|
|
|
|
California Faculty Association at CSU San Marcos |
|
|
|
 Alliance Fax Sheet to Governor Contact The Governor Joint CFA / Senate Statement on Budget Cuts (1/17/08) Governor Schwarzenegger’s proposed 10% budget cut is a concern to all of us at CSUSM: faculty, students, staff, and administrators. In the spirit of open dialogue, the leaders of the CSUSM Academic Senate and the California Faculty Association, San Marcos Chapter are writing to let you know that we have met and agreed to seek answers to the many questions raised by the governor’s budget proposal. We are committed to ensuring that a faculty voice will be heard as we all discuss how best to make the decisions that will impact our students and ourselves. We have reviewed the Governor’s proposed budget for the California State University system and there are several figures about which we have questions. We assure you that we will seek clarification from the CSU Statewide Academic Senate and the statewide California Faculty Association, as well as from the CSU administration, both statewide and here on our campus, about the assumptions and the funding levels presented in the Governor’s budget. The alarming headlines are a cause for concern, but not panic. We are calling for measured dialogue among all parties. Of particular interest to faculty are concerns related to quality education such as workload (class size, cancelled classes, sabbatical replacements), contractual issues (compensation, layoffs, hiring of new faculty), increases in student fees, and establishing enrollment targets. As you may recall, in May 2004, the CSU, UC, and Governor entered into a Compact that guaranteed the CSU annual budget increases through 2010-11 (with a 5% increase designated for 2008-09), 2.5% per year increase in student enrollment, and no more than a 10% student fee increase per year. If the Compact is voided, the impact will be felt in all these areas: budget (including faculty compensation), student enrollment, and student fees. It is important to note that conversations have already occurred on our campus about how to address the challenges presented by the Governor’s budget. The President has made some decisions which she has shared with the campus. To our knowledge such discussions are continuing. However, those bodies and committees where faculty representatives have a formal role in the decision making process have not met; indeed, the chairs of the University Budget Committee have cancelled the committee’s first scheduled meeting of the semester and the President’s Cabinet does not meet again until February. This is not a time for the campus administrative leadership to isolate itself either from the larger community or from faculty, who have a statutory role in the governance of the university. Shared governance means that the administration works with the faculty. If the bodies that already exist to advise the President about budget and strategic decision-making aren’t going to be involved as key actors in the process of developing the 2008-09 budget, we need to think of other ways to make sure that faculty are directly and fully involved in CSUSM’s planning to address the new budget challenges. To this end, we are asking for immediate Academic Senate and CFA representation -- when matters concerning the 2008-09 budget are discussed -- on the President’s Executive Council and the Academic Affairs Leadership Council. Furthermore, we expect that college deans and the leadership of other units will fully involve faculty and staff in budget discussion in their areas to develop responses to CSUSM’s budget challenges. CSUSM prides itself on being a campus where ‘university first’ is more than just a catchy slogan. The entire university must come together as a community in times like these and work together to address our challenges. Patty Seleski, Chair, CSUSM Academic Senate Janet Powell, CSUSM Chapter President, CFA CTA Disaster Relief Fund Has your home been damaged by the Southern California wildfires? The California Teachers' Association can help. CTA's Disaster Relief Fund
provides financial assistance to CTA members who have
experienced significant losses due to disasters in
California. As a CFA member, you have full access to CTA
member benefits. Peer Review of Faculty Grievances (9/27/07) We encourage CFA members to run in the Faculty Hearing Panel elections which will be occurring soon. This panel will serve as a "jury pool" for peer committees to hear cases in the new alternative grievance track. This new process
For more information on the Statutory Grievance Procedure, see the following documents:
Trustees Hike Executive Pay. Again! (9/24/07) "In an effort to stay competitive with other underprivileged college executives, the board decided to slip a little sumpin' sumpin' extra in their pay envelopes. They looked around the room, noticed one of them had a hole in their Gucci loafers and upped their paltry six-figure salaries by a meager 11.8 percent." Read more here:
United We Won! What Next? (9/1/07) As the Fall 2007 semester begins, we have good reason to be confident that things have begun to turn around after five long years. Through unity and determined action, we won 20.7 percent in general salary increases and four annual service step increases. Those who receive all of the raises in the new contract will see an aggregate, compounded pay increase of 35 percent over four years. Plus, a $28 million equity fund will correct widespread problems with salary inversion and compression. The new contract also increases job security for lecturers,
provides for the settlement of grievances by faculty panels,
improves family leave benefits, and preserves the popular Faculty
Early Retirement Program. By winning a strong new contract, we have
