appears to back off this sweeping claim, but their revisions add additional confusion regarding what is meant by “University-supported education materials,” which is not defined in the Article.
In their previous proposal for Article 19, Conflict of Interest, the BOT team had added language stating that a conflict of interest could occur if a faculty member engages in any act that conflicts with any contract by any outside sponsor for any amount. We explained why this language was highly problematic and deleted their proposed language in our counter proposal. On June 4, the BOT proposed that the teams agree to status quo language for Article 19 as well as Article 1, Recognition (we had proposed adding UFF to BOT meeting agendas). We are glad to see that the University agreed to delete the problematic Article 19 language. We will provide an answer to their proposed trade at our next bargaining session.
Please join us for the next collective bargaining session, which is scheduled for this Wednesday, June 11, from 2:00–5:00 at the FSU Training Center, just across Stadium Drive from the University Center (or join us on Zoom).
In solidarity and on behalf of your faculty bargaining team,
Jennifer Proffitt
Professor, Communication
UFF-FSU Co-Chief Negotiator