From Just as Anonymous:

Interesting that vehement opponents of absentee ballots (or at least vehement anti-Mohler types) seem to find it impossible that their peers might have previously scheduled work obligations on dates a month in the future.

Could it be that their concern over salary protection is justified by their own lack of productive engagement in the work expected of a modern clinician/researcher? Would it not be disingenuous for a person to cancel a previous work commitment before exploring all options for participating in the vote without disruptions?

As the average UCHC faculty member of 2009 is clearly a different type of worker than the average Storrs faculty member of 1974 (the last UConn AAUP vote?), one might want to consider that this effort to create the most executive-level Union of workers in state history might encounter, and need to accomodate, some conflicts that break new ground for the LRB.

There is clearly a reason that abolition of absentee ballots was never codified into statute or law. Policies are made with the expectation that they will need to be changed for just cause.