Over 99% Vote in Favor of Contract Extension

Recognition and Appreciation to all UH Faculty in Bargaining Unit 7

Over the past two days, you had the opportunity to ratify extending the current 2021-2023 UHPA-BOR Agreement an additional two years to June 30, 2025 with the following pay increases:

  • 1% lump-bonus payment retroactive to July 1, 2021
  • 3.72% increase on July 1, 2022
  • 5% increase on July 1, 2023
  • 5% increase on July 1, 2024

The offer from the Employer was approved by the UHPA Board of Directors on April 2, 2022 to be given to the UH Faculty in Bargaining Unit 7 for their consideration and to take a ratification vote.

Results of the Ratification Vote

The ratification vote ended today, Friday, April 8, 2022 at 12:00 PM.  The results of the ratification vote are as follows:

99.1% – YES (1806 in favor)

0.9% – NO (17 opposed)

UHPA greatly appreciates you taking the time to vote.  Needless to say, the past couple of years have been daunting, challenging, and extremely difficult.  However, the UH Faculty in Bargaining Unit 7 displayed tremendous resilience, determination, and dedication by continuing to persevere through these difficult times allowing students to obtain their degrees and increasing student enrollment at the UH Manoa and the UH Hilo campus while nationally the trends show otherwise.  UHPA is proud to represent the UH Faculty.  In Unity We Stand.

Mahalo!

Big News on SB3269: Faculty Made a Difference!

Faculty Made a Difference!

SB 3269, SD2 – House Will NOT Hold Hearing on Tenure Bill

UHPA was notified today by Representative Gregg Takayama, Chair of the House Committee on Higher Education and Technology, that he will NOT hold a hearing on SB 3269 SD2 Relating to Academic Tenure at the University of Hawai‘i.

Representative Takayama shared that he reviewed the many pages of testimony from the Senate hearings, and took to heart your concerns and perspectives on tenure that unequivocally expressed opposition to this bill. He also shared that he clearly understands and respects the role and responsibilities of the UH Board of Regents, and how this legislation attempted to circumvent their decision-making authority.

Faculty engagement was critical in effecting this final outcome.  Without your collective voice, this outcome would not have been possible!  This proves that as a union, your voices can and are being heard!  We extend our appreciation and thanks to all of you for responding to the Call For Action.  No further action is required or needed at this time, but will keep you informed and apprised since we will continue to monitor this situation during this legislative session.

MAHALO

Special mahalo to Chair Gregg Takayama, House Finance Chair Sylvia Luke, and the entire House Leadership Team who took the time to listen, understand, and work with UHPA to hear the collective faculty voice on this critical issue.

IN SOLIDARITY

Big Mahalo to Senators Karl Rhoads and Brian Taniguchi

Courage, exemplified

It takes courage to go against the grain and to stand up for what is right. Mahalo to Sen. Karl Rhoads and Sen. Brian Taniguchi for voting “no” on SB 3269 SD 2, relating to academic tenure of faculty. These two bravely called out the elephant in the room rather than simply go with the flow by voting in favor of the bill with 23 other senators. Mahalo to Sen. Rhoads and Sen. Taniguchi for standing with faculty and not compromising their principles.

SB 3269 SD 2 Still Moving to Put UH Under The PIG

Despite the bill passing to the House, UHPA remains adamantly against the bill and its implications for UH faculty. The bill, in its most recent iteration, proposes a statute that coerces the UH Board of Regents and the UH president to think and act in a way prescribed by certain legislators to suit their own agenda. The Bill states this intention very clearly:

“Direct the board of regents and the president of the University of Hawaii to discuss and adopt the recommendations of the permitted interaction group on tenure and to confer with the faculty and the exclusive representative of each applicable collective bargaining unit to implement the permitted interaction group on tenure’s recommendations.”

But the BOR Rejected the PIG

The truth is, the UH Board of Regents did NOT accept the recommendations of the Tenure Permitted Interaction Group. In fact, at its February 17, 2022, the BOR voted to disregard the findings and recommendations of the dissolved Tenure PIG (Permitted Interaction Group) and to adopt the Report of the Senate Concurrent Resolution 201 (2021) Task Force. How much clearer can this be made?

