The Chancellor Doesn’t Care About Faculty Voices – Part 2
Chancellor Goldsmith's interference with the Faculty Union
One of the pressing issues brought to our attention is Chancellor Goldsmith’s alleged calculated efforts to divide faculty by targeting faculty leaders and manufacturing controversy to undermine the power and influence of both the Faculty Union and Academic Senates. This article explores the Chancellor’s alleged attempts to achieve just that with the State Center Federation of Teachers, Local 1533, CFT/AFT (“Faculty Union”), an organization integral to safeguarding the rights and voices of faculty.
What Happened:
1. A Disturbing Pattern of Overreach
On December 15, 2023, Chancellor Goldsmith sent a district-wide email to all employees of the State Center Community College District (SCCCD), citing “alleged inappropriate behavior that occurred at multiple faculty union meetings this month”.
This email explicitly targeted the conduct of Faculty Union members during their private general and executive meetings—spaces legally protected for union business. In an alarming move, Chancellor Goldsmith announced her intent to investigate the Faculty Union, including its members and leadership, for actions taken within these private sessions. Her justification for such an unprecedented step? Five complaints filed with the District by faculty members alleging concerns over the internal operations of the Faculty Union.
This announcement raised serious questions about the overreach of the Chancellor’s authority and represented a troubling intrusion into the Faculty Union’s internal affairs. Legally, unions are protected from administrative interference under labor laws, and this action appeared to flagrantly disregard those protections. It is yet another example of Chancellor Goldsmith’s administration’s apparent disdain for shared governance, employee rights, and the fundamental principles of union independence.
On December 18, 2023, the situation escalated when the District’s General Counsel, Dr. Kristen Corey, sent an email to the Faculty Union’s Executive Council Officers. In her communication, Dr. Corey claimed that five complaints had been filed against the Faculty Union leadership and demanded the submission of “all unredacted audio and video recordings and transcripts of the SCFT meeting identified”. She reiterated the District’s intention to investigate the Faculty Union’s internal affairs, further encroaching on legally protected union activities.
2. The Faculty Union’s Response
On December 21, 2023, Roger Wilson, General Counsel for the Faculty Union, firmly rejected the District’s actions in a pointed letter. Wilson made it unequivocally clear that the District had no legal authority to interfere in the Faculty Union’s internal matters. He laid out the legal basis for his objection, emphasizing that the District’s actions—attempting to coerce, dominate, and interfere in union business, disparaging union leadership, and making public accusations through the Chancellor’s email—violated rulings by the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). Wilson identified these actions as blatant examples of unfair labor practices and reaffirmed the union’s commitment to defending its independence against administrative overreach. He also made clear that the Faculty Union was handling the matter via its internal processes.
3. Escalation of Coercion and Intimidation
Despite these warnings, Chancellor Goldsmith continued her campaign against the Faculty Union. On January 24, 2024, Mr. Keith Ford, President of the Faculty Union, received a “Notice of Allegations” letter from the District. The letter outlined allegations against him and explicitly threatened severe consequences. It warned that, if found responsible, he could face “corrective action and sanctions up to and including no contact orders, involuntary transfer, termination, and/or other disciplinary or corrective measures”.
The intimidation escalated further on April 12, 2024, when the District sent multiple letters to Faculty Union Executive Council members. These letters confirmed an ongoing investigation and issued direct threats, stating, “failure to comply with provisions of this notice shall be deemed an act of insubordination and may result in discipline up to, and including, termination from employment”.
4. A Troubling Pattern of Governance
This sequence of events underscores the Chancellor Goldsmith’s aggressive and antagonistic approach toward the Faculty Union—a body integral to protecting faculty rights and ensuring fair governance. By allegedly overstepping legal boundaries, Chancellor Goldsmith and her administration have displayed a disregard for labor protections and shared governance principles. These actions not only undermine the Faculty Union but also set a dangerous precedent for employee rights across the district.
