MARCH 1, 2005
 CONTRACT UPDATE


home
about us/contact us
benefits/services
calendar

committees
communications
  contract
 document/data/archive
grievances/rights
health & safety
links
membership/dues info

part-timers/adjuncts
political/legislative
psc chapters
psc news
solidarity page
 who's who in the psc
site map

PUBLIC SECTOR BARGAINING: 

In the past year (2003/04) New York State government settled contracts with many state government employees, including our SUNY colleagues in UUP (United University Professions).  UUP members accepted a four-year contract worth 15% in salary improvements over the life of the agreement, including an $800 cash bonus. 

 

HERE’S WHAT WE ARE FIGHTING FOR:

  • increased salaries
  • restored Welfare Fund benefits
  • improved working conditions and equity

WHAT’S AT STAKE IN OUR CONTRACT?

  • what kind of university CUNY becomes
  • what kind of professional lives we lead at CUNY
  • what kind of education we’re able to offer to the people of New York