Bargaining Recap for October 26

The negotiating teams for the AAUP and administration (ANT) met on October 26. It was an exciting afternoon as we closed the books on two proposals and re-opened negotiations on an article we had been told the administration would not discuss.

To the latter point, President Birx has agreed to re-open talks on a Shared Governance proposal. We have yet to see this proposal, but the ANT promised to bring a draft to our November 16 bargaining session. Second only to Workload, Shared Governance was the most important issue for faculty surveyed in the lead-up to negotiations. We look forward to hearing the administration’s proposal on the topic.

Below is a description of the proposals that were discussed, followed by a list of the proposals that have been resolved and those that are still on the table:

• Workload [Tentative Agreement Reached] — We officially signed a Tentative Agreement (TA) on this article. The article acknowledges that faculty time and resources are not unlimited and puts several measures in place to set reasonable bounds on the work we are asked to do. We were guided by the belief that our contract should create transparent, consistent, and fair workload expectations for all faculty. Some of the article’s highlights:
  • Faculty will now have the ability to negotiate a differentiated workload, allowing them to temporarily reallocate their time when significant scholarship opportunities or service needs arise.
  • Nine-month faculty will now be compensated for work scheduled by the administration outside of contract time (such as June Orientation and Advising).
  • Faculty can now “bank” overload teaching credits towards future semesters to a maximum of 4 credits.
  • Credit for supervision and laboratories will now be allotted more consistently so that faculty who are doing the same work will be paid accordingly.
  • All new bargaining unit faculty will now receive a course release each semester (3-4 credit) of their first year to allow them to manage new course preparations and establish their scholarship.
  • No bargaining unit faculty shall be assigned more than 30 advisees without that faculty member’s permission. In cases where a faculty member agrees to take on more than 30 advisees, they may now renegotiate their service or scholarship requirements.
  • Librarians will now be given more flexibility in how they schedule their time and in how they conduct their scholarship.
  • Major service roles, such as Chair of the Curriculum or General Education Committee, will now be given a standard course release.
• Professional Development [Tentative Agreement Reached] — We officially signed a Tentative Agreement (TA) on this article (having agreed to do so on October 5). This article increases professional development funds from $400 to $625 in FY18 and to $800 in FY19. What’s more, faculty members can now roll-over their professional development funds from one year to the next (for a maximum of two years total). The agreement will also guarantee new tenure-track faculty $2000 in professional development funds in each of their first two years. The agreement kept the status-quo for sabbaticals and other professional development leaves.
• Promotion, Tenure & Evaluation (ANT) — The administration brought a counter proposal that acknowledged the need for mandatory training for P&T committee-chairs and accepted our call for continued review of Department P&T guidelines. However, they again reinserted Post-Tenure Review, this time as part of the work plan evaluation.
• Management Rights (ANT) — The ANT brought a counter proposal that replaced all instances of “collaborate” with “consult” in regards to the role of faculty in such things as curriculum, academic policies, and the like. However, given the re-opening of the Shared Governance article, they agreed to revisit this at a future meeting.
• Retrenchment (AAUP) — We brought a counter proposal for retrenchment based on financial exigency. Retrenchment is a mandatory topic for bargaining and the ANT’s original proposal was brief and wide-reaching. Our proposal described a detailed transparent process in which faculty and administration would work together before and after a declaration of financial exigency to review the data and make important decisions. Our proposal described a process for program review that ensured faculty participation in the process and set rules for how subsequent faculty retrenchment would occur.

The ANT asked to cancel our planned November 2 bargaining session, however we did agree to set additional dates this Fall and into next year. Our next bargaining session is scheduled for November 16.

Proposals that have been resolved and those that are still on the table: