Summer Bargaining & Socials

Students, workers and community members:  We encourage you to attend bargaining sessions, for all or part of the time. Your presence shows that you care about a fair contract for PSU faculty.

PSU-AAUP members: Please join us for 3 summer socials. Get an update on what’s happening in bargaining, and meet colleagues from across PSU. Enjoy an ice cream, barbecue or a cold beer.

June 8. Bargaining. 9am -1pm. UTS 503.
June 15. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. SMSU 236.
June 24.
IMAGINE A COLD COLD ICE CREAM
…3-4pm. Urban Center Terrace, 4th floor.
…A social for faculty & APs. Our bargaining team will give an update. Ben & Jerry’s ice cream provided.
July 8. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. ASRC 620/630.
July 9.
IMAGINE A SMOKEY BBQ
…Noon-1pm. Urban Center Terrace, 4th floor.
…A social for faculty & APs. Our bargaining team will give an update. Lunch provided.
July 10. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. ASRC 620/630.
July 29.
IMAGINE A COLD BEER
…4-6pm. Rogue Brew Pub. 1717 SW Park Ave.
…A social for faculty & APs. Our bargaining team will give an update. Some appetizers and pitchers provided.
July 30. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. ASRC 620/630.
Aug 14. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. ASRC 620/630.
Aug 25. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. ASRC 620/630.
Aug 31. Bargaining. 11am – 4pm. ASRC 620/630.
Sept 9. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. ASRC 620/630.
Sept 14. Bargaining. 10am – 4pm. SMSU 296.

Advertisements

Ground Rules: Part 3

Leanne Serbulo, VP of Collective Bargaining

We met today (May 21st) hoping to finish establishing our ground rules for interest-based bargaining (IBB). We made significant progress, but still have two areas left to discuss: how data will be shared during IBB and codes of conduct. We had a long discussion, using the seven steps of IBB, about communication and agreed upon a set of ground rules on this issue. During that discussion, we emphasized our need to communicate with our members on our own terms and our desire for openness and transparency in the bargaining process. We also sought to clarify the role the board would play in our negotiations and expressed an interest in having an opportunity for the union to address the board directly.

In addition, we also agreed upon ground rules that would govern our process—sticking to start and end times, using a facilitator during negotiations, having a shared note-taker, allowing subgroups if needed, inviting outside experts to share data with the teams, assigning a smaller groups to write contract language which will be brought back to and approved by the full teams, and allowing the teams to bring-up additional issues by mutual agreement.

As in past rounds of bargaining, all of our sessions will be open, and we encourage anyone to attend, including AAUP members, students, or the general public, for all or part of the time!

Our next bargaining session is set for June 8th at 9-1pm with the location TBA. It will be a shorter session. On the agenda for next time:
• Finish ground rules around data sharing and codes of conduct
• Clarify the role the board plays in the negotiation process
• Sequence our bargaining issues for upcoming sessions

Ground Rules: Part 2

Leanne Serbulo, VP of Collective Bargaining

We met on this morning (May 15th) for a short Interest-Based Bargaining session. The purpose of this session was to come-up with our ground rules for the IBB process. Establishing ground rules is taking longer than it does in traditional bargaining because we are practicing the IBB steps as we create ground rules.

During this session, we:

  • Recognized students’ statutory right to observe bargaining and welcomed their participation in our IBB sessions and in each team’s caucuses when appropriate.
  • Confirmed our Spring and Summer bargaining dates. We agreed to bargain for eight, six-hour days (48 hours total) over the summer. (Click here for the schedule)
  • Received the administration’s letter to open bargaining, which outlines the issues/article they would like to discuss.
  • Began discussing how to create ground rules around communication and listed our interests around this issue.

We will meet again on Thursday, May 21st. Our agenda includes:

  • Finishing discussion around communication
  • Completing ground rules
  • Scheduling bargaining issues/topics for our upcoming sessions.

Training and Ground Rules

Leanne Serbulo, VP of Collective Bargaining

Bargaining has officially begun! Thanks to all of you who came out for our joint bargaining kick-off action with PSUFA, the union that represents our part-time colleagues. Together, our voices filled the Park Blocks and echoed through the Market Center Building. President Wiewel heard our message, and your energy, strength and commitment to excellence, accessibility and affordability in higher education will help carry us through this round of contract negotiations.

