In a surprising turn of events, Loyola Marymount University has announced that it will no longer recognize its newly formed non-tenure-track faculty union and will cease negotiations, citing a religious exemption with the National Labor Relations Board. This decision has left many faculty members feeling confused and frustrated, as they grapple with the implications of this move.
The university’s decision to halt union recognition could potentially set a concerning precedent for faculty unions at other religious institutions, according to experts in labor relations. Faculty members are now left questioning the future of their union and the rights they believed they had secured.
Bryan Wisch, an instructor in rhetorical arts and a member of the union’s bargaining team, expressed his shock at the announcement. After a decade of unsuccessful attempts to unionize, non-tenure-track and visiting faculty members had finally voted to form a union in June 2024. Negotiations began in December, and representatives from both sides had met multiple times without any indication that the university would claim a religious exemption.
Wisch criticized the university’s actions as both illegal and unethical, stating that the administration has betrayed the values of the institution by disregarding the faculty’s rights. He emphasized that the union has already filed a charge of unfair labor practices with the NLRB, highlighting the seriousness of the situation.
In a letter addressing the decision, the chair of the board defended the move, arguing that invoking the religious exemption is essential for maintaining the university’s mission and autonomy. He claimed that the union’s proposals could lead to significant financial burdens, including tuition hikes and layoffs, which would ultimately harm students and the institution’s sustainability.
Despite the lengthy bargaining process, the union and the university had not reached any tentative agreements on proposals, particularly regarding economic matters. Wisch noted that the union’s initial proposals were ambitious, aimed at addressing the exploitation of non-tenure-track faculty, but the university did not provide counteroffers.
A university spokesperson contended that counteroffers were made, but specifics regarding the economic proposals were not disclosed. The administration conducted financial analyses, concluding that the union’s proposals would lead to unsustainable costs, prompting the decision to invoke the religious exemption.
While it is not uncommon for religious institutions to claim exemptions from NLRB jurisdiction, the timing of Loyola Marymount’s announcement raises eyebrows. Experts point out that the university did not raise religious objections during the union’s representation petition, which is typically when such claims are made.
Legal experts have noted that the university can invoke the exemption at any time, but the current decision is troubling. Some believe that the university’s leadership is using religious grounds as a means to avoid compliance with labor laws, especially given the current political climate surrounding labor relations.
Since the recognition of the union, the NLRB has undergone significant changes, impacting its ability to address cases. The board currently lacks a quorum, which could delay the resolution of the union’s unfair labor practice charge.
The debate over the NLRB’s jurisdiction over employees at religious colleges has been ongoing. Previous rulings have shifted the landscape for faculty unions at such institutions, making the current situation even more complex.
Maureen Gonzales, a lecturer and bargaining team member, expressed her dismay at the university’s decision, noting that many faculty members are anxious about the loss of union protection. The change in university leadership since the union’s recognition may also play a role in the current dynamics.
Historically, the Catholic Church has supported labor rights and unions, with papal encyclicals advocating for workers’ rights. Wisch reiterated that the administration’s actions contradict the university’s values and expressed hope for a return to the bargaining table.