American Association of University Professors
OCAAUP President John T. McNay had an op-ed published on September 29, 2014 by the Cincinnati Enquirer, which encouraged legislators and university administrators to start focusing on the real problems that Ohio’s higher education system faces.
| Click here to read his piece: “Opinion: Bloat driving up UC, Miami costs.” |
OCAAUP sent questionnaires to candidates of both political parties running for Governor, Secretary of State, and Attorney General. Below are the responses received from State Sen. Nina Turner (D), candidate for Secretary of State, and David Pepper (D), candidate for Attorney General. Thank you to these candidates for their responses!
State Sen. Nina Turner for Ohio Secretary of State
What is your position on current levels of state funding to higher education?
• I believe that the state of Ohio is currently underfunding our public university and college system. This reality leads to increasing pressure on faculty to expanded course loads, as well as dramatic tuition increases that affect the academic rigor at these institutions and increase student debt loads. It also creates an incentive for administrators to cut full time faculty in favor of adjuncts, many of which are overworked and underpaid.
The state has also decreased support for financial aid programs like the Ohio College Opportunity Grant (OCOG). Funding for this program has never recovered to its peak before the recent recession.
If you believe that state support for public higher education ought to be increased, how, specifically, would you attempt to increase it?
• First, I believe we need to re-examine the state’s recent propensity to pass tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy few. Instead of pursuing the failed trickle-down economic policies of the past, we should be using funds to invest in our educational system at all levels. That is the only way to ensure that the next generation is prepared to be successful working adults.
This year, the state is slated to have a surplus of hundreds of millions of dollars. This should be re-invested in education and financial aid programs to help Ohioans succeed.
What specific plans would you propose or support to reduce the current levels of student debt?
• As Secretary of State, I would not be directly involved in this space, but I believe that by investing additional funds into basic support for public colleges and universities, and increasing state support for financial aid programs like OCOG, we can help keep down the cost of higher education and student debt loads.
The state also needs to increase financial literacy outreach to educate parents and students about their financial options and the consequences of the loans they are taking out, regardless of what school that student attends. Steering more students toward community colleges for their first two years of school, or expanding the ability of advanced high school students to earn college credit, would also do a lot to reduce the overall cost of college for Ohio students and their families.
Do you agree that the dramatic increase in administrators and administrative staff and their compensation, at the expense of allocations to instruction, is a major driver of the cost of postsecondary education? If you agree that this is major issue, how would you address it?
• The numbers don’t lie; administrative expenses continue to comprise a larger and larger share of college budgets. If we want to reduce the ballooning administrative costs at colleges and universities, we need to shift focus away from the bells and whistles of campus life and back toward academics and classroom instruction.
Do you agree that for-profit colleges and universities need increased regulation? If you do, what specific proposals would you support at the state level?
• I am not ideologically opposed to for-profit colleges and universities, as I believe students need to be able to find the academic situation that fits their needs. However, I do believe that all institutions should be forthright with their students about their likelihood of success, costs, and career prospects as compared to other educational options and should be held to the same standards as non-profit educational institutions.
Do you support collective bargaining by public employees—by college and university faculty and staff, in particular?
• I do, unequivocally. I travelled the state campaigning against Senate Bill 5 in 2011, and working to educate Ohioans about what was at stake. I also fully support the ability to collectively bargain for adjunct and other part time faculty at public institutions. This is why I introduced Senate Bill 65—every worker deserves a seat at the table.
Do you agree that the increased reliance on adjunct faculty is exploitative of these faculty and undermines the value of the instruction provided by our colleges and universities? If so, how, specifically, would you address this issue?
• I believe that the increasing reliance on adjuncts does undermine instructional value. Although these faculty members are no less committed to their work than their tenured and tenure-track peers, the pressure of having to string together more classes at multiple institutions, oftentimes, to make ends meet, makes it more difficult for adjuncts to dedicate the time they would like to their students.
One of the most effective ways to address this issue would be to enact rules at the state level regulating maximum course load and instituting other protections. In addition, I believe adjuncts should be allowed to collectively bargain on an institution by institution basis.
Do you support a change in state law to allow adjunct faculty at public colleges and universities to engage in collective bargaining?
