Bargaining Update: September 25, 2008, session
The Bargaining Team wants to thank the members who have shown up at the last two negotiations for their support. Having other faculty members in the room to witness what the Board’s representative has to say really puts pressure on the Board to act responsibly and negotiate in good faith.
That being said, however, there was little movement on any substantive issues during the session.
Article 9: Other Professional Activities. After reviewing PJCFA’s proposal to cease scheduling OPA hours, Keith Samuels, the Board’s Chief Negotiator, rejected it in principle although he did offer one consolation prize: that those who teach primarily online classes would be able to serve some of their OPA time off campus. Since the CBA already allows ALL faculty members to serve some or all of their OPA off campus, this concession is meaningless.
Article 11: Administrative Evaluation of Faculty. PJCFA responded to the Board’s proposal which would mandate that all faculty members prepare and maintain a portfolio and that the portfolio be required for each faculty member’s annual evaluation. PJCFA will not support any language which mandates the production of such a portfolio for all faculty or which requires that a portfolio be the basis of the annual evaluation. In addition, PJCFA asserts that some department managers are out of compliance with the current requirement to perform annual classroom evaluations of faculty members, endangering affected faculty members’ chances of promotion as those evaluations are required portions of the portfolio.
Article 15: Salaries. The Board still declines to make any alternate salary proposal or to consider increases to overload, promotion, or educational incentive pay. However, it has asked that we continue negotiating over the extended payroll option. This method would allow faculty to divide their annual base salary over the 26 bi-weekly college payroll dates so as to ease our budgeting for summer. Both sides agreed to work on the language for this section of Article 15.
Article 6: Intellectual Property Rights. The Board proposed that a white-paper committee be delegated to compose language mutually agreeable to the Board and PJCFA on this issue. PJCFA has declined to participate in such a committee since the white-paper committee from the previous bargaining year (concerning distance learning) has yet to present any decisions. Dr. Samuels agreed to check on the progress of this previous committee and revisit this topic later.
Article 6: Student Rights. In an earlier session, the Board proposed language which safeguarded students’ rights to meet with faculty to discuss materials used for evaluation purposes. PJCFA asserts that student rights are not covered under the CBA, a contract between the Board and the faculty covering wages, benefits, and working conditions of faculty, not students. PJCFA suggested that such language would be appropriate in the Student Handbook. Dr. Samuels concurred.
The next bargaining meeting will be held October 9, 2008, at 1:30 in Room 416. We would love to see the room overflow, so feel free to show up and support your union!
If you have any questions, concerns, or suggestions, please contact Paige Anderson, Chief Negotiator (ext. 2167), or Charlotte Sweeney, PJCFA President (ext. 2007).
2 comments:
Someone mentioned that faculty could provide department heads with an annual self assessment to help them fill out annual evaluation paperwork. The self assessment would list what committees we have been involved in, workshops we attended, and community work we have performed in the evaluation year. Or to save trees a less than ideal vita could be provided. Vitas like the larger requested portfolios don't emphasize activities performed in the most recent year, the annual evaluation period. Newbies might not be aware of the fact that many faculty members have been longer than 10 years.
If you're looking for someone to analyze, put your magnifier glasses down and move away from faculty members. We have been assessed by everyone and their brothers out the yin yang forever. Go do the college some good and look at yourselves in the mirror.
A performance pay plan if any must augment salaries above inflational increases. The portfolio was suggested as the basis for this new plan. Of course theoretical performance pay is not acceptable in lieu of not providing annual salary increases to cover inflation. Let's just pay the few biggest suck ups and forget about everyone else.
Essential basics of paying people have not been covered. First things first.
On the scale of ways to irritate faculty members, the portfolio might score a 4 on a scale of 1-5. Not paying faculty members scores a 5. And we are less than pleasant to be around when we are irritated.
Florida finances are hitting rock bottom and salary increases appear non-existant. So, let's talk CUTS in programs. Why not do something big--cut out athletics, have money for programs and perhaps a little raise! Just how many students are involved in PJC's athletic programs? How many local students are athletics? Just a suggestion for possibilities.
Post a Comment