On Monday, the 14th of May, UC-AFT met with the University. The session produced no formal proposals, but at least the two sides agreed to ground rules for negotiations, after three months of meetings.
The majority of meeting time was used to discuss changes to the Workload article. The University is beginning to recognize the disparity of workloads across the system following Bob Samuels' presentation during the April session. Much of the discussion on Monday treated contract enforcement. UC-AFT is determined to get arbitration for the Workload provisions so that when our members have a problem with workload there is a mechanism to ensure the University is not stealing our labor. The University seems to understand the importance of applying arbitration to this part of our contract.
Nothing happened with the Salary discussions. The University is still studying its budgetary situation for the upcoming fiscal year. The UC-AFT has filed an information request about the mechanisms for funding COLA adjustments. As you probably know, the California budget allocated a 4% increase in academic salaries last fiscal year, and we received a 2% COLA adjustment. The Union is trying to find out what happened to the other 2%. The University claims that the missing money went towards merit pay increases, but the accounting is unclear to us. We anticipate further discussion on this matter.
To sum up, nothing concrete has happened yet. The University might be willing to give us appropriate salary increases and to ensure we have reasonable workload expectations. Or, the University might become intransigent.
Our members need to prepare for increased activity during the summer break and the fall term. Please contact your local campus leadership.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Meeting on Monday, 14 May
Tomorrow our team is meeting with the University again. Their team will present new counter proposals on Salary and Workload. So far, as you know, there has been good discussion, but not much movement. We hope that upcoming meetings will generate light and heat.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Campus Meetings
It seems that the year is already winding down, and the bargaining team members want to hold meetings on every campus, so we had better start. Look for local postings about dates and times. These meetings about contract negotiations are only open to those who are members of the union, not people paying "fair share" fees. If you are not sure whether you are a union member, contact your local campus representative. If you would like to join, you can download print, fill out, and mail this form:
http://www.cft.org/councils/uc/pdfs/memberform.pdf
Return the form to: Treasurer, UC-AFT, 11728 Wilshire Blvd, #B1007, Los Angeles, CA 90025.
We look forward to meeting with you to discuss the contract.
Ben
http://www.cft.org/councils/uc/pdfs/memberform.pdf
Return the form to: Treasurer, UC-AFT, 11728 Wilshire Blvd, #B1007, Los Angeles, CA 90025.
We look forward to meeting with you to discuss the contract.
Ben
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Update 15 April
There was a charged negotiating session on Friday, 13 April. As you remember, four articles from our MOU (memorandum of understanding, IE contract) are open for renegotiation. These are Article 21-Salary, Article 24-Instructional Workload, Article 26-Release Time for UC-AFT Business, and Article 40-Duration. In short, these articles speak to what we are paid, how much work we do, what support the UC owes the Union, and how long the current contract will last.
The UC gave proposals on Articles 21 and 40. It still proposes that our contract be extended one more year (to 2011) with no opportunity to re-examine problem articles. In light of proposed changes to benefits and our total compensation, the Union finds that such a change would not be in our interest.
In terms of salary, the UC managed to convey the unfortunate attitude that we lecturers should be grateful to take salary increases called for by the compact (along the lines of two to four percent, depending on how much the legislature gives and how much the UC redirects to merit pools or other items). Through frank discussion, our bargaining team conveyed our dissatisfaction with such a proposal.
From this point, the bargaining session focused on discussion of salary and workload. The Union President, Bob Samuels, gave a presentation on workload problems and methods employed on several campuses to address these problems. By the end of these discussions, the UC indicated better understanding of our concerns.
The final topic of negotiations was the ground rules for negotiations. The UC had proposed language that might limit whom the Union could bring to the table and curtail our communication with our members and broader constituents. Our counter proposal was not received well because we cut some provisions the UC considers key. We will attempt to craft ground rules that address the UC's concerns without censoring ourselves.
The most positive news is that any scheduled COLA increases in October will apply to Lecturers as well as to Senate faculty. However, the two teams agreed to delay our next meeting until mid May in order to give both sides more time to craft counter proposals. Both sides hope to finish negotiations in the first part of summer, but we are still clearly in the opening stages.
The UC gave proposals on Articles 21 and 40. It still proposes that our contract be extended one more year (to 2011) with no opportunity to re-examine problem articles. In light of proposed changes to benefits and our total compensation, the Union finds that such a change would not be in our interest.
