The National Labor Relation Board recently made a judicial ruling (yes, it is an administrative agency, but agencies do act like courts frequently) concerning the rights of faculty at private colleges and universities to unionize.  The actual decision is somewhat complicated and I have not yet read it in full, but the upshot of it is that if faculty are classified as a certain kind of group (the ruling makes two distinctions among faculty), depending on their role and authority in governance, they may be allowed to form unions.  This ruling would encompass private and Christian colleges and universities, creating all sorts of interesting and possibly harmful scenarios.  The following is not a legal analysis, though I hope to do that later, but rather a suggestion for Christian colleges to avoid the desire for unionization if the ruling stands.

The most obvious first problem has to do with costs.  Would faculty unions have the ability to change the salary structure at a Christian university in a way that would artificially lead to higher personnel costs that would have to be borne legally by the university?  If they operated like normal unions they would be able to exert that power and it would be legally binding.  And much research has shown that unionization does tend to increase costs of labor without an associated increase in productivity.  The increase becomes just a “dead weight” loss to consumers/students.  But Christian institutions do not have unlimited resources.  Likely something would have to be cut or tuition raised.  Cuts might well harm the actual educational quality at the university.  In addition, union rules might create a situation in which faculty could refuse to perform certain tasks or to perform less of those tasks.  Would they then negatively affect the educational goals of the university?  Tuition increases might not be well-received to the point that enrollment might begin to decline.

One could argue of course that faculty at a Christian university would certainly not act in a such an obviously self-centered manner.  But if an administration “pushed” the majority far enough by pursuing policies that lead to a decline in morale or relative pay, the faculty could be enticed to join a union.  The students, who are consumers, might have to endure either larger tuition increases—in an environment in which increases are already viewed suspiciously—or reduced services, including direct educational services.

On the other hand, it seems that it behooves an administration to treat its faculty as well as it feasibly can, given the economic constraints.  This includes endeavoring not to waste funds doing things that are clearly wasteful.  All too many administrators have been able to get away with a lot of pretty wasteful spending.  Examples have included immense salaries for administrators (and increasing), adding more administrators that are not usually needed in such numbers, lavish refurbishing of offices (and sometimes homes), adding amenities that make a university begin to resemble a spa or theme park, and on and on.  At a small Christian college or university, these things cannot be hidden all that easily—though sometimes they can be concealed for a few years.  Moreover, administrators can also do things that either hinder transparency, exert arbitrary power, or amount to sheer unethical behavior, purely apart from bad spending habits.  These can drive a faculty to unionize.

So what is to be done?  First, stop wasteful spending and concentrate spending on academics—quality academics.  Cut aspects of programs that are mere luxuries—if necessary (some universities I realize are “rolling in the money” at least for now).  This also means they shouldn’t add costly academic programs that will tend to pull funding from everyone else.  Unfortunately certain professional programs fit this bill, as worthy as they might otherwise be.  Second,  every effort ought to be made to pay faculty salaries that are reasonable.  I understand this is a bit tricky.  It is always difficult to determine what a salary ought to be.  One could look at the other private universities for guidance, or just guess based on cost of living, or some combination.  But one thing is certain:  If you are serious about quality of academics the best way is to look at what the best actually offer.  Examples include Hillsdale College, Grove City College, even Wheaton, among Christian colleges, and try your best to get there or make strides.  Third, and this might be the most important, create an environment of maximal transparency.  The temptation is to ignore faculty and keep them in the dark on many issues.  But why?  At every opportunity the administration should formalize in writing that they will be open and honest, and that they will allow faculty to evaluate those claims.  For example, I was once appointed chair of a university subcommittee to explore general education.  As all academics know, this can be a contentious issue.  The first thing I did was to draw up a document to be sent to all faculty on how all meetings and reporting would be conducted, how often reports would be issued, and that all meetings would be open to all faculty.  Moreover I welcomed any and all faculty input.  I also proposed a high voting rule to ensure that we would first have a wide commitment to any proposals.  This was all in writing and known.  In a phrase everything was to be “above board.”  It also created checks and balances so that no one person could abuse authority.  This is how trust is built and kept.   This is how administrators ought to function.   Obviously there are exceptions, for example personnel matters, but these should be few and far between.

Will these actions foreclose the possibility of unionization?  I cannot say.  I don’t even know whether the NLRB ruling will stand for Christian universities.  It might well be an infringement on First Amendment rights of religious institutions (not to mention a Religious Freedom and Restoration Act violation).  But Christian universities ought not to rely too heavily on the courts.  At any rate, this could be an opportunity for them to do right and in the process avoid the potential results of unionization.  We shall see what happens.