While SCR 201 Reported Tenure Should Not Be Changed

As you may recall, this report was requested by the Senate in the previous legislative session. UH administration and UHPA worked collaboratively to fulfill that request by conducting exhaustive research on the tenure system of peer institutions. The findings of the task force showed there was no reason to change the current tenure system at the University of Hawai‘i.

Accepting the Rejected and Rejecting the Accepted – Why?

It is puzzling why the Senate has chosen to ignore this document but wants to base a law on the Tenure PIG, which has already been dismissed by the Board of Regents with the support of UH administration, UHPA, and faculty.

What Kind of Faculty Will Want to Apply At UH Now?

All of Hawai‘i should be embarrassed that these self-serving legislators and their meddling tactics have attracted national attention. It makes prospective faculty think twice about applying for positions at the UH and this will adversely impact faculty recruitment and retention.

The article in Inside Higher Education, titled, “Hawaii Senator Takes Aim at Tenure—and More,” Sen. Donna Mercado Kim tells an alternative story:

A Confused Lawmaker?
“Kim notes that the effort to revise tenure emerged from the Board of Regents, as part of a task force known as a policy implementation group. ‘What I keep pointing out is this is not our recommendation; it came out of the Board of Regents,” she said… At a meeting last month, the Board of Regents ultimately adopted the recommendations from the Senate report and not the policy implementation group’s. Kim’s bill requires regents to ‘discuss and adopt’ the recommendations of the policy implementation group, which the Board of Regents previously shot down.’”

The article concludes with Sen. Mercado Kim attempting to justify her actions:

“At the end of the day, Kim suggested that it isn’t her clashes with UH at the heart of her legislation, but rather that she has a ‘history of looking at things and revamping, upgrading and renewing,’ ultimately pushing institutions toward uncomfortable changes. ‘Sometimes that’s met with a lot of objections because things have been done a certain way for the longest time,’ Kim said.”

BOR Drops The PIG And The Curtain Gets Pulled Back

At Thursday’s (2/17/2022) BOR meeting, the BOR voted to adopt the Report of the Senate Concurrent Resolution 201 (2021) Task Force and to disregard the findings and recommendations of the dissolved Tenure PIG (Permitted Interaction Group).  By the BORʻs vote on Thursday, it sends a clear message to the Senate that the BOR doesnʻt support the action proposed by the Findings and Recommendations of the Dissolved BOR Tenure PIG.

Moreover, as a governing body that by Constitution is granted authority, power, and exclusive jurisdiction over the internal structure, management, and operations of the university, they have decided that it is in the best interest of the University of Hawai‘i to follow the recommendations as detailed in the Report of the Senate Concurrent Resolution 201 (2021).

Jan Sullivan Exposed

Based on the BORʻs decision, it provides the clarity UHPA was seeking as to the genesis of SB 3269.  Thursday’s BOR action clearly revealed that the BOR is not supportive of the legislation introduced by Senator Donna Mercado-Kim and dispels the narrative that this bill was proposed by the now dissolved BOR Tenure PIG.  Only one former BOR member testified in support of the bill, connect the dots and the picture will be revealed for all to see..

And Senator Donna Mercado Kim Exposed

At the Senate HRE Hearing on February 10, 2022, Senator Donna Mercado Kim directly accused UHPA of inciting fear and scare tactics in UHPAʻs Newsflash to its membership, and openly took offense at UHPAʻs assertion that “The bill is an attempt by Senator Donna Mercado Kim, Chair of the Senate Committee on Higher Education to interject the Legislature into the constitutionally established role of the UH Board of Regents by taking away the exclusive jurisdiction over the internal structure, management and operation of the UH, thereby granting themselves as the governing body of the Board of Regents.”  further stating that “Now, this measure was again, proposed by the Board of Regents permitted action group.”