In terms of salary, the UC managed to convey the unfortunate attitude that we lecturers should be grateful to take salary increases called for by the compact (along the lines of two to four percent, depending on how much the legislature gives and how much the UC redirects to merit pools or other items). Through frank discussion, our bargaining team conveyed our dissatisfaction with such a proposal.
From this point, the bargaining session focused on discussion of salary and workload. The Union President, Bob Samuels, gave a presentation on workload problems and methods employed on several campuses to address these problems. By the end of these discussions, the UC indicated better understanding of our concerns.
The final topic of negotiations was the ground rules for negotiations. The UC had proposed language that might limit whom the Union could bring to the table and curtail our communication with our members and broader constituents. Our counter proposal was not received well because we cut some provisions the UC considers key. We will attempt to craft ground rules that address the UC's concerns without censoring ourselves.
The most positive news is that any scheduled COLA increases in October will apply to Lecturers as well as to Senate faculty. However, the two teams agreed to delay our next meeting until mid May in order to give both sides more time to craft counter proposals. Both sides hope to finish negotiations in the first part of summer, but we are still clearly in the opening stages.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
(Very Late) Second Post
So naturally, I appear unclear on the concept of blogging. Sorry about that. The fact is that nothing reportable has happened in the 2 1/2 months of negotiations with the University of California. I am reminded of a line from The Lord of the Rings: "It takes a long time to say anything in old Entish, and we never say anything, unless it is worth taking a long time to say."
You might think of bargaining as the process of speaking in an obscure, slow language. After four bargaining sessions, we have finished saying "hello," and we are just now beginning to discuss our issues in earnest. We have explained that we are woefully under-compensated, and tomorrow, Friday, 13th April, we will explain that we are overworked. The University has stated that it wants us to extend our contract, and we have indicated that we aren't willing to do that at this time.
Tomorrow, we expect a salary proposal from the University, and we hope to get signals from its bargaining team about workload, and how the UC sees this round of bargaining unfolding. The UC seems to want to finish negotiations by early summer, but we aren't sure whether it is willing to give us what we need in order to have a swift resolution.
In any case, I'll begin twice-weekly updates, if only to tell you that nothing is happening. Look for posts on Wednesdays and Weekends.
You might think of bargaining as the process of speaking in an obscure, slow language. After four bargaining sessions, we have finished saying "hello," and we are just now beginning to discuss our issues in earnest. We have explained that we are woefully under-compensated, and tomorrow, Friday, 13th April, we will explain that we are overworked. The University has stated that it wants us to extend our contract, and we have indicated that we aren't willing to do that at this time.
Tomorrow, we expect a salary proposal from the University, and we hope to get signals from its bargaining team about workload, and how the UC sees this round of bargaining unfolding. The UC seems to want to finish negotiations by early summer, but we aren't sure whether it is willing to give us what we need in order to have a swift resolution.
In any case, I'll begin twice-weekly updates, if only to tell you that nothing is happening. Look for posts on Wednesdays and Weekends.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
First Post: Welcome to the Update
The negotiating season is now upon us. In mid January, a small group met with two University of California administrators to exchange bargaining proposals.
Four articles are now open for bargaining: Article 21--Salary, Article 24--Instructional Workload, Article 26--Release Time and Support for Union Business, and Article 40--Duration.
In a nutshell, the AFT is proposing significant salary increases, especially for lecturers who have been employed for more than ten years; standardization of lecturers' workload in such a way that we are credited for all of the work we do for the University, and that we have time to do that work well; and implementation of reasonable resource sharing between the University and the Union in order to efficiently engage in negotiations, grievance resolutions, and other business.
The UC is proposing that our current contract be extended one extra year, until 2011, with no opportunity for negotiations between 2008 and 2011. Otherwise, they have made no significant proposals for change, so we are waiting for their counter proposals.
Four articles are now open for bargaining: Article 21--Salary, Article 24--Instructional Workload, Article 26--Release Time and Support for Union Business, and Article 40--Duration.
In a nutshell, the AFT is proposing significant salary increases, especially for lecturers who have been employed for more than ten years; standardization of lecturers' workload in such a way that we are credited for all of the work we do for the University, and that we have time to do that work well; and implementation of reasonable resource sharing between the University and the Union in order to efficiently engage in negotiations, grievance resolutions, and other business.
The UC is proposing that our current contract be extended one extra year, until 2011, with no opportunity for negotiations between 2008 and 2011. Otherwise, they have made no significant proposals for change, so we are waiting for their counter proposals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)