CFA Bargaining 2006

BARGAINING
2006

CFA represents the instructional faculty, librarians, counselors and coaches who comprise Unit 3 among CSU employees. The union engages in collective bargaining under the terms spelled out in the state labor relations law that covers us, known as the Higher Education Employees Relations Act.

The contract that results from bargaining covers salary, benefits, workload and many other aspects of our working lives.You may request a printed copy of the contract from your CFA chapter, or you may view it as a PDF file on this Web site. Contract.

If you have a problem you believe is addressed in the contract, contact your campus chapter to make an appointment with a Faculty Rights Rep. on your campus who can help you. See a listing of Faculty Rights Representatives.

This year, CFA and the CSU administration will negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement—known as a “successor contract”—for the faculty. Reports from the CFA Bargaining Team will be added to this page periodically.

See the issues we are working on during contract negotiations with the CSU. Click here.

Bargaining Update
December 19, 2006

Mediation ends; contract talks move to next step

As first reported in yesterday’s Special Headlines, mediation between CFA and the CSU administration has reached a stalemate and will move to the next stage.

On December 15, state-appointed Mediator Tony Butka declared mediation between CFA and the CSU has failed to break the impasse in contract negotiations. He said he will certify the parties to the next phase in the legally mandated bargaining process known as fact-finding.

Fact-finding is the non-binding process by which a state-appointed third partymakes recommendations to resolve the impasse.

Fact-finding probably will begin in mid-January.

CFA Members to Vote to Authorize Strike Action

While the CFA bargaining team hopes a fair contract agreement can be reached through fact-finding, the previous actions of the of the administration make such a settlement seem unlikely. With this in mind CFA is preparing for job actions and to hold a vote early next semester to authorize a strike.

When this important vote takes place, only CFA members will be able to cast a ballot. Although non-members will be asked to honor picket lines and participate, voting is a member-only privilege in CFA.

In the days to come more information will be provided to the faculty regarding the strike vote. In the meantime, CFA encourages non-members to join CFA and get involved in your campus CFA chapter.

If you are not sure about your membership status, simply complete another membership form at the CFA Member Help Desk. Go to http://www.calfac.org and click on “Join CFA.”

CTA Passes Resolution in Support of CFA

The California Teachers Association board unanimously approved a resolution of solidarity with CFA during their board meeting last week. The resolution reads:

Whereas, the California Faculty Association has engaged in protracted bargaining for more than eighteen months with the California State University Administration,

Whereas, CFA is in impasse dealing with an administration that has bargained repressively and punitively,

Whereas, CFA may be faced with no options other than statewide actions and legislative intervention,

Be it resolved that the California Teachers Association (CTA) will do all that it can to support the California Faculty Association (CFA) in this struggle for a fair and just contract.

Bargaining Update
December 18, 2006

Mediation Ends; Faculty Contract Talks Move to
Fact-Finding Phase

CFA Prepares to Take Strike Authorization Vote

Last Friday, December 15, Mediator Tony Butka declared mediation between CFA and the CSU administration ended. He said he will certify the parties to the next phase in the legally mandated bargaining process known as fact-finding.

Fact-finding is the non-binding process by which a state-appointed third party makes recommendations to resolve the impasse.

After five days of meetings, the mediator advised both bargaining teams that, given the unwillingness of either of the parties to change positions on key issues, he did not see an advantage to continuing the mediation process.

Despite hopes to the contrary, CFA’s bargaining team anticipated this outcome when Chancellor Reed revealed his decision to delegate Assistant Vice Chancellor Sam Strafaci to represent the Chancellor’s Office in mediation.

The CFA bargaining team has found that Strafaci is not troubled at seeing the relationship between the faculty and the CSU administration spiral downward. CFA’s bargaining team holds him responsible for an attempt in mediation to disavow key agreements reached in earlier negotiations.

CFA Members To Vote to Authorize Strike Actions

When the vote to authorize strike actions takes place early next year, only CFA members will be able to vote. Although non-members will be asked to honor picket lines and participate, voting is a member-only privilege in CFA, as it is in almost all public and private-sector labor unions.

More information will be provided regarding ballot procedures and voting dates when the time comes early next term. Meanwhile, all non-members are urged to join CFA to ensure your right to vote. Membership also demonstrates your support for the faculty in our uphill battle to negotiate an equitable contract that includes a salary increase reflective of the central role faculty play in delivering a quality education to CSU students.

If you are not sure about your membership status, simply complete another membership form at the CFA Member Help Desk. Go to http://www.calfac.org and click on "Join CFA."

By mutual between the parties, the current contract has been extended through January 31, 2007.

Bargaining Update
December 12, 2006

Mediation Continues Friday
The CFA bargaining team will meet with the administration Friday for another day of mediation.

The session, over which a state-appointed mediator will preside, will be the fourth scheduled mediation date between the parties. After Friday’s session the mediator will render a decision on whether further meetings between the groups would be productive in breaking the impasse.

If the mediator rules that the impasse cannot be broken through mediation, negotiations will then move into the next stage, known as fact-finding.

Fact-finding, which would begin in mid-January, is a non-binding process in which both sides present their cases to a neutral, state-appointed arbitrator who will make recommendations on how the impasse could be broken.

Bargaining Update
December 5, 2006

Next Mediation Date Upcoming
The fourth and final scheduled mediation date between CFA and the CSU administration will be held Friday, Dec 15.

After that session the mediator will render a decision on whether further meetings between the groups would be productive.

If the mediator rules that the impasse cannot be broken through bargaining, fact-finding will then be initiated. Fact-finding is the non-binding process by which a state-appointed third party makes recommendations to resolve the impasse.

Meanwhile, CFA and the CSU administration have again agreed to a one-month extension of the current contract.

Bargaining Update
November 28, 2006

Administration continues disinformation campaign
CSU faculty received an email on Tuesday or Wednesday from Sam Strafaci at the Chancellor’s Office reporting on the mediation session. (On some campuses the e-mail came to you over the campus president’s name.)

Strafaci’s report is just the latest installment in the administration’s continuing disinformation campaign that includes a couple of reoccurring themes: 1. The Administration claims it has already made a very generous salary proposal. 2. The Administration claims CFA’s counter proposal is unaffordable. 3. The Administration claims that higher pay for faculty will come out of your own campus budgets.

