OCTOBER 21: Agreement
On Wednesday, October 20 at 5:00 pm the negotiating teams for Akron-AAUP and the UA Administration reached a tentative agreement on all outstanding health care and compensation issues. Details on the distribution of the agreement for member review and ratification, per our chapter constitution, will be provided to members early next week.
Compensation:
The agreement includes:
- Merit-based increases, with a fixed percentage to base salary and an additional component determined by merit score.
- Increased promotion raises.
- Increases in summer compensation.
- Additional monies to address market compression issues.
- A 0.5% raise pool to allow the University a measure of flexibility in investing in strategic priorities.
- A provision permitting the University to match bona fide offers, as well as to adjust individual salaries to retain a member or for some other justifiable reason.
- Reopened negotiations on compensation for 2013-2014.
In response to University concerns about future state support Akron-AAUP proposed contract language providing tiered decreases to raises (not to salary) if University tuition, fee, and state support decrease. The proposed agreement will be available on the chapter website for members to review.
For Academic Year 2011-2012, BUFs who were employed as of July 2011 and receive a satisfactory performance review will receive 0.5% increase to base salary, and will be eligible for an additional 2.0% merit increase. Another 2.0% is provided to address compression/market adjustments. A .5% pool is included to implement University strategic priorities.
For Academic Year 2012-2013, BUFs who were employed as of July 2012 and receive a satisfactory performance review will receive 1.0% increase to base salary and will be eligible for an additional 2.0% merit increase. Another 2.0% is provided to address compression/market adjustments. A .5% pool is included to implement University strategic priorities.
Health Care:
The Akron-AAUP has agreed to the university’s self-insurance model for healthcare coverage. The TA accepts the University’s HC changes that will be implemented for the rest of the University community effective January 1, 2011. We have retained retiree dependent/spouse medical coverage consistent with past practice, and have increased the amount of employee flexible spending accounts from $3,500 to $5,000.
The tentative-agreement is submitted to the membership with the unanimous recommendation of the Negotiating Team, the Executive Committee and the Health Care Sub-Committee.
Akron-AAUP
Communications Committee
Contract Negotiations Re-Opener 2010: Tentative Agreements
Posted October 21, 2010
Updated October 28, 2010: Here is a link to slides from the Chief Negotiator's presentation to the membership on 10/27 and 10/28 describing contract highlights .
Updated October 29, 2010: The dates concerning "trigger" language in Article 16 have been corrected.
Added October 26: Employee Contributions
These agreements are still being proofed and may be updated here in the next few days to reflect minor corrections and modifications. No substantive changes are expected, and any updates to these documents will be noted here.
October 20
Akron-AAUP engaged with the UA negotiating team for another 10 hour mediated negotiation session Tuesday, October 19. We have not yet reached agreement, though it seems fair to say that some progress was made. We're at a critical juncture in our talks on compensation and health care. We've agreed to another last meeting with UA representatives and the mediator/fact-finder today, October 20, immediately after the chapter meeting.
October 18
AKRON-AAUP CHAPTER MEMBERS ONLY, please join us Wednesday from 11-2 in Student Union 312.
A FREE LUNCH will begin at 11 followed shortly after noon by the chapter meeting that will feature updates on the current status of contract negotiations.
Akron-AAUP LIAISONS should try to attend to convey relevant updates on negotiations to their colleagues.
If you are not a chapter member but would like to join you can do so before the meeting.
October 13
Akron-AAUP met with UA representatives for the last scheduled negotiation session Monday, October 11. We met again October 12th for an additional, previously unscheduled, meeting. After eight hours of talks Monday and another 12 hours Tuesday both sides agreed, at midnight, to call it a day. There was some movement on both sides with respect to compensation issues but, finally, no agreement was reached.
