|
|
 Justice Denied
Bargaining Team works to raise grievance issues in contract negotiations
|
1. It is unjust for faculty members’ grievances to be delayed
The CSU administration is responsible for delaying the grievance process though hearing postponements, late responses and pushing simple cases to arbitration.
Although the CSU employs a large number of attorneys and human resources staff, grievance processing is severely understaffed. There are no penalties for lateness and delays.
2. The last war is re-fought…again & again
No precedents are set by previous grievances so the same grievances are battled repeatedly. There are no penalties for repeat violations.
3. It’s a fight to get the necessary evidence from administrators
The administration controls the paperwork and the witnesses. CFA needs access to both to present its own evidence. But evidence procedures under the contract and via the Public Employment Relations Board are slow. And there are no penalties for withholding evidence.
4. The CSU’s lawyers adopt absurd legal positions to foul up the process
The CSU administration, through its lawyers, argues outrageous positions and forces CFA to litigate them. This arises in cases on FMI/SSI, new and additional work, family leave and so on.
Overall, the CSU loses too many arbitration hearings, once grievances finally get to a hearing. If the administration were living by the contract, CFA would not win so often. This is a strong indication that the delays are used to discourage faculty members and to deny them justice.
Send CFA feedback on representation delays you’ve experienced: editor@calfac.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