Click here for CFA's breakdown of Starfaci's "report"

Bargaining Update
November 7, 2006

Mediation session opens tomorrow; keep the fax heat on
Chancellor Reed
With collective bargaining between CFA and the CSU administration at formal impasse and job actions looming, mediation mandated by state public employee law begins tomorrow, Nov. 8.

CFA’s Stop the Ripoffs campaign will give Chancellor Charles Reed no respite until he responds to our insistence to negotiate fairly and in good faith with the CSU’s faculty and student-services professionals. Let Reed know what you think by taking a few moments to visit http://stoptheripoffs.org and send him a fax. If you’ve faxed him before, fax him again!

Bargaining Update
October 24, 2006

Membership vote for strike action authorized
By unanimous vote of the more than 100 delegates gathered in Sacramento, the CFA Assembly on Sunday authorized a membership vote to take job actions to break through an impasse in collective bargaining talks with the CSU administration.

Leaving open options—but no ambiguity as to the seriousness of the situation—the Assembly resolution defines job actions as “rolling walkouts, two-day strikes and/or a system wide strike.”

Combining perspective with tactical determination, CFA President John Travis characterized the Assembly’s decision as a logical ratcheting up of the resolve of the CSU’s 23,000 professors, lecturers, librarians, counselors and coaches.

“At this historic moment, the entire CSU system is in jeopardy because of a lapse of leadership by the university’s management and trustees,” Travis said. “They have engaged in unfair labor practices, stonewalled bargaining and brought us to this juncture.

“Our bargaining problems are symptomatic of a much larger ailment. I believe that it is time for CSU students, faculty and staff to take a stand.

“All of us are increasingly frustrated over inadequate pay proposals while top executives receive large pay and benefit increases and outgoing executives enjoy lavish golden parachutes. The latest round of these outrages was exposed by the news media just this summer. This administration and board are not providing leadership that is focused on the classroom and our 400,000-plus students.

“In the eight years of Charles Reed’s chancellorship, he has continued the march of his predecessor, Barry Munitz, toward privatization of the public universities. Reed puts his corporate and political relationships ahead of the CSU’s needs. The result has been plunging state support for the CSU, and still more skyrocketing fees for students of a crippled institution that is losing teachers and basic resources.

“That—as well as our determined advocacy for our member’s interests—is what is at stake for CFA in the months ahead.”

The Assembly resolution culminated a weekend of reports and discussions on the last 18 inconclusive months of bargaining—which led the state Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) to certify an impasse and authorize the beginning of mediation under PERB’s auspices. (Job actions by CFA will become legally permissible after mediation and the next statutory step, known as “fact finding,” are exhausted without a settlement.)

Deftly adding a touch of humor to the somber proceedings, Chapter President Susan Green and other delegates from Chico presented a parody entitled “Wheel of Misfortune,” which included an “Executive Pick-a-Perk” board.

In a three-part presentation, San Bernardino Chapter President Tom Meisenhelder addressed the crippling corporate influence of the Reed administration on the state of the university, while statewide Associate Vice President-Lecturers Elizabeth Hoffman talked about its negative impact on the faculty. Dominguez Hills Chapter President David Bradfield’s remarks focused on the plight of students.

Bradfield painted the whole grim picture as an “integrated attack.” He said, “Only the executive friends of Reed, and Reed himself, are doing well.”

“If you doubt how faculty and student fates are tied together, ask the faculty and students at Humboldt State, East Bay or Dominguez Hills,” Bradfield added. “Ask the students who carry heavy debt and can’t get their classes. Ask the lecturers who are no longer teaching on those campuses. Ask the remaining faculty who are now teaching classes that have quadrupled in size.

“We’re fighting for the kind of higher education system we will need in the future, one that is affordable, one that provides increased—rather than decreased—access to quality education. It is up to every faculty member to take a stand.”

CFA’s public announcement of the Assembly resolution authorizing a membership vote to take job actions is viewable at http://www.calfac.org/resolutions.html

Bargaining Update
October 23, 2006

First Step toward Job Actions

Over the weekend, CFA delegates took the first step toward job actions should a fair and equitable contract with the CSU administration not be reached.

On Sunday, the 65th CFA Assembly unanimously approved a resolution authorizing the CFA bargaining team to conduct a general membership vote to approve possible job actions.

To read the full text of the job action resolution as well as CFA’s official news release visit: http://www.calfac.org/releases.html

Bargaining Update
October 17, 2006

Mediation dates set
In response to certification of an impasse in CFA’s negotiations with the CSU administration, the following mediation dates have now been set in accordance with state public employee labor law:

Nov. 8-10
Nov. 20-21
(if needed) Dec. 1 and Dec. 4

CFA President John Travis noted that the union is eager to get talks moving again. At the same time he added a note of caution: “Historically, mediation has seldom worked between the CSU and its unions. So we are preparing for everything that must be done in the event this step doesn’t succeed in breaking the impasse.”

CFA Assembly will consider escalation in bargaining fight
More than 150 delegates from all CSU campuses will converge in Sacramento this week for the 65th CFA General Assembly. The Assembly will hear reports on bargaining and politics, and consider escalating actions against an increasingly hostile CSU administration.

CFA President Travis predicted an historic call to action. He commented: “I know the delegates are coming to town in a fed-up mood, angry over executive pay increases and golden parachutes and the stalled bargaining, and they want to talk through raising the stakes in an already nasty fight.”

Bargaining Update
October 11, 2006

Mediation set for end of October

CFA and the CSU administration are set to begin mediation on stalled bargaining talks at the end of the month.

The California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) certified in late September that bargaining had reached an impasse and a state mediator has been assigned to the case. Now the two sides will have an opportunity to see if a neutral third party can help bring about an agreement.

While bargaining proceeds via mediation, CFA and the CSU agreed last week to extend the current contract through the end of October.

Bargaining Update
October 2, 2006

Impasse certified, current contract extendeed through the end of October

California’s Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), the judicial administrative agency charged with administering the collective bargaining statutes covering employees of California's public schools and colleges, certified last week that negotiations between CFA and the CSU have reached an impasse.

PERB is now in the process of appointing a mediator who will hear the case.

While bargaining proceeds via mediation, CFA and the CSU agreed to extend the current contract through the end of October.

