CCCFE Faculty News Notes Sept 24, 2013

September 24, 2013

WELCOME BACK:

Welcome also new faculty members. We now have  88  full-time faculty, and an estimated 226 part-time faculty, and given the wait-listed students in classes, the enrollment seems to be more robust than was originally anticipated for this term.  Furthermore, the parking was not as much of a problem as had been expected.  The opening of the east Greenleaf gate eased the congestion at the west gate where the only access to and exit from lot F had been. Much appreciation is due to Linda Owens for her tireless work in making sure that the contractors and work crews meet the deadlines. However, although the road between Artesia and Greenleaf may open even earlier than the anticipated October date, it will close again for one week to complete a trenching job.

UNION MEETING in Review:

The union meeting held on September 10 had only one item on the agenda, and that was the negotiation status;  it has become apparent that we need to close out the 2012-13 contract—in which there was no money available whatsoever, and turn our attention to the 2013-4 contract for which there will be some money available from the 1.57 COLA provided by the state.  We do not qualify for growth funding, but the COLA money will be on the table.

            We discussed the need for an increase in the health benefit funding, but there was no relief for the 2012-13 year. The District—and the Board of Trustees—has been notified that the situation is reaching crisis proportion, in that faculty who are trying to provide health coverage for a family are paying out of pocket more than the district provides each month:  although the district may currently pay $1,000/month, new faculty with families may pay up to $1380/month. This situation is exceptionally discouraging to new faculty who see their salaries decreased by that amount each month. It was reported that the district is willing to negotiate increases for the 2013-14 year.

This was purely an information meeting;  there were no actions taken. The meeting was well-attended, with over 40 members attending, and the discussions centered, of course, on compensation issues. One of the faculty members brought up the idea of having flex credit for work on SLO’s/ PLO’s/ ILO’s.  This matter will be discussed at the next negotiations. Another faculty member suggested that  the workload for on-line classes needs to be reviewed and adjusted.  This, too, will be a matter for negotiations in the next contract.

NEGOTIATIONS UP-DATE:

·      The District offers $2,000 increase per annum in health benefits

The faculty has now been offered a $2,000/year increase in the fringe benefits for those taking the full package ($10,000) offered by the District.  This would be due to take effect upon ratification of the 2012-13 contract, and it is not retroactive.  Those who do not take the full package will remain at a $7,000 cap.  The increase will certainly help those insuring a spouse, and it will make a small dent in the amount some are paying for family coverage.  Fortunately we will begin a new round of negotiations immediately following ratification of this contract.  The District offered this concession only after the classified unit hesitated in accepting the offer because classified members wanted the money put on the salary schedule.  The advantage of putting money onto the benefits package is that it is not taxed as earnings, and any increase in the District-paid benefits reduces the amount that the faculty members must pay out of pocket.

·      The District seeks elimination of lifetime health benefits and life insurance for new faculty

The District has put on the table a proposal to eliminate the district-paid lifetime health benefits for faculty members serving the district for 20 years or more. The proposal applies to any faculty hired after July 1, 2013. The District also proposes to eliminate the continuation of the life insurance benefit for faculty hired after July 1, 2013. The proposal does not affect anyone hired prior to July 1, 2013.

            The Classified bargaining unit has already signed off on this item, as have the Confidential/Supervisory staff, and the administrators.  We are the lone hold-outs.  There is nothing to be gained in return for giving up this hard won benefit. The District claims that it is necessary as a means of getting the Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEBS) under control.  The difficulty with this explanation is that the OPEBs are hypotheticals—projections over a thirty year period, based on existing staff and their ages.  It’s just grist for an actuarial table, but management of it is required for accreditation.

            However, we were able to convince the District that the effective date for the proposal should be January 1, 2014;  this date ensures that newly hired faculty from fall semester will still be able to retire from the district with 20 years of service acknowledged by continued district-paid health care and with a life insurance policy.

·      Revised Evaluation Policy Still Under Review

                        However, just as we thought we were approaching a tentative agreement to bring to the faculty, the evaluation policy emerged as a problem.  While both sides had worked diligently on trying to refine the existing policy to provide language that would meet the accreditation demands by focusing on self-evaluation and reflections, as well as peer evaluations of classroom instruction, and allow for greater participation of administrators (the district’s demand), the union found that when the policy was being typed up for possible tentative agreement that we do not have enough tenured faculty to serve on evaluation teams without modifying the policy.  The District is not pleased.  What this indicates is that the District did not factor in what happens when there is a sudden escalation of probationary faculty to be evaluated.  The District was also very concerned with getting rid of basic evaluations;  we tried modifying them to include a mini-portfolio and the observation of a minimum of 1 class, but the real problem remains that we have too many people being evaluated each year as probationary faculty, and not enough faculty to do the evaluating without affecting the workload.

·      Language on Health Benefits for Part-timers Restored

            The language regarding health care for part-time employees serving three semesters has been restored, and it will be put into effect if the state provides sufficient funding, as it had done when the budgets were more stable.

·       Status of Division Chairs

            The article on division chairs reduces (effective July 1, 2014) the number of chairs to 3;  in the mean time, there is a memorandum of understanding to keep the 5 newly elected chairs.  You can rest assured that this item will be brought up in the next negotiations, because it is becoming abundantly clear that the reorganization is unwieldy as it is with 5 chairs.  The duties and responsibilities of the division chairs have been modified by eliminating numbers 2, 3, 14, and 19.  The language of 1, 4, 5, 6, 10, and 12 has been refined—the changes being largely grammatical.

            The district is insisting on eliminating the stipends—except for the $2,000 for the summer—and instead providing a 40% reassigned time for division chairs. In short, there is not much that the district was willing to do in the 12-13 contract;  things look much better for 13-14.

·      Unit Meeting will have short notice

Once the District provides us with the “clean copy” of the articles, we will send you an electronic copy for your perusal;  then we will hold a union meeting and a possible ratification vote.  Be on the lookout for emails.

            Once the district provides us with the “clean copy”, we will send you an electronic copy for your perusal; then we will hold a union meeting and a possible ratification vote.

Update on Salary Increases for 13-14 at other districts:

        CFT has posted the negotiated increases from districts that have completed negotiations for 2013-14. Contra Costa, Foothill DeAnza, and Yosemite have signed off on a 2% increase;  Adjuncts at Citrus also have a 2% increase.  Los Angeles and Palomar settled on 3%.  The range is from 1% (San Diego) to 5.3% at Santa Rosa.  The average is slightly above 2%..  In short, most districts are using COLA at 1.57% + their growth—which seems to be minimal in most cases.

Some of these districts have large reserves;  Coast, for example, has a reserve of 20%, but Glendale has only a 6% reserve and is not getting an increase at this time.  Most districts are looking to increase their reserves. El Camino Torrance has a reserve between 15 and 20%. Between the demands of the ACCJC (accrediting agency) for larger and larger reserves and the fears of the state economy experiencing another collapse, districts are putting a lot into their reserves;  the average among the group surveyed in the CFT study, the average was around 14%.