Ryan Nelson: UC should release records to student-workers union

RYAN NELSON

Californians don’t like to be left in the dark.

Since the 1960s, the state legislature has passed a number of bills to help keep our public institutions accountable.

Of those, the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act, or HEERA, gives University of California employees the right to collective bargaining, and subsequent legislation has given unions the right to gather information necessary to negotiate fairly.

Recently, the University of California Student-Workers Union, United Auto Workers Local 2865, which represents teaching assistants, readers and other employees at UC campuses, filed a petition under HEERA to obtain documents relating to employees’ gender, age and other characteristics.

The union did not accuse the University of any wrongdoing, but is interested in using the requested information to establish whether or not the UC has been discriminatory in its hiring practices.

The University failed to adequately answer some of the inquiries, claiming in vague terms the records were unavailable due to a combination of lack of relevance, burdensome costs, privacy concerns and ongoing data collection.

Though the union requested a sizable amount of information, unless the UC can prove that releasing the records they refused to provide would actually inflict some kind of harm on an individual or community, the University should be forthcoming with all requested information.

The University has pointed to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA, as a defense. FERPA protects educational institutions from disclosing information that could allow students to be personally identified, including names and dates of birth, as well as other information a school deems relevant. Teaching assistants are considered students as well as employees, and therefore fall under the protection of FERPA.

However, the Public Employment Relations Board, a branch of the state government dedicated to mediating public collective bargaining disputes, has ruled in cases concerning private information before, claiming employers are required to appropriately weigh the right to collective bargaining against employee privacy.

The board has jurisdiction over HEERA cases, which gives the union a strong footing when presenting its case.

The conflict between HEERA and FERPA lies at the core of the legal dispute. While the University could likely obtain a ruling that FERPA protects its decision to restrict information, such a move would unreasonably restrict the union’s ability to look after the interests of its members.

Dodging the union’s request harms the very people FERPA is meant to protect. This isn’t a random person asking for information about teaching assistants; this is a union with the expressed mission of bargaining for the betterment of its members.

Restricting information, in addition to hindering the ability of the union to represent its members, draws the University into a difficult legal situation full of technicalities and gray areas.

It should be noted that the University produced some of the disputed information, and agreed to give more information with a different set of employee identifiers. Even so, the union viewed these steps as insufficient and the University never gave out anything under the new parameters.

By not providing the information or concrete reasons for refusing to do so, the UC has made this a bigger deal than it needs to be.

If there’s nothing to hide, the UC should adopt a more constructive policy toward the union that represents both its employees and its students.

[Source]: Daily Bruin