Bargaining Update
September 26, 2006

Bargaining nears impasse; mediation on contract negotiations is pending

CFA President John Travis, clearly fed up with the chancellor's obfuscation and "virtual" salary offer, said today, "If he will guarantee us a 25% raise over three years with no strings attached, I'll recommend it. Otherwise he should stop playing with numbers, stop lying about what is in his offer. And he should make his bargaining team sit down and bargain.

"This CSU administration needs to tackle the contract for the 22,000 faculty with the same seriousness it's using to address the pay and perks of 27 top executives."

As reported last Friday in a special CFA Headlines, CFA urged Chancellor Reed to drop the disinformation game and get his team back to the bargaining table where the sides can negotiate a contract. Instead, his team walked out of talks a second time, again after CFA attempted to bargain by making a salary counter-proposal.

And now the administration is using CSU money to run ads in newspapers denouncing CFA while at the same time petitioning the Public Employment Relations Board for an impasse in bargaining.

CFA will not oppose the petition to impasse, which simply means an impartial mediator will be assigned to try to get the talks back on track. However, CFA believes progress could still be made if the chancellor's negotiators were willing.

The ads contain "virtual" information about the chancellor's salary offer. Faculty members could count on only a fraction of that money.

Bargaining Update
September 22, 2006

Chancellor’s Office steps up effort to perpetuate disinformation

CFA Bargaining Team urges Chancellor Reed:
‘Get your team back to the bargaining table’

CFA is prepared for bargaining, mediationor whatever it takes to get an agreement.

Ads appeared this week in student newspapers, apparently placed by the CSU Chancellor’s Office, spreading the same disinformation about bargaining for a faculty contract that was emailed last week to the faculty by campus presidents.

In the ad the Chancellor appears to be aiming to divide students from the faculty as part of their media campaign to pressure CFA to settle for a contract that does not improve the broken salary structure or respond to other key issues that the faculty face. We can expect to see more efforts like this as we continue to press for a fair contract.

The unity between students and the faculty has been forged over years, speaking out together against the administration’s unrepentant attempts to shift the cost of education onto the students, faculty and staff through steep fee increases and below-market faculty and staff salaries.

Faculty members can be proud of taking a strong stance for accessible, affordable, quality education for our students.

Instruction remains our top priority.

In contrast, the Chancellor responds by defending the misdirection of scarce CSU funds to award departing executives, to elevate top executive pay already valued at more than $400,000 a year, to direct managers’ paid time to real estate development deals, to increase the proportion of CSU personnel in management, and to hire expensive consultants and lawyers to drag out bargaining of contracts and arbitration of grievances.

Now the administration has stooped to spending scarce university money on advertising their alleged bargaining positions in lieu of working at the bargaining table as is the intent and requirement under the Higher Education Employment Relations Act.

“Bargaining is a back and forth process,” says John Travis, CFA President. “But when we respond to their proposals, the Chancellor’s team keeps walking away in a huff. Sooner or later, they have to learn how to suck it up, stick to it, and keep exchanging proposals until we reach an agreement.

“Sooner would be better for the faculty and students. And cheaper for the CSU, so the money wasted on consultants and lawyers can go to the classrooms instead.”

To help the faculty wade through the complexities of the Chancellor’s advertised bargaining position, we recap information sent previously by CFA to the faculty:

SALARY

CHANCELLOR’S SALARY OFFER

The Chancellor’s Office claims they have offered the faculty a 24.87% salary increase.

In reality, most faculty members would get far less.

The raises would be spread over four years, beginning with 2006/07.

The raises would be contingent on the governor honoring the compact funding.

The raises also would be contingent on the governor and legislature providing an extra 1% in state funding above the compact.

The raises also would be contingent on CFA signing an agreement not to criticize the CSU budget proposal, and to support all elements of the proposal including student fee increases.

CFA’S ANALYSIS OF THE CHANCELLOR’S SALARY OFFER

This is an excellent example of the Chancellor’s double-speak on salaries. Had the actual salary offer been nearly 25% over four years for all faculty, CFA would have been delighted.

However, when you clear away the Enron-style accounting, here is what most faculty really could count on in the administration salary offer:

2006-2007 3 % GSI
2007-2008 3.53% GSI
2008-2009 3.84% GSI
2009-2010 4.5% GSI

REAL TOTAL 14.87% General Salary Increase over four years

SUBTRACT THE PURPORTED COST OF SSIs

The Chancellor’s offer requires that the faculty “purchase” an SSI (Service Step Increase) for some of our faculty with the GSIs of all. So, only those eligible for an SSI in any year would get that part of the raise. And everyone else’s raise would be reduced to “pay” for it.

CFA has long argued that, as in every other state agency, SSIs are self-funding. The CSU rejected our offer to share the cost of an independent financial investigation of the CSU budget to determine if we are correct or not.

Over the life of the contract, “purchasing” SSIs reduces the amount most faculty will receive by 3%.

SUBTRACT THE VALUE OF CONTINGENT FUNDING

The Chancellor’s offer also included 3% in “virtual” dollars.
While CFA has expended considerable time and money over the past three years attempting to restore much needed funding to the CSU, the Chancellor and the Trustees have opted to sit on their hands. Year after year, while faculty salaries stagnate and workload becomes staggering, they have assured the leaders in Sacramento that the system is “managing” with fewer dollars.

Notwithstanding their inaction on behalf of the system, the Chancellor asks us all to trust that he will somehow persuade the governor and legislature to provide an augmentation for our salaries.

Adding insult to injury, Reed demands that in exchange, CFA silence any criticism that we may have of the CSU’s overall budget even if it includes funding to increase already bloated executive salaries or more increases in student fees.

None of us can pay our bills with “virtual” dollars. As the fine print on the Chancellor’s offer says: “If no augmentation is achieved, the GSIs will be reduced by 1% for fiscal years 2007/08, 2008/09 and 2009/10.”

Remember, in 2005 campus presidents received on average a 14% salary increase in a single year. When combined with perks like a car and housing allowance the total increase was 19%.

SUBTRACT THE COST OF SO-CALLED INCENTIVE & EQUITY PAY

The Chancellor proposes to set aside 3 percent of the total salary increase offer, the 24.86 percent mentioned above, for “incentive” pay. The CSU proposal does not require the creation of new procedures to award incentive pay.

