Academic Freedom for UM Faculty and Staff
Members concerned with their rights and responsibilities in moments of political tension should remember that, contractually, lecturers and LACs are assured protections to their academic freedoms. Members have also inquired about the role that LEO will play in any disciplinary action pursued against a lecturer or LAC for expression of their political beliefs. First, it is important to know that the union will represent you in any such circumstance.
Second, though this statement does not offer legal advice, it provides materials to help members understand the language of current policies and statements from the Michigan Faculty Senate and AAUP.
Main takeaways:
Lecturers and LACs are guaranteed protected academic speech, covering discussion of political topics.
Discussion of political topics should be incorporated as part of the relevant course curriculum.
Instructors must make space for a range of opinions on political topics and be particularly mindful of the power dynamics between students and teachers.
LEO will provide support for any instructors who are accused of unmerited political discussion.
For those who are interested in specifics, there are several places to look. For instance, two important sections of the contract speak to this issue:
ARTICLE II NON-DISCRIMINATION
Section A.
Discrimination against any Employee shall be prohibited by the Employer and will not be tolerated. The Employer will take proactive measures to ensure that Employees are treated without discrimination because of age, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, citizenship status (subject to compliance with federal and state law), sex (including gender identity and gender expression),religion, disability, height, weight, marital status, ancestry, political persuasion or affiliation, sexual orientation, HIV status, pregnancy, familial status, or special disabled veteran or Vietnam-era veteran status. Discriminatory harassment is a form of discrimination.
This article can reasonably be read to require the University to proactively protect employees from attacks based on their political opinions, just as they should protect against other attacks. If an employee feels harassed or otherwise discriminated against because of a political persuasion or affiliation.
ARTICLE XXXVIII ACADEMIC RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The LEO contract: ARTICLE XXXVIII ACADEMIC RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Section A and the GLAM contract ARTICLE XXVlll share language on Academic Freedom.
Academic Freedom.
All Employees shall enjoy the full rights of academic freedom and such rights will extend to Employees no less than they extend to other instructional faculty at the University. The Employer shall not take disciplinary or limiting action against an Employee for exercising their academic freedom.
The University of Michigan is a community devoted to learning. Members of this community advance, preserve, and transmit knowledge through study, teaching, artistic expression, research, and scholarship. As a public university, there is a special obligation to serve the public interest.
The University has an especially strong commitment to preserve and protect freedom of thought and expression. Reasoned dissent plays a vital role in the search for truth; and academic freedom, including the right to express unpopular views, is a cherished tradition of universities everywhere. All members of the University have the right to express their own views and hear the views of others expressed, but they must also take responsibility for affording the same rights to others.
The parties to this Agreement acknowledge the mutual obligations to respect the autonomy of each person’s conscience in matters of conviction, religious faith, and political belief.
The parties to this Agreement affirm the importance of maintaining high standards of academic and professional integrity
Questions of popularity of views aside, this article protects the rights of individuals to express their views on political questions, provided they afford equal opportunity for others to do the same. Therefore, if you engage in discussion of politically-sensitive topics, it is the responsibility of the instructor to make space for other perspectives. The attempt to create an atmosphere of open dialogue is central to the creation of a vibrant intellectual space and is, therefore, a further guarantee of continuing academic freedom.
The Faculty Senate has issued previous statements on the role of academic freedom that further clarify and specify what they understand the ranges of these freedoms to be.
The main distinction they offer is that academic freedom is not unfettered freedom of speech, but rather pertains specifically to the freedom to engage with political content within the bounds of an individual’s disciplinary work in research and teaching.
Academic freedom and free speech.
This statement adopts the stance of the 1915 AAUP Declaration, which describes academic freedom not as an individual protection from any and all constraints, but rather as the freedom to pursue a scholarly profession in accord with the standards of that profession. As the Declaration states, academic freedom is meant to defend “not the absolute freedom of utterance of the individual scholar, but the absolute freedom of thought, of inquiry, of discussion and of teaching, of the academic profession.” See Finkin and Post, 38-39. In this respect, academic freedom is distinct from the constitutional right to free speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. However, in some instances modern courts have construed the right to free speech as protecting aspects of academic freedom, particularly within public universities. The present statement is occasioned, in part, by a perception that federal courts are currently abridging the constitutional protection of faculty, so that a heightened degree of institutional protection is now required. See O’Neil, 43-77, and also the AAUP’s 2009 article cited above, which makes the point that, because of a number of recent judicial decisions permitting university administrators to treat faculty members on the model of ordinary employees, “the case for academic freedom at both public and private institutions [should now be made], not as a matter of law, but as a principle vital to the effective functioning of institutions of higher learning.”
Therefore, political statements shared as part of a class should be framed in terms of the materials covered in that course. In another part of the statement, the Faculty Senate specifically notes that political speech is protected if it furthers the goals of the class:
Freedom of teaching.
Faculty members must be able not only to disseminate to their students the results of research by themselves and others in their profession, but also to train students to think about these results for themselves, often in an atmosphere of controversy that, so long as it remains in a broad sense educationally relevant, actively assists students in mastering the subject and appreciating its significance.
However, some ambiguity in the statement remains, particularly around questions of what constitutes “disruption” to “authorized activities on campus.”
Qualifications on academic freedom.
Assertions of academic freedom can come into conflict with other basic institutional values of a modern university. Academic freedom is not a defense against allegations of professional misconduct in research or teaching, nor does it provide complete protection against illegal or otherwise justifiably prohibited conduct or speech, particularly if it significantly disrupts teaching, research, administration, or other authorized activities on the campus. Academic freedom would not, for example, provide a defense to harassment of a student, nor would it in itself justify offensive speech in a classroom that is irrelevant to the subject matter being taught. Further, although academic freedom entails a high degree of faculty autonomy in organizing and teaching courses, it may also be limited by the requirements of curricula and of responsible teaching and collegiality, within an environment of tolerance and mutual respect. For example, as the AAUP acknowledged in its 1940 Statement, faculty members “should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matters which have no relation to their subject.”
The Faculty Senate further qualifies protections for individuals speaking specifically in opposition to University policy:
Scope of statement.
For purposes of this statement, faculty members are members of the University of Michigan’s Senate, as defined in Regents Bylaw 4.01. Although the AAUP’s 1940 statement associates academic freedom with tenure, it needs to stress that academic freedom applies equally to all faculty members, regardless of rank or tenure. However, those faculty who serve the University as senior officers or administrators, or who are on their immediate staff, are normally expected to publicly support the University’s policies, procedures, goals, and programs; therefore they have more limited freedom to speak about these matters without institutional restraint or discipline.
Still, the Faculty Senate notes that the right to participate in public debates and activities supporting particular political programs is protected, provided that employees speak as individuals, not as representatives of the University.
Freedom of participation in public debate.
Both within and beyond their areas of expertise, faculty members are generally entitled to participate as citizens in public forums and debates without fear of institutional discipline or restraint, so long as it is clear that they are not acting or speaking for the University.
Therefore, it is reasonable to say that discussion of political topics is protected as long as it occurs as part of the learning of course material and there is open room for dissenting opinions.
Relevant protections:
Article XXXVIII Academic Freedom
“Political persuasion or affiliation” are also protected categories in Article II
UMich SPG on Freedom of Speech - https://spg.umich.edu/policy/601.01
UMich Faculty Handbook - https://facultyhandbook.provost.umich.edu/1-a/
Contact LEO at office@leounion.org if you want to discuss your rights and protections.