An additional negotiating session has been scheduled for Tuesday, October 19. We anticipate a very long meeting lasting well into the night. Wednesday October 20 marks the scheduled beginning of the fact-finding hearing. If both sides agree this day could be used for further mediated negotiations. In this case, the fact-finding hearing will take place Friday, October 22. Both sides will present their briefs on all unresolved issues to the fact-finder, and, at some, as yet undetermined, date the fact-finder will submit his report. That report will become the contractual agreement on all unresolved issues if neither side votes to reject his findings.
More details will be available at the chapter's meeting Wednesday, October 20th. The meeting is for dues-paying, voting, members of the chapter only. Members of the bargaining unit who are not dues-paying members of the chapter will receive updates via e-mail announcements.
September 24
Our next mediated negotiations are scheduled for October 4 and 11. If no agreement has been reached by the 11th, the fact-finding hearing will take place on October 20 and 22. Our chapter meeting, for full dues-paying members of the Akron-AAUP, is scheduled for October 20th as well, so be sure to attend for important updates.
There is no agreement yet with the fact-finder as to when he will issue his report. That date will depend upon the number of unresolved issues he will be required to address.
In a previous message we informed you as to what happens after receipt of the fact-finder's report. You can find that HERE.
We'll post updates here as we have them.
September 15
Compensation and Health Care Negotiations Update
On Monday, September 6, Akron-AAUP made a proposal across-the-table intended to accommodate the Provost’s and the Administration’s concern that they are not ready to negotiate compensation, and the Chapter’s commitment to abiding by the contract and negotiating both health care and compensation together.
We proposed delaying negotiation of compensation issues for academic years 2011-2014 until spring of next year, and delaying as well the implementation of structural health care changes until January 1, 2012. Our proposal addressed the concerns of both parties and simply suggested that until the Administration is able fairly to negotiate faculty compensation, the current health care benefits would remain unchanged.
Our proposal was summarily rejected at Monday’s meeting by the Administration’s negotiating team on behalf of the Board of Trustees.
*****************************************************************
The University’s Salary Proposal:
At Monday’s meeting the Administration's team presented Akron-AAUP, for the first time, with a compensation proposal. The Administration’s approach to collective bargaining and its attitudes toward faculty are readily apparent in the terms set forth in the document.
Section 1 reads:
“Each bargaining unit faculty member employed as a member of the faculty as of July 1, 2011, who also was a member of the bargaining unit as of the beginning of fall semester 2010, whose performance review is satisfactory or better as determined by the merit review criteria shall be eligible to receive an increase in compensation from a 2% set aside for academic year 2011-2012, which will be allocated by the University to faculty to fund its strategic priorities as determined by the administration.”
In short, they propose that a faculty member will receive a pay increase if, and only if, the faculty member fits the administration's undefined “strategic priorities.” Any attempt to impose such a provision, one that is undeniably aimed at eviscerating collective bargaining, is clearly illegal. The UA administrative leadership, old and new, must accept the fact that UA is a collective bargaining campus and not one governed by administrative fiat or management caprice.
Thesis/Dissertation Credit Bank and the Value of Your Labor, Past and Present:
Both sides have long agreed that it is time for the ineffective thesis/dissertation credit bank system to be dismantled. The Administration’s proposal, however, now values the accumulated credit hours of highly skilled, committed faculty at potentially less than the lowest part-time faculty rate per credit hour - an even lower rate than what was discussed, and rejected, across the table last year.
In short, the Administration admits that they owe you; but they don’t owe you much.
Faculty Should Work For No Compensation:
Additionally, the Administration (every member of which has a twelve month contract) now seeks to contractually bind faculty to working for no compensation. The language they’ve devised speaks for itself:
“Faculty in graduate degree programs shall be expected to advise and mentor students to thesis and dissertation completion year-round as part of their duties as a tenured or tenure-track faculty member without explicit compensation for these activities in the future.“
In short, they are proposing that faculty offer a portion of their labor (for 25% of the calendar year) for free. We challenge anyone to find and identify even one member of management willing to do so themselves.