In their earlier offer there was to be a 1.5% pool of money distributed over two years of the contract. In this offer, the same 3% was stretched out over three years, hardly an improvement.

Moreover, the most recent program on the table would have given the administration full discretion over the distribution of these dollars and leave faculty members the ability to appeal only to the president if dissatisfied with their awards.

OTHER ISSUES

FERP

The Chancellor’s Office would reduce the maximum number of years a faculty member could use the Faculty Early Retirement Program from five to four years. They claim this would bring it into line with actual utilization. They report that the average faculty member is enrolled in this program for only three years.

The Chancellor has had an ongoing effort to kill a program that actually saves the university money. The California Faculty Association has no interest in eroding this successful program and Reed has shown no interest in alternatives like a buy-out for faculty who might wish to move to a FERP of fewer than five years.

HEALTH AND DENTAL BENEFITS

These issues were not on the table in the first place and it seems odd that they are mentioned in the summary of bargaining progress that appeared in emails and the ads in student newspapers.

Neither bargaining team has proposed changes to faculty eligibility for PERS retirement, which includes medical and dental benefits. Alls these benefits were won in bargaining for previous contracts.

It is true, as the Chancellor keeps saying, that CSU health and dental benefits are good. This speaks to the tremendous success of CalPERS, our retirement system. That is another reason we are proud that one of our own, CSU San Marcos business professor George Diehr, sits on the board that oversees CalPERS.

The Chancellor now is trying to include the value of these benefits in order to argue that he miraculously has closed the CPEC gap.

MATERNITY AND PATERNITY LEAVE

The CSU proposes a committee to evaluate current policies for maternity/paternity leave. At the moment, faculty members are eligible for 30 days of leave, which must be taken within 60 days of the birth or adoption of a child. Current CSU policy, which was won in bargaining previous contracts, is good, although it is not “the best offered by any university.”

Nevertheless, at the bargaining table, the CFA team found the Chancellor’s team to be absolutely intransigent on the issue of maternity/paternity leave and challenged CFA to find programs that are better than those provided by the CSU.

CFA’s research uncovered quite a few such programs in higher education and private industry that provide considerably more flexibility to new and prospective parents. Here again, CFA’s team tried to argue for creative solutions to this issue but the Chancellor’s response was to bury this family friendly issue in the committee mentioned above.

PARKING FEES

The Chancellor proposes that by the end of the four-year contract, faculty members will pay the same parking fees as students. He argues that the CSU faces increasing costs to operate and maintain campus parking facilities and believes that these costs are disproportionately borne by students.

The bargaining team was told that the issue of parking fees is of particular importance to Chancellor Reed; we only wished that faculty salaries ranked as high.

The sticking point is that while at some campuses parking fee increases are minor—a few dollars a month—at others they have risen $100 or more. Considering the size of the CSU’s salary offer, some faculty members could actually see their raises returned to the university in parking fees!

LECTURER RIGHTS

The Chancellor now proposes to maintain current lecturer employment rights. These are rights that have been won by CFA in bargaining previous contracts. When bargaining started this time around, the Chancellor wanted to curtail these hard-won rights.

CFA is quite pleased that the Chancellor has finally backed away from an effort to thoroughly undermine the workforce stability provided by our contract.

Bargaining Update
September 19, 2006

In last weekend’s bargaining session between the CFA and CSU administrators, the new news was the same as the old news. The Chancellor again failed to authorize adequate proposal.

Some progress actually was made by the CFA team, who worked diligently to create an amicable proposal that would induce some movement on the chancellor’s behalf. But after the CFA team and the CSU administration’s teams reconvened to hammer out specifics, the CSU left in somewhat of a huff, refusing to respond to any further offers.

On Monday morning the administration then petitioned PERB to move to impasse, which, if PERB agrees, simply means that an impartial mediator will try to get things moving again.

“They need to understand they don’t always get their way - that’s bargaining,” said CFA President John Travis. “We go back and forth trying to get an agreement. They have been ready to walk at the slightest disagreement. That’s not bargaining.”

MARK YOUR CALENDAR FOR CAMPUS BARGAINING MEETINGS

CFA is holding meetings on each campus to update members on bargaining. Join your CFA bargaining team members and statewide officers to learn about the current status of contract and salary negotiations.

The meetings feature a report on this summer’s marathon negotiations between the CFA and CSU bargaining teams, the administration’s bogus salary offer, and CFA’s proposed salary structure to close the CPEC pay gap.

These meetings are open to all faculty members. Please join us to help further this important dialogue. Check in with your campus CFA office to find out the time and location of your meeting, if it is not listed below. Contact information for your chapter can be found at: http://www.calfac.org/chapters.html

Campus bargaining meeting schedule:

Bakersfield Thursday, Oct. 5, 3:30

Dominguez Hills Tuesday, Sept. 26, 4 pm, &
Wednesday, Sept. 27, 11:30 am

East Bay Tuesday, Oct. 10, 12 pm, &

Wednesday, Oct. 11, 12 pm

Fresno Monday, Sept. 25, 12-2 pm, Student Union 311

Fullerton Tuesday, Sept. 26

Humboldt Monday, Sept. 25, 12-1 pm & 1-2 pm

Long Beach Thursday, Sept. 21, 4:30-6 pm, Chart Room

Los Angeles Wednesday, Oct 4, 12-1:30 pm &
Thursday, Oct 5, 9:30-11:30 am

Monterey Bay Tuesday, Sept. 26, 3-6 pm

Northridge Wednesday, Sept. 20, 12:30-2 pm

Pomona Tuesday, Oct. 17, 4-6pm

Sacramento Wednesday, Sept. 27, 4-6 pm

San Bernardino Wednesday, Oct. 11 11:30 am,
Sycamore Room &Thursday, Oct. 12 11:30 am, Sycamore Room

San Francisco Thursday, Sept. 28, 12-2 pm Rosa Parks
Student Center, Rm. D

Stanislaus Wednesday, Oct. 4, 11:00 am

Bargaining meetings have already taken place at Channel Islands, Chico, Los Angeles, Maritime, San Jose, San Marcos and Sonoma. If you missed a meeting, contact your campus CFA office for all the information. Contact information for your chapter can be found at: http://www.calfac.org/chapters.html

Bargaining Alert - Impasse Likely
September 15, 2006

Chancellor Refuses to Authorize Adequate Salary Proposal

At 3:30 PM on September 15, 2006, CFA’s latest efforts to reach a salary settlement with the CSU came to an end. Although the CSU administration had indicated that they had some significant movement to offer, the bargaining team was disappointed to discover that the administration had little to add to their previous proposal. After consulting with the Chancellor, the CSU team announced that they had offered all they were authorized to propose.