Misuse of District’s Complaint Procedure
Credible information from our sources suggests that one of Chancellor Goldsmith’s alleged strategies to silence opposition involves encouraging employees to file complaints against individuals she views as adversaries. This tactic reportedly exploits the District’s complaint procedure, granting the Chancellor and her administration the final say in the outcome of investigations—regardless of the findings of an unbiased investigator. If true, this represents a deeply troubling and insidious method of suppressing dissent, undermining faculty leaders, and conducting what can only be described as a “kangaroo court” rather than legitimate investigations.
In the case of the five complaints against the Faculty Union, our investigation revealed that at least two of the complaints were allegedly filed at the direct encouragement of Chancellor Goldsmith or under the influence of her proxies. This revelation highlights a concerning misuse of administrative processes as a weapon to intimidate and silence faculty voices.
As we continue to engage with our sources, we are repeatedly struck by allegations of Chancellor Goldsmith's disregard for shared governance and her apparent hostility toward faculty body’s involvement in decision-making. The sheer volume of information from within her administration paints a troubling picture of a leader who allegedly views faculty not as partners in education, but as obstacles to her agenda. Faculty—recognized experts in academic and professional matters—are vital to the success of any educational institution. Yet, the accounts we’ve gathered suggest that Chancellor Goldsmith sees their participation and advocacy as impediments rather than assets.
This apparent disdain for shared governance and efforts to marginalize faculty voices highlight a leadership style that prioritizes control and coercion over collaboration. Faculty, whose voices are rooted in expertise and an unwavering commitment to students and education, are indispensable for fostering a thriving academic community. By allegedly sidelining these voices, Chancellor Goldsmith not only undermines the foundation of institutional success but has also fostered a pervasive climate of fear and mistrust. Our inbox is inundated with messages from faculty members who feel intimidated by her and her proxies—an alarming indicator of an unhealthy and dysfunctional institution.
Faculty Union's Efforts to Seek Resolution
Despite the District's alleged unfair labor practices and adversarial stance, the Faculty Union sought to engage the administration in good faith. On May 2, 2024, Faculty Union leaders and representatives met with Vice Chancellor of Human Resources, Julianna Mosier, and General Counsel, Dr. Kristen Corey, to address the District’s unwarranted intrusion into the Union's internal governance.
During this meeting, Union representatives firmly reiterated that the District lacked any authority to interfere in the Faculty Union’s operations or to conduct investigations into its internal matters. They stressed that any complaints regarding the Union’s governance should be directed to the Union itself, which has well-established procedures for handling such issues.
Additionally, the Faculty Union called on Chancellor Goldsmith to issue a public correction and apology for her disparaging email targeting the Union and its leadership. They also demanded the retraction of subsequent threats and notices of allegations directed at the Faculty Union leadership. These actions, the Faculty Union argued, not only undermined their credibility but also violated fundamental principles of labor law and governance. However, Chancellor Goldsmith remained defiant and unapologetic, refusing to acknowledge any wrongdoing or to commit to refraining from similar overreach in the future.
This refusal to take responsibility highlights a troubling disregard for the autonomy of the Faculty Union and the principles of fair governance. Our sources told us that by failing to concede or take corrective action, the Chancellor sent a clear and concerning message: She prioritizes control over collaboration and seeks to undermine organized employee representation rather than engage constructively.
The Faculty Union's good-faith efforts to resolve the issue underscore its commitment to protecting faculty rights and upholding the principles of shared governance—principles that are essential to the success and integrity of any educational institution. The District’s lack of accountability, on the other hand, raises serious questions about its commitment to fostering a collaborative and equitable work environment.
Actions Have Consequences
As the saying goes actions have consequences—or, as some of our students might put it, F... around and find out!
Chancellor Goldsmith’s refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing or take corrective action left the Faculty Union no choice but to escalate their case to the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). The PERB is a quasi-judicial administrative agency charged with administering the collective bargaining statutes covering employees of California’s public schools, colleges, and universities, and other public organizations.
The Faculty Union sought resolution from the PERB through five specific remedies:
Retract and Apologize: The State Center Federation of Teachers (SCFT) demanded that Chancellor Goldsmith issue an email to all SCCCD faculty and staff retracting her December 15, 2024 email. This retraction should include an apology for interfering in the internal operations of the SCFT.
