Signs of Progress
On Tuesday, we signed tentative agreements (TAs) with the administration on:
- removing language from the contract that is now out of compliance with the Supreme Court’s Janus decision, which no longer allows public sector public sector unions to collect fair-share fees from those they represent
- removing a side-letter in the contract that had the Faculty Senate determine which subcommittee of the University Tenure and Promotion Advisory Committee a tenure case is assigned to; the candidate for tenure can now make the request
- the promotion of librarians to L4, the highest possible rank
We are in agreement with the administration and at our next session should be able to sign TAs on:
- a new fact-finding step in grievances
- sick-leave for librarians
Following significant push-back from our side, the administration has withdrawn their proposal to remove academic professionals and program directors from the TAUP bargaining unit. In return, they requested language that will allow them to petition the PA Labor Relations Board in the future to argue their case there, which then can do regardless of whether there is language in the contract about it or not. In addition, we believe we will settle all of the non-compensation issues for TAUP’s academic professionals at our next session, including a shortened probation period, greater clarity in job descriptions and career path, and merit procedures.
There were useful discussions on adjunct evaluations, the public posting of full-time jobs, the clarification of merit procedures for full-time faculty on the research track, and limits on the use of student feedback forms in personnel decisions.
In addition to withdrawing their proposal to remove APs and program directors from the bargaining unit, the administration has dropped its proposal to remove members’ ability to grieve and arbitrate health and safety issues.
To reciprocate and show good faith with the administration after their withdrawal of these proposals, the union withdrew our intellectual property proposal. Though there are important issues that need to be addressed in this area, we believe many concerns can be pursued through the meet-and-discuss provision in the contract.
So we are marking progress together, and hope the spirit of cooperation that led to it can be maintained, but this does not obscure the seriousness of the issues still on the table:
- Job security for contingent faculty: while the two sides continue to trade proposals on adjuncts and non-tenure track faculty, the administration has not moved at all on providing greater job security.
- Increased tenure-track hiring: the current contract contains a mutual commitment to a “sizable complement of tenure-track faculty.” We have repeatedly asked the administration to clarify their understanding of that language in light of the clear and precipitous decline in tenure-track hiring at Temple, which leaves Temple with a lower percentage of full-time faculty who are tenure-track than almost all other public research 1 universities and most other schools. They have not acknowledged that this is a problem or provided any clarification on their interpretation of the contract language.
- Faculty Diversity: We have presented statistics that indicate the need for the administration to devote more resources to hiring and retaining a diverse faculty. The administration has stated that hiring is a management right, and that they will not discuss it with the union. Since there is an Affirmative Action article in the union contract, it has been accepted as an area where the union and administration can have discussions, and we intend to pursue them further.
- Limitations on demands made on NTTs: Full-time non-tenure track faculty in two colleges are being required to engage in the tri-partite mission of research, teaching, and service, which is in violation of the union contract. We have proposed language to clarify and strengthen the prohibition that exist in the contract. The administration has counterproductively proposed language that would allow NTT contracts that would include all of these duties.
- Protections for faculty in cases of dismissal: The administration has proposed moving tenure-track faculty from the current robust termination procedure, to the less secure process that currently covers NTTs. TAUP has rejected this proposal by countering that all full-time faculty should be protected by a more deliberate process. This provision came into the contract in 2004. The administration has proposed the removal of current contract language on several issues. We are not interested in bargaining away hard-won rights for our members.
Economics Still to Be Discussed
The President and Provost’s most recent update states that “the parties have agreed to turn their attention to proposals on pay and benefits only after sufficient progress has been made on these other proposals.” Though this was discussed, TAUP did not agree to this process, and no agreement was reached. We intend to continue working on non-economic issues, but we also believe with the contract expiration date of October 15th fast approaching, the sides need to know where they stand on wages and benefits.
On the afternoon of October 4th, we plan to present our economic proposals on raises, healthcare, pension parity for NTTs, child care, tuition benefits at other schools and other issues that are likely to require much discussion . The administration is under no obligation to present their benefits and compensation proposals until they wish to do so.