The administration’s latest proposal is based on the same Enron math as their previous one. Essentially, the approach was to increase the length of the contract rather than the quality of the economic offer.

After the administration shifted dollars around, the bottom-line that faculty could count on only increased by 5.6%, and that would not arrive in faculty pockets until the 2009/2010 academic year.

In the end the 9.25% over three years that faculty could rely on in the last offer became 14.87% over four years in the new offer. In addition, the 3% in “discretionary” money that would have been distributed over two years would now be stretched over three. Furthermore, the serious structural problems with compression for senior faculty and inversion for junior faculty remained unaddressed.

As with their earlier offer, the administration demanded that all SSIs be paid for from the General Salary Increase pool. As before, their offer included a “virtual” 1% in the second, third and fourth years contingent on additional allocations from the governor and on CFA’s unquestioning acceptance of the administration’s future budget proposals.

The facts surrounding CSU faculty salaries in recent years underscore the inadequacies of this latest salary package. Having gone since 2002 without a GSI (except for a 3.5% increase last July that barely matched inflation), all faculty need more than the 3% GSI the Chancellor is offering this year. Faculty who were hired in 2003 and have not yet received a single SSI symbolize the extreme needs of our newer faculty.

Although the Chancellor’s offer was unacceptable, the CFA bargaining team was determined to make every effort to reach a fair agreement. To keep the process going, the CFA team offered to lower its proposal for a first-year GSI from 4.5% to 4.0% in addition to an SSI and equity money. The CFA team also added a fourth year to its economic proposal in an attempt to elicit movement on the Chancellor’s part and open the road to a settlement.

Unfortunately, the Chancellor refused to budge. The administration’s team made clear that they lacked authorization to make any further proposals. At this point it is likely that the parties will move into impasse and begin the statutory process of mediation and fact-finding.

Reflecting on the end of this phase of negotiations, CFA President John Travis commented, “The Chancellor’s continued insensitivity to faculty salary problems contrasts sharply with his efforts to champion the cause of underpaid executives. It’s galling for faculty to see that the next Board of Trustees meeting will include yet another discussion of executive compensation when we cannot reach an agreement on even a modest GSI for faculty this year.”

Considering where we go from here, Vice President Lillian Taiz suggested, “Actions speak louder than words. We have told the Chancellor and his team repeatedly that faculty are enraged at their inadequate salaries, but Charlie obviously remains unmoved. From this point, faculty actions will have to speak louder than words. Only action away from the table will lead to action at the table.”

Bargaining Update
September 12, 2006

Come join your CFA bargaining team members and statewide officers for an update on contract and salary negotiations. Meetings are being held on each campus and feature a report on this summer’s marathon negotiations between the CFA and CSU bargaining teams, the administration’s bogus salary increase offer, and CFA’s proposed salary structure to close the CPEC pay gap.

These meetings are open to all faculty members. Please join us to help further this important dialogue. Check in with your campus’s CFA office to find out the time and location of your meeting. Click here for contact information for your chapter.

Campus bargaining meeting schedule:

Bakersfield Thurs. Oct. 5, 3:30

Dominguez Hills Tue. Sept. 26, 4 pm &
Wed. Sept. 27, 11:30 am

East Bay Tues. Oct. 10, 12 pm &
Wed. Oct. 11, 12 pm

Fullerton Wed. Sept. 26

Humboldt Tues. Sept. 25, 12-1 pm & 1-2 pm

Long Beach Thurs. Sept. 21, 5:30-6:30 pm,
Chart Room

Maritime Wed. Sept. 13

Monterey Bay Tues. Sept. 26, 3-6 pm

Northridge Wed. Sept. 20, 12:30-2 pm

Pomona Wed. Oct. 18

Sacramento Wed. Sept. 27, 4-6 pm

San Bernardino Wed. Oct. 11 11:30 am, Sycamore Room & Thur. Oct. 12 11:30 am, Sycamore Room

San Francisco Thurs. Sept. 28, 12-2 pm Rosa Parks Student Center Rm. D

Bargaining meetings have already taken place at Channel Islands, Chico, LA, San Jose, San Marcos and Sonoma. Contact your campus CFA office to get the pertinent information if you missed it.

DID YOU READ YOUR BARGAINING NEWSLETTER?

By now you should have received the CFA bargaining team’s letter about the newest contract proposals. The letter addresses this summer’s week-long bargaining marathon, the truth about Chancellor Reed’s salary offer, and CFA’s plans for the bargaining. If you have not yet read the letter, click here to view.

If you did not receive a copy of the letter at your home, it means your mailing address or other contact information is not up to date with CFA. The CFA helpdesk is a resource where you can: join CFA, update your contact information, and find out how to get your questions answered by CFA leadership, get information of grievances and much more. Click here to access the CFA helpdesk.

BARGAINING UPDATE
August 29, 2006

The CFA and CSU administration bargaining teams still have not met since the weeklong negotiating session in late July broke down. At that time, the administration team walked out rather than respond to CFA’s salary counter-proposal.

Representatives of the sides have, however, had informal conversations to explore ways to get the teams back to the bargaining table. Meanwhile, the CFA Bargaining Team continues to hold in its pocket an authorization from CFA’s Board of Directors earlier this month to go to the Public Employees Relations Board requesting a declaration of impasse. Such a declaration would move the bargaining process to mediation.

Meanwhile, CFA has agreed to extend the current collective bargaining agreement through the end of September. CFA will act on the extension letter tomorrow (Wednesday).

WOULD YOU TRADE FREE SPEECH FOR A 1% RAISE?

Most of us put a high premium on academic freedom and free speech. That is why CFA negotiators were taken aback by a line in the CSU administration bargaining team’s now-defunct salary plan put on the table for a brief time in July (and reprised in Assistant Vice Chancellor Sam Strafaci’s email on faculty salary in August).

The proposal read that 1% of the faculty’s General Salary Increase would be “contingent” on additional funding provided by the legislature over and above the money in the chancellor’s and governor’s funding compact.