Proof That DMK Wants to Dismantle the BOR

However, on February 8, 2022, Senator Donna Mercado Kim as  Chair of the Senate HRE Committee, without any open public discussion or conversation, unilaterally amended SB 3186 with a draft SB 3186, SD 1, by proposing a Constitutional Amendment to change Article X, Section 6. of the Hawaii State Constitution, relating to the powers of the BOR to eliminate the BORʻs “exclusive” jurisdiction over the internal structure, management, and operation of the university.  This recent action taken by Senator Donna Mercado Kim further supports UHPAʻs claim that the Senator is trying to assume the constitutional power and authority granted to the BOR and to become its governing body.  Actions truly speak louder than words.     

Senator Fevellaʻs Alternative Facts

Where Does He Get This From?

Based on last weekʻs Senate HRE hearing on SB 3269, SD 1, UHPA performed its own due diligence in researching various statements and comments offered by Senator Kurt Fevella when he questioned testifiers by making the statement “I donʻt know what they was <sic> reading?” 

No, Taxpayers Don’t Pay for All of UH

In Senator Fevellaʻs public statement that “…the State of Hawaii is the only one that pays for everything by the taxpayer” we can only assume the context of his comment was as it applies to funding of the University of Hawaii (UH).  However, that public statement is by far the furthest from the truth.  While we all wish the legislature  funded all of the UH, the legislature appropriates about 60% of the total funds to operate the UH. 

We Are, By Definition, a Public University

The UH is no different from other public research universities (and there is at least one in every state) across the country.  In fact, the term public research university is actually defined as a “research intensive, doctorate-granting institutions that receive a share of funding from state and local appropriations an serve as a critical component of the overall higher education landscape.”  This definition of a public research university is found in the 2012 Report  by the National Science Board (NSB) that was submitted to both the President and Congress.  Public research universities play a distinct and indispensable role in producing research and scholarship, enhancing economic development and technical assistance to our communities, states, and our nation, as well as opportunities for anchor-institutional collaborations.  The difference between public and private research universities is that public research universities are charged and expected to equally address all these roles together as effectively, efficiently, and affordably as possible.

This is What Public Research Universities Do

While UHPA may not agree with Senator Fevellaʻs statement on the overall funding of the UH, we hope that Senator Fevella agrees with the importance of public research universities which are that they: 

  • Initiate the fundamental research that drives scientific and technological discovery; 
  • Educate and train the skilled workforce of tomorrow; 
  • Prepare school teachers and faculty for the classroom; 
  • Are stewards and repositories of human knowledge; and most importantly 
  • Equip the next generation of leaders and policy makers with the knowledge, skills, and education to lead a twenty-first century democracy with honor and empathy.

Which Universities is he Talking About?

In regards to Senator Fevellaʻs statement that, “The researchers that we talk about, that weʻre talking about and the oneʻs thatʻve been talking, they donʻt bring in 80% of their research fund.  Most of the colleges in the mainland does require that” UHPA is assuming that Senator Fevella is referring to public research universities and not colleges as he referenced in his statement.  

Uh, Colleges Don’t Do Research. Universities Do

For clarification, colleges across the nation do not normally employ research faculty and neither do any of the colleges under the UH system.  While the word “college” doesnʻt have the same meaning in every country, in the United States the term college is normally used to define smaller education institutions that offer undergraduate/Bachelorʻs degrees, associate degrees, or certificates.  On the other hand, “universities” in the US are normally defined as larger education institutions that offer both undergraduate and graduate/postgraduate degree programs, while “research universities” are a subset of doctoral degree-granting institutions that conduct research.

UH Manoa is in Rare Company

More significantly for UH Manoa, it has obtained the distinguished Carnegie Research I designation (very high research activity – and one of only 146 private and public institutions granted such designation) that per the 1994 edition of the Carnegie Classification system is defined as:

  • Offer a full range of baccalaureate programs
  • Are committed to graduate education through the doctorate
  • Give a high priority to research
  • Award 50 or more doctoral degrees each year
  • Received annually $40 million or more in federal support.

And Yes, Our Researchers Pick Up Most Of the Tab

As noted in the UHʻs report (Report to Examine and Assess the University of Hawaiiʻs Tenure System) to the 2022 Legislature per SCR 201, SD1, HD1, (2021), it reflected that for Research faculty at UH Manoa who are not tenured or on a tenure track, only 5% of their funds are received through the State general funds, and 75% is expected of the researcher to cover.  In all, 3% is from Tuition & fees special fund, 5% from Research & training revolving fund, 12% from other funds which covers the remaining 20% in question.

