By Peter McInnis
In recent years, numerous incidents have arisen where faculty and institutional relations have sharply diverged. Inquiries and reports into these events have emphasized the positive obligation to protect academic freedom and a similar onus to promote collegial governance, as the two are mutually reinforcing.
Collegial governance may take multiple forms, including involvement in decision-making bodies, joint committees administering collective agreements, occupational health and safety panels, and consultations in the hiring or renewal of senior administrative positions.
While there is a tendency to assume that a lack of meaningful participation of faculty in the hiring or reappointment of senior administrative positions is both typical and of longstanding practice, it is neither. Several faculty associations retain contractual rights to participate actively in the appointment and review of academic administrators.
Some of these conditions were first negotiated in the 1970s, an era of expansive support for democratic inclusion. In some instances, these procedures have been subject to repeated efforts to eliminate this collegial role. The advent of corporate recruiting firms and closed executive searches has exacerbated the situation. This is detrimental to positive collegial relations as it erodes the necessary connection between faculty and senior administrative roles and weakens accountability.
Recent collective bargaining negotiations have resulted in faculty associations expanding and clarifying their role in the initial appointments of senior administrators, periodical performance reviews, and any subsequent re-appointments. This is a trend that should continue.
Most of our institutions function on a well-established bicameral model of governance, the basis of which should be to maintain effective connections between the academic and administrative levels. The marginalization of senates from decisions of a board of governors remains a persistent problem as the voices of faculty offer a vital perspective in academic deliberations.
Boards must not undertake academic decision-making or impose an academic mandate for their institutions. Boards must also prevent external interests, whether they are governments or private donors, from exerting undue influence on academic activities.
The lack of substantive consultation with faculty, or the imposition of pseudo-consultative gestures, undermines the spirit and functionality of collegial governance. Faculty offer invaluable insight into a range of issues affecting post-secondary education, and therefore, efforts to bypass the role of the senate are counterproductive.
Strengthening connections between faculty and administrative positions is a constructive approach to effective organizing as it encourages transparency and fosters democratic process in determining institutional strategic goals related to the conditions of academic work.
Contractual provisions should support the principle of fair employment and a process of faculty complement renewal. Issues ranging from equity, health and safety to academic freedom also require attention. Contracts then must be observed closely and enforced as the legally binding documents they are.
CAUT established a committee on governance, first as an ad hoc initiative, now standardized as a Committee of the Executive. Representation on the Governance Committee provides an opportunity for member associations to analyze varying practices of collegial governance nationally and to formulate best practices to develop this important element of the professional working environment.
The CAUT Governance Library is an evolving resource for member associations that offers succinct explanations of collegial governance’s primary concepts. Later this year, an expanded library will offer member associations additional support to defend the principles of collegial governance and establish pathways to achieve necessary governance reforms.
The introductory section to the CAUT Governance Library provides a summary of the debate: “As central members of an institution’s community of scholarly practice, academic staff have a key institutional role to play not only through their immediate academic labour — for example, through their teaching and research work — but also in a collegial capacity. At the same time as being a member of their institution’s scholarly community, each member of the academic staff is an employee of their institution. The tension inherent in the dual nature of the academic staff role requires a working environment, including but not limited to formal terms and conditions of employment, that protects and fosters the collegial dimension of the role.”
Collegial governance, therefore, represents a constructive opportunity to engage in the collective effort to support Canadian higher education, and one that we must embrace.