Community college districts will soon be compelled to negotiate what CFT-sponsored legislation calls “reemployment preference for part-time, temporary faculty.” The landmark provisions require districts to negotiate with the union in order to receive significant funding available from the state Student Success and Support Program.
What is “reemployment preference”?
Because part-time faculty in the California community colleges are defined in the state Education Code as “temporary,” they are not guaranteed any form of reemployment at the end of each academic term’s teaching assignment. However, many part-time faculty are in practice “reemployed” by colleges and districts where they have previously taught, frequently teaching two or more academic terms per year over many years.
Reemployment preference refers to rights earned by part-time faculty to be reemployed or offered an assignment by a college or district before other part-time faculty who have not yet earned those rights. Such rights are sometimes called “rehire rights” or “the right of first refusal.”
How will this law help part-time faculty?
Part-time faculty without any locally bargained “reemployment rights” have no ability to predict their future employment at institutions they may have taught at for decades and are effectively “at will” employees. Some but far from all California community colleges have established, through collective bargaining, some form of reemployment rights for part-time faculty. These range from a straight seniority list, with individual faculty ranked and then rehired according to length of service, to “pools” or levels of reemployment preference in which all members have achieved some minimum length of service. In this latter scenario, all members of a given pool or level have equal reemployment rights.
This law will require districts seeking state Student Success and Support Program funds to establish “minimum standards” for reemployment rights that include: length of time taught at the college or district; number of courses taught there; professional evaluations; and “availability, willingness, and expertise” of individuals to teach specific classes or accept specific assignments.
Will this affect my job? If so, when?
The law stipulates that in order to receive SSSP funds, any district without a collective bargaining agreement for part-time instructors in effect as of January 1 must begin good faith bargaining by July 1 with those instructors’ exclusive representative to establish a system of reemployment rights. Any district with a collective bargaining agreement is required to establish such a system “as part of the usual and customary negotiations between the district and the exclusive representative for part-time, temporary faculty.” Thus, negotiated changes will occur at varying times over the next several years.
What kind of reemployment can I count on in the
Because of the governor’s preference for local control of legislation implementation, we’re likely to see variations in the form reemployment rights take throughout the state. Changes where you work will depend on what local unions and districts are willing and able to negotiate on behalf of part-time faculty.
How can I strengthen reemployment rights where I
Because this legislation requires local bargaining by the exclusive representative of part-time faculty, you should communicate directly with your union leaders. Join in discussions about this legislation, asking questions and adding your thoughts at union meetings and gatherings. Encourage your colleagues to do the same.
— By Linda Sneed, part-time English instructor at Cosumnes River College, member of Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, AFT Local 2279, and a CFT Vice President. This article appeared first in the CFT’s Part-Timer newsletter
On the long and winding path toward job security
Former part-time community college instructor Jose Medina, an assemblyman from Riverside, carried CFT-sponsored Assembly Bill 1690. The bill requires districts with no collective bargaining agreement for part-time faculty in effect as of January 1, 2017, to negotiate with their unions to establish standards for reemployment, including workload distribution, evaluation procedures, and seniority rights.
However, after AB 1690 passed the Assembly on a concurrence vote, Gov. Brown requested amendments. In hopes of securing the governor’s signature, efforts were made to include his amendments, but it was not possible in the final days of the session. Instead, Medina collaborated with former teacher turned senator Tony Mendoza to, in legislative shorthand, “gut and amend” Mendoza’s Senate Bill 1379 to allow incorporation of the amendments.
SB 1379, among other things, requires minimum standards of
reemployment preference, extends the timeframe for compliance to
July 1, 2017, and makes compliance a condition of districts
receiving funds allocated for the Student Success and Support
The governor signed AB 1690 and SB 1379 on September 30, and the two bills act in tandem.
—By the CFT Legislative Staff