According to a press release yesterday the Chancellor’s Office has decided to return to the bargaining table with CFA over a successor contract.

The California State University and the California Faculty Association have agreed to return to bargaining on a successor contract in early May.  At this point in the negotiations there are a limited number of issues that remain in dispute.  Both parties have expressed a desire to reach a negotiated settlement and CSU, for its part, remains committed to that goal.

On Monday CFA members began voting to authorize two-day rolling strikes in the event that the Chancellor’s Office imposed a contract on faculty following a required neutral fact-finding process.

What should we make of this “coincidence?”

An optimist would argue that the Chancellor is feeling the heat from the faculty vote on the one side, and from political operators in Sacramento.

I am not an optimist on this score.

My bet is that the Chancellor and his minions scheduled this announcement in part to undermine the faculty’s strike vote. By returning to the table–Charlie’s union-busting, multi-million dollar, consultants have told him–many faculty will refrain from voting, convinced that an agreement is imminent. Once the strike vote is over the Chancellor’s stooges will announce a “breakdown” in the negotiations.

This strategy has the added value of “running out the clock.” The Chancellor’s consultants are likely advising him to impose his “last best offer” during the summer when faculty are challenged to organize; a sort of “July Surprise.”

Through July and August the Chancellor’s Office can mount a public relations attack on faculty (one that has already begun), aimed at discrediting faculty as greedy parasites, weakening our bargaining position with the public. They believe that in July and August few faculty will be prepared to mount a defense.  In addition I suspect he figures that a July Surprise will make organizing Fall strikes difficult.

By “returning to the table” at this point Charlie ensures a timetable that he believes is beneficial for him.

At this point faculty should continue voting to authorize a strike. Given the Chancellor’s record at the helm of the CSU there is no reason to believe that the Chancellor and his toadies have any interesting in honest negotiation much less reaching an equitable settlement with the faculty, a group for which he seems to have nothing but contempt.