Language on Bona Fide Offers:
The language in our current agreement states:
“The University has the right (but not the obligation) to make a positive salary adjustmentfor any bargaining unit faculty member who has been given a bona fide written offer ofemployment, in order to counter such offer and retain the bargaining unit facultymember to whom it has been made.”
The Administration’s proposal now states:
“The University reserves the right to adjust a member’s salary beyond negotiated levels to retain the member and/or to counter bona fide offers of employment...”
In short, they seek to engage in salary bargaining with individual faculty, an illegal practice that runs counter to laws governing collective bargaining.
What Does the Administration Hope to Gain?
In light of their “compensation” proposal, and in the context of a long history of unnecessary administrative delays, promises made to faculty seem particularly empty today.
--The University President publicly promised in December to have a budget built around increases to base pay. Here, less than a year later, is the first poor manifestation of that promise.
--Our new Provost has spoken enthusiastically of a new strategic plan, and has promised faculty that salaries will no longer be residually budgeted. This proposal is clearly nothing more than a continuation of that ineffectual policy.
There is nothing new in any of this. The administration's attitude toward faculty manifests clearly as one of contemptuous disdain and disregard.
We wonder what any member of the administration hopes to achieve. How does the administration hope to attract talented new faculty with such an impoverished and hostile opinion of its employees? Why would faculty ever again agree to re-opening negotiations when all evidence suggests that the administration will not, and cannot be trusted to, abide by either its commitments or the law?
Any vestige of trust that remained at the negotiating table prior to these discussions has been destroyed by the cynical and dishonest actions of UA’s administrative managers.
And none of this damage to the Administration’s reputation has ever been necessary.
Our negotiating team will continue to bargain on your behalf.
Look for further updates as negotiations continue through the month of October.
September 10:
The AAUP’s salary proposal seeks to reduce the market gap for Associate Professors and Professors, elevate the lowest faculty salaries to levels comparable to the minimum salaries of nearby institutions, and provide for across the board and merit increases to keep from falling further behind. Our proposal requires an increase in spending on faculty salaries equivalent to less than 1% of the entire university budget each of the three years under negotiation.
The graph below is from a previous communication in December 2009.
September 9, 2010: Negotiations Update
A printable copy of this communication can be found here.
To Our Colleagues in the Bargaining Unit:
You will recall that Akron-AAUP completed negotiations with the University this past January and agreed to a four year contract, in force from December 15, 2009 through December 15, 2013, with the following understanding guaranteed in Article 33, section 1:
“provided, however, that the parties shall negotiate for the period July 1, 2010-December 15, 2013 only with respect to mid-term increases/modifications regarding Article 16 (Compensation) and modifications regarding Article 17, Section 1 (benefits set forth therein-including benefits for eligible spouses and dependents of retirees…). . . ”
The University of Akron has clearly, and contractually, agreed to negotiate both health care and faculty compensation together.
The University Fails to Co-operate:
In preparation for the upcoming compensation and health care benefits negotiations, an Akron-AAUP health care subcommittee began meeting in late March with a UA health care subcommittee. The University is seeking to consolidate its health care plans and to move to self-insurance, among other changes. To effectuate self-insurance, the University needs to hire a third party administrator (“TPA”) to administer claims. The University resisted all efforts by Akron-AAUP to participate in preparing the Request for Proposal that was distributed to potential vendors soliciting bids on these TPA services. After those vendors responded, the University failed to provide Akron-AAUP with key information from the vendors because the vendors claimed the information was confidential. The Chapter requested the University to assist us in obtaining the necessary information and offered to sign confidentiality agreements with the vendors. This request and offer was made both verbally and on May 19th in an email from Akron-AAUP chief negotiator, Prof. Mike Cheung to Mr. Steven Nobil, the University’s chief negotiator.
