UFF-FAU

February 3, 2010. Administration claims “philosophical” objection to faculty teaching in summer, Says professors should use summer months for research, BOT and administration remain tight-fisted on salaries

We continue to try to reach an agreement on summer teaching. The administration’s new position is that cuts to faculty summer appointments were not entirely driven by budget cuts. They have a “philosophical” objection to faculty teaching in the summer and believe faculty should use this time for research activities.

Faculty cannot expect any raises based on research activities in the nine month contract period (let alone in the summer) since there is still no money on the table for merit or any other salary increase.

We have, however, reached tentative agreements on three other articles. Article 15, Tenure and Permanent Status, remains unchanged. In Article 17, Leaves, we have agreed to their request that faculty on a 9 month contract use sick leave in four hour increments. This is in response to administrative complaints that faculty do not use sick leave appropriately. They would like to encourage us to stay home when we are sick. We have also reached a tentative agreement on Article 16, Job Abandonment. An employee is considered to have abandoned his or her job if absent without authorized leave for seven or more consecutive calendar days — unless the absence is for reasons beyond the control of the employee and the employee notifies the University as soon as practicable.

An article-by-article description of additional proposed CBA changes in ongoing bargaining is provided below.

In solidarity,

Sharmila Vishwasrao
for the UFF-FAU Collective Bargaining Team

BARGAINING REPORT BY ARTICLE 1/08/10

PREAMBLE  :  Unchanged, Tentatively agreed (TA)

ARTICLE 1:  BOT proposed no changes, UFF holding off until end of negotiations.

ARTICLE  2:  Unchanged ,  TA

ARTICLE  3: Unchanged, TA

ARTICLE  4:  BOT proposes listing 39 instances of reserved management rights including changing teaching time/prep time, reorganization, days in semester, semester system etc, unless specified in contract.  1/6/10.

ARTICLE 5:  BOT proposed defining misconduct as failure to uphold Academic Responsibility, UFF will not accept,  proposed no change.  UFF countered with grievability for failure by BOT (11/19).  Admin agrees to grievability – UFF under advisement.

ARTICLE 6:  BOT proposed no changes, UFF proposed addition of ‘sexual orientation’ among non-discrimination items along with race, gender, etc.  BOT agreed to include ‘sexual orientation’.  TA 12/17/09

ARTICLE 7:  No substantive changes, TA

ARTICLE 8

ARTICLE 9:  BOT proposal  11/19/09. No substantial changes.  We are holding until Article 8 is decided.

ARTICLE 10:  At issue, who is responsible for annual evaluation, should UFF activities be part of annual evaluation, process of disputing annual evaluation.  Mostly agreed, UFF will counter with minor language changes. 12/17/09.

ARTICLE 11:  No change, TA

ARTICLE 12:  BOT proposed unchanged.

ARTICLE 13: BOT proposes substantial changes.  1/6/09.

ARTICLE 14:  No changes.  TA. 12/7/09

ARTICLE 15.  No substantial changes.  Continuing multiyear removed from title (they do not exist) TA 12/17/009

ARTICLE 16:  Job considered abandoned after 7 consecutive calendar days of unauthorized leave.  (Used to be 10 days) TA 12/17/09.

ARTICLE 17:  9 month faculty must take sick leave in 4 hour blocks.  They think this will induce faculty to use sick leave appropriately.  We are skeptical but agreed.  TA 12/17/09.

ARTICLE 18:  Administration wants “Traditional Works of scholarship and Instructional works to be made available to, and maintained by the University for administrative, educational, research or other pedagogical purposes”.  UFF response only for administrative purposes (11/19).  Admin agrees to UFF counter.  New language in 18.4 (b)”Traditional Works of Scholarship and Instructional Works are the property of the Creator, but such works must be made available to, and maintained by the University for administrative purposes.  The University shall compensate the employee for any costs incurred.”  TA on 11/19/09.

ARTICLE 19:  BOT proposal is unchanged, UFF will propose changes.  BOT agrees that faculty without summer appointments can teach at other educational institutions, UFF will counter 1/6/10.

ARTICLE 20:  BOT has proposed substantial changes 12/7/09.  UFF is considering.

