From Edward Marth

this is a reply to: Joel Levine
8/28/09 11:58 am

Since there is a (labor relations term) "practical impact" on conditions of employment, there would have to be negotiations over this. Negotiations does not mean either party can compel the other to agree, it means accountability in decision-making. I am sure that no one wants to advocate a course of action that would ultimately be contrary to the best interests of having the best medical school possible, that does not mean that the course advocated by HH and the Administration is in fact the best. Maybe it needs to be shaped one way or the other in the interest of keeping clinical faculty active and involved rather than be recipients of mandates. It may be that the Dean's interest is in keeping UCHC faculty in a vulnerable position in future decisions about staffing in the new arrangement. We don't know, but it does not reflect a view that faculty should be more empowered.

We are considering another forum where a labor relations lawyer might answer questions regarding the law and we had a fine suggestion from one of the state prosecutors (who have a union) to discuss the role of their union in their professional lives. A union does not get into prosecutorial considerations any more than it is involved in medical or pedagogical considerations, but it useful, they find in dealing with the state bureaucracy. We would also have more faculty from Storrs for the panel discussion and Q&A.
Ed Marth