Noah Zatz, Professor of Law at UCLA. The tweet version of this post is here and Noah is also working on a longer version with colleagues.
I’m flabbergasted that the systemwide (not UCLA) UC Senate leadership has issued guidance on the strike that undermines its own Senate faculty members (like me) and undermines solidarity with the UAW strikers, our co-workers and students. It does so by parroting weak administration talking points that would sharply limit Senate members’ rights to respect the UAW picket line, while also failing to acknowledge, let alone advance, contrary points that protect faculty. There are multiple problems with the letter, but I highlight one here: statements about the Faculty Code of Conduct (APM-015).
The guidance letter turns to the Code of Conduct after offering an already cramped account of Senate faculty’s rights to respect the picket line under the state Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA) (more on that another time, but for now, compare this FAQ). It then seems to take back even this grudging acknowledgment by claiming that that “Notwithstanding the right to respect the picket line, Senate faculty have certain obligations as [UC] employees,” referring to our instructional duties, especially with regard to grading. This “notwithstanding” is nonsense because our statutory HEERA rights cannot be trumped by an internal UC document. The APM is not higher law! The whole point of respecting a picket line is to withhold work that the employer ordinarily requires.
Furthermore, the letter omits a crucial detail within the Code of Conduct itself. The critical provision [II.A.1.(c)] refers to not carrying out instructional duties “without legitimate reason.” What reason could be more legitimate than exercising a statutorily protected right?