|
|
|
BARGAINING 2007
|
CFA represents the instructional faculty, librarians, counselors and coaches who comprise Unit 3 among CSU employees. The union engages in collective bargaining under the terms spelled out in the state labor relations law that covers us, known as the Higher Education Employees Relations Act.
The contract that results from bargaining covers salary, benefits, workload and many other aspects of our working lives.You may request a printed copy of the contract from your CFA chapter, or you may view it as a PDF file on this Web site. Contract.
This year, CFA and the CSU administration will negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement—known as a “successor contract”—for the faculty. Reports from the CFA Bargaining Team will be added to the Bargaining Report Page periodically.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Board of Trustees ratify new contract
May 14, 2007
The CSU Trustee’s Committee on Collective Bargaining unanimously ratified Tuesday the tentative contract agreement reached with CFA in April and approved last week by CFA members.
Jackie McClain, CSU Vice Chancellor of Human Resources, recited the provisions of the new agreement; and with a slap of his gavel, CSU Trustee Bill Hauck, chair of the Committee, stated: “The contract is ratified.”
"Today marks the end of two years of contentious collective bargaining. It has been a difficult time and I am pleased to have a contract completed," said John Travis, President of the California Faculty Association.
|
|
CFA members vote to ratify new contract
May 6, 2007
California Faculty Association members have voted overwhelmingly to ratify the tentative contract agreement between CFA and the California State University Administration.
The results of the voting, which took place on all 23 campuses May 1-3, were released Monday to reveal that 97 percent of CFA members participating in the voting have approved the contract. The CSU Trustees must now vote to approve the contract, either over a conference call or at their May 15-16 meeting.
Even with the new, four-year contract nearly complete, CFA leaders remained on guard against any letdown until the pact is fully implemented and the faculty’s rights under the agreement are enforced.
“While we are excited to ratify this new contract, ratification is only the first step,” said Lillian Taiz, CFA President-Elect and a history professor at Los Angeles. “We still must work to build the power and influence of the faculty for even
greater improvements in working and learning conditions throughout the CSU.”
To view the full text of tentative contract, click here
|
|
CFA and CSU reach deal in principle on contract
Two-day rolling walkouts put on hold while deal is finalized
CFA and the CSU administration have reached a tentative contract agreement and the union’s Board of Directors has voted unanimously to postpone rolling walkouts pending finalized contract language.
Tentative agreements have been signed on the issues of salary, workload, grievances, parking and appointments. Which have been the most contentiously debated topics in this round of bargaining. The accord was reached using the recommendations of neutral fact finder Sylvia Skratek as framework for the deal.
“We have a tentative agreement that will be good for the CSU, good for our students, good for the faculty,” said CFA President John Travis. “Through this agreement faculty will make real progress toward closing the pay gap between us and our colleagues in other states.”
Should an unforeseen breakdown in these latest talks occur, faculty remain prepared to initiate job actions.
The new contract will likely be sent out to the membership for final ratification in late April.
Visit the tenative agreement page for more information.
|
|
CFA/CSU Bargaining Summary
January 31, 2007
With contract talks now at an impasse and fact finding set to begin in early February, you can now review a history of the current round of contract negotiations and a summary of key points in bargaining.
Bargaining between CFA and the CSU has been going on for over 20 months.
- CSU faculty salaries are much lower than faculty salaries at similar universities and the average salary for community college faculty surpassed the CSU average in 2003.
- Almost all non-economic (no-cost) terms are settled.
- Economic terms center on salary increases and the disagreement can be broken down into disagreement over:
* raises for year 1 (the current budget year, retro to July '06)
* raises for years 2, 3, and 4 (2007/08 to 2009/10
Year 1
CSU offered:
3% raise + step increases for faculty who are qualified
OR
4% raise with no steps
CFA countered:
4% raise + step increases for faculty who are qualified
AND
0.5% for equity increases (e.g. for faculty with several years of experience paid thousands less than newly hired colleagues in the same department)
Average Salary, Tenure Track Faculty
Bottom Line Disagreement: Year 1
- The 1.5% difference for year 1 is barely $20 million out of a budget of more than $4 billion: this is less than half of one percent of the CSU budget.
- In the past, the chancellor has found and spent much larger amounts from within the CSU budget for projects he cares about. E.g., the CMS project cost $600 million and has been paid completely from system funds
- CFA research shows CSU accumulating wealth: its expendable net assets increased by 51% ($821 million) since 2002.
