At-Will Clause Discovered in Tenure Contracts Sparks Serious Concerns

Image courtesy of Connecticut College.

TENURED: Of an official position, usually one in a university or school: carrying a guarantee of permanent employment until retirement. -OED

“A tenured appointment is an indefinite appointment that can be terminated only for cause or under extraordinary circumstances such as financial exigency and program discontinuation.” -American Association of University Professors (AAUP).

Tenure is a vital aspect of higher education that is key to ensuring academic freedom. Therefore, when faculty at Connecticut College discovered that their contracts had been revised without their knowledge, they were outraged. Exactly a week into spring break, Professor of Sociology Afshan Jafar, who is the Chapter President for the AAUP, received an email from a prospective faculty member who was about to sign a tenure-track contract but wanted clarity about some concerning language that was included. That language read:

“While it is our expectation that you will work throughout the term specified in this offer, your employment will be ‘at will,’ meaning you are free to leave your employment with the College at any time. Similarly, the College may terminate your employment at any time, for any reason, with or without notice. At will status may only be modified via a written agreement that is executed and signed by the President of the College.”

Similar language was later found in the Coaches’ Appointment, Promotion, and Review Procedures (APRP) from October 2018: 

“The employment relationship which exists between the College and each of its non-tenured or tenure-track employees is employment-at-will… the College may at any time, decide to end an individual’s employment at any time for any reason or no reason, with or without cause or prior notice and at its sole discretion. No representative of the College is authorized to provide any employee or employees with an employment contract or special arrangement concerning terms or conditions of employment unless the contract or agreement is in writing and signed by the President or the Dean of the Faculty.”

Coaches sign their reissued contracts every few years after reviews, so they caught this change in 2018. The tenure contract changes went unnoticed for so long because they are only signed once at the time of appointment and are not reissued. Therefore, professors who signed their contracts before the change would never have an opportunity to see the at-will addition. As news of this discovery spread, more professors realized that their contracts included the same language. Faculty and coaches questioned the administration about the clause when they were appointed and were told that “the language was standard contract language,” which Jafar says is not true. 

Whether or not this was a “copy/paste error” as some claim or a change kept under the radar, the College gave itself the power to change contractual language without notice in this case, which undermines the entire shared governance system and the Employee Handbook and Policies and Procedures (IFF), which includes a section on termination and its conditions, due process, which committees are involved, and the appeals process. Jafar says that the at-will clause “was entirely in violation of that.”

Although most states, including Connecticut, are “At Will States,” meaning employers have the right to terminate contracts at will across industries, this is not the case with tenure contracts, which, by definition, are permanent except for “extraordinary circumstances.” President Katherine Bergeron denied having knowledge of this contractual language, which Jafar estimates to have occurred around 2017 after surveying faculty members. Though Bergeron apologized and took full responsibility for this failure, it is still unknown who is responsible for this change.

Tenure is an incentive for professors to pursue university positions: “What reason do you have to give up, you know, a salary that could be double, triple what you’re making in academia if you were in the corporate world? Tenure,” she says, “was supposed to offer economic stability for people who are willing to pursue a Ph.D. or any other terminal degree.”  Additionally, she says tenure is “a bedrock of academic freedom” that “ensures you are able to say things without repercussion.” In a time when Critical Race Theory is criticized and controversial legislation, like Florida’s “Parental Rights in Education” aka “Don’t Say Gay” bill, censors sexual orientation and gender identity education for young children in public schools, upholding academic freedom is more important than ever so that professors can teach about these important subjects without fear of being fired at will. 

“If my working environment doesn’t support academic freedom, that means your learning environment doesn’t support academic freedom either,” says Jafar, noting that even untenured, long-term appointments are still considered to have academic freedom. This raises concerning questions about how this massive change could go undetected for so long, especially given the serious implications of censorship, loss of academic freedom, and loss of confidence in the shared governance system.  Some professors confess that it feels like this discovery is “hanging over their heads” or that they are “on pins and needles” teaching now, which severely limits the breadth of research and education faculty feels comfortable teaching. Jafar compares it to student life: how would you feel if you had to sign a contract that says you could be thrown off campus at any time with or without reason? How would that impact how you act? What would that do to your sense of freedom in interacting with people or pursuing a certain line of questioning?

“Despite the years and years of love and labor and sweat and tears that we have poured into [the shared governance system],” she says, “It is just so incredibly disheartening. There was a covenant that was supposed to be signed on shared governance that SGA had been working on that had been postponed. Maybe the students don’t understand from the faculty perspective why that happened, but I hope that we can all agree that we should never be doing things just to be performing, just for the performative aspect of it.” She adds, “This is just the latest and most egregious example of broken governance at Conn. It is not an issue to be understood in isolation. It is rather, the straw that broke the camel’s back.”

The alarming implications of this discovery are worse still. Over the past decade or so, the College has disproportionately hired more BIPOC and women professors because of their commitment to recruiting and advertising positions to underrepresented groups of people. For example, of the 2019 tenure-track hires, 8 hired are women, 3 are men, and 7 are women of color. Currently, faculty of color are overrepresented in the newer and junior ranks, which will eventually even out in higher ranks as these newer hires continue their careers. However, it is concerning that the at-will clause entered contracts as employee demographics diversify.

On top of that, Jafar and the faculty learned that the College is represented by the law firm Jackson Lewis, whose reputation is infamous for its employee relations and rights. They are known as a “notorious union-busting law firm” and are employed by some of the biggest systems in the country, including major universities. “We cannot be unionized by federal law,” Jafar explains. “We cannot be unionized at a private institution like ours. So why are we retaining a law firm that fights some of the biggest union battles out there?”

The faculty met on Apr. 6, 2022 and approved a new resolution by a vote of 112-6:

“Therefore be it: Resolved, That, The faculty* denounces the unapproved changes in faculty contracts that bypassed provisions laid out in IFF and finds such acts, whether deliberate or not, to be a fundamental breach of trust and good will between the faculty and administration. 

*The term “faculty” refers to all members of Connecticut College holding faculty status, which includes head coaches (who have faculty status and voting rights).”

It is easy for an administration to sow dissent among people, especially between faculty, staff, and students, to maintain the status quo, which helps people in power stay in power. “When [faculty, staff, and students] become united over a common cause… that would be a force that could question the status quo,” Jafar explains. This is why it is vital that the student population and greater campus community gain this knowledge and remain unified to hold our institution accountable for its treatment — or rather its mistreatment — of our faculty, staff, and coaches, who are the lifeline of our academic integrity and free pursuit of knowledge. Actions like this cannot happen again in the future.