Senator, Kindly Point Out Where You Got Your Facts From, Please

Thus, while UH Researchers are accountable for 75% of their extramural funds, we couldnʻt locate any public research R-1 universities in the mainland that require the 80% requirement as referenced and maintained by Senator Fevella.  UHPA respectfully requests that Senator Fevella share what he was reading when he made the above-referenced statement.

Mystery Remains on Hearing’s Details

Re: SB 3269 SD 1

Where is Jan Sullivan’s Missing Testimony?

While an NFL Superbowl LVI Champion was crowned, restaurants and florists inundated with reservations and deliveries on Valentines Day meet the challenge, and as the US moved up from 6th place to 3rd place on the 2022 Winter Olympic medal counts, there is still no posting, access, or availability on the Hawaii State Legislature’s website to obtain former Board of Regent member Jan Sullivan’s testimony on SB 3269, SD 1.  Since former Regent Sullivan continued to reference her written testimony during the hearing, inquiring minds are interested to read the contents of her written testimony as it was referenced many times during her testimony and questioning.  

Does Oceanit Have An Interest Here?

It’s perplexing that this is supposed to be an open public hearing and not just a one way listening session.  While the majority of all testimonies were posted on the website, including LATE testimonies, so how is it that former Regent Sullivan’s testimony remains elusive and missing?  As the Chief Operating Officer for Oceanit, we do recognize that former Regent Sullivan has a vested, if not, personal interest in all matters surrounding the UH.

Who Asked Who?

Senate Higher Education Committee Chair Donna Mercado Kim continues to stand by her statement that this isn’t an act by the Legislature to impose their will on the Board of Regents (BOR). The only Republican on the HRE, Senator Fevella, supported HRE Committee Chair Kim’s statement that, “we did not come up with this Bill as stated by Ms. Sullivan.”  (1:08:08) Chair Mercado Kim explained in an email to a UHPA Faculty Member that:

“This measure was introduced for a couple of reasons: 

(1) Outlining the recommendations of the Board of Regents’ “permitted interaction group” (PIG) that was charged with evaluating the institution’s tenure system and set forth ideas for reform and improvement to allow public discussion on the Regents report

(2) The UH administration failed to meet the deadline of January 4, 2022 (10 days before the convening of the Legislature) to report on SCR 201 Report to Examine and Assess the University of Hawaii’s Tenure System so it could not be introduced in a bill as the bill introduction deadline was Jan.26, 2022.”

Where’s The BOR PIG Written Testimony In Support Of SB 3269?

At the hearing, Chair Mercado Kim stated that SB 3269 was proposed by the BOR PIG (32:50-32:56).  In review of all the testimonies posted on the Legislature’s website, there were no written testimonies available from any of the BOR PIG members.  Again, the BOR PIG consisted of BOR members Jan Sullivan, Ben Kudo, Ernest Wilson, Robert Westerman, UH officials Deb Halbert, Bonnie Irwin, Erika Lacro, Brennon Morioka, Velma Kameoka, and UHPA Executive Director Christian Fern.  

Other than BOR PIG member Jan Sullivan verbally testifying in support of the bill, there were no other individuals of the BOR PIG who submitted written testimony in support of the bill or at least there was none posted, referenced, or recognized by Chair Mercado Kim.

Again, who asked who to introduce this bill?

Where is Ben’s Testimony?

Former BOR Chair Ben Kudo (Attorney Ashford & Wriston) only provided oral testimony on the proposed SB 3269, SD 1, and was cut off before he had a chance to state his position in support or opposition. He only got as far as testifying that the BOR did NOT act on the PIG recommendation. 

Are You For, Or Against This, Ben?

UHPA asks that Regent Kudo clarify his position over SB 3269, SD 1, and whether he was speaking on behalf of the BOR, a member of BOR PIG, or as an individual.  As a standing member and current Vice Chair of the BOR, Regent Kudo’s position needs to be identified to determine his standing when testifying on this measure.

