Members of the University of Florida chapter of the United Faculty of Florida (UFF) are writing to you today to share our disappointment in the continued attacks on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) in our state, placing Florida’s students at a competitive disadvantage.
“We are disappointed in this decision by the Board of Governors (BOG) but unfortunately, we are not surprised. Florida’s State Board of Education (SBOE) and BOG have made it abundantly clear that they do not care about the robust education of our students, and instead only care about political games. I repeat this warning – Florida is now the only state in the nation that no longer includes sociology as a core course option within the general education curriculum.
Education leaders are calling on the Florida Board of Governors (BOG) to “Save Sociology” and reconsider an amendment that would remove Principles of Sociology as a general education core course option for students. The proposal, which will be voted on at the BOG’s January 24th meeting, comes on the heels of the Florida State Board of Education’s decision to remove it as a core course offering in all Florida colleges.
An extensive survey conducted by faculty organizations in Texas, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina has revealed that faculty leaving those states are unwilling to come to Florida. There is no question that Florida’s future depends on a strong and flourishing higher education system.
UFF chapter at the University of South Florida and three individual faculty members who were laid off from the University of South Florida filed suit in federal court to challenge the SB 266 arbitration ban and to protect union contracts in Florida’s university system. Today, we continue our fight to protect our members and their families, all of whom work every day to make Florida a better place for all people of all beliefs and backgrounds.
Earlier today, the United Faculty of Florida filed suit in state court to challenge the arbitration ban in SB 266, which gives final decision-making authority to university presidents regarding personnel disputes. Without question, there is no justice in allowing the same university leaders who violate contractual agreements to serve as the final arbiters of whether they have acted fairly.
