When you hear that the University of San Francisco Faculty Association (USFFA) is negotiating a new contract with the University, you might wonder: What does this have to do with me? The short answer is: everything.
Contract negotiations typically occur every three years, but due to financial uncertainty, USF administration has proposed a one-year contract. When negotiations of the contract happen, the faculty association and the administration can each choose up to three articles in our collective bargaining agreement (CBA) to re-open, in addition to economics. The USFFA has chosen to focus on articles that will strengthen our participation in the life of the university, maintain a reasonable workload and protect our intellectual property. In short, we are seeking fair work, fair pay and a fair say.
USF has proposed increasing faculty teaching loads while reducing the competitiveness of faculty benefits, increasing out-of-pocket health care costs, creating greater uncertainty through shorter contract terms and limiting faculty participation in university governance. Together, these proposals ask faculty to do more with fewer resources and less institutional support, in the name of fiscal responsibility.
Think about the professor who wrote a recommendation letter, helped you find an internship, supervised your research or advised your student organization. Think about the office-hour conversations that changed the direction of your academic career. Those moments are not built into a class schedule. They happen because faculty have the time and capacity to invest in students as individuals.
Most people see professors for a few hours each week in class. What they don’t see are the many hours spent preparing lectures, giving thoughtful feedback, redesigning courses, mentoring students, advising, conducting research, writing grants, serving on committees and supporting the countless activities that keep a university running. Faculty already perform this work because we believe it is essential to USF’s mission. But time is finite. We cannot teach two more classes per year, because we simply cannot give personalized attention to 60+ more students, accommodate them in office hours, write their letters of recommendation, bring them with us to conferences and give meaningful feedback on all of their coursework.
When teaching loads increase, there are only two possibilities: faculty work significantly longer hours — which contributes to burnout — or they have less time available for the work that makes a USF education distinctive and substantial. That means fewer opportunities for mentoring, less undergraduate research, lower feedback on assignments, fewer opportunities to innovate in the classroom and less individualized support for students. These are not hypothetical concerns, they are a result of changes in faculty support. Research consistently shows that students who build meaningful relationships with faculty are more likely to stay enrolled, graduate and succeed after college. Faculty accessibility is not an extra benefit — it is one of the strongest predictors of student success.
USF has long distinguished itself by offering close faculty-student relationships. It’s one of the reasons many students choose this university over larger institutions. Those relationships require institutional investment. The University’s proposals also make it more difficult to recruit and retain outstanding faculty. Competitive compensation, reasonable workloads and strong benefits matter when faculty decide where to build their careers — especially in one of the country’s most expensive housing markets.
When experienced faculty leave (at least seven last year), students lose mentors, departments lose continuity, academic programs become more difficult to sustain, recruiting replacements and rebuilding those relationships can take years.
Research-active faculty create opportunities for undergraduate students to work on research projects, co-author publications, present at conferences and gain experiences that strengthen graduate school and job applications. Research requires time. Increasing teaching responsibilities while reducing institutional support makes it harder to sustain the scholarship that enhances both USF’s reputation and the educational opportunities available to students.
Faculty understand that universities must make difficult financial decisions. We are not arguing that budgets don’t matter. We are arguing that priorities matter. If student success is truly the University’s highest priority, then every proposal should be evaluated by one simple question:
Will this improve the educational experience for students?
Will increasing faculty workloads give students more access to professors? Will reducing benefits help recruit and retain excellent educators? Will weakening faculty participation in university decision-making strengthen academic programs? If the answer is no, then you should ask why those proposals are being pursued. Faculty chose careers in higher education because we believe in teaching, scholarship and mentoring students. Those commitments are at the heart of USF’s Jesuit mission and its promise to educate the whole person. Contract negotiations are about more than employment conditions. They are about protecting the time, energy and institutional support required to fulfill that mission.
As negotiations continue, we hope students will pay attention — not because this is a labor dispute, but because it is a conversation about the future of the university you chose and the resources you depend on.
Please get involved by following our Instagram or showing up in solidarity. USFFA will be hosting a rally on Sept. 8 in Gleeson Plaza from 11:45 a.m.–12:45 p.m. Please drop by to find out more, share your thoughts and learn how to support your faculty and librarians during these negotiations.