On May 20th, in an email response the University’s chief negotiator, Mr. Steven Nobil, informed Akron-AAUP that the University refused to assist the Chapter in obtaining the relevant and necessary information from those vendors to analyze the responses received:
“With respect to your [the Chapter’s] willingness to execute confidentiality agreements in order to review “trade secret” information that may be contained in the responses to the University’s RFP, the University has not and will not request the vendors to share trade secrets with the AAUP.”
We then engaged in several attempts to change the University’s position, including having the Chapter’s counsel write the University’s counsel with case citations supporting our view that the University was acting illegally. The University refused to change its behavior.
On July 12 the Chapter filed an unfair labor practice charge (ULP) against the University of Akron over this issue.
The University then changed its behavior and worked with the Chapter so that we could obtain the necessary information from the vendors to properly analyze their proposals. We gained access to this information only after much unnecessary delay and expense.
Our ULP still stands and has been amended to reflect the University’s unreasonable delay in providing this information.
On July 29th the University unilaterally invoked mediation. Akron-AAUP has continued with mediated talks under protest. The University’s goal in doing this is evidently to try to force a settlement on the issue of health care without seriously attempting also to settle the issue of compensation for 2011, 2012, and 2013.
The University’s Desire to Decide Health Care Now and Compensation Later
Throughout late spring and summer, the University’s emphasis has been to negotiate health care and resolve those issues prior to November, 2010 so that changes can be implemented effective January 1, 2011. During this same time period, the University has sought to delay until next semester all negotiations regarding compensation. The University has argued that because the key aspects of compensation have been set for this academic year, there would be no harm in such a delay. More recently, the University has argued that because the Provost is new and there is no permanent Chief Financial Officer, such a delay would assist the University in better marshaling the facts necessary to support President Proenza’s 2009 promise to re-orient priorities and to construct a budget built around increases to faculty compensation.
At our most recent meeting on Sept. 7th, University representatives made the remarkable, and false, claim that they never agreed to negotiate health care and compensation together.
The Chapter has consistently responded that the Parties agreed in their collective bargaining agreement to negotiate both health care and compensation together.
The Provost:
Recently, the new Provost, Mike Sherman, has become involved in our negotiations. In a small group meeting, and in across-the-table negotiations, he explained that he is committed to faculty salary increases no longer being funded by residual budgeting (whereby faculty receive what, if anything, may be left after all other spending), as the University has done historically, but by planning for salary increases, using additional marginal income to the University (i.e. growth in the University’s income). If that marginal income does not materialize, then there would be internal non-academic reallocation of resources to make up for the shortfall on the academic side.
Provost Sherman told Akron-AAUP he needed more time--until the spring-- to better understand the University’s finances and that he needed the University to hire a permanent CFO to assist him in the analysis and planning of the University’s future. He would then be better able to provide a plan to the University community and the Board of Trustees that all could have confidence in. Such a plan would include performing the appropriate research to further develop benchmarks regarding market comparisons.
We brought to his attention that the University earlier had refused to work with the Chapter to do exactly this. To the Provost’s credit, he immediately reversed that decision and agreed that his staff and the Akron-AAUP would work together on this issue.
Where we are today:
On September 7, we made a proposal across-the-table intended to accommodate the Provost and the University’s concern that it is not ready truly to negotiate compensation, as well as the Chapter’s commitment to abiding by the contract and negotiating both health care and compensation together. We proposed delaying negotiation of compensation issues for academic years 2011-2014 until spring of next year, and as well, delaying the implementation of structural health care changes until January 1, 2012. Our proposal simply suggests that until the University is able fairly to negotiate faculty compensation, the current health care benefits will remain unchanged. We believe our proposal cooperatively addresses the concerns of both parties. The University is taking that proposal under advisement and is expected to respond at our next session on September 13.
Where we go from here:
Mediated negotiations are scheduled for September 13 and 17, and October 4 and 11. If no agreement has been reached by the 11th, the fact-finding trial will take place on October 20 and 22. There is no agreement yet with the fact-finder as to when he will issue his report. That date will depend upon the number of unresolved issues he will be required to address.