• Absolutely. This is why I introduced Senate Bill 65 in the Ohio Senate. As a former adjunct and present AAUP member, I know from first-hand experience the value of ensuring these professionals have a seat at the table.
Do you support a change in state law to allow graduate students at public colleges and universities to engage in collective bargaining?
• Yes. Graduate students are also covered in Senate Bill 65. If any of an institution’s instructors are excluded from having input into how their working life is structured, there will be room for them to be taken advantage of.
Do you believe that both employer institutions and individual employees need to make equal contributions to the public employee pension systems, in particular the State Teachers Retirement System?
• Yes. Equal contributions from both employees and employer is the fairest way to go about things. Ohio’s educators are tasked with preparing the next generation of Buckeyes for successful lives—the least we can do is ensure they have a secure retirement.
David Pepper for Ohio Attorney General
1. What is your position on current funding levels for higher education?
Increased higher education funding should be a priority for the state. Ohio has one of the most comprehensive systems of public higher education in the country, and we need to do everything we can to maintain access to high quality colleges and universities for all Ohioans.
2. How, specifically, would you attempt to increase higher education funding?
So many public dollars are being wasted on bad decisions driven by pay-to-play politics…and the most clear example is how much money is being wasted on charter schools that are completely failing. So my plan is to reduce wasteful spending by cracking down on pay to play, bringing far more accountability and transparency in areas such as charter schools, which would free up million of dollars to be invested in quality public education at all levels.
I also will end the pay-to-play system the Mike DeWine uses in the area of collections, which led to declining collections revenues in 2012 and 2013. Fixing this corrupted system will bring more revenues back to state coffers.
3. What specific plans would you propose to reduce student debt?
I am hugely concerned that our students are being saddled with debt for decades, holding them back and hurting our economy.
As attorney general, I will do all I can to keep the cost of tuition down, and to crack down on lending practices that harm students. I will use the office to investigate lenders who exhibit deceptive marketing or other lending practices to ensure that the student loan market operates in the best interest of students, not the best interest of lenders’ profits.
4. Do you agree that the dramatic increase in administrators and administrative staff and their compensation, at the expense of allocations to instruction, is a major driver of the cost of postsecondary education? If you do agree that this is major, how would you address it?
It’s a major concern. And I will be a voice for administrative efficiency and other steps to maximize focus on and investment in instruction
5. Do you agree that for-profit colleges/universities need regulation? If so, what proposals would you support?
As attorney general, I will focus in particular on cracking down on for profit colleges that engage in deceptive practices to lure students into high-cost, low-reward programs. The AG’s consumer protection section can serve both an enforcement and education function to ensure both that illegal practices are stopped and that potential students are aware of scams and traps that may exist.
6. Do you support collective bargaining by public employees – by college and university staff and faculty in particular?
Yes. I have a long commitment to collective bargaining rights for public employees. During the battle in Ohio over Senate Bill 5, I testified against the bill before the General Assembly and served as a traveling spokesman for the We Are Ohio campaign to repeal it.
7. Do you agree that increase reliance on adjunct faculty is exploitative and undermines the value of instruction provided by universities and colleges? If so, how, specifically, you would address this issue?
I think adjunct faculty can be useful at times, but the practice of using them can be abused in a way that undermines overall instruction.
8. Do you support changing state law to allow adjunct faculty at public universities and colleges to engage in collective bargaining?
Yes.
9. Do you support changing state law to allow graduate students at public universities and colleges to engage in collective bargaining?
Depending on what role those graduate students are playing, yes.
10. Do you believe that both employer institutions and individual employees need to make equal contributions to the public employee pension systems, in particular STRS?
Yes.
If you feel like you know Nina Turner, it could be because she’s your State Senator, or because you’ve caught one of her many national media appearances, or because she has taught alongside of you at Cuyahoga Community College (Tri-C).
Yes, in addition to representing Ohio’s 25th Senate District, Sen. Turner, a Democrat, is a proud AAUP member at Tri-C, where she teaches history.
Like many with a passion to teach, Turner was inspired by one of her professors. She credits her mentor, Dr. Dorothy Salem, who taught her at both Tri-C and Cleveland State University, for encouraging her to earn a B.A. and M.A. and then pursue a teaching career.
