U-M should do more to respect due process, civil liberties group says
Even with improved policies involving sexual misconduct allegations, Ann Arbor campus earns only a “C”
The University of Michigan does only a mediocre job of recognizing the due process rights of students who are accused of misconduct, including sexual misconduct. That’s according to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which recently issued a report on 53 leading institutions of higher education, including the U-M Ann Arbor Campus.
FIRE evaluated universities such as U-M, Harvard and Stanford on their policies for looking into allegations of misconduct and gave each a numeric rating for the rights it recognized. A university could earn anywhere from zero to 20 points. FIRE looked at how the Ann Arbor campus responded to two separate kinds of allegations: those that involve sexual misconduct and those that do not. U-M earned 12 points out of 20 for its policies on allegations of sexual misconduct, an improvement an improvement from 2018, when it earned only 8 points. But its score on policies governing other allegations went down, going from 12 to 10. This gave the university a “C.”
The FIRE scoring system is based on 10 components of due process. They include:
- A meaningful presumption of innocence
- The right to cross-examine one’s accuser
- The right to present evidence on one’s behalf
- The right to have enough time to review the evidence that supports the allegation, before any disciplinary hearing
- The right to appeal an adverse ruling
U-M was dinged for not having a policy that lets individuals who are accused of sexual misconduct present all relevant evidence to a fact-finder. It also failed the standard that any expulsion be supported by clear and convincing evidence or the unanimous agreement of a panel.
Most of the 53 institutions in the report have two types of policies that cover allegations of sexual misconduct: those that are governed by Title IX and those that are not. According to FIRE, a university is more likely to recognize due process rights if a case of alleged misconduct is covered by Title IX. That’s a federal rule that applies to institutions receiving federal funding.
The University of Michigan is one of only four institutions that does not exempt some allegations of sexual misconduct from Title IX protections.
CapCon reached out to Rick Fitzgerald, the university’s associate vice president for public affairs. Fitzgerald said the university has changed its policies about allegations of sexual and gender-based misconduct to keep up with changes in local, state and federal regulations. He also referred CapCon to a Sept. 23, 2021, issue of The University Record, which describes the most recent changes in university.
Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.
Michigan Democrats go 0-6 in predictions on right-to-work’s economic effects
In the decade of right-to-work in Michigan, dire predictions have not panned out
Michigan’s legislators approved right-to-work in 2012 over the objections of Democratic members. Those members predicted that allowing workers to keep their jobs without having to pay unions would harm the state’s economy and Michigan’s workers. A number of legislators reiterated this talking point, recorded in the Michigan House of Representatives Journal:
A decade is more than sufficient to evaluate whether these predictions were accurate.
Since lawmakers enacted right-to-work, Michigan’s average annual pay increased from an inflation-adjusted $55,140 to $61,683.
Average incomes in the state increased from 38th among the states to 35th. There is still room for improvement, but the higher personal income ranking indicates the law’s detractors were missing something when they predicted dire losses. Contrary to predictions, income is up in Michigan and is improving relative to other states.
Nor did employment benefits take the predicted dip. The average benefits package per worker is up 5% above inflation over the period.
Right-to-work’s opponents said the law would harm the middle class, but the trends don’t support that claim, either. The state’s median household income has increased from $46,859 in 2012 to $63,498 in 2021, a 15% increase above inflation.
Opponents also predicted that workplaces would become less safe, but worker safety has only improved since passing right-to-work. The state’s occupational injury and illness rates declined 28%, at least before the pandemic started. Michigan’s rates are 21% lower than the national average.
More difficult to evaluate are the claims that right-to-work would hurt small businesses. But according to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are more Michigan businesses with fewer than 500 workers, and they employ more people now than in 2012.
As for the anticipated harm to local economies, the inflation-adjusted per-capita personal income in every Michigan county improved since 2012. Given that growth, it’s hard to say opponents were reading the tea leaves correctly.
The jobs picture has looked even better. Michigan added 382,100 jobs in the time between right-to-work’s passage and the eve of the pandemic. That 9.4% increase was the best in the region. But while right-to-work has been an economic boon, other policies have not been.
Thanks in no small part to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s ordering the most restrictive lockdown in the country, Michigan has not fully recovered from the job losses it suffered during the pandemic.
The state is down 94,500 jobs, the worst in the region, while 23 other states have more jobs than they did when governors started shutting down so-called nonessential workforces. And of the states that have recovered, 17 of them are right-to-work states.
Residents can be relieved that the harms predicted for right-to-work predicted did not show up. Opponents of right-to-work went 0 for 6. The Detroit Lions have a better record.
The right to voluntarily associate with whom you choose is important, but it’s an issue that gets forgotten when paying a union is required. Right-to-work laws keep unions from taking their members for granted. An employee’s ability to opt in or out of dues-paying is an important check. People only pay in if they’re getting their money’s worth.
There is a better way to assess the economic effects of a policy than reviewing what happens to major trends after it is enacted. Economists can separate the effects of the law from everything else going on in a state. Our attempt at the Mackinac Center found that, excluding other factors, right-to-work improves inflation-adjusted income, employment and population growth, and employment gains. This can be seen more clearly in counties on the border between states with right-to-work and those without.
With Democrats holding all the gavels in Lansing come January, some lawmakers have said that they want to force workers to contribute to unions again. They ought to reconsider their stance. Their predecessors were wrong in their dire predictions of economic ruin, and the law has improved Michigan’s economic performance.
A prediction that’s far more likely to come true is that repealing right-to-work would hurt Michigan and its workers.
James M. Hohman is director of fiscal policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Email him at hohman@mackinac.org.
Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.