 |
UC - AFT NEWS
|
|
| UC-AFT Bargaining
Update |
| Lecturers/Non-Senate
Faculty Unit 18 Negotiations |
April 18, 2003
By Mike Rotkin
Hold onto your socks. After over three years of discussions, we
actually have something new to report with respect to Unit 18 bargaining.
This report must be read with the understanding that much of the
progress we are about to report is still not embodied in final contract
language. In addition, we have not reached final agreement on every
key element That said, however, both the UC-AFT Bargaining Team
and the University Administration's Team appear to have pushed close
to a realistic framework for a contract acceptable to both parties.
During the next several weeks, we expect to see an increase in the
activity of small teams from each side working on final contract
language on several of the outstanding articles. The next full-team
meetings will be held in Oakland on May 7th and 8th. There we hope
to be able to consider final language on many, if not all, of the
outstanding articles, and to hold a discussion to clarify any ambiguity
in the parties' interpretation of the concepts that that language
embodies. It appears—assuming that the University delivers
in certain key areas—that it may be a realistic expectation
that we wrap up a contract before the end of the current academic
year.
There are a number of remaining areas where exact contract language
remains elusive. We need to make sure that the contract we recommend
to our members for ratification actually embodies the conceptual
understandings developed by the two teams over the past two days
(and three years) of bargaining.
Among the improvements that the Administration proposed in its last
offer to the union are:
• New and significant protections for pre-six
year NSF. Among these are provisions to prohibit automatic churning
of NSF in order to block all access to post-six year appointments;
and a requirement that departments will review files and follow
procedures when they are making decisions based on the academic
qualifications of pre-six year NSF. A prohibition on replacing incumbent
pre-six year lecturers simply in order to hire someone at a lower
salary also remains on the table although the exact form it will
take is unclear.
• A significant increase in the minimum salary paid to pre-six
NSF (we are still discussing the exact dates for the implementation
of these increases).
• Retroactive pay increases going back to October 2000.
• An automatic step increase (about 2 and 1/2%) for all NSF
in the third year of employment and consideration every three years
for a minimum two-step merit increase (about 5%) for post-six year
NSF.
• A new system of benefit and retirement coverage for part-time
employees who work more than half-time, even if they are hired on
a quarter by quarter basis. The new system will not penalize NSF
for not working for the University over the summer.
• Committees, including lecturers, on each campus to study
the workload problems in language, writing, and a third department
on some campuses and to recommend necessary changes.
• A new system of continuing appointments for post-six year
NSF to replace the current three year appointment system. The system
would provide significant protections against arbitrary dismissals
or layoffs. We are still clarifying how augmentations to appointment
percentages will work. This is not a tenure system, since NSF could
still be laid off or reduced in time if there are no courses for
them to teach. However, the reasons for layoff will be limited in
very specific ways. Lecturers could still be terminated for cause—among
other reasons, for a significant decline in the quality of their
teaching; but there would be a clear system allowing for remediation
of problems and appeals before such termination.
• New contract protection for NSF engaged under the "by
Agreement" salary provisions including coverage under Unit
18 range adjustments and minimum salary provisions.
• A new professional development fund which will, for the first
time, provide financial support for the professional activities
of NSF members, including attendance at professional conferences
and a limited number of paid leaves. Decisions about the distribution
of the money will be based on the recommendations of campus-based
NSF committees.
• An expanded system of third-party arbitration for dispute
resolution.
Again, we need to emphasize that some of these improvements are
not yet embodied in final language and a great deal of hard work
remains ahead of us to get this done. While we may not accomplish
every goal we set for ourselves three years ago, if we are able
to consummate what appears to be a conceptual agreement in final
contract language, we will deliver a substantially improved new
labor agreement for the NSF and other members of Unit 18 in the
UC system.
The next step in this process is moving to formal, tentative agreement
on each of the outstanding articles. This would be followed by a
ratification process in which each UC-AFT member of Unit 18 would
vote on the proposed contract (Memorandum of Understanding). Before
any ratification vote would take place, meetings will be held on
each of the campuses to explain the proposed contract and answer
questions about it. More detailed written explanations of the proposed
agreement and copies of the actual agreement itself will, of course,
also be made available to all members of the Unit.
Remember that only members of the UC-AFT will be allowed to
participate in a ratification vote, so any lecturer who wants to
have a voice in the final decision but who has not yet joined UC-AFT
will need to actually complete a brief, one-page membership
application before the voting period commences.
Your membership will allow the locals on each campus continue to
build the union. The educational work we have done on the campuses
and in the community during this entire process—and particularly
over the past year—has played a critical role in the recent
advances we appear to have made at the bargaining table. It would
be a mistake to become complacent or let our guard down at this
critical juncture. In order to create the contract for the future,
we need to continue to build power and leverage through increased
membership, continued public discourse, ongoing legislative presence
and coalition building. It is only with a growing and activist presence
on each campus that we can accomplish all of the legitimate goals
we set as we started this process.
In the meantime, we will continue to do our best to keep all of
our members informed about the state of bargaining over the next
month while we continue to try and hammer out a final agreement.
|
|