In solidarity we stand!

A Sham of a Hearing (SB 3269 SD 1)

The Facts of What Really Happened

We went through the recording of the SB3269 hearing and pulled out important soundbites you need to know. In UHPA’s opinion, this was an example of collusion at its finest and the epitome of a rigged hearing. There was unanimous written opposition to the bill. Its sole support came from former Board of Regents (BOR) member Jan Sullivan whose written testimony continues to remain elusive and invisible. 

We’ve extensively hyperlinked to relevant sections of the videotaped hearing along with timestamps in YouTube so you can see and hear this yourself. 

Chair Kim Calls Out UHPA

Senate Higher Education Committee Chair Donna Mercado Kim started the meeting on SB 3269, SD 1 by calling out UHPA on its member communications saying that the measure was not action taken by her or the legislature.  Chair Mercado Kim stated that the measure was proposed by the Board of Regents (BOR) Permitted Interaction Group (PIG), and that it was not the Legislature’s attempt to take away or insert themselves over the BOR. Chair Mercado Kim was referring to the UHPA newsletter (32:18-32:51) that is posted on the UHPA webpage. 

Jan Sullivan Referencing Written Testimony That Doesn’t Exist

At the start of Thursday’s Senate Higher Education Committee (HRE) meeting, there was posted online a total of 579 pages of written testimony on the proposed SB 3269, SD 1. All written testimony posted online at the time of the hearing were opposed to the HRE passing proposed SB 3269, SD 1. During oral testimony, Senate HRE Chair Donna Mercado Kim called on former BOR member Jan Sullivan (Chief Operating Officer Oceanit) and former BOR Chair (and current BOR member) Ben Kudo (Attorney Ashford & Wriston) to provide their oral testimony on the proposed SB 3269, SD 1. Sullivan expressed strong support for the bill and continuously referenced her written testimony (34:49), while ironically BOR Kudo only stated facts, did not take a position, and did not submit any written testimony.  

For many of us who looked through all the written testimonies submitted prior to the hearing, it was bewildering to comprehend since Sullivan’s written testimony was non-existent or available online.  It could’ve been written in invisible ink and contained in some of the blank pages in the 579 pages of written testimonies submitted.    

Sullivan Criticizes the Board of Regents (Where She Served)

While being questioned by HRE Chair Donna Mercado Kim about the Board of Regent’s Permitted Action Group (PIG), Sullivan criticized the BOR for not performing its responsibilities for granting tenure. Sullivan stated that at one time the BOR used to act on tenure and promotions, but she objected because she believed the BOR had no idea what they were approving.  Sullivan stated that they had no background on individuals, how it was justified and prioritized, and thought it did not make sense for the BOR to perform those functions. Thus, the policies were changed to delegate those responsibilities to the UH President (i.e. because of their lack of understanding, knowledge, and experience with tenure the BOR removed themselves from the process). Wow?! After more than a decade (serving two (2) five-year terms as a BOR appointee), a reasonable person might come to expect that any long-term serving Regent would at least have a basic understanding of academic tenure. (58:29-59:38)

Board of Regents Double Talk?

During former BOR Chair Ben Kudo’s oral testimony, he testified that the BOR voted not to take any action on the PIG recommendations because the SCR 201 Task Group had not been formed and when he tried to explain the recommendations of the SCR 201 Task Force, Sen. Mercado Kim abruptly cut off former BOR Chair Kudo (36:17-37:47) saying his time was up.  Again, Regent Kudo only offered to state the facts and didn’t take a position on the measure. 

Since the BOR didn’t submit any written or oral testimony, the question is: Was Regent Kudo speaking on behalf of the BOR or as an individual?  Regent Kudo didn’t qualify and/or clarify who he was speaking for or on behalf of during his oral testimony.  Was his testimony on behalf of the BOR in support of SB 3269, SD1, or was it his own personal testimony in support of SB 3269, SD1, in which the BOR has yet to take action on these recommendations? Or was he trying to provide background information but was prohibited from continuing?

Who From the PIG Actually Proposed This?

