Bargaining Report #2, Bargaining Session #2, May 7, 2013
Amendment to Bargaining Report #1 (April 24, 2013):
In my first Bargaining Report, in reaction to the Administration’s statement of intent to refer all of our members’ evaluation process and procedures to the Faculty Senate, I stated that it was my belief that the Faculty Senate served in an advisory capacity. Since then, my discussions with current and long-time faculty senators have convinced me that the Faculty Senate is much more than that. It is, in fact, the only representative body from which policy and programs that impact the academic lives of students and the corresponding work of faculty may originate. The significance of this will be apparent in the following report of our bargaining session, May 7, 2013.
Bargaining Report #2:
At our second Bargaining Session, May 7, 2013, the AAUP-PSU Bargaining Team was presented with proposals removing all of the evaluation procedures from our contract, along with a letter from David Reese, PSU’s general counsel (click to download), explaining the legal basis for removing the language.
The main points in the letter are as follows:
-
The Administration will remove ‘permissive’ portions of significant and long-standing articles from our contract [Note: ‘mandatory’ articles are those pertaining to compensation and some workplace issues which, by law, they must bargain; ‘permissive’ articles, such as those dealing with faculty evaluation among other topics, may be bargained at the discretion of the Administration]. They have already removed aspects of those articles that bind the Promotion and Tenure Guidelines, Post tenure review, fixed term faculty evaluations and academic professional evaluation processes to our contract. Their legal arguments for this appear accurate, but this is unprecedented at PSU and virtually never seen in collective bargaining. We consider this a hostile action of the University for which they provided no rationale despite our emphatic requests for an explanation that would help us understand what problem they were trying to fix.
- The Administration has stated that it is their intention to refer the rights afforded by these permissive articles to the Faculty Senate, while permitting the AAUP the ability to represent faculty in grievance and arbitration. [Faculty Senate will write the procedures; the Administration should exercise their authority within those bounds and the AAUP will defend the procedures by challenging perceived infractions through grievances and arbitration.
Implications for Bargaining:
By its actions, the Administration has ended a long and fruitful tradition of collaborative problem solving-based bargaining at PSU. Under Oregon State Law [Public Employees Collective Bargaining Act], AAUP must have permission from the Administration to continue bargaining to restore or amend those articles and sections of articles that are permissive that the Administration has removed and advised they will not bargain. This is an aggressive attack on the tradition of collaboration that characterizes our profession here at PSU and nationally. Although we may not bargain these issues as we wish at the table, we all must convey our discontent to the Administration at bargaining and through public demonstration and private communication.
AAUP has bargained for 35 years to create the contract we currently have, and we have defended this contract in bargaining and in our many grievance defenses. We view the permissive articles of bargaining as essential for best practices for the governance of PSU. Furthermore, as in all collective bargaining, compromises in mandatory subjects of bargaining (compensation and some working conditions) were offered in return for Administration agreements on permissive bargaining articles. For example, in the years that PSU froze salaries and merit pay, or elicited reductions in pay, AAUP bargained to improve evaluation procedures and increase job security of fixed term faculty. In effect, we have already paid for these articles, and their removal or reduction by fiat is a take-back by our Administration and demonstrates a callous lack of good will. Our bargaining team has yet to determine what, if anything, the Administration is offering in return for this raid on our protections as employees.
Where we go from here:
AAUP must work closely with our Faculty Senate to ensure new evaluation processes are established that are consistent with the expectations of members and with the culture at PSU. To that end, AAUP will continue to bargain to create contract language that explicitly holds the Administration accountable for those processes, procedures, and policies created and adopted by vote of the Faculty Senate. We will also continue to bargain for our members to progress on all topics of mandatory bargaining, specifically with respect to pay, benefits, and working conditions. To the extent that we can, we will voice our concerns and our proposals. Since some permissive language is allowed, we will promote our members’ interests in future bargaining sessions.
SUPPORT AAUP BARGAINING:
Come to bargaining on Tuesday, May 21, noon-3pm, in MCB650.
We will bargain for Article 17, Academic Professional Faculty, and Article 18, Fixed Term and Research Faculty.
Stay as long as you can. Bring your colleagues, please. Your presence makes a difference.
Future Bargaining Dates:
May 21, noon-3pm, MCB650
June 4, noon-3pm, Smith 296
June 25, noon-3pm, MCB650
July 2, noon-3pm, Smith 338
Here is a monograph on mandatory vs permissive subjects of bargaining
Interested in working on the Strike Strategy Committee?
Save the Date
Date: Wednesday May 29, 2013. 1 pm.
Location: To Be Determined
RSVP to Strike Strategy Committee Leadership (click to send email)