ARTICLE 21:  BOT proposes unchanged. (Lydia will check).  TA 12/7/09

ARTICLE 22:  BOT proposes unchanged.  UFF proposes additional full pay sabbaticals and .75% increase on half pay sabbaticals. (11/19).

ARTICLE 23:  Salaries.  UFF proposed bargaining starting salaries, 2.5% ATB, 1% merit, 1% equity, no discretion, step increases for FAUS.  Admin suggest on 11/19/09 that BOT is not inclined to give raises this year.  BOT proposes 0 raise 12/7/09.  Wants limited discretion for counteroffers.

ARTICLE 24:  BOT 12/7/09.  Proposes language changes for phased retirement.  Employees will be re hired as adjunct but may retain pre retirement working title.

ARTICLE 25:  Removed.  Remains blank as placeholder, TA

ARTICLE 26:  No changes.  TA

ARTICLE 27:  BOT proposes removal of one phrase, “No employee, shall as a result of the establishment of a level of rights or benefits in this Agreement, suffer a loss or diminution of any such rights or benefits for which otherwise eligible.”  This is apparent hangover from blue book where different universities may have offered benefits which do not exist in FAU-BOT CBA.  Advise?  UFF proposes unchanged (11/5)

ARTICLE 28:  BOT proposes receipt of notice be within 3 days of mailing.  UFF

ARTICLE 29:  29.2 removed because it is duplicated in 28.2.  TA (11/19/09)

ARTICLE 30:  Only dates changed, TA

ARTICLE 31:  BOT proposes unchanged 12/7/09.  UFF will withhold until end.

ARTICLE 32:  BOT proposes, “University” means the administration/management of the Florida Atlantic University, UFF will wait to see if more definition changes are warranted.

APPENDIX A:  BOT proposed unchanged, UFF proposed addition of Biomed faculty. (UFF counter with addition of Biomed 11/5)
APPENDIX B:  BOT proposed unchanged, we will clean up some old language. TA 11/19/09

APPENDIX F:   Rescinded TA

See related posts:

2009 Collective Bargaining Survey Results

Collective Bargaining Update December 16, 2009

Between October 23 and November 14 UFF-FAU conducted an online survey regarding important issues and concerns that our chapter’s Bargaining Team (FAU Professors Sharmila Vishwasrao, Lydia Smiley, Fred Hoffman, UFF’s Bruce Nissen ) negotiates with the FAU administration and Board of Trustees’ bargaining representatives (FAU Associate General Counsel Lawrence “Larry” Glick, Michael Mattimore of the Allen, Norton & Blue Law Firm, and FAU Associate Provost Norman Kaufman). A total 247 faculty members participated in the survey, or about 30% of the Bargaining Unit.

Taken as a whole, the survey results strongly suggest that FAU faculty members are concerned about low salaries, the protection of tenure, and the need to specify layoff criteria. Layoff criteria stipulated in the UFF-FAU/BOT 2006-09 Collective Bargaining Agreement were compromised by the administration last spring through the College of Engineering’s creation of “functional units” or “pools,” which were used as a pretext to terminate five tenured faculty. Summer teaching was also an issue for about half of faculty surveyed. Roughly a third of faculty also noted promotion for instructors, benefits for domestic partners (already acknowledged and offered at other Florida state universities), intellectual property, and childcare, as matters that should receive priority at the bargaining table.

Over half of faculty (51%) worry that their salaries are falling below national averages for their rank and discipline, a concern that is upheld by the most recent salary data gathered by AAUP, showing faculty salaries at FAU as second-lowest in the state, ahead only of Florida Institute of Technology. Results also indicate that about 60% of faculty rely on summer teaching to augment their low salaries. The right to summer teaching is one which the administration’s bargaining team has sought to restrict even further. Given the choice between a ten percent increase in salary and the right to teach two summer courses, faculty overwhelmingly (91%) chose a salary increase.

UFF-FAU would like to thank all of the faculty members who took a few moments to take part in the survey. We realize that the survey could be improved in areas–particularly for those faculty such as counselors and librarians who work on a 12 month contract. Further, in future surveys we intend to provide for open-ended questions where faculty will be able to provide detailed responses and suggestions for improvement, so please stay tuned.