Chair Mercado Kim explained that SB 3269 was proposed by the BOR PIG (32:50-32:56).  The BOR PIG consisted of BOR members Jan Sullivan, Ben Kudo, Ernest Wilson, Robert Westerman, UH officials Deb Halbert, Bonnie Irwin, Erika Lacro, Brennon Morioka, Velma Kameoka, and UHPA Executive Director Christian Fern.  However, only BOR PIG member Jan Sullivan testified in support of the measure.  In the spirit of transparency, honesty, and openness of elected officials, one should provide further clarification on who specifically asked the Legislature to introduce SB 3269.  Whether it was several, all, or just one of the BOR PIG members who asked for its introduction, and/or whether it was approved by the BOR as a body of the whole.  It is clear and evident that the BOR didn’t submit any written or provide any oral testimony on SB 3269, SD1.  Thus, there are serious, unanswered questions regarding who specifically supported and authorized the introduction of SB 3269 from the BOR. 

Senator Kurt Fevella: A Must LISTEN 

During questioning, Senator Kurt Fevella at the end of the hearing went into a rant (1:05:09 – 1:08:36) about how he personally felt about: 1) the individuals testifying in opposition of the bill; 2) why he believes the bill will improve the quality of life for everyone at UH; 3) how he didn’t appreciate the individuals testifying in opposition spreading false narratives and bad mouthing Chair Mercado Kim; 4) UH researchers cannot perform legitimate research work if they are not physically on site; 5) how our State pays for everything and that UH is the only university in the nation that is funded by state funds or taxpayer monies; 6) that UH researchers don’t bring in 80% of their research funds in which most colleges in the mainland require that of their researchers; 7) that the Hawaiian community didn’t get their facts straight, that their arguments are based on a false premises, that there tenured colleagues from the other campuses told them to testify on this bill, and said in the end to remember We was here for you guys; and 8) all this is being done to save “some” taxpayer money. 

Union Solidarity Demonstrated 

UHPA and its over 3,185 members across the State sends a shout out with deep appreciation and gratitude for the support provided by our fellow unionized brothers and sisters who submitted testimony in opposition to SB 3269, SD 1, on behalf of UHPA:

  • Hawaii Government Employees Association, AFSCME, Local 152
  • State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers
  • Hawaii Nurses’ Association, OPEIU, Local 50
  • Hawaii State AFL-CIO
  • United Public Workers, AFSCME, Local 646
  • Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council, Inc. 
  • International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employees, Local 665
  • Hawaii Fire Fighters Association, Local 1463 
  • Graduate Student Organization 

Our fellow unionized brothers and sisters understand that this bill encroaches on public employees constitutionally protected collective bargaining rights guaranteed by the Hawaii State Constitution, and that an injury to one is an injury to all.   

The Fight Has Just Begun

The bill now heads to the Senate Ways and Means (WAM) Committee.  UHPA will keep you apprised of the next steps through our News Flashes to your inbox. You can catch up any time via our website article archives.

In Solidarity We Stand!

TODAY: Watch SB3269’s hearing LIVE

The Moment Has Arrived

Today at 3pm, the Committee on Higher Education will be holding a public hearing and broadcasting it live via YouTube

Democracy Belongs to Those That Show Up

One silver lining of COVID restrictions is that we can now all attend public hearings remotely.   Use this opportunity to virtually show up.  Go to this YouTube link at 3pm today and let it play on your desktop or mobile device. 

Let’s Break Youtube Viewing Records

A quick glance of the Senate’s YouTube channel shows previous hearings with a few hundred views at most.  UHPA members are in the thousands.  Let’s all “show up” as a sign of solidarity for the future of higher education in Hawai‘i and blow out the views.  

Share your commentary via Facebook

We created this post which also links to the hearing video.  If you are watching the hearing (either live or after the fact) and come across something notable (good, bad, ugly, or otherwise) please post your commentary on this Facebook Post.  For extra points, add the time stamp on the video at your notable moment so that others can go to that point in the hearing and see what you saw. 

All Your Hard Work Is Now

We’ve had countless, non-stop emails and messages from you that see the danger being posed. You’ve worked hard to write and submit your testimony. Attending live and watching this drama unfold is our next step. Join us! 