demonstrated that faculty are the most reliable and powerful force
for positive change in the CSU as a whole. After all, our working
conditions are student learning conditions. By defending our jobs,
we are defending the vital center of the university, our classrooms. Serious threats to the quality of education at Cal State San Marcos have not gone away. The administration recently increased enrollment limits in dozens of lower-division classes in public speaking, Spanish, mathematics, philosophy, history, and more. Most of these classes are taught by lecturers, our most vulnerable colleagues. Choosing to raise caps in classes for first-year students seems especially strange at a time when the administration is touting its participation in the self-study exercise, "Founda-tions of Excellence in First-Year Programs." CFA will challenge this arbitrary order through both the traditional grievance process and the new “statutory” grievance track that provides for hearings before faculty panels. But this increase in class sizes is just one example of a very disturbing pattern. We have also seen a reduction in the number of sabbatical leaves. And funding for future tenure-track growth searches is being held back. As a result, student/faculty ratios will continue to rise despite the administration’s stated commitment to bring them down. In order to justify these measures, the administration has
repeatedly claimed that faculty raises require belt-tightening in
other areas of the budget. But the campus’ general fund allocation
was just increased by about $12 million as a result of last year’s
huge enrollment growth. There should be plenty of money to fully
fund our core mission, instruction. Why is the administration
deprioritizing educational excellence now? Please participate in the ongoing work of the California Faculty
Association. If you are not a member, please join. If you are unsure
of your status, ask us. If you have been impacted by the recent
round of class size increases, please contact us about the
possibility of filing a grievance. Our students have seen their fees nearly double in five years. But they are paying much more for less. Now is the time for us to stand up for the quality of the education we deliver. CSU Trustees Ratify New Contract (5/15/07) CFA and CSU Agree on Tentative Contract (4/6/07) CFA and the CSU administration have reached a tentative contract
agreement and the union’s Board of Directors has voted unanimously
to postpone rolling walkouts pending finalized contract language. CSUSM Strike Dates (3/29/07) The CFA supports the fact-finder's report because it will help close the 18% gap between CSU professors and their peers at similar universities around the country. CFA remains “cautiously optimistic” that a contract will be agreed upon. In the meantime, we will continue strike preparations in the event that the Administration does not follow through with the promise made on March 25 when it agreed to use the independent report as a “framework to reach a settlement”. If CFA and the CSU Administration do not work out a new agreement during the 10-day negotiating period that ends on April 6, CFA will begin striking the week of April 9th. If an agreement is not reached by the 6th, CSUSM faculty will strike on Wednesday, April 11th and Thursday, April 12th. If you have important events, due dates, or exams scheduled for those two days, I encourage you to have alternate plans that will help ease student’s anxiety about the strike. More information will follow. CFA and CSU Return to Bargaining Table (3/25/07) CFA and administration officials today
announced a ten day extension of the current faculty contract
(to April 6) during which time no strike activities will take
place. "We have indicated both to the fact finder
and to the faculty union that we are willing to use the report
as the basis for an overall settlement agreement," says Roberta
Achtenberg, chair of the CSU Board of Trustees. "We are hopeful
that at the end of this process, we will have a finalized
agreement so that we can move forward with getting our faculty
their salary increases." CFA Accepts Fact Finder's Report (3/25/07) The California Faculty Association announced today that it accepts the recommendations set forth by neutral third-party fact finder Sylvia Skratek, who spent several weeks listening to arguments from the CSU Administration and the Faculty concerning the contract that expired in June 2005. The report recommends that the CSU Administration raise the faculty’s salary by 25.37% over four years plus 10% in SSI pay (service step increases), which “are not an additional cost to the University.” John Travis, President of the California Faculty Association stated, “It is time for the Administration and the Board of Trustees of the California State University to face the facts and settle this contract.“The fact-finder’s report which becomes public today validates our long-standing position – that CSU faculty are underpaid and that other issues including class size need to be addressed. Further, the fact finder’s report validates that CFA’s bargaining proposals for a new collective bargaining agreement are reasonable. “CFA broadly supports the fact finder’s recommendations and finds them to be a sound basis for the resolution of our contract dispute. We call on the CSU administration to accept them as well. “The fact finder’s recommendations would make meaningful progress toward closing the salary gap between CSU professors and our peers around the country. “The CSU administration has more than $1.2 billion in unrestricted funds available – meaning the administration has flexibility in how those funds will be used. Knowledge of these funds is provided by Moody’s Investor Services in their report on CSU bonds for potential investors. “Yet, the faculty