Regarding Question 1 of the survey, College or Unit designation, 4%(9) of faculty members noted their position was in College of Urban and Public Affairs, 13% (31) in College of Engineering and Computer Science, 32% (77)  in College of Arts and Letters, 14% (34) College of Business, 4% (10) Library, 3% (7) Honors College, 2% (5) College of Nursing, 14% (34) College of Science, 13% (30) College of Education, and 1% (1) Counseling. On Question 2, years of service at FAU, 17% were employed 1-5 years, 32% 6-10 years, 20% 11-15 years, 13% 16-20 years, 9% 21-25 years, and 9% have 26 or more years employment. The remaining results are presented below as they were presented on the survey.

3. Of the following concerns, rank each from 1 to 5 where 1 is most important and 5 is least important. (Percent ranking as top two concerns)

3a. Salary increases. ………………….80%
3b. Protecting tenure. ………………….71%
3c. Layoff criteria and units. …………..64%
3d. Promotion for instructors. …………30%
3e. Summer teaching. ………………….47%
3f. Intellectual property rights. …………33%
3g. Benefits for domestic partners. ……29%
3h. Childcare. ……………………………27%

4. Indicate using numbers betwen 1 and 100, what percentage of any salary increase should be allotted to:
4a. Across the board. …………………41.3% (average)
4b. Market Equity. …………………….30.8% (average)
4c. Merit. ………………………………….26% (average)

5. Of the following concerns, rank your most important concern 1, your next most important concern 2, your next most important concern 3, and your least important concern 4.
5a. The most serious salary concern for FAU faculty is the failure to be rewarded for meritorious performance: 21%.
5b. The most serious salary concern for FAU faculty is FAU faculty falling behind national averages for rank and discipline: 51%.
5c. The most serious salary concern for FAU faculty is salaries for experienced faculty falling behind those of newly hired faculty: 24%.
5d. The most serious salary concern for FAU faculty is salaries failing to keep pace with increases in the cost of living: 45%.

6. Was the possibility of extra pay for teaching summer classes mentioned when you were hired to work at FAU?
Yes. ……………………80%
No. ……………………..20%

7. How many classes did you teach in …
7a. Summer 2009
0………………………..42%
1………………………..40%
2………………………..18%
3+………………………..1%

7b. Summer 2008
0…………………………38%
1…………………………41%
2…………………………19%
3+………………………..2%

7c. Summer 2007
0…………………………35%
1…………………………35%
2…………………………27%
3+…………………………2%

8. In 2009 would you have liked to have taught more classes than you were offered to teach in order to augment your 9 month salary?
Yes……….39%
No…………61%

9. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where “1″ is most important and “5″ is least important, how important is summer pay in your decision to stay at FAU in the long term?
1……………30%
2……………19%
3……………17%
4…………….9%
5…………….25%

10. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is most important and 5 is least important, which of the following are important for summer assignments.
10a. Salary
1…………….61%
2…………….20%
3……………..9%
4……………..2%
5……………..7%

10b. Predictability in pay and assignments.
1……………..38%
2……………..29%
3……………..18%
4………………6%
5………………9%

10c. Flexibility in course times/semesters.
1………………24%
2………………17%
3………………32%
4………………12%
5………………15%

11. Given a choice between (a) or (b) below, indicate which you would choose.
a) A 5% increase in your 9 month salary: 70%
b) The right to teach up to two courses in the summer: 30%

12. Given a choice between (a) or (b) below, indicate which you would choose.
a) A 10% increase in your 9 month salary: 91%
b) The right to teach up to two courses in the summer: 9%

See related post:

Collective Bargaining Update, December 16, 2009.

November 11, 2009. The UFF Bargaining Team and FAU Board of Trustees negotiators have met to bargain the full collective bargaining agreement (CBA) for 2009-2012 three times this semester.  Additional meetings are scheduled for November 19th, December 2nd, December 7th and December 11th.

We have reached tentative agreements on some articles already.  An article-by-article description of proposed changes appears below.