Once his report is issued, each side will then have fourteen (14) days to accept or reject the report. The report is deemed accepted under the law, unless, within that two week period, one side or other rejects by at least sixty percent (60%) of all potential voters. The potential voters include all dues-paying members of the Chapter, and, in the case of the University, the 9 members of the Board of Trustees. A potential voter who does not vote is effectively voting to approve the fact-finding report. If both sides approve--or if both sides fail to reject--then the fact-finder’s report becomes the contract.
If the report is rejected by either side, and we are at impasse, the University can implement its last, best offer. The Chapter can take a strike vote and call for a strike after giving ten (10) days written notice to the university.
If we are not at impasse, we can continue to bargain. The Chapter still has the right to strike upon ten (10) days written notice to the University. However, unlike the law governing the private sector under the National Labor Relations Act, in this case the University cannot lockout its employees under any circumstances.
Faculty can expect regular updates on negotiations from the Communications Committee until we reach agreement or begin the fact-finding process.
A printable copy of this communication can be found here.
Akron-AAUP Communications Committee
September 8, 2010:Health care
Compensation and Health Care Negotiations: We are at an important point in negotiations on health care and faculty compensation. We will have an update for you by week's end on these important subjects. That said, several faculty have asked about the definition of Self-Insurance.
What is Self Insurance? To reduce costs the University of Akron proposes a change in how health care is to be funded. UA proposes abandoning the HMO model and adopting a “self-insurance” model. The phrase “self-insurance” has elicited expressions of concern from many of our colleagues. The idea, simply, is that costs to the university are reduced by eliminating the carrying-costs of commercial insurance providers. The University already is self-insured in a number of areas--for example, prescription drug coverage. The university will pay medical claims from the general fund, in effect becoming the insurance provider. The University is required to set aside an additional reserve to pay incurred but not yet processed claims. The manner for determining the appropriate reserve amount is set by state law, and requires determination by an outside, independent actuary. The university will not be administering your health care. The still-to-be-negotiated plans and employee claims will be administered by a third-party administrator (TPA), the choice of which is presently under discussion by both UA and the Akron-AAUP. The University will pay processed claims as the bills are sent from the TPA. (FYI: Companies such as Summa, Cigna, etc., all provide TPA services).
It is important to remember that moving to self-insurance is "simply" a change in the funding mechanism
and otherwise does not, in and of itself, affect coverage for employees. What may have an effect is the
extent to which the TPA has a network of hospitals and doctors different from the current providers. This
issue occurs whenever an employer changes providers, either on a self-insured or fully-insured basis. As
part of the contemplated move the University seeks to go to one provider to maximize its risk pool; this is
a strategic financial move given that the University would be the insurer. The university would also
purchase individual and group “stop-loss” insurance to protect itself (and us) from catastrophic claims
experiences.
Generally, our position on health care, in addition to demanding that both sides negotiate in good faith on the issue, is to minimize disruption of existing coverage and providers for our members while dealing with some fundamental procedural changes in how insurance coverage is funded. The faculty most likely to experience such disruptions are those enrolled with Kaiser. We believe that we can cooperatively achieve the university’s not-unreasonable goal of maximizing its risk pool and, at the same time, protect the interests of our members who have contracted with Kaiser. We have met with resistance on this issue, but it is still very much a matter of discussion.
Akron-AAUP does not have any philosophical opposition to self-insurance as a new model. We will not, however, blindly support such a move without having all necessary information on costs to you. The university appears to be moving ahead with this new model as though it is a “done deal.” It is not. We continue to try to negotiate this important issue. We also insist that our agreement that health care will be negotiated in tandem with faculty compensation be honored and respected. We have been clear that acceptance of the university’s choice of TPA, indeed, of this entire policy shift, is contingent upon receipt of a legitimate compensation proposal.
