Tag: negotiations 2019

Progress: Discrimination, AP Merit, Retrenchment, Office Space 

On Tuesday, October 22nd and Thursday, October 24th, the union and the administration met and made progress on several issues:

  • Language was crafted that both sides could agree to on the contract language covering discrimination grievances, and a tentative agreement has been signed on the issue, preserving our members’ rights.
  • Both sides have also been able to work out issues in regard to the AP merit process, and a TA has been signed.
  • Retrenchment:  A tentative agreement has been signed to acknowledge the specific place of full-time non-tenure track faculty should the university declare a financial emergency and seek to layoff faculty.
  • The Adjunct Office Space Committee, which convened as a labor-management committee following the ratification of the first adjunct contract, will continue with a focus on office space issues for all CBU members.A tentative agreement has been signed.

 

Additional Progress: Adjunct Proposals

The Adjunct Appointment, Evaluation and Job Security proposal moved forward significantly on Thursday. After multiple shifts in language from the union, on Thursday, the administration modified a number of its positions, putting us very close to an agreement that will advance the professional standing of adjuncts. It will increase support for their teaching from within their departments, and offer a path to increase job stability through the ability to request an evaluation for the purposes of promotions, raises and/or multi-semester appointments. There are a few final details to work through before both sides can come to agreement, but many of the largest obstacles have been overcome.

 

Major Issues Remain:  Healthcare, Wages, Family-Friendly Policies, NTT Job Stability, Compensation.

The administration has made it clear that their key priority is increasing healthcare costs.  They have proposed significant increases to the percentage of premiums all full time members would pay, with families bearing a considerable burden, with increases in premiums of over $1000 a year.  While the administration has proposed a new tier for those with only one dependent that would cut premiums for some members, the new deductibles they have proposed would eat significantly into these savings–in network, $250 for individuals and $500 for plus-one and families, double that out of network.  They have also proposed doubling the co-pay for specialists to $40.

 

TAUP will be pushing back against these punishing proposals while pushing for more family-friendly policies: 

  • Support for childcare
  • Tuition benefits at other schools
  • Parental leave for librarians and Academic Professionals
  • Healthcare benefits that support families rather than punishing them

To help TAUP fight the administration’s anti-family proposal. Email Jenna at jsiegelaft@gmail.com.

 

Compensation

TAUP has made significant moves in our compensation proposals, the administration’s proposals on wages remain below projected inflation, and they have not yet moved on other key proposals, among them  NTT job security, NTT pension parity, course releases for exceptional service, and others.  

 

NTT Job Stability

The administration is still not willing to take the most important step in helping to insure that NTTs who have taught for 3 years will have a degree of job stability.  Our proposal, which would trigger 3 year or longer renewals or explanations for non-renewal, will cost the university nothing. It follows what is already the general practice at many schools and colleges at Temple.  The university should take the final step in giving NTTs some contractual guarantees for their commitment and hard work.

 

Next Steps

Join us in  fighting for these proposals and the values they represent at the table.  

Have you attended open bargaining? Come  on Nov. 6th or Nov. 12th to show your support for these issues. RSVP 

 

Have you signed the petition urging the Board to agree to a Fair Contract?

If you want to know who is circulating the petition in your school/department, or if you’d like to circulate a petition to you colleagues, contact Jenna at jsiegelaft@gmail.com    

 

We know the administration can afford our proposals.  It’s time for them to say “yes.” 

 

Our Two Cents: Funding the New Contract

As we have shown, Temple is last among public Research 1 universities in the cents on every dollar of tuition and fees it spends on instruction.  To fund all of our proposals for wages and benefits, all Temple needs to do is add to the instructional budget less than 2￠on every dollar it collects from tuition and fees. 

That is a very reasonable demand when the Board still seems ready to spend millions  each year to service the debt it would take on in the funding of a football stadium. There are no guarantees that this would be matched by the savings coming from no longer having to pay the Eagles. 

It is a very reasonable demand when we see that the salary pool for the administrators in our bargaining unit identified as “executive/administrative and managerial” has increased by 32% from 2013-2018*. (The number of administrators in this highest category alone has increased nearly 26% during that same period.)  This more than doubles the percentage increase in the TAUP full-time salary pool and more than quadruples the percentage increase in full-time hires.  

Among the many signs of financial health, Temple’s own audited financials reveal that it has amassed $350 million in cash and cash equivalents, an increase of $150 million since 2014:

It is unclear to what degree this money was amassed from one-time or recurrent expenses, and we believe the administration should offer an explanation for the source of these funds. However, since 63% of Temple’s revenue aside from patient care comes from tuition and fees (and patient care in FY 2018 cost slightly over $100 million than it brought in), we would not be surprised if much of it came from this recurrent source.   

It would take a very small redirection of funds to properly compensate the people who teach the courses, direct the dissertations, do the research, guide the students in the library, and advise them.  We do not believe that there would be a need to raise tuition or cut other sectors of the university, as the administration alleges. It would require a long-overdue shift in priorities.

 

*This data is drawn from the Stairs Report / Commonwealth Reporting Requirements.  The numbers above narrow the data to the colleges and schools represented by TAUP, including the Library, and other core academic offices: Temple University Press, and the Offices of the Provost, the Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, and the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Studies.

 

Negotiations Update 9/26/19: Progress Despite Major Differences

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.  

Join us:
Open Bargaining:  Friday, October 4th at 9:30, when we present our compensation proposals Rsvp
contract expiration Rally:   Tuesday, October 15th from 1-2pm, mark the expiration of our current contract with guests City Councilwoman Helen Gym and State Representative Malcolm Kenyatta RSVP