The last meeting was devoted to a discussion of a new summer appointment article.  UFF is interested in preserving the quality of instruction in the summer and maintaining predictable faculty incomes over the summer appointment period.  The administration team has expressed a desire to have the discretion to offer classes and assignments based on budgetary concerns.  As part of an earlier settlement of an Unfair Labor Practice brought by UFF-FAU in June, both parties have until December 6th to reach an agreement on summer appointments or the issue will go to impasse.  We will discuss proposals on summer appointments at the next meeting.

We understand that the academic year is already underway and that faculty are working without any pay increases for 2009-10. UFF has already proposed salary increases.  We will keep you posted as to the progress of any negotiations.

Please take the time to fill out the UFF Bargaining survey.   It is one of the ways we are trying make bargaining more representative of the entire faculty’s wishes and concerns. If you are a faculty member you should have already received a password to access the survey. Contact James Tracy at 297-6265, or email president(at)uff-fau.org to obtain the password. Survey data collection closes on November 14.

In solidarity,

Sharmila Vishwasrao
for the UFF-FAU Bargaining Team

BARGAINING REPORT BY ARTICLE

PREAMBLE  :  Unchanged, Tentatively agreed (TA)

ARTICLE 1:  BOT proposed no changes, UFF holding off until end of negotiations.

ARTICLE  2:  Unchanged ,  TA

ARTICLE  3: Unchanged, TA

ARTICLE  4:

ARTICLE 5:  BOT proposed defining misconduct as failure to uphold Academic Responsibility, UFF will not accept, proposed no change.

ARTICLE 6:  BOT proposed no changes, UFF proposed addition of ‘sexual orientation’ among non-discrimination items along with race, gender, etc.

ARTICLE 7:  No substantive changes, TA

ARTICLE 8

ARTICLE 9

ARTICLE 10:  At issue, who is responsible for annual evaluation, should UFF activities be part of annual evaluation, process of disputing annual evaluation.

ARTICLE 11:  No change, TA

ARTICLE 12

ARTICLE 13

ARTICLE 14

ARTICLE 15

ARTICLE 16

ARTICLE 17

ARTICLE 18:  Administration wants “Traditional Works of scholarship and Instructional works to be made available to, and maintained by the University for administrative, educational, research or other pedagogical purposes”.

ARTICLE 19:  BOT proposal is unchanged, UFF will propose changes.

ARTICLE 20

ARTICLE 21:  BOT proposes unchanged.

ARTICLE 22:  BOT proposes unchanged.

ARTICLE 23:  Salaries.  UFF proposed bargaining starting salaries, 2.5% ATB, 1% merit, 1% equity, no discretion, step increases for FAUS.

ARTICLE 24

ARTICLE 25:  Removed.  Remains blank as placeholder, TA

ARTICLE 26

ARTICLE 27:  BOT proposes removal of one phrase, “No employee, shall as a result of the establishment of a level of rights or benefits in this Agreement, suffer a loss or diminution of any such rights or benefits for which otherwise eligible.”  This is apparent hangover from blue book where different universities may have offered benefits which do not exist in FAU-BOT CBA.  Advise?

ARTICLE 28:  BOT proposes unchanged.

ARTICLE 29

ARTICLE 30:  Only dates changed, TA

ARTICLE 31

ARTICLE 32:  BOT proposes, “University” means the administration/management of the Florida Atlantic University, UFF will wait to see if more definition changes are warranted.

APPENDIX A:  BOT proposed unchanged, UFF proposed addition of Biomed faculty.
APPENDIX B:  BOT proposed unchanged, we will clean up some old language.
APPENDIX F:   Rescinded TA

On May 15 the UFF-FAU Executive Committee met to conclude the ratification process for changes to the 2007-08 and 2008-09 Collective Bargaining Agreement imposed by the FAU Board of Trustees on April 21. About six percent of faculty (54) cast ballots. A total of 43 voted to ratify the 2007-08 contract changes involving phased retirement and refusal of any salary increase; 9 voted against ratification and 2 abstained. Just 35 faculty voted to ratify the 2008-09 changes for a 1% increase in salary effective November 1, and a $1,000 bonus, 18 voted against the changes, and three abstained. UFF-FAU contests the BOT’s contract language on summer course assignments which restricts faculty from teaching more than one summer class.