After graduating from Cleveland State, Turner spent a year as a legislative aide in the Ohio Senate. She then returned home to Cleveland, where she worked at Tri-C as an adjunct professor while also serving in Mayor Michael R. White’s administration as his Executive Assistant for Legislative Affairs.
Since she experienced life as an adjunct firsthand, Turner is acutely aware of the challenges part-time faculty face. It was no surprise, then, when she introduced Senate Bill 65, which would grant adjuncts and graduate students collective bargaining rights under Ohio law.
Currently, state law says that these part-time teachers are not “employees,” and thus are exempt from the public employee collective bargaining law.
In 2001, after an unsuccessful bid for Cleveland City Council, Turner assumed a full-time teaching position at Tri-C and was placed on tenure track after a year.
It wouldn’t be long before she would find her way back into public service while continuing to teach, first serving as Director of Government Affairs for the Cleveland Metropolitan School District, then being the first woman ever elected to represent Cleveland’s Ward 1 on City Council.
In 2008, Turner was appointed to fill the 25th Senate seat vacated by Lance Mason and served the remainder of his term. In 2010, she ran unopposed and was elected to her first full four-year term.
During her nearly six-year tenure as a State Senator, Turner has earned a reputation for being a reasonable yet outspoken voice on many issues, but most notably on voting rights. Consequently, it was a natural fit for Turner to set her sights on becoming Ohio’s next Secretary of State.
Turner says that she is running for Secretary of State because she believes Ohioans should have simple, convenient, and secure elections. She firmly believes that in addition to education, the ballot box is the other great equalizer in a democracy, and she has chastised Republican lawmakers for passing legislation that has restricted voting access.
In addition to being the chief election officer, the Secretary of State also provides business services. Turner believes that she can help transform the office from one that merely files paperwork into a resource center that helps empower business owners to be more successful.
For more information about Sen. Turner’s campaign, visit: http://www.ninaturner.org/.
Turner will face incumbent Secretary of State Jon Husted (R) on the ballot this November.
Did you know that in Ohio you can receive a dollar for dollar tax credit up to $100 for a contribution made to a state candidate?
Pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 5747.29, a taxpayer filing as an individual can claim a tax credit of up to $50 for contributions made to state candidates, while taxpayers filing jointly can claim a credit up to $100.
It’s like giving away free money!
A state candidate is any candidate who is running for a statewide office (e.g. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor), as well as anyone running for the Ohio General Assembly.
Over the past four years, we have seen an unprecedented attack on collective bargaining rights and voting rights, more reductions in higher education spending, and specific attacks on faculty working conditions. We cannot afford to sit out this election.
So in addition to making sure you’re registered to vote at your current address, please consider making contributions to candidates you support and know will support you in your profession and everyday life.
The next Ohio Conference AAUP Annual Meeting will be held Friday, November 6 – Saturday, November 7, 2015 at the Renaissance Columbus Downtown.
For many years, the Annual Meeting had been held on the second weekend of April, but due to conflicts with other professional meetings regularly scheduled around that time, as well as some internal considerations–such as the advantages of approving our annual budget before one-third of the year has already passed–the Conference Board of Trustees has decided to move the Annual Meeting to November.
Because we just held our Annual Meeting for 2014 in April and because it was impractical to try to schedule a meeting so close to November 2014, there will be an 18-month interval between the meetings.
We will send reminders on the change in dates in the late spring and early fall of 2015.
Supporters of a “right-to-work” constitutional amendment missed the July 2 deadline to submit the approximately 385,000 signatures from registered Ohio voters in order for the amendment to appear on this November’s ballot.
The Tea Party coalition that spearheaded the effort reportedly came under heavy pressure from the Republican Party to stop pursuing the amendment, at least for this year. Republicans feared that the amendment could lead to a heavier turnout of labor and Democrats, thus hurting their chances for reelection.
Gov. John Kasich and Republican legislative leadership have tried to dodge questions about pursuing “right-to-work,” saying it’s “not on the agenda.” The governors of Indiana and Michigan said similar things before the time was ripe to shove the anti-union policy through their legislatures.
It is possible, perhaps even probable, that the Republicans will pass “right-to-work” legislation after the elections, during lame duck session. If that happens, We Are Ohio will begin a campaign to exercise the citizens’ veto option just as we did with Senate Bill 5.
More information on “right-to-work” can be found here on our website: https://ocaaup.org/gov-relations/sb5.aspx.
The next Ohio Conference AAUP Annual Meeting will be held Friday, November 6 – Saturday, November 7, 2015 at the Renaissance Columbus Downtown.
For many years, the Annual Meeting had been hosted the second weekend of April, but due to many other meetings being held around that time, in addition to other considerations, the Conference Board of Trustees have decided to move it to November.
Please mark your calendars!
Did you know that in Ohio you can receive a dollar for dollar tax credit up to $100 for a contribution made to a state candidate?
Pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 5747.29, a taxpayer filing as an individual can claim a tax credit of up to $50 for contributions made to state candidates, while taxpayers filing jointly can claim a credit up to $100.
It’s like giving away free money!
A state candidate is any candidate who is running for a statewide office (e.g. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor), as well as anyone running for the Ohio General Assembly.
Over the past four years, we have seen an unprecedented attack on collective bargaining rights and voting rights, more reductions in higher education spending, and specific attacks on faculty working conditions. We cannot afford to sit out this election.
So in addition to making sure you’re registered to vote at your current address, please consider making contributions to candidates you support and know will support you in your profession and everyday life.
HB 484
House Bill 484, which contained the higher education components of the mid-biennium review (e.g. the state budget corrections legislation), has been passed by the General Assembly and sent to the Governor for his signature.
Thanks to our lobbying efforts, especially testimony given to legislative committees by OCAAUP President John McNay, the language in the original bill that called for a 10 percent increase in faculty workload was not included in the final version of the bill.
The final bill mainly tweaks funding formula issues, but also creates a Higher Education Student Financial Aid Workgroup, which is to make a report to the Governor and General Assembly on financial assistance that is available to students.
The bill specifically invites a number of associations to have a representative as part of this workgroup, but unfortunately, leaves out having a faculty representative. However, the bill allows the Chancellor of the Board of Regents to appoint additional members to the committee, and we are working with the Ohio Faculty Council to push for a faculty representative.
HB 483
House Bill 483 was the main budgetary bill of the mid-biennium review. In addition to state funding issues, this omnibus piece of legislation contained numerous policy changes, including one that was pushed by the Inter-University Council (IUC), as well as large annuity providers like TIAA-CREF, to limit the number of 403(b) annuity vendors that a university has to work with and accept.
Specifically, the language states that a university has to a select a minimum of four (4) vendors, and its in the institution’s sole discretion to decide which vendors those are. The language is permissive, so universities may choose not to change anything about their annuity provider options.
However, some institutions obviously were pushing for this change so that they would only have to deal with four vendors.
The OCAAUP Board of Trustees took a position of opposition against this language because of the impact it could have on some of our members.
For instance, if a university chooses to limit itself to working with the requisite four vendors, it would force employees to start putting all future contributions into one of the approved vendor plans, if they’re not already with one of those vendors. If an employee would want to move their money from their old account, they would be responsible for any negative financial impact this would have, like paying exit fees charged by their former vendor.
Despite our efforts as an association, as well as working with a coalition that included smaller 403(b) vendors, this language was included in the final bill.
Did you know that in Ohio you can receive a dollar for dollar tax credit up to $100 for a contribution made to a state candidate?
Pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 5747.29, a taxpayer filing as an individual can claim a tax credit of up to $50 for contributions made to state candidates, while taxpayers filing jointly can claim a credit up to $100.
It’s like giving away free money!
A state candidate is any candidate who is running for a statewide office (e.g. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Auditor), as well as anyone running for the Ohio General Assembly.
Over the past four years, we have seen an unprecedented attack on collective bargaining rights and voting rights, more reductions in higher education spending, and specific attacks on faculty working conditions. We cannot afford to sit out this election.
So in addition to making sure you’re registered to vote at your current address, please consider making contributions to candidates you support and know will support you in your profession and everyday life.