Marymount to close in a cloud of dispute

FORDHAM--As Marymount College of Fordham University prepares to close its doors in the wake of the college's 100th anniversary, Marymount faculty members and Fordham administrators are engaged in a series of disagreements over a resolution passed by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), the Marymount faculty members' union, and the treatment of the Marymount faculty members who have yet to be offered full-time positions at either the Rose Hill or Lincoln Center campuses.

The main point of contention between Fordham administrators and faculty is over Regulation 4 (d) of the AAUP's Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which reads, in part, "The institution will make every effort to place the faculty member in another suitable position."

According to Leo Cooley, professor and president of Marymount's chapter of the AAUP, as of April 12, no appointments of Marymount faculty had been announced and several Marymount faculty had been informed that they would not be appointed. Cooley said, "On April 13 we informed The New York State Conference of the AAUP of the situation and on April 14 the Conference unanimously passed a resolution condemning Fordham University for its treatment of tenured faculty."

The AAUP resolution stated that Fordham has "violated" its commitment to Marymount with the "stunning announcement" that the faculty's contract employment is terminated as of May 31, 2007.

The resolution additionally said, "Fordham University has made little effort or commitment of employment for the displaced faculty and this represents the termination or tenure and contractual bargaining and these colleagues of significant experience, credentials and stature in the academic community have been abandoned by their 'parent' institution."

Fordham has called the accuracy of this resolution into question. The Observer contacted the Rev. Joseph M. McShane, S.J., President of Fordham University, but he did not comment. Instead a statement was released by Bob Howe, editor and media relations specialist for public relations at Fordham, on behalf of the University saying, "In short, The State AAUP's resolution is factually incorrect: Fordham University has faithfully kept all of its agreements with the faculty."

"For example," the statement reads, "at least nine members of the Marymount faculty have been offered continued Fordham employment." In addition it states, "Several other faculty members are under active consideration for positions that may be opening."

Cooley, however, in response to what he called a "misleading statement put out by Fordham University's Public Relations Bureau," said, "To date, only three members of the 42 current Marymount faculty have been offered employment at Fordham." "One of those three positions is part-time," Cooley said, "While other Marymount faculty have obtained positions at Fordham as adjuncts, they will earn a small fraction of their full-time salary at Marymount, receive no health insurance, retirement or other benefits and have no job security."

"Far from making any special effort to place Marymount faculty at Fordham, Fordham has done nothing more than 'allowed' Marymount faculty to apply for open positions," Cooley said.

He added, "In at least one case that we are aware of, the Fordham administration steadfastly refused to even consider a Marymount faculty member for any of the three open visiting positions in a department in which the faculty strongly recommended that faculty member for appointment."

Leonard Nissm, a professor at Lincoln Center and a member of the faculty senate, said, "Nine positions offered are obviously better than zero, but there are still several Marymount facultythat I know of who should have been offered positions and have not." He added, "I can only hope that they are among those 'under active consideration' spoken of in the letter."

The tension that exists between Marymount faculty members and Fordham Administration dates back to when and why Fordham initially merged with Marymount. According to a Jan. 5, 2001 article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, "Father O'Hare [former University president] said the merger would enable the University to expand the graduate programs on its Tarrytown Campus and develop stronger ties to Marymount's undergraduate Programs."

According to the article, "He noted that Fordham would continue to operate Marymount as a women's college only as long as it is academically and financially feasible, but he said he believed the University could help by streamlining some administrative costs and Expanding the enrollment."

"On the issue of tenure," the article stated, "Father O'Hare said he did not know how the Marymount faculty would be evaluated once their contract expires."

In the fall of 2005, Fordham announced that Marymount would close because, "It was no longer academically or financially feasible to continue to operate Marymount College as a separate university,...it will cease its operations in June of 2007."

Soon after the announcement of the closing, according to Fordham's letter, the university began negotiating extensively with the AAUP chapter at Marymount, and over 17 sessions came to an agreement with faculty over their status after Marymount closed. The agreement, according to Fordham, was voted on and approved by the Marymount AAUP membership and has been in effect for nine months.

It goes on to say, "The agreement explicitly states that Fordham University bargained in good faith in the course of ne gotiating the effects of the closure of Marymount upon the faculty and fulfilled its obligation under the applicable collective bargaining agreement."

The agreement, according to Fordham, also provided for a salary increase for Marymount faculty through May 2007, and eligible faculty were also granted phased-in retirement benefits for the 2006-2007 academic year. Faculty members who did not accept retirement and who were unable to obtain other employment at Fordham were entitled to receive additional salary, as well as benefit continuation through Oct. 31, 2007.

Cooley responded on behalf of Marymount saying, "We are surprised and dismayed to learn that the normal cost of living increases which the Marymount faculty received this year (as did the Fordham faculty and administration) and the extension of the early retirement program which had been available to Marymount faculty for many years, is considered by Fordham to represent the special treatment it has afforded the Marymount faculty."

He added, "The vast majority of the faculty at Marymount are over 50 years old, a particularly difficult time of life to lose one's job. Most of us are not yet able to retire and yet it has been extremely difficult for us to find comparable jobs. Having spent our careers at Marymount and worked tirelessly to achieve the College's mission, the eight weeks in severance pay provided by Fordham, hardly begins to address the difficult position in which we find ourselves. We want to continue to teach and we had hoped and believed that Fordham would ensure that we were able to do so."

Gabriel Gomes, a philosophy professor at Marymount, said he was not surprised by the lack of appointments. He said, "I knew we got shafted right away after the announcement of the closing. We have no legal basis to get hired."

"I lay all blame on McShane," Gomes said. Gomes said McShane was never interested in keeping Marymount open because it wasn't up to par with FCLC or FCRH in terms of SAT requirements. "McShane is consumed by ambition to make Fordham the number one Catholic school and Marymount being below Fordham's level is a blot to that ambition."

Cooley said, "This has been really demoralizing because I have a great love of Fordham, and [I] am disappointed that they're not acting in accordance with their principals."

Fordham's letter stated, "Although the closing of Marymount College is painful for all involved, it was done with two years of notice and extensive negotiations with the Marymount faculty and their representatives from the AAUP."