The low vote at least partially suggests the faculty’s overall disillusionment with the FAU BOT’s leadership of the University. The Florida Board of Governors, a body established in 2002 under the Governorship of “Jeb” Bush, superseded the Board of Regents as the governing body of the State University System. In association with the Governor the BOG appoints local Boards of Trustees as their designees at each state university to oversee labor-management relations. Because of the heretofore unresolved inference that the Boards of Trustees are legislative bodies with the power to settle disputes involving state employees, the changes to the Collective Bargaining Agreement became effective when the BOT voted on April 21. In the matter of the impasse invoked in November 2008 by the FAU-BOT, the body was likewise a party in the dispute. The impasse process requires obtaining recommendations from a Special Magistrate appointed by the Public Employee Relations Commission to settle the dispute. On April 21 the FAU BOT defied the Magistrate’s recommendation of a minimum 2.5% across-the-board salary increase for FAU faculty members.

On Tuesday, April 21st, the FAU BOT voted to ignore the recommendation of the special magistrate to raise faculty salaries by 2.5%.  It chose to adopt the administration’s position of giving a 1% raise and a $1000 bonus for in unit faculty.  Faculty will not receive a raise for 2007-08.

Further, the board chose to unilaterally amend Article 8 to allow administration increased discretion in summer appointments.  While faculty will have first preference for one summer course, any additional courses may be taught by employees of their choosing including graduate students and adjuncts. Contrary to statements by attorney Mattimore and Trustee Blosser, this overturns a longstanding practice under which courses were assigned to out of unit employees only when faculty were not available to teach courses.  This change effectively results in a 10% pay cut for many of us and a summer program in which less qualified employees will be found in the classroom.
Since we started bargaining with the BOT, faculty salaries at FAU have lost ground relative to those at peer institutions.  The 2008-09 salary data from the AAUP published in the Chronicle of Higher Education indicates that the only doctoral-granting institution in the state of Florida with lower faculty salaries than Florida Atlantic University is the Florida Institute of Technology, and that FAU’s senior female faculty are the most poorly paid in the state.
The table below shows raises at FAU after bargaining with the BOT began.  In spite of the promises made by the Board of Trustees in 2002, and by the Provost continually since his coming to FAU,  to make faculty salaries competitive, very few resources have been allocated to fix the problem.

Contrary to comments made by members of the Board of Trustees, the UFF has been very supportive of performance based raises.  During the bargaining process, we had proposed that the $1000 bonus be converted to recurring merit increases as they might be more meaningfully used to retain productive faculty.  This change was also proposed to the BOT at their meeting by Trustee Eric Shaw, although that is not clear from the newspaper coverage.

Trustee Blosser’s allegation that “the United Faculty of Florida has focused almost exclusively on the salary issue” misconstrues the role of UFF.  We represent the faculty in bargaining conditions of employment.  We are required to bargain salaries every year.  Given the sorry state of our salaries and the cost of living in South Florida, we make no apologies for trying to improve salaries for our dedicated members and colleagues who go beyond the call of duty in providing a public service for students every day.

In addition to salaries, we are only allowed to open two other articles in each year of the three year contract.  In the second and third years of our contract, we have tried to improve educational benefits and domestic partner benefits for our membership.  We have tried to improve notice conditions for faculty, recognizing that faculty job markets are unique.  We have tried to improve the quality of the summer program by ensuring that appointments are based on qualifications rather than budget considerations.   At every turn, it is cost considerations and management discretion that has trumped faculty governance and instructional quality.

We understand that, just as it is our role to represent faculty in improving work conditions, it is the Trustees’ role to oversee the entire University.   In the interests of moving forward and improving the admittedly fraught labor relations at this University, we would like to issue the Trustees a public invitation to open a dialogue with representatives of UFF.   As we begin to bargain all the 30+ articles of the contract this year, we hope to get helpful suggestions from faculty and good-faith bargaining from the Board.

In solidarity,

The UFF-FAU Bargaining Team