-There is no real argument that they can't afford the additional 1.5%.
Years 2, 3, 4: the "out years"
Chancellor Reed claims his offer for the "out years" totals about 21%. If it really did, CFA would have accepted it. In fact, what most could count on boils down to less than 12%. The differences:
- 3% (1% each of the three out years) would have to pay for step increases, even though they are actually self-funding and cost the system no new money.
- 3% is contingent on a budget augmentation (beyond the compact) that must be approved by the legislature and the governor. The record shows this is unlikely.
- 3% is for "merit pay" or what is really discretionary pay. Two other similar programs over the last 10 years were thrown out because they were poorly administered and too divisive.
Growing CPEC Faculty Salary Gap
Bottom Line Disagreement: Years 2, 3, 4
-The chancellor's offer for the three out years is actually 12% (21% minus 9%).
-The chancellor's offer ignores the lost years - when faculty salaries were frozen for 2 years during the state's fiscal crisis - and the CSU's broken salary structure.
-His offer will do little to close the CPEC gap - the measure of how CSU faculty compare to others working at comparable universities.
What is the Chancellor saying?
Reed: We have to make part of our offer contingent on budget augmentations, otherwise we can't afford to cover them.
CFA: Not True. Out of its $4 billion budget, the CSU clearly has the monies right now to fund CFA's salary proposal. This is an issue of of willingness not an issue of whether the CSU can afford it.
Reed: CFA is unreasonable, disrespectful, attacks the institution, etc.
CFA: The chancellor is very stubborn and inflexible. He takes many actions personally and views disagreements on issues as CFA attacking "his" institution.
Reed: This is a 25% increase! the most generous we've ever offered.
CFA: It's not really 25% when you look closely.
Reed: We can't afford more money than we've offered for year 1.
CFA: They easily can.
CSU State General Funds in
Constant Dollars (in Millions)
CFA Salary Proposal
Raises that keep up with inflation and help close the growing salary gap
-Year 1: 4%
-Year 2: 4.25%
-Year 3: 4.5%
-Year 4: 5.25%
Step increases at actual, not inflated cost
-Year 1: for all qualified faculty (current eligibility)
-Years 2, 3, 4: for all faculty (expanded eligibility -- to address structural inequities in the salary structure)
Equity program to correct salary inversion problems (that everyone agrees are serious)
-Years 1-4: 0.5% or about $7 million
Post-Promotion Increase program to correct salary compression problems (that everyone agrees are serious)
-Years 2-4: 0.5% or about $7 million
Summary
|
Total 4-year cost of
CFA Salary Proposal
|
|
General Salary Increases
Service Step Increases
Equity Porgram
Post-Promotion Increase Program
|
18.00%
3.75%
2.00%
1.50% |
| Total |
25.25% |
|
Letter to the Faculty
From the
CFA Bargaining Team
January 1, 2007
See as a .pdf
January 1, 2007
Dear Colleagues,
As we approach the New Year, the faculty of the California State University are faced with a new challenge. It is possible that during the coming term the CSU faculty may be called upon to participate in strike actions.
It is likely that each of us will be called upon to take a stand not only for our own livelihoods and the support of our families, but also for the quality of education provided to our students and the future of the university itself.
After 20 months of bargaining with the CSU administration for a new collective bargaining agreement including salary increases, we have reached the final statutory stage known as fact-finding. On December 15, the previous statutory step, mediation, ended without progress having been made on the critical issue of faculty compensation. Furthermore, the administration bargaining team attempted in mediation to back out of tentative agreements that already had been reached. This is a serious violation of trust and threatens the integrity of the bargaining process.
We anticipate that fact-finding will begin mid-January. A neutral “fact-finder along with one person from each of the CFA and CSU administration bargaining teams will examine arguments and evidence from each side and issue a report.
It is possible that both sides will agree with the report, in which case we will have a settlement. It is more likely that one side or the other will not support the report. The decision of the neutral fact-finder is not binding.
While we always remain hopeful that the statutory process will be successful, we cannot be optimistic.
When fact-finding ends the statutory process is over. At that point, faculty members will have the legal right to engage in concerted actions, including a strike.
It is possible that the Chancellor will take the extreme step of imposing terms and conditions of employment consistent with their “last best offer.” Labor organizations like CFA consider imposition to be among the most offensive actions an employer can take in the bargaining process. It is an insult to the faculty, their union and the bargaining process.
