After the sighting of a man impersonating an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent on campus in February 2025 and the recent surge in ICE enforcement activity in the broader Washington, D.C., area, American University Staff Union Representative David Kaib said staff and faculty were put on edge.
Rather than wait for another situation to arise, the Staff Union took the initiative to bring a formal proposal to the University.
“We don’t want to wait until a thing has happened. We want to have things in place,” Kaib said. “We were trying to work with the international SEIU, lots of people are talking about these issues. We’re not the only ones.”
The University and the union representing its staff signed an agreement on Nov. 20, 2025, establishing additional workplace protections for employees, amid a growing national prevalence of immigration enforcement action.
The University has previously stated that AUPD would not cooperate with ICE, unless required to by law in multiple emails from February 2025. The agreement reiterates this, saying the University will only cooperate with federal agents when presented with a warrant signed by a judge.
It also guarantees union notification during potential immigration enforcement activity on campus, and creates pathways for job reinstatement for employees who have been detained or have lost their work authorization, as long as they resolve their immigration status within six months.
Kaib, who also serves as assistant director of the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, said the agreement was a preemptive measure to protect staff and faculty in case any enforcement activity reached the University’s campus.
“It was about making sure that both sides had thought through what the potential challenges might be and what an appropriate response would be,” Kaib said.
Vice President and Chief Communications Officer Matt Bennett said in a statement sent through a spokesperson that the University would immediately notify the union if it becomes aware of immigration enforcement on campus.
“AUPD and university officials will engage with [law enforcement] to determine the facts of the situation and the appropriate response,” Bennett said in the statement. “Our engagement in such situations applies for students, faculty and staff.”
Bennett only provided the written statement and declined to answer specific questions, including whether the University would accept administrative warrants, which are not issued by judges, as authorization for ICE agents to enter campus.
Staff Union members said the importance of notifying the union about ICE on campus became clear when, in January, messages began circulating in union group chats that an AU employee was detained by agents in their home. Although the detainment didn’t happen on campus, Eleanor Sciannella, a financial aid counselor and co-chair of organizing for the Staff Union, recalled how quickly members came together to offer support.
“There was a GoFundMe going around in the union WhatsApp chat within the week, so we were able to activate the union support network,” Sciannella said.
Kaib said in this instance, the union found out quickly, but that might not always be the case and the union wants to be prepared. The notification requirement makes sure that Union Representatives have time to gather resources and support for those potentially taken into custody by immigration enforcement.
Pia Morrison, president of Service Employees International Union Local 500, said the agreement reflects the University’s obligation to ensure staff safety and protection.
“We don’t want to just have ICE on campus without alerting the Union,” Morrison said. “What happens if people don’t come to work out of fear and that impacts what happens with students?”
Sciannella said that other topics didn’t go the union’s way in the bargaining process, particularly around on-campus parking for staff and salary items, but the immigration enforcement agreement was a win.
“That’s kind of the best that we could do: using the contract to encourage management to do the least amount of compliance with immigration enforcement,” Sciannella said.
Kaib said he is also hesitant to see how the University will implement the job reinstatement provision within the agreement.
“HR does not move super fast,” Kaib said. “But beyond that, it’s really the question of whether this ends up working, something I don’t know, won’t really know, until it’s happening.”
According to Kaib, the Union sought to expand the original agreement’s provisions to include training on how staff, faculty and students could respond to immigration enforcement activity on campus. The ICE impersonator last year revealed gaps in how staff knew to respond, Kaib said.
“I don’t think sending people one email is sufficient,” Kaib said. “I suspect that some training about how to handle yourself in that situation, not just how to respond but what else to do in that moment, would be helpful.”
The agreement also suggests a lack of trust between the union and the University, according to Morrison. The staff and professors are an essential part of the University’s functioning and deserve to be protected as such Morrison said.
The agreement is both a practical safeguard and a signal that the University’s values extend to the people who make its academic programs run daily, she said.
“Solidarity isn’t just a word, it’s about collective action,” Morrison said. “I would like to see that solidarity between staff and students that you are all aiming to create the best working and learning environment at AU.”
This article was edited by Owen Auston-Babcock, Payton Anderson and Walker Whalen. Copy editing done by Avery Grossman, Paige Caron, Mattie Lupo and Ava Stuzin. Fact-checking done by Andrew Kummeth and Luca Palma Poth.
investigations@theeagleonline.com
