Cleveland musicians call in union
NewsFaculty at the Cleveland Institute of Music have voted 56-25 to join the American Federation of Musicians.
‘This is a historic vote and a signal to the world that CIM will remain one of the very finest conservatories in the nation, said faculty member Frank Rosenwein, principal oboe of the Cleveland Orchestra. ‘This vote will help to retain and sustain our world-class faculty, it will reassure students that we are a stable institution with their needs as our primary focus and it will provide a framework for stability for all institutional stakeholders, including the board, the administration, the faculty and the students.’
CIM said: ‘Certain steps now must be followed in a certain order and manner. CIM will fully abide by these requirements, including negotiating in good faith with the faculty’s union representatives.’
Earlier this year the faculty voted no-confidence in president Paul Hogle and Provost Scott Harrison.
Student numbers are down and morale is rock-bottom.
Hogle, Harrison and their allies ran a desperate campaign of intimidation and half-truths to stop the teachers voting to join a union.
Their defeat is irreversible.
Since this blog has become a sounding board for CIM opinions – with its clear, yet unexplained editorial bias against an institution with which it has no proximate connection – would it be possible for someone in a position of authority on the matter to explain, in detail, objectively and without ad hominem attacks, the following:
1. Why is was necessary for the faculty of a small, private conservatory to form a union?
2. Why this particular union was chosen, as opposed to others?
3. What are the principal aims of unionization for the near and long term vision of the school?
Respectfully, etc.
As the husband of a faculty member, you ought to declare an interest. Educate yourself in the history of maladministration.
Norman, respectfully, I speak for myself and my general point stands. I have read everything posted on this blog, and more, and it remains impossible to understand what is going on – to educate myself – because most of the information is non-specific, highly ad hominem in tone, and offers little by way of objective data analysis or room for rebuttal. My questions, above, are a genuine, non-partisan search for answers to legitimate concerns, since I have no idea – for better or worse – what the unionization process implies, or what this specific union relationship will offer. It reminds me of the Brexit vote, in which people were asked to vote for something without understanding what was really being offered on the back end, since the detailed negotiations only begin post-vote. But it is a serious matter for all involved, and I think serious answers ought to be forthcoming, so those involved in the future of the school can better understand how this will impact their lives and the lives of their students. Perhaps you could invite the leader(s) of the unionization effort to publish a statement outlining their broader vision.
It’s not my job to bore readers to tears. Simple fact: the faculty voted no confidence by a 9-1 margin in the administration. What does that tell an ‘interested party’?
I have exactly the same questions.