As fact-finding unfolds, we must continue to build our power as well as our capacity to act together. We must be prepared to act if an agreement is not reached.
When more than 1000 faculty members marched on the Trustees meeting on Nov. 15, our message was clear: The faculty are angry, well organized, and ready to fight for ourselves, our students and our university. We must reinforce this message in the new year.
Pressure is being applied to convince the Chancellor of the seriousness of our convictions that a fair contract and better management to fulfill our instructional mission is needed.
• Media Relations: We continue to work with the media, encouraging them to examine the system’s misplaced priorities. This is crucial work to ensure the public understands the real instructional conditions that we face on the campuses, and the impact this has on students.
• Labor and Community Outreach: CFA has built relationships with Central Labor Councils (CLC) up and down the state. They indicate they will support us.
• “Charlie Watch”: An intrepid team continues to make sure that whatever public event the Chancellor attends, CFA will be there too, letting people know what kind of damage he and his policies are doing to the California State University. His public messages almost always contradict his actual record at the CSU.
And we persist with other areas of work that likewise address the larger context in which our bargaining is one manifestation.
• Budget Action: So long as the Trustees do not ask the legislature for enough state funding to meet the real needs of the CSU, there will be pressure on workload, salaries, class size and offerings. The Academic Senate took the courageous position this year to push for funding for more tenure-track hiring in the administration’s budget request. Although the Trustees voted it down, CFA fully supports this request.
• Legal Action: CFA continues to pursue lawsuits on executive perks and parachutes as well as our challenge to the hiring of Barry Munitz as a “Trustee Professor.”
• Legislative Action: CFA representatives are meeting with statewide elected officials and members of the state legislature to garner their support. Many of them share our concern about the mismanagement of the CSU, of which our bargaining troubles are only one example.
You have the opportunity to participate in any of this work. But, should fact-finding fail to reach a settlement, you will need to act further.
In the end, this Chancellor and his administration will only respond if he comes to understand that the faculty of the CSU will not be acquiescent. That is why the CFA Board of Directors, if necessary, will ask the CFA membership to vote during the coming term to authorize CFA’s Board to call a series of two-day rolling strikes.
We will not take this action lightly or without thorough preparation.
CFA members must understand what this vote would mean. A no vote indicates acceptance of the Chancellor’s offer. A yes vote indicates the intention to escalate our fight for a fair contract.
(As in the case of most unions, only CFA members have the right to vote to strike. If you not a CFA member, we urge to join. You can do so online at www.calfac.org by clicking on “Join CFA.”)
In the meantime, to prepare for what lies ahead, CFA’s Board of Directors has asked all 23 CFA campus chapters to begin the next term with informational picketing. This will be a time to distribute information and talk with the campus community about our bargaining situation and the larger context of disrespect and mismanagement that is leading to a strike.
Our message to the CSU administration and Trustees: “We don’t want to strike but we will.”
We also must explain to our students why we feel this kind of action may be necessary. The damage incurred to the university’s mission by allowing things to go on as they have unchallenged is far greater than the short-term disruption of a strike. Enclosed is a message that you can include with your syllabus at the beginning of class. There are readings to select from to give CFA’s actions a larger context in the CFA Research Center at http://www.calfac.org/research.html#readings
Our message to our students: “Faculty working conditions are Student learning conditions.”
CFA’s Board also has asked the CFA campus chapters to hold strike meetings where you and our colleagues will have the opportunity to discuss the plans. Statewide CFA officers and members of the CFA bargaining team will be at these meetings to answer your questions about bargaining or future actions.
The officers of CFA strongly urge you to stay informed, participate in the informational pickets, and find other ways to educate our campus communities in preparation for a strike.
As a last word, it may be self-evident but the unity of the faculty over the coming months will be decisive. Along with our students and the staff, we are all in the CSU boat together, no matter our rank, appointment status, discipline, or seniority. Each of us must make an individual choice, but victory will depend on how we act together once we have made that choice.
That is why our message to ourselves must be:
“Unite to Win.”
In union,
The Officers of the California Faculty Association
John Travis, President
Lillian Taiz, Vice President
John Halcón, Secretary
Kim Geron, Treasurer
David Bradfield, Associate Vice President – South
Andy Merrified, Associate Vice President – North
Elizabeth Hoffman, Associate Vice President – Lecturers
Cecil Canton, Associate Vice President – Affirmative
 Action
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