Past performance by the chancellor’s office suggests this is not a serious proposal. While CFA, students, staff and supporters have been at the legislature arguing for more funding for the CSU, the administration and Trustees have been MIA.

But the contingency went further than that. The deal would require CFA to support the entire state budget request by management regardless of other provisions included. In other words, for a 1% raise, CFA would be bound by the contract not only to a gag order against critiquing the Trustees’ budget plan, but also to a requirement to support it.

That would be regardless of whether CFA found the plan lacking in adequate funding for instruction. That would be uncritical support of increases in student fees; and the Trustees and governor already say they will raise student fees 10% a year in the future.

“There is no reason to agree to a demand like this,” said Andy Merrifield (political science, Sonoma), member of the CFA Bargaining Team. “Demands like this are what make a person wonder whether the people on the CSU bargaining team actually know anything about a university at all.”

BARGAINING UPDATE
August 22, 2006

Laying the procedural groundwork for possible future job actions, the CFA Board of Directors voted Saturday to authorize the Bargaining Team to move toward a formal declaration of an “impasse” in contract talks, should that step become necessary.

The Board’s move complies with California’s Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA) while giving the union maximum tactical maneuverability in the event that talks do not get restarted following the breakdown of last month’s marathon session on salary and workload issues.

CFA President John Travis said: “I’m deeply disappointed we weren’t able to move the administration to show the flexibility they led us to believe they’d exercise at the bargaining table. It was premature for their negotiators to make a final offer, particularly on our compensation. There remains a lot to work to do in that area. I hope we don’t have to go to impasse.”

Impasse is a mechanism that moves the parties to mediation. One or both sides can seek a declaration of impasse from the Public Employee Relations Board (PERB).

Should CFA go forward with seeking the impasse designation, PERB either would order the two sides back to the table or would affirm a declaration of impasse. That, in turn, would trigger mediation. Should mediation fail, there would be a further procedure before job actions were permitted—an independent review of the two sides’ positions, known as Fact Finding.

Through all this, virtually every provision of the existing collective bargaining agreement remains in effect. [And, indeed, the CFA Bargaining Team and the CSU administration have agreed to extend the expired contract to Sept. 1.]

BARGAINING UPDATE
August 15, 2006

As reported earlier, talks between the CFA Bargaining Team and the CSU administration last month failed to produce an agreement on the threshold issues of salary and workload, and no new sessions are scheduled.

As a result, CFA is proceeding with leadership and organizing training prior to the CFA Board of Directors meeting, which begins Friday.

“We hope the administration will bridge the remaining differences between us,” CFA President John Travis said. “We are not, however, going to put our members’, and the CSU’s future, at the mercy of wishful thinking. We need to start preparing actions in the field to convince the administration that we are serious about bargaining. In anticipation of these actions, faculty should mark the following dates on their calendars: Sept. 20, Oct. 26 and Nov. 15.”

With CSU executive compensation and student fees both out of control, CFA leaders will focus the coming campaign on the theme “Stop the Ripoffs!”

WHY THE BIG HANGUP OVER SSI?

The CFA Bargaining Team is aggressively rebutting skewed accounts by the administration of its inadequate response to creative and constructive CFA proposals to rebuild a CSU salary structure--which is universally regarded as broken for both junior and senior faculty and student-support professionals.

Last week, Headlines offered an overview of the fine print in the administration’s “offer.” This week we begin a series of reports focusing on specific points of contention.

One such issue is Service Salary Increases (SSI). Our differences on this, while dramatic, simply do not represent the costs to the university that Chancellor Charles B. Reed is attempting to represent.

Nor is the dispute complex or technical. The administration’s compensation proposals require that General Salary Increases (GSIs) be reduced to pay for SSIs.

CFA Vice President Lillian Taiz reiterated that this is a bizarre apples-and-oranges linkage, one not used by any other state agency. These steps are self-funding, since faculty who leave the system have higher salaries than those who replace them.

“If they would package the pay proposal in a normal way, we’d be just a few million dollars apart,” Taiz said. “That’s not very much when you’re talking about an overall budget of nearly four billion dollars.”

She added: "We can't let the administration hold GSIs hostage to the arrangements for routine service increases. Except for the 3.5% increase for 2005/06, faculty have not had a GSI since 2002."

BARGAINING UPDATE
August 8, 2006

A recent misleading message from the chancellor’s office suggested that the administration had offered the faculty a 20.75% salary increase package over four years.

Here’s the fine print that explains why the CFA Bargaining Team found the proposal unacceptable.

• First of all, the “package” included the 3.5% general salary increase (GSI) that faculty already received last July for the past academic year—hardly a part of a future salary “package.”

• Another 2% of the “package” would be contingent on an additional allocation from the Governor and legislature beyond what is already projected in the budget “compact.” This contingency is particularly worrisome given how steadfastly the CSU administration has shied away from aggressively seeking additional budget funds over the past two years.

• Still another 3% of the total would be subtracted from the GSIs to fund step increases (SSIs).

• Yet another 3% would be allocated to an undefined “merit” program that would give the administration unfettered discretion to hand out raises and leave faculty with no meaningful appeal rights.

In reality, the package amounts to less than 10% in salary increases distributed to most faculty over three years.

After years of low raises or no raises, the CSU’s instructional, librarian, coaching and counselor faculty need and deserve bigger raises than this proposal puts on the table. The CFA Bargaining Team believes this offer to be insufficient, especially in light of the average increases in compensation (salary, car allowance, and housing allowance) of 19.5% provided to executives in the single Academic Year 2005-06.

Over the coming weeks Headlines will offer analysis of merit pay, funding for Service Step Increases and other key bargaining issues.

BARGAINING UPDATE
July 28, 2006

On the final day of a grueling five-day marathon, bargaining for a new faculty contract between the CFA and CSU administration teams ended abruptly with the CSU administration reneging on its public pledge to narrow the CPEC salary gap by refusing a deal on faculty pay.

Bargaining ended three hours before its scheduled time today (Friday), stuck on the large sand bar that is money.

The talks ended when the Chancellor’s bargaining team proved intransigent on the key financial issues of salary and workload without which there can be no agreement.

“There is a deep divide over how money is spent in the CSU,” said John Travis, CFA President and chair of the CFA bargaining team. “On the one hand there are the students paying more to attend and us, the faculty, who are teaching more and more students while our salary stagnates.

