There’s More

Posted: December 4, 2014 in Uncategorized

After reading the TA (Tentative Agreement), I can now say that my understanding as posted prior, was, unfortunately, correct.  And, there’s more.

1.  “The District and the Federation agree that any revision to the division workload, including course caps/maximum enrollment in compliance with 5.8 shall be implemented by the District and shall not be subject to negotiations.”

The union has given up its legal right to negotiate course caps!

2.  The Workload Committee is being raised from the dead with members appointed by the union, senate, and district.  The Academic Senate has no role whatsoever under EERA in faculty workload, yet that is now changed at Cuesta.  The Committee will be chaired by the VPAA.  If there is no agreement on FTEF/FTES targets, “the Vice President of Academic Affairs shall set the targets for each division.”

Since the union has given up its right to negotiate load to a committee, the Academic Senate–not our exclusive representative–has an equal vote on a purely bargaining matter.

3.  Temporary faculty office hours can no longer be counted as flex credit.

4.  And, as we told you, “There shall be no negotiation re-openers for the 2014-2015 academic year.”

These two 1% increases are all we’re going to get from 2013-2016–a three year span.  As a local example, I think Poly is getting something like 8% over three years, and that was low.  These are not uncommon figures for those community colleges who bargain multi-year contracts.  If you’re going to give up the right to bargain for the current year, you normally want to get something for it.

5.  Finally, is the following language regarding the 2014-15 salary increase of 1% clear to you?:

“Unit members employed as of January 20, 2015 shall be eligible for this increase.”

Yes, the devil is in the details.

  1. lcurtis2012 says:

    Just read this. I don’t understand why they say the bit about employed as of January 2015. Maybe they mean new hires after that date won’t be eligible for the same rate of pay? (horrible if so) Doesn’t make sense.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s