Just how different are the interests of Non Tenure-System faculty from those in the tenure system? So different that they should be covered by separate bargaining agreements? Or represented by different officers in the union - - or different negotiators at the bargaining table? University of Illinois at Chicago United Faculty believes that in most matters, from pay to pensions, the interests of NTS and TS faculty at UIC are one and the same. That is why UIC's full-time faculty members created a single union to protect their interests and appointed a single bargaining committee composed of NTS and TS faculty to negotiate the two collective bargaining agreements required by Illinois law. As one might expect, our successes in union-building and contract negotiations (we expect to reach tentative agreement on both CBAs by December) have resulted in major improvements in pay and working conditions for NTS faculty; however, they have also changed the paradigm about what counts as "academic work" at UIC. In short, we have learned--from the shared experiences of our members--that the AFT, NEA and AAUP are absolutely right: 1) teaching is important academic work, and should be valued as such; and 2) teaching-intensive appointments should be made tenurable.
Contingent Labor in Classics: The New Faculty Majority?