“On the other hand, there are wealthy executives, running our public university in a way that benefits themselves and their wealthy friends the most,” he said.

CFA’s bargaining team speculates that the Chancellor is not yet convinced of the faculty’s resolve and willingness to fight on these issues. It appears that, as in getting the previous contract, the faculty will have to increase its pressure to persuade him that we are absolutely serious and united.

The stakes are high according to members of the CFA bargaining team. “The combination of low faculty salaries and staggeringly high workload is a formula for the destruction of the CSU” said Lillian Taiz, CFA Vice President.

During the first two days, Monday and Tuesday, the sides made progress on issues that would improve faculty working conditions. They addressed sabbaticals, fee waivers, Lecturers’ issues and improvements in the process by which faculty bring grievances under the contract.

Less progress was made on family-friendly policies as the administration team resisted proposals to enhance parental leave benefits.

Nevertheless, in the first two days, more progress was made in the talks than in the last eighteen months of stalled bargaining. Although the agreements reached are tentative and subject to completion of the entire agreement, the bargaining process on these issues showed that the parties can work together to find middle ground on difficult issues. That is the good news.

On Wednesday, though, the process hit a squall.

“It’s not merely that did they not offer enough money to meet the needs of the faculty,” said Ed Purcell, chief negotiator of the CFA bargaining team. “They have refused to ask the state legislature or the governor for enough money in the CSU budget to fund the CSU system. There is an element in the CSU administration who claim that the budget is tight and they don’t have enough, and yet persistently refuse to ask for enough money to fund the university, to pay the faculty. That’s the most galling aspect of it.”

BARGAINING UPDATE
July 18, 2006

The CFA Bargaining Team says that an intensive five days of talks with the CSU administration—beginning next Monday, July 24, in San Francisco, and scheduled to run day and night to focus on the core contract issues of pay and workload—will go a long way toward determining both the future course of the bargaining process and the future character of the CSU.

Meanwhile, what CFA leaders describe as surprising progress emerged from the negotiations’ “side tables” on Articles 10 (Grievance Procedures) and 12 (Appointments).

Under the bargaining ground rules, understandings reached at the side tables are tentative and subject to approval at the main table. But CFA President John Travis called this development “possibly an encouraging harbinger for the upcoming salary-and-workload marathon.”

Travis added: “The side-table agreements are very fair and demonstrate a greater understanding and willingness to do the right thing on two very key issues for the faculty. We were impressed with the manner in which the side table discussions were handled. They were well worth the time and effort.”

Travis also said that CFA has prepared for the possibility of an unsatisfactory outcome to the bargaining marathon. “We want these negotiations to turn a corner and head in the right direction. The faculty want and need a decent raise. A settlement is our goal—but we’re not counting on it.”

If necessary, a leadership training session for escalating public and campus actions will be held at the Crowne Plaza Hotel near the airport in Los Angeles on August 18 prior to the meeting there of the CFA Board of Directors. A team of field, public relations, political and research experts is positioned to assist if the marathon talks fail to produce a new contract.

BARGAINING UPDATE
July 11, 2006

By mutual agreement, an intensive five-day session of contract talks with the CSU administration will begin July 24. CFA President John Travis said the CFA bargaining team hopes during that period to make substantive progress on the core issues of salary and workload.

The two bargaining teams will meet day and night. Bargaining is dragging into its second year with limited progress made, particularly on faculty salaries, and the teams hope an accelerated effort will reinvigorate the talks.

Despite the CFA bargaining team’s efforts to find creative new approaches to the broken salary structure, the team reports the administration has stuck to little more than a flat 3% raise.

“Failure to achieve a significant breakthrough could be regarded as a signal that a confrontation is coming this fall,” said Travis. “That is not what we want, and we will give this process our best effort.

“But faculty salary problems are severe at every level of the salary structure while workload for most faculty members continues to increase,” Travis added.

“We believe this contract will not be settled until the chancellor and Trustees make an offer that reflects the kind of effort they made in response to the alleged pay problems of CSU executives. I don’t believe the faculty will settle for less.”

BARGAINING UPDATE
June 27, 2006

The CFA Bargaining Team and the CSU Administration have set aside five days for intensive negotiations during the last week in July in an attempt to resolve the remaining articles in the contract, including the critical ones of salary and workload.

“We need to have this intensive session,” CFA President John Travis said. “We’ve had over 60 meetings already, and while we have made progress, it has been limited and modest. At this point both sides think it would be helpful to get into a focused setting for a concerted effort to resolve some of the more critical issues.”

At its June 21 caucus the Bargaining Team worked on a salary proposal that will include both General Salary Increases (GSIs) and Salary Step Increases (SSIs) for the duration of the contract.

Last week the two sides reached a tentative agreement on the contract’s Article 15 (Evaluations).

BARGAINING UPDATE
June 20, 2006

The major issue still before us in bargaining is faculty salary. CFA’s bargaining team developed a set of “salary principles,” which were adopted as goals on salary by CFA’s 64th Assembly last April. The bargaining team wants discussions with the CSU administration on these principles as soon as possible.

See http://www.calfac.org/salaryprinciples.html

At the time the Assembly adopted these principles, CFA President John Travis, chair of the CFA bargaining team, said, “There is a crisis in pay; there is a crisis in equity.”

“Our salary structure is a mess,” he said. “It’s been allowed to erode to a state that there’s no quick road to a solution. It has left junior, senior and lecturer faculty alike angry and frustrated.”

The principles tackle our salary problems from various angles, including the pressing need for a fair General Salary Increase in each year of the contract. But, the team believes, across-the-board raises are not enough. The CPEC gap between CSU faculty salaries and those of colleagues at comparable institutions across the country is at 18 percent, and it continues to grow.

“We not only need more money, we need to construct a way to eliminate the problems,” Travis said.

BARGAINING UPDATE
May 31, 2006

Bargaining is scheduled for Thursday and Friday, June 1 and 2. Among the topics to be discussed are extension for credit and issues of appointment.

BARGAINING UPDATE
May 16, 2006

The California State University Employees’ Union will address the Board of Trustees tomorrow while CSUEU members and supporters from CFA protest outside about dragging negotiations for a new staff contract.