The day after the rally, both teams began our two-day Interest–Based Bargaining Training. It was conducted by Janet Gillman, the state conciliator who also served as our mediator when we settled our contract last year. On Thursday, we were joined by Eric Noll and Rayleen McMillan (student representatives from ASPSU) and Provost Sona Andrews. Friday’s attendance was limited to members of the two bargaining teams.

The Interest-Based Bargaining process consists of seven steps:

1. Framing the Problem: The party that identified an issue will frame it as an open-ended problem and share stories or data.
2. Exchanging Data: If more data is needed to understand the problem or determine solutions, both teams will collect the information they need and bring it to the next session.
3. Identifying Interests: The two teams state their underlying interests, describing why the issue is important to their constituencies and outlining what needs to be addressed in the solutions generated.
4. Inventing Options: The parties brainstorm options to address the problem, then evaluate options based on the parties’ interests.
5. Evaluating Options: The two teams (hopefully) come to consensus on the best option.
6. Selecting a Solution: We work together to develop a mutually beneficial solution.
7. Closure

Traditional bargaining includes many of these same steps, but they tend to happen away from the table. In IBB, the two parties work through the process together.

The Interest-Based Bargaining process is long and laborious, but it can be a useful method for addressing some of the deep-rooted issues at PSU if both teams come to the table with a willingness to be transparent; have the authority and ability to share information; and are committed and open to new ideas. During the training, both teams expressed a desire to come to an agreement before our contract expires.

The two teams began practicing IBB last Friday to create ground rules for this round of negotiations. When we meet again tomorrow (May 15), we hope to finish establishing ground rules; hear the administration’s issues for this round of negotiations; and set a schedule for summer bargaining. We will share what we learn and accomplish with you.

Bargaining Priorities

Our union is a democratic organization, and our bargaining priorities reflect what our bargaining team heard over the course of many conversations with members across the university. The team has identified four major areas of interest. They are not listed in any priority order. Within these interests, we can imagine many possible improvements to our contract.

1. Support for Professional Development
  • Faculty and academic professionals do not have sufficient access to professional development.
  • There are limited opportunities to design, lead, or participate in programs that develop excellence in teaching, re search, service and student support.
  • The indirect funds researchers receive are not adequate to fully support their research programs.
2. Retention and Recognition of Service
  • Academic professionals have no room for advancement and are not rewarded for their years of experience or the specialized skills and knowledge they possess.
  • The Article 18 Task Force proposal has not been adopted, and as a result, non-tenure track faculty members still do not have meaningful job security.
  • The post -tenure review pool will need to be funded at an equivalent rate.
3. Healthy Workplace
  • Faculty and academic professionals do not have paid family leave, and current policies are not family-friendly.
  • Out of pocket health care costs are rising, and health incentive programs do not meet the needs of faculty and academic professionals.
  • Academic professionals are unable to take leave and are not reimbursed for leave they do not take.
  • Faculty and academic professionals carry heavy workloads, which interfere with maintaining a healthy work/life balance.
  • We seek to capture the current leave policies and statutes for faculty and academic professionals in the contract as a new article, or as an addition to a current article
4. Fair Compensation
  • Salaries must rise with inflation, so we do not fall further behind our peers.
  • Summer session pay rates and teaching opportunities have been reduced resulting in significantly lower annual income for many members.
  • Our members experience salary compression and inversion, and our annual salaries are considerably lower than our peers both within the state and at comparator institutions.
  • We need better retention and retirement incentives, and issues of pay equity (by race and gender) need to be considered and addressed

2015-2016 Bargaining Team Members

PSU-AAUP Bargaining Team Members:

Leanne Serbulo, VP: University Studies
leanne@psuaaup.net

Michael Clark, MCECS

Gina Greco, Foreign Languages

David Hansen, School of Business Administration

Anh Ly, Social Sciences- CLAS

Pam Miller, School of Social Work

Ron Narode, Curriculum and Instruction

Ex-officio Members
Phil Lesch, Executive Director

PSU Administration bargaining team members:

Bob Bucher, Dean: College of the Arts

Shelly Chabon, Vice Provost: OAA

Ramon Diaz , Director-Employee and Labor Relations:HR

Carol Hawkins, Director Academic Labor Relations: HR

Scott Marshall, Vice Provost: FADM

Leslie McBride, Associate Dean: School of Public Health

David Reese, University Counsel

Dana Tasson, Director: SHAC