Cease and Desist: SCFT called on the District to cease interference, domination, and coercion, including:
Questioning or investigating union leaders or members regarding internal union activity.
Threatening discipline for non-compliance with such investigations.
Undermining SCFT through communications based on internal union matters.
Discouraging bargaining unit members from addressing union concerns directly with the union.
Public Acknowledgment: SCFT requested a District-wide posting, distributed to all campuses, acknowledging that the District violated the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) and that the Faculty Union operates independently of District control.
Referral of Complaints: SCFT sought a commitment from the District to refer any complaints from bargaining unit members about union governance directly to the Faculty Union and to communicate such complaints to SCFT.
Compliance with the ACT: SCFT demanded that the District adhere to EERA regulations (Sections 3540, 3543.5(a), 3543.5(b), and 3543.5(d)) moving forward.
A mediation session was eventually held between the District and the Faculty Union to address the grievances. While the details remain confidential, the Faculty Union stated through proxies that their “requested remedies were sufficiently satisfied”.
To gain insight into the legal implications of the District’s actions, we consulted two labor law attorneys. Both unequivocally stated that the District lacked any legal authority to interfere in the internal governance of the Faculty Union. They were surprised the issue even reached mediation, given the clear legal protections against such interference.
We, however, were not surprised. Chancellor Goldsmith has allegedly built a team of loyalists, seemingly intent on pushing her agenda at any cost—even if it means disregarding the rights of employees and constituents. Stay tuned as we continue to investigate and uncover these attempts.
Ultimately, Chancellor Goldsmith was compelled to issue a formal apology letter—a significant vindication for the Faculty Union and a stark acknowledgment of the District’s overreach. This resolution underscores the importance of union autonomy and serves as a reminder that administrative power has clear legal limits under California labor law.
Let us echo the pointed words of Roger Wilson, General Counsel for the Faculty Union, in his letter to the District as a lasting reminder to Chancellor Goldsmith: “Respectfully stay out of Union business and to stop disparaging Union leadership”.
Stay Vigilant
Faculty and Classified professionals must stay alert to Chancellor Goldsmith’s reported tactics of sowing division among constituency groups through alleged fabricated controversies designed to create chaos. Unity is strength, and Chancellor Goldsmith is acutely aware of this fact. Faculty and staff must remain united, seeing through such divisive strategies and actively working to counter them.
Chancellor Goldsmith’s interference with the Faculty Union is not just a breach of trust but a flagrant violation of its rights. These actions reflect a troubling governance style—one that prioritizes coercion over collaboration and manipulation over transparency. Faculty, staff, and the public must demand accountability from the Board of Trustees and insist on a governance approach that upholds integrity, fosters unity, and respects the principles of shared governance.
6. A word for the Board
While Chancellor Goldsmith’s actions have drawn widespread criticism, YOU, the Board of Trustees, the sole body responsible for holding her accountable, continues to stand by her in silence.
The outpouring of supports and information from faculty, classified, and administrative professionals has strengthen our resolve to ensure that you take notice. Your refusal to act on behalf of your constituents—students, faculty, and classified professionals—represents a staggering dereliction of your duty. Your inaction and complicity enable a culture of coercion and disregard for shared governance. Your failure to hold your sole employee accountable is nothing short of disgraceful.
As promised, we will continue to include your names in our articles, ensuring that your inaction and failure to meet your fiduciary responsibilities are permanently etched in digital archives for future scrutiny:
Magdalena Gomez
Danielle Parra
Robert A. Fuentes
Austin Ewell
Deborah J. Ikeda
Nasreen Johnson
Destiny Rodriguez
Haiden del Fierro
Our group is making a new commitment to the Board of Trustees. Starting with this publication, we will share our stories with local news outlets and expand our reach to national media. With every new story, we will ensure it is sent to all previously contacted news organizations, along with 25 additional outlets. We believe that increased media scrutiny is essential to compel you to take meaningful action.
State Center Community College District (SCCCD) - Fresno City College (FCC) - Madera Community College (MCC)- Clovis Community College (CCC) - Reedley College (RC) - Dr. Carole Goldsmith - Chancellor Goldsmith