has received one 3.5% raise since 2002 (given in July 2005), which is less than 1% a year. Meanwhile, the Administration and Board of Trustees have given top executives 23% in raises in just the last two years. “The fact finder’s recommendations may cost the CSU an additional $60 million over the four years of this contract – funds that are available and that will help to retain quality teachers in the classroom. “If the Administration is truly committed to providing students with a quality education, and if it truly cares about the future of the CSU system, it would accept the fact finder’s recommendations and settle this contract dispute.” CFA member and Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero said, “I am not surprised by the mediator's report and recommendations. “The professors have been saying for 23 months that they deserve to be paid at the same level as their peers. Now that an independent, third party has analyzed the situation and set forth her recommendations, it is time for Chancellor Reed to return to the table and negotiate in good faith.” Senator Alex Padilla added, “The mediator's report validates what the faculty has been saying from day one, which is that they are being underpaid and that they have proposed a reasonable solution. I cannot see a reason why the Administration cannot sit down with the faculty and work out a settlement. Based on this report, I do not think the Administration is in a position to continue haggling with the faculty who are only asking to be paid fairly. I strongly encourage the Chancellor to return to the table, and bring closure to this process without delay.” Informal conversations through intermediaries occurred this week between the two sides, but there is no progress to report yet. The CFA Board of Directors is considering its strike options at this time. Fact Finder Report’s Main Points · “While there was much discussion during fact finding as to how various figures should be viewed, there was no dispute that no matter how the figures were viewed, the faculty at CSU were lagging, in the double digits behind their comparable institutions. There was also no dispute that the faculty at CSU were falling in the rankings amongst its comparable institutions as evidenced at Displays 4 and 5 of the Commissions’ Report on Faculty Salaries (p.19) · “…the fact finder must take into consideration the Commission’s finding that there is a double digit parity discrepancy at the University. It is important to note that the Commission is not a creation of the Union, nor is it a function of the University, but rather has been established by the Legislature to focus on higher education and policy issues. Its findings represent the best evidence available on faculty salaries at California Public University’s which cannot be ignored by the fact finder.” (p. 20) · The fact finder’s recommendation recognizes “it was unlikely that this round of negotiations was going to eliminate the gap,” and that “the challenge was to shape a recommendation that would make progress toward closing the gap while recognizing that there was not an infinite amount of money available” (pp.19-20) · The faculty should be given a 24.87% raise over four years plus the 10% in SSI pay (service step increases), which “are not an additional cost to the University.” (p.22) · SSI’s are “dependant on satisfactory performance” “not additional year of service”…”Given the University’s stated interest in pay for performance its resistance to fund SSI’s is puzzling.” (p.22) · In 2006/2007, the faculty should receive a 4% raise (3% retroactive raise to 7/1/06 and an additional 1% retro active raise to 1/1/07). In addition, the faculty who are eligible for service step increases should receive the 2.65% to which they are entitled. · In 2007/2008, the faculty should receive a 5.53% raise (4.53% effective 7/1/07 and 1% effective 1/1/08) plus the .5% equity [see definition below] and .5% PPI [post-promotion increase; see definition below]. In addition, the faculty who are eligible for service step increases should receive the 2.65% to which they are entitled. · In 2008/2009, the faculty should receive a 5.84% raise (4.84% effective 7/1/08 and 1% effective 1/1/09 plus the .5% equity and .5% PPI. In addition, the faculty who are eligible for service step increases should receive the 2.65% to which they are entitled. · In 2009/20010, the faculty should receive a 6.5% raise (5.50% effective 7/1/09 and 1% effective 1/1/2010) plus the .5% equity and .5% PPI. In addition, the faculty who are eligible for service step increases should receive the 2.65% to which they are entitled. · “The Union has put forward a compelling argument that the Service Salary Increases are not an additional cost to the University and in fact, there may be savings to the University due to the fluctuation within the bargaining unit as faculty retire or resign resulting in lower overall cost of the salary schedule.” (p.22) · “The University has put forward an equally compelling argument that the savings realized by the University due to the fluctuations should not automatically be provided to the bargaining unit members” (p.22) · “…the University confirmed for the Panel that it was not contending that it did not have the ‘ability to pay’” (p.22) See the fact finders report and related documents here. See definitions of bargaining terms in the “ABCs of salary negotiations” here. (Quotations and citations from actual report. Emphasis added by CFA) Landslide Vote Authorizes Strike (3/21/07) CFA members overwhelmingly voted in favor of a strike if a labor agreement cannot be reached with the CSU Administration. The labor negotiating period under state law ends on Monday, March 26, ten days after an independent fact finder issued a report recommending how