Email from Raynard S. Kington in response to letter from Zijun "Sam" Xu, Executive Board Member of UGSDW
Dear Sam:
Thank you for your letter dated December 7. I appreciate the time that you took to lay out your position on the recent union activity taking place on campus.
As you know, Grinnell strongly disagrees with the recent decision issued by the NLRB’s Regional Office in Minneapolis finding that Grinnell students engaged in experiential learning are “employees” under the National Labor Relations Act. We are deeply concerned about the impact this decision could have on Grinnell’s academic mission and distinctive culture and, on Friday, December 7, the College took the step of appealing that ruling to the full NLRB in Washington, D.C. I encourage you to read the College’s appeal brief – we posted a copy of it on the College’s public website upon filing. By doing so, I believe you will get a very clear sense of the reasons for the College’s disagreement, if you are not aware of them already.
In your letter, as in prior communications from other leaders of UGSDW, you ask that on behalf of the College I enter into negotiations with the UGSDW to reach a “framework agreement” regarding unionization issues. Indeed, you attached a copy of such an agreement to your December 7 letter. Your letter also refers to the agreement that was recently reached at Columbia University. I have reviewed both the Columbia agreement and the draft that you have proposed.
In the Columbia agreement, the university agreed to recognize and begin bargaining with the union. Moreover, Columbia agreed to withdraw its appeal to the NLRB. Similarly, the draft agreement you proposed for Grinnell would require the College to recognize and bargain with UGSDW and to forego its appeal. While an agreement with those terms may have been acceptable at Columbia, where there had been years of litigation over these issues, we do not believe such an agreement is in the best interests of Grinnell. Because of the impact this change could have on educational opportunity across the College, we are committed to pursuing our appeal.
With that being said, I must decline your invitation to negotiate a framework agreement with UGSDW. However, as I noted in my December 4 email (posted on the College’s website), my door is always open to you, or any other student, who would like to speak with me as an individual member of our academic community, not as a representative of the union or of other students. If you would like to schedule a meeting, please contact Tammy Prusha at prushatd@grinnell.edu (and cc’d above).
One additional point. At Grinnell, we support peaceful protest and the respectful communication of different ideas. Indeed, it is part of being a Grinnellian. However, as emphasized in a recent Special Campus Memo, such protests must always be conducted in a non-threatening manner that does not impede access to campus buildings or interfere with the educational experience of students and must be limited to appropriate venues. My family home, where I reside with my spouse and young children, is not an appropriate location for student protests, which is something I hope the UGSDW can appreciate and respect.
Thanks again for your letter.
Best,
Raynard S. Kington