Written By: Humza Mohsin
Edited By: Janakiram Rajaraman
CNN
“Fair, reasonable, and responsible” are three words with very different meanings depending on whom you ask. Suppose you ask Jonathan Holloway and the Rutgers administrative team amid a labor crisis. These are the words the university administration would use to describe the contracts offered to three faculty union members representing over 9,000 Rutgers employees. The employees, however, disagree. According to them, a fair contract would not compel three major faculty unions to engage in intense contract negotiations and eventually strike.
In March of 2023, members of the Rutgers chapter of the American Association of University Professors – American Federation of Teachers (AAUP-AFT) announced that 94% of those who voted in their referendum agreed to authorize union leadership to call a strike should their negotiations with the Holloway administration plateau. After the announcement, rumors traveled through classrooms and confused the student body about the strike’s implications for end-of-semester affairs like final exams and graduation. Then, on April 10th, 2023, the faculty went on strike with protests and class cancelations across the Rutgers campuses.
On top of growing tensions, students observed what appeared to be contradictory statements from both parties. In addition to disagreements about contract quality, the unions and administration provided conflicting answers to a simple legal question: are strikes legal? Would the union strike be deemed unlawful and compel a court to issue an injunction?
On March 21st, 2023, President Holloway emailed students to address concerns about a potential strike. One line read that it’s “well-established that strikes by public employees are unlawful in New Jersey. This activity includes work stoppages and work slowdowns, among other things. We hope that the courts would not have to be called upon to halt an unlawful strike.” But according to the AAUP-AFT, both the NJ “state constitution and the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act are silent on this issue [public employee strikes]. No state statute prohibits strikes or work stoppages by public employees, including faculty employed by Rutgers.” The contrast in these two statements may reveal a tactic both sides use to gain sympathy.
Despite both sides providing a clear stance on the legality of a strike, the Rutgers Administration has an edge in the legal fight, according to precedent. Though New Jersey law, specifically the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act, features no specific statutes that apply directly to the Rutgers Labor strike, other New Jersey cases could oblige a judge to issue an injunction.
The New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act is not without strike regulations. For example, a provision prevents police officers and firefighters from striking because they provide an essential service. An additional provision states that the act should not be construed to impose on a private worker’s right to strike. So, general provisions on strikes are addressed in the legislation, but nothing clearly labels the striking of all public employees as unlawful.
But in common law legal systems, statutes are not the only source of law; President Holloway’s argument that “strikes by public employees are unlawful in New Jersey” is a valid claim based on centuries-old case law that predates the New Jersey Constitution. “When government undertakes itself to meet a need, it necessarily decides the public interest requires the service, and its employees cannot reverse or frustrate that decision by a concerted refusal to meet that need,” which is understood to bar government entities serving the public from striking against the people. The statute barring public safety officers from striking illustrates this concept by restricting strikes by public servants. Simply put, the administration has the upper hand; there is respected common law, with several historical incidents with conditions that match the current labor situation.
While the university’s case is strong, Governor Murphy urged President Holloway to continue negotiations under the mediation of Murphy’s administrative team instead of taking the case before a judge. After five days of bargaining, a substantive update has yet to cross student email accounts, and they remain restless after a week filled with anxiety, uncertainty, and for a change, phenomenal weather conditions.
[The views expressed in this article are those of the author and the author alone; they do not necessarily represent the views of all members of the RULR Editorial Board and Rutgers University]
Comments