Bargaining Session Update
Today, before heading into the long holiday weekend, the two negotiation teams spent several hours at the table together. Most of the simpler language items have been resolved but several complicated and incredibly important items remain on the table, including language proposals from Oakland that seek to weaken individual academic units’ control over workload. Near the end of today’s session, the employer’s team presented their economic package. Our team will take the weekend to review the economic proposals and be prepared with a response as well as our own economic proposals during next week’s negotiations. Bargaining sessions are currently scheduled for July 8, 10, 16 and 18.
Tentative Agreement:
The teams TA’d Article IX (Discipline and Discharge). The change originally requested by the employer in this article to allow for a temporary increase in the teaching workload of faculty deficient in research or service was slightly modified and moved to Article X (Professional Responsibilties). It remains an important item of discussion.
Ongoing Discussions:
Faculty Employment, Re-employment, and Tenure (Article VII): While the teams did agree in principle on some minor changes to review procedures, other items remain open. Our team does not want to see the possibility of three years of prior experience for tenure track and Special Instructors hires reduced.
Professional Responsibilities (Article X): The employer shared a new proposal on this article today that included slightly modified language from their original proposal to Article IX (Discipline and Discharge). The employer still seeks to allow the increase to an individual faculty member’s teaching workload as “relief” from research or service expectations. In their proposal the employer also seeks to impose a universal teaching workload for faculty in the rank of Special Instructor. Both of these proposals interfere with the individual academic units’ Workload Statements.
Calendar (Article XXIX and Appendix I): Both teams spent time and energy on the employer’s calendar proposal. While both teams acknowledge room for improvement in the current calendar, we have yet to find consensus either in terms of calendar priorities or adjustments. Discussion will continue on this subject Monday.
Special Lecturer Scheduling Priority (Appendix O): The OU-AAUP team presented a modified version of our Scheduling Priority for Special Lecturers. As with our previous proposal, this one offers a modicum of job security that will improve the overall working conditions for our most vulnerable faculty, butt the new one also addresses the employer’s concerns regarding scheduling concerns for full-time faculty.
Intellectual Property Committee: The employer’s team offered a counter proposal to our team’s Intellectual Property Advisory Committee Letter of Agreement shared last week. The two teams generally agree on the principle behind the committee and just must reach final agreement on language.
We were joined in the room today by several members with expertise and experiences on topics under discussion. As always, we appreciate all of the support being offered by faculty, staff, students, alumni and community members!