EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Your UAOSU bargaining team and the administration team met at 9am-noon on Wednesday, July 10 and 9am-1pm on Tuesday, July 16. In the first session, we passed 3 counterproposals to the administration team: Grievance Procedure, Union Rights, and Non-Discrimination and Respectful Workplace. The administration team passed 3 counterproposals: Personnel Records, Dues Deduction, and Letter of Agreement: External Review Letters associated with the Promotion Process. We reached tentative agreement on all 3 of the counterproposals brought by the administration team. In the second session, we passed Leaves and Benefits and the administration team passed Union Rights, Non-Discrimination, and Grievances. We came to a tentative agreement on Union Rights. This marks three consecutive bargaining sessions in which we have reached tentative agreement on articles, clearing the way for us to focus on some of the major issues that we still have to resolve. We plan to bring Compensation this Thursday, July 25 – please stop by to show your support.
UPCOMING SESSIONS
Use the links below to add these to your calendar.
- Thurs July 25 12-4pm (Cascade Hall 120)
- Wed July 31 9am-1pm (Cascade Hall 120)
- Fri Aug 16 9-11am (location TBD)
- Thurs Aug 22 9am-12:30pm (location TBD)
FULL UPDATE
The first session began with the administration team passing their counterproposals. The first of these, a Letter of Agreement (LoA) pertaining to external review letters associated with the promotion process, eliminates the requirement for external review letters for the promotion dossiers of non-professorial faculty (i.e., Instructors, Faculty Research Assistants, and Research Associates). We had already reached agreement on this in principle, and indeed the policy has already been implemented for the current promotion cycle; however, we still had disagreement regarding the role for the union in putting that language into policy. The administration’s current proposal had moved toward our position in this iteration, guaranteeing the union the opportunity to weigh in on whether new policy language captures the spirit of our agreement in a way that is fair to faculty.
Similarly, the administration team had made steps toward us in their counterproposals on Dues Deduction and Personnel Records. In Dues Deduction, the administration team agreed to follow legal obligations for payroll deductions other than standard dues payments. In Personnel Records, the administration team agreed to respond to any request for personnel records within fourteen days with available records and a timeline for any additional material. For all three of these counterproposals, the administration’s movement toward us was sufficient for us to reach tentative agreement.
The union team then passed a counterproposal on Grievance Procedure. We are continuing to propose language that would allow a faculty member to file a grievance in response to an academic judgment that was arrived at improperly and had a demonstrably negative impact on their working conditions. While we respect the importance of academic judgment, we think it is crucial to ensure that evaluations are based on evidence, and therefore believe that faculty should have the ability to challenge evaluations that are demonstrably capricious or arbitrary
In Non-Discrimination and Respectful Workplace, we continue to seek to be able to include allegations of bullying in a grievance for a non-bullying matter if the allegations of bullying are relevant to the grievance. Finally, in Union Rights, we are still seeking to add language that would ensure that faculty members are not subject to retaliation if approved for release time to do service for our union.
In the second session, the administration started by passing Union Rights. They struck one line from our previous proposal which asserted that UAOSU members could not be prevented from taking release time. The administration team claimed that this line was redundant, that they had clearly affirmed that our union has the right to decide how to allocate our release time and the administration will administer that, no matter the concerns of individual supervisors or units. While we are disappointed that the administration team is unwilling to codify in our contract the process we have worked out together, we secured a clear commitment to address any problems and were able to come to tentative agreement on this article.
The administration team then passed their counter on Non-discrimination. They continue to cut the idea of a “respectful workplace” and once again declined language that would allow a grievant to include bullying as a fact in a grievance about a separate contract violation.
However, in their counter on Grievances, the administration made some movement on this issue. They proposed language that would allow the grievant and employer more flexibility in routing grievances that include elements of discrimination, harassment, or bullying as just part of a larger grievance. The administration team also offered compromise language that would allow us to add new, related information to an existing grievance rather than have to file a second grievance. The administration team proposed to replace explicit reference to EOA with “appropriate office” – we asked why and did not receive a clear answer. The administration team continues to strike any language that would clarify the limits of academic judgment when it is capricious or arbitrary. They also continue to strike language about not having the same Employee and Labor Relations representative involved at each step of a grievance, although they acknowledged our concern and said they’re willing to work towards a solution.
We presented Benefits. We continue to propose that post-doctoral scholar healthcare be covered at 95%, with administration covering the full administrative fees, to match the rest of our bargaining unit. We reintroduced a section on retiree benefits, as we believe this rewards loyalty and long service for faculty. We re-proposed our language preventing the increase of parking fees for faculty and expanding the tuition reduction (staff fee privilege) in ways that would support faculty with multiple family members taking OSU courses at the same time. For international faculty, we continue to seek limitations on how a supervisor can discuss visa issues with faculty in order to prevent a case in which supervisors use a faculty member’s visa status as a source of pressure or intimidation. While we appreciate the administration’s desire to hear about this kind of problem when it occurs, international faculty may feel extremely vulnerable and are unlikely to seek out conflict. In Leaves, we continue to push to expand sabbatical leave beyond tenure track faculty, because it is important for all faculty to have opportunities for professional development that will benefit OSU and its students. We also continue to push for higher percentages of salary support during sabbatical, which would make these leaves accessible to more faculty.
We have now had three bargaining sessions in a row in which we reached tentative agreement on articles. There are still major areas of disagreement with regard to issues such as Compensation and Workload, and much work remains to be done on those articles; however, we are seeing encouraging signs that it is possible for the administration team and your union team to work together toward agreement.
The next bargaining session is 12-4pm on Thursday, July 25 in Cascade Hall 120. Even if you can only drop by for half an hour, your attendance matters: show the administration that faculty are watching this process.
You can find a list of the currently scheduled bargaining sessions, as well as read our updates and proposals at uaosu.org/bargaining.
Our power in negotiations comes from all of us working together as a united faculty. Becoming a member is the first step in supporting your bargaining team and securing a strong second contract . You can become a member online by going to uaosu.org/join.
In solidarity,
Bill Thomas and Kelly McElroy for Your Bargaining Team