CSUEU, which represents non-instructional CSU staff on the 23 campuses, like CFA, is in the process of bargaining a successor contract. The CSU administration has yet to introduce a salary proposal.

“The problems CSUEU has experienced in bargaining are no different from CFA’s in that we are both dealing with a hostile, anti-union administration, which wants to take away benefits and not invest in the human infrastructure of the university,” said CFA President John Travis, who will be one of CSUEU’s supporters Wednesday.

The rally will be held from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. outside the Chancellor's Office, 401 Golden Shore, Long Beach.

BARGAINING UPDATE
May 10, 2006

The CSU and the CFA bargaining teams continued discussions last Thursday and Friday on extension, evaluations and reprimands. The parties are scheduled to meet again this Wednesday and Thursday.

According to CFA Director of Representation Ed Purcell, "Bargaining continues to move at a very slow pace. In an attempt to move things more quickly, we tried to package several different proposals, but the CSU team rejected the offer. After more than a year of bargaining, in most part trying to fight off takeaways, the frustration level of our bargaining team is building."

BARGAINING UPDATE
April 14, 2006

SUMMER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT REACHED

After more than two months of bargaining over this single issue, the CFA Bargaining Team announced early Friday morning that an agreement has been reached with the CSU Bargaining Team over summer pay and employment conditions.

The new agreement will cover summer work in 2006 and after resolving a few additional issues, it will apply to 2007 and 2008. It will be implemented immediately although the remainder of the successor contract is unsettled and the parties continue to bargain.

According to the CFA President John Travis, “We are pleased with this agreement, which came together at last when the negotiators from the chancellor’s office backed away from several regressive proposals. One of these would have taken away our right to the significant salary gains in summer won in a CFA arbitration case.

“On a positive note, the CSU bargaining team was responsive to our demand that the newly won higher pay rates also replace lower extension pay rates. This is a notable achievement,” Travis added.

For the first time in the history of the CSU, summer extension pay rates will be based on academic year faculty pay rates, thereby reducing the incentive to move summer work to extension.

The new agreement provides, for the first time, compensation for indirect instruction during summer. The agreement also allows for a small reduction in pay for under-enrolled courses.

“We went back and forth about the need to demonstrate some flexibility from our full pay demand,” Travis continued, “and eventually decided to allow for a slight reduction for summer classes less than 15 students as long as the faculty members retain the right to refuse to teach the course if that were their preference. In the end, we felt that allowing for some flexibility for under-enrolled classes during the next few summers was responsive to the needs of the students for certain courses during the summer and helpful in preventing small classes from being canceled.”

The agreement includes the following provisions:

SALARY

Extension Pay Rates--Pay rates for summer teaching of for-credit courses offered through Extension will be raised to the level of regular, state-funded summer courses; this provision reduces the incentive to move for-credit courses to Extension because faculty salaries are lower there.

Computation of Summer Pay Rates--On semester campuses, faculty will be paid at the rate of 1/30 of their full-time academic year salary for each Weighted Teaching Unit (WTU) taught (1/45th on quarter campuses). In order to provide increased opportunities for summer and to prevent the cancellation of small classes, courses below 15 students may be offered with a slightly reduced salary (not to exceed 85% of the full rate). The President may offer rates higher than the reduced compensation rates for low enrollment.

Indirect Instruction--Tenure-track faculty will receive $150 of indirect instruction compensation for each WTU taught. The agreement includes explicit contract language specifying that Lecturers who are assigned indirect instructional work will be compensated for that work.

JOB SECURITY & BENEFITS

--Improved eligibility for benefits for summer work at semester campuses (bargaining to continue on benefits for summer work at quarter campuses);

--Health benefits stipends for eligible Lecturers at both quarter and semester campuses;

--Extension of priority hiring order for incumbent Lecturers to quarter campuses;

--Regular access to data on students who are employed as instructors in the CSU to help ensure that such employees are appropriately classified.

CFA worked hard to reach an agreement on Summer Employment for 2006 to ensure that students would be able to get the classes they need and that faculty would have enough time to prepare for summer courses.

Expressing the feelings of CFA’s bargaining team, General Manager Bob Muscat commented, “While we wanted to move quickly, we were also committed to providing improved compensation and benefits to those who teach during summer term. Although it took us a while to reach agreement, we are hopeful that this progress means we can move more quickly toward a positive conclusion on the other outstanding issues.”

For a complete copy of Article 21, Summer Employment, click here.

BARGAINING UPDATE
April 4, 2006

A three-day bargaining session last week brought CFA and CSU administration negotiators closer to an agreement on pay and other conditions for summer teaching, otherwise known as YRO.

The administration has been asking CFA to explore exceptions to standard faculty pay rates for low-enrollment classes during the summer. CFA would like to see low-enrollment classes offered in the summer for the students’ sake. Though lower summer pay had been the practice in the CSU, it was ended by an arbitration decision favoring CFA’s claim that the lower pay violates the faculty’s collective bargaining agreement once state support for summer sessions was made the same as other academic sessions. CFA needs to be convinced that there is a serious problem with regard to under-enrollment that must be addressed.

The lengthy time spent in talks on YRO have been well spent because they could be an indication of how future negotiations will progress on other issues, including pay increases, maintaining Lecturer rights under Article 12, protecting the Faculty Early Retirement Program and reducing the grievance backlog.

“Reaching an equitable agreement on YRO is important to the faculty who want to make plans for summer ‘06 and for our students,” said CFA President John Travis, a member of the bargaining team and a professor at Humboldt. “It’s no simple matter to anticipate how changes under consideration will work on 23 different campuses this summer and in future summers.

“Nevertheless, we’ve given it serious attention; we need to wrap this subject up in the next week or we will have little choice but to put it aside and move on to other equally important issues such as salaries. Reaching an agreement gives us a better starting point for moving on, and I believe that making every effort to reach an accord on YRO is the right thing to do.”

In addition to regular bargaining sessions, special “facilitated talks” began last week under the guidance of consultant Richard Barnes to bring clarity to the issues and report back to the bargaining table. The talks continue Thursday and Friday in Los Angeles.

BARGAINING ISSUES SIDE-BY-SIDE
March 21, 2006
By mid-March, the most challenging issues boiled down to the items in this chart.

What We Want:
CFA's Bargaining Proposals

What They Want:
Administration's Proposals