Opinion: The self-care industry is selling us stress, not solace (pg. 7)
The Case Western Reserve
Observer
Friday, December 6, 2024 Volume LVI, Issue 14 Est. 1969
NEWS
CIM joins American Federation of Musicians, Local 4 in faculty vote to unionize Zachary Treseler News Editor At the end of September, faculty at the Cleveland Institute of Music (CIM) voted to unionize at The Coffee House. Passing by majority, CIM faculty joined the American Federation of Musicians, (AFM) Local 4, which includes professional musicians from The Cleveland Orchestra. According to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), 81 ballots were submitted with 56 voting in favor and 26 voting against unionization. Twenty-five of these ballots were challenged for their legitimacy. During the campaigning stage, both sides presented passionate and charged arguments. Robert Vernon, a former violin professor at CIM, argued against a union, saying that “AFM’s leadership and negotiators have no experience in negotiating salaries and compensation for college or university faculties” and that they are unable to bridge the gap between issues unrelated to compensation. A YouTube video, which has since been deleted, from Bonnie Cook, a secretary of the board of trustees of CIM, also encouraged faculty to vote against unionization efforts. “CIM’s leadership team and faculty have worked diligently to turn CIM around,” Cook said. “It is my opinion that we don’t need a third-party union to come between our faculty and leadership.” She further mentioned that a union would increase the possibility of strikes, which would impact CIM students. She concluded the video by saying, “While unions have value for performing artists, I fear that a union at CIM will interfere with our sustainability as
The Cleveland Institute of Music votes to unionize, with 56 out of 84 in favor, joining the American Federation of Musicians, Local 4 union. Moses Fleischman/The Observer an educational institution, and consequently, not be of help to our students.” Many of the individuals who supported unionization emphasized the need for better treatment. Frank Rosenwein, a professor at CIM who supported the union, said, “The faculty of the Cleveland Institute of Music is composed of world-class musicians and educators … We deserve to be treated as such, whether teaching in the conservatory, the Joint Music Program with Case Western Reserve University, or the Academy.” Organizers also created a small website to post their rallying cries. In the most recent post, they argued that the vote was not “against administration—it is a vote for ourselves, for our
dignity, and for the future of our profession.” Certified on Oct. 7, the text of the certification of representative notes that “Guest instructors and Guest conductors” are not eligible to join the union. Though, there is still ongoing litigation about who is subjected to the agreement. Leonard DiCosmio, the president of the AFM Local 4, noted that from the vote, “Directors and Division/Department Heads are neither included in nor excluded from the bargaining unit covered by this certification.” He said, “It remains the position of Local 4 that these faculty members are to be included in the new bargaining unit and will request a hearing before the NLRB to finalize the definition
of the bargaining unit if a voluntary agreement cannot be achieved with CIM.” According to the NLRB, there were not enough votes cast by these individuals to influence the outcome of the election. DiCosimo further detailed that a similar situation had occurred with faculty in the Joint Music Program, their academy and public programs. He said, “The Union prevailed in pre-hearing sessions and teachers in all departments were included in the election. The remaining faculty members that are now being challenged by CIM had an opportunity to participate in the election as a voter subject to challenge, and all parties agreed that they may request a review of the post-election determinations.” While the unionization pull is strong across East Boulevard, it remains to be seen if these waves will hit elsewhere in University Circle. In early 2024, staff at The Holden Arboretum, which runs the Cleveland Botanical Garden, rejected a union vote. At CWRU, the last union vote took place in 2014 in the Division of Public Safety, where out of the then 14 police officers, nine voted against forming a union. In a statement from CIM to Crain’s Cleveland Business, CIM administration said, “The CIM administration will respect the results of the vote and looks forward to working with our outstanding faculty to continue to accomplish our mission, to empower the world’s most talented classical music students to fulfill their dreams and potential.” The vote reflects a national trend of increased unionization across higher education, as 27% of faculty members in the United States are a part of a union.
EDITORIAL
Student leaders are failing the student body Editorial Board Just months after the KSL Oval Gaza solidarity encampment, Case Western Reserve University’s administration issued a series of policy updates, from “clarifying” the posting policy to reestablishing the Freedom of Expression Policy Committee. In instituting these changes, the administration has repeatedly stated that they sought out feedback from student leaders and other governing groups around the university. In regard to policy changes for tabling, posting, Spirit and Advocacy Wall use and student organization standing, one of the groups solicited was the Student Presidents’ Roundtable (SPR)—an organization comprised of the highest-ranking officers of the Undergraduate Student Government (USG), University Program Board (UPB), Undergraduate Diversity Collaborative (UDC), University Media Board (UMB), Class Officer Collective (COC), Interfraternity Congress (IFC), Panhellenic Council (PHC), Residence Hall Association (RHA) and the Allocations Committee (AC), each serving
in an ex officio capacity. In a written comment to The Observer, the university stated that “Elected student leaders of the Graduate Student Council Executive Board, Undergraduate Student Government Executive Board and Student Presidents’ Roundtable were invited to review the proposed policies and provide input. Adjustments were made based on their suggestions before being adopted and implemented.” The current form of SPR was established in 2016 by the Student Executive Council, and they have since been responsible for large-scale improvements to the campus community. In 2016, the organization lobbied and secured $44,000 in funding to renovate the Thwing Student Center and its ballroom. More recently, in 2021, SPR advocated to reopen Eldred Hall, previously vacated by the Department of Theater. Over a series of meetings, they were able to amass funding from the other board organizations to significantly improve the space so it could become available for community use. In 2023, Eldred was officially opened for students and continues to function
as a study space and theater for campus and community productions. Beyond campus initiatives, SPR’s duties include being a voice for the student body when interacting with the administration. In her Nov. 4 email introducing the revised tabling and posting policies, Provost and Executive Vice President Joy K. Ward and Vice President for Human Resources Carolyn Gregory stated the administration “shared these new or adjusted policies and guidelines with leaders of student government, Faculty Senate and the Staff Advisory Council to review and enhance, based on their experiences in and advocacy for their communities.” During the open forum of SPR’s Oct. 23 meeting, Director of Student Activities and Leadership Marc Hartmann and Vice President for Student Affairs Travis Apgar presented the updates to the group. In response, student leaders asked clarifying questions about the policies, which Hartmann and Apgar attempted to address. For example, one member wanted to know if these updated policies “[applied] to university departments posting things on boards/
kiosks,” while another one wanted to specify if the new social media regulations encompassed the current logo or previous ones as well. Students also asked whether these changes would prohibit larger posters from being displayed in Thwing Center. Overall, most of the queries could be deemed inconsequential compared to the more large-scale impacts that these policies have on student perceptions and campus culture. To SPR’s credit, in the subsequent Oct. 30 meeting, one student leader brought up concerns about these changes, stating that the language could be generalized to regulate the way community members interact with the university and through social media. After a lengthy discussion, SPR voted 7-2 that they were “dissatisfied” with the updates as they were introduced and voted 5-0 to send their specific concerns to Apgar. According to the following meeting minutes, though, no further action on the topic has since taken place. Continue reading on page 5