August 2010: Negotiations and health Care
The Akron-AAUP has been involved in serious healthcare negotiations with the university
administration since early Summer. The administration wants to pursue self-insurance as a means of saving money. This represents a substantial overhaul of our current model of health
care at the University of Akron. Akron-AAUP has no philosophical objections to self-insurance but we wish to inform you, and the university administration, that we simply will not agree to
any changes unless and until we receive all information needed to consider the merits
and potential deficits of such a proposal and to represent faculty interests effectively. Despite
the administration's contention that the healthcare issue must be resolved by the end of
September the university has not responded to our multiple requests for such information in a
timely way. Therefore, the chapter filed, on July 12th, an unfair labor practice (ULP) lawsuit
against the university with the State Employment Relations Board (SERB).
The chapter continues to use the services of The Segal Company, a healthcare and human resources consulting firm, for their expertise in critically analyzing the university's position and constructing our proposals.
The university has also attempted, in our view, to force a resolution to healthcare negotiations before fully addressing compensation, in effect bifurcating the re-opened negotiations and limiting our ability to fully negotiate both issues together, as we had previously agreed to do.
This issue, too, was part of our unfair labor practice charge. We continue to negotiate
healthcare and compensation and to fight for our contractually guaranteed rights to do so based
upon nothing less than all relevant information.
The university administration has called for mediation on the healthcare issue. This places
healthcare negotiations on a very fast track before the parties go to the fact-finding process.
Negotiations are moving quickly; we encourage you to stay tuned and be sure to read
negotiation updates as they arrive in your email.
Still Relevant: UA's Profligate Spending. A "Landscape For Earning"
From a communication to faculty, December 2009
"...The salaries for the president, provost, deans, vice presidents, and other administrators soared from a total of $3.3 million in FY 2005 to $5.6 million in the current fiscal year (2009). UA faculty members and staff should ask whether the University has almost doubled its investment in faculty and staff over the same period of time.
This record of self-aggrandizement of administrators has not only shortchanged faculty and staff but students as well. While the University has increased spending on administration, an audit of UA finances shows that from 2002 to 2008 it simultaneously decreased from 35 percent to 32 percent the revenues devoted to the academic side..."
Read the entire message HERE.
Collective Bargaining Agreement 2.0 is ratified
As of 5:00 P.M. Thursday January 28, 2010 members of the Akron-AAUP ratified the proposed collective bargaining agreement. The ballot was structured to present 2 measures for consideration: a three-year agreement and a subsequent 1 year agreement, an arrangement necessary to conform to state law and achieve a four-year agreement. Both measures passed by wide margins.
In their January meeting the University of Akron's Board of Trustees voted unanimously to approve the proposed agreement.
The approved contract is now in force.
The Akron-AAUP negotiating team is currently in preparation for the next phase of negotiations over changes to health care benefits and compensation for years three and four. All other issues are settled for the entire 4-year life of the agreement. Formal negotiations on these important remaining issues are scheduled to begin again in July of this year.
The new agreement will expire December 15, 2013.
Joint Statement on Contract Negotiations - January 8, 2010
The Administration of The University of Akron and the Akron Chapter of the American Association of University Professors reached tentative agreements on all issues pertaining to contract negotiations. The tentative agreements now must be ratified by the University’s Board of Trustees and by the membership of the Akron-AAUP. The timetable for ratification is being established.
For the Akron-AAUP, the chapter membership will vote shortly after informational meetings held on January 13th and 14th for the chapter membership.
Both parties recommend ratification to their respective constituents.
More information for chapter members HERE.
Strong membership = A strong contract
You can have a voice in the process of shaping and protecting the future of The University of Akron: protecting academic freedom, ensuring the role of faculty in governance, and preserving the integrity of our shared academic mission.
Join Akron-AAUP as a dues-paying member now. It's the only way to have a say that will be heard.
Akron-AAUP: Your Choice For Real Shared Governance.
Questions? Akron-AAUP invites you to
ASK US ANYTHING!