the dispute should be settled. If the current ten-day “quiet period” concludes with no agreement, the CSU faculty has the legal right to begin job actions. Of the 8,129 faculty members who voted, 94% voted in favor of a strike. The 81% voter turnout on the 23 CSU campuses exceeded the CFA’s expectations. These numbers reflect the depth and breadth of faculty anger. The CSU administration, after 22 months of fruitless talks, walked away from the negotiating table last summer. Chancellor Charles B. Reed claims the university system cannot afford to close the 18% gap by which CSU faculty salaries lag behind those at comparable institutions. Meanwhile, the Reed administration has raised executive salaries by 23% and imposed cumulative student fee hikes of 94% since 2002. Testifying at a legislative hearing earlier this month, Chancellor Reed, in response to legislators’ concerns about a faculty strike, said he looked forward to reviewing the fact-finder’s recommendations and expected that they would be useful in resolving the dispute with the faculty and their union. However, in the first days after the fact-finding report was delivered to him, there has been no reaction from his office or any indication to CFA that the administration wishes to return to the bargaining table before the report is made public. CFA President John Travis said, “Today, the faculty has spoken loud and clear – they are tired of the way in which they are being treated by the CSU Administration. And they want a return to a true focus on the mission of the university — the instruction of students. “They are frustrated by millions of dollars wasted on pet projects and golden parachute deals for executives while our classrooms and student services are being cut. And finally, they are sick of being lied to and treated disrespectfully by an Administration that makes ‘take it or leave it’ offers and refuses to bargain fairly. “We need to make real progress toward paying the CSU faculty at the same level as our peers around the country. We know this administration has the financial flexibility to make it happen, but they choose not to. If they don’t find the will to reorder their priorities, we don’t want to strike but we will.” The vote authorizes CFA’s Board of Directors to set the dates and locations of the strike. CFA’s leaders have already indicated that the job actions will begin with “rolling strikes” in which campuses will strike at different times for two days each. The actions are likely to occur in April. CSU Has $1.2 Billion in Cash Reserves (3/20/07) The authoritative Moody’s Investors Service last month upgraded the CSU’s bond rating from A1 to Aa3. A key factor in the upgrade, the Moody’s report says, is the existence of “unrestricted reserves” totaling $1.2 billion. Essentially liquid assets that administrators can spend as they please, these unrestricted reserves have increased 45% over the last five years. You can read the Feb. 12 report by registering (for free) at http://Moodys.com and searching for “California State University.” The Moody’s report forms the backdrop for a CFA-commissioned analysis of the contrast between the administration’s claims regarding the university’s fiscal health, and reality. Financial consultant Randy Barber, president of the Center for Economic Organizing, was retained to analyze the CSU’s flexibility to shift funds for the purpose of meeting faculty and educational need. Instead of simply recapitulating CSU budget documents, which provide only static line items, Barber studied what he and other experts regard as one of the most important factors in the financial vitality of a complex organization: control of cash flow. Toward that end, his report produced tables tracking “cash net income” (analogous to “profit” in the for-profit world) and fluctuations in assets and liabilities (analogous to “working capital”). Conclusion: The CSU “has significant financial flexibility to readjust budgetary priorities,” Barber told media from across the state today on a telephone conference call. Not only is there a cumulative five-year positive cash flow of $1.2 billion, Barber added. “The numbers are consistently positive and trending upward…. These are measures of significant strength.” At the news conference, CFA President Travis noted that the differences between CFA and the CSU administration on salary proposals calculate to about $15 million a year, or $60 million over the life of a four-year agreement. “I think they’re being evasive—disingenuous—when they say they don’t have the capacity to bridge that gap,” Travis said. “When administrators wanted to come up with more than half a billion dollars for the Common Management System software, they found the money without getting additional funding from the legislature.” CFA’s summary of Randy Barber’s analysis is posted at http://www.calfac.org/allpdf/Budget_07-08/Summary_Facts_Mar07.pdf The full 12-page report is at http://www.calfac.org/allpdf/Budget_07-08/CSU_Cash_Flow_Mar07.pdf We Don't Want to Strike, But We Will! (3/16/07) The statewide CFA strike vote concluded Thursday, March 15. We are extremely pleased that the voting process has gone so smoothly and look forward eagerly to the results of the ballot count, which will be conducted in the next few days by the League of Women Voters. We anticipate high turn-out numbers with very strong majorities on each campus voting in favor of job actions. We hope that vote itself will be a powerful enough statement to persuade the administration to return to the negotiating table. However, since they may well remain intransigent, CFA has begun to plan two-day rolling strikes that will occur on a Monday and Tuesday or a Wednesday and Thursday sometime before the end of the spring semester. We hope to combine maximum impact at the negotiating table with minimal impact on our campus communities. If called, the strikes will "roll" from campus to campus, shutting down operations for two days at each location. If faculty do strike, it will be because this administration has shown it is not concerned about the impact a demoralized, underpaid, and overworked faculty has on the quality of education in the California State University. The purpose of the strike is to send a clear message that we are united behind the demand for a fair contract. We anticipate broad and enthusiastic faculty participation in picketing and we encourage students and staff to join us on the lines. We hope that those faculty members who have not decided whether to participate in the strike understand that crossing the picket lines will weaken their colleagues and strengthen the administration. We feel very strongly that those who do choose to hold class should not punish students who refuse to cross the lines. And we recommend that faculty prepare alternate dates on which exams might be given and assignments turned in. It is against the law for the administration to punish faculty for striking (other than withholding pay for the classes missed). We do not believe that our local administration will target individuals for retribution, since they do not want to inflame an already tense situation. Moreover, the CFA will take swift and concerted legal action in the face of any attempts by administrators to punish faculty for activities that are explicitly protected by law. The CSU administration is currently under heavy fire from many directions at once. An award-winning and widely syndicated series of articles in the San Francisco Chronicle has revealed the depth of cronyism at the top. Students and their families are fed up with non-stop fee increases. State lawmakers are considering a variety of ways to rein in a bureaucracy they see as veering out of control. 28 influential state legislators recently sent a letter to Chancellor Reed demanding that he immediately settle a fair contract with the faculty. And very soon the results of the faculty strike vote will make front page news. In short, the administration has been abruptly thrown on the defensive this spring, and now is the time for decisive and unified faculty action. Should the decision to call two-day rolling strikes be made, CFA's statewide executive board will coordinate them centrally. As soon as our campus' strike dates are set, we will announce them. In the meantime, we have begun making preparations and invite your help (see below). At a minimum, please begin planning now to observe the strike and join the picket lines. Again, we hope that the strike vote will prove to be a sufficient show of strength, but now is the time to prepare for more forceful actions. Why CSU Faculty May Strike (1/22/07) In 2002, corrupt energy corporations drove California into a fiscal meltdown, so CSU faculty members agreed we would tighten our belts. We wanted to help our university survive the crisis. Since then, we’ve gotten by on one tiny 3.5%
raise while the cost of living has gone up by 12% and the
price of a home has skyrocketed. Just to add insult to injury, the administration demands that we pledge not to criticize CSU budget. They want us to keep quiet about the 94% rise in student fees since 2002 and about their plan to hike them another 10% per year from now till 2011. They want us to ignore growing class sizes and student/faculty ratios. They want us to be silent about shrinking EOP budgets and declining diversity. They want us to shut up about their cronyism and greed. In other words, they want to buy us off
with fake raises while they wreck our school. In what could be a turning point in the history of the California State University labor relations, the CFA Board of Directors voted unanimously on February 20 to authorize a vote of union membership on whether or not to proceed with job actions including the possibility of a strike. This will be the first time that the CSU faculty has taken a strike vote. If a strike does occur, it will be the largest strike of higher education teachers in U.S. history. The voting will take place March 5 through 8 on some campuses and March 12 through 15 on the remaining campuses. “We have said all along that we do not want to strike, but we will if that is what is necessary; and more than ever it is beginning to look like it is,” said CFA president John Travis, a political science professor at Humboldt State University. After more than 22 months of negotiations, talks between the two sides are at an impasse. A state-appointed neutral third party is overseeing the fact-finding process, after which a panel will submit a list of recommendations to CFA and the CSU administration on how to break the impasse. If the Administration and the faculty do not accept these recommendations, the contract officially expires and the faculty would be free to conduct job actions. “It is our responsibility both to our members and to the CSU to make these preparations because an acceptable resolution does not seem likely to be worked out,” said Travis. Arnold's Budget Chops Faculty Raise -- Already! (1/12/07) Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Jan. 11 preliminary 2007/08 state budget included significant general under-funding of the CSU—plus some specific outrages. First, the faculty found that 1% of the pseudo-pay raise promised by Chancellor Reed during bargaining has already bitten the dust. In every conceivable forum—the media, campus email, paid ads, letters to the legislature—Reed and his surrogates have gone to great lengths to convince the world that his offer is a “generous” total of 25% for “nine months’ work.” If that had been true, the contract would
already be settled. It’s a lie. |