ICYMI – get caught up

I)n C)ase Y)ou M)issed I)t , catch yourself up on this issue and read this collection of articles we published since Jan 31.

Don’t Play Sen. Donna Mercado Kim’s Game

Sen. Donna Mercado Kim is at it again.

SB 3269, SD 1, a revised version of the bill relating to academic tenure at the UH, stealthily attempts to diminish the recognition and importance over the cornerstones of academia – namely academic governance, shared governance, and academic consultation of UH faculty.  The bill will ultimately undermine the existing UH shared governance structure that ensures that faculty rights are protected and more importantly that faculty voice is recognized.  It’s an unprecedented and underhanded attempt by the Legislature to gain full control and authority over the University of Hawaiʻi.  

Don’t fall for it

The bill is an attempt by Sen. Donna Mercado Kim, Chair of the Senate Committee on Higher Education, to interject the Legislature into the constitutionally established role of the UH Board of Regents by taking away their exclusive jurisdiction over the internal structure, management, and operation of the UH – thereby granting themselves as the governing body over the Board of Regents.  On the surface, the revised version of the bill appears to be benign by making minor concessions to certain classifications of UH faculty.  However, the bigger picture is that under R-20, Roles and Consultation Protocols Involving UH Administration, UH Professional Assembly, and UH Faculty Senates, of the Unit 7 Agreement, such matters as faculty classification, faculty five-year periodic review, and topics that impact faculty which are all subject to a shared governance structure will be swept away with this legislation.  Thereafter, what will stop the legislature from coming back year after year seeking to remove Faculty voice in the determination of academic programs, mission, strategic planning direction, goals, assessments, faculty criteria, etc.  This is nothing other than a veiled attempt for the Legislature to trump the authority of the Board of Regents in that they can meddle and control the UH. This must be stopped before going any further.

The Legislature, as a governing body, should not be involved in any type of UH policymaking. That is a recognized responsibility and jurisdiction of the UH administration and UH Board of Regents. This bill is nothing other than a vehicle for the Legislature to establish itself as a supra-Board of Regents, supplanting the authority granted to the UH Board of Regents. It also sets a dangerous precedent that allows the Legislature to usurp the authority of not only the Board of Regents but also the UH administration. The Legislature’s track record has shown it doesn’t have requisite knowledge, expertise, and understanding of a higher education system nor appreciate the nuances of an academic environment.  Taking away core principles of academia such as academic governance and shared-governance will strip away the voice of faculty in their work, their occupation, and the academy they serve.  

Taking away what you already have

Through the UHPA and contractually established collective bargaining rights, faculty have a voice in shaping their future and how the academy operates and functions in order to prepare its students for productive employment in the State’s workforce and to become engaged citizens of our community.  By allowing the Legislature to become the primary entity that governs the UH, all policies, procedures, rules and regulations will eventually all be converted and codified in statute. The role of the Faculty Senates will become obsolete and the faculty’s ability to discuss concerns and recommend any changes with UH administration and the UH Board of Regents will cease to exist. 

UHPA urges UH faculty to use your VOICE in opposition to this bill before your VOICE is stolen by these Legislators.  

Take Action Now on SB 3269

Hearing Set for Thursday at 3:00pm

We told you that Senator Donna Mercado Kim was going to pull a fast one on  SB 3269 and here it is: she introduced an amendment earlier with SB 3269, SD1 and it’s scheduled for a hearing this Thursday, February 10, 2022, at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 229 and video conference.

Our Analysis of SD1 Will Be Posted

UHPA is currently analyzing the changes made to SB 3269, SD1, and will be posting our analysis and impact of the proposed changes.

But Don’t Wait. Your Testimony Submission is a Must

We need you to submit written testimony (via the button on the bill’s page) and/or testify via videoconference (how-to details here) and you must do so at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the Thursday 3pm hearing which means your deadline is this Wednesday 3pm. 

Do it now. 

If you are planning to submit written testimony, we encourage you to work on your draft now and submit your testimony before the 24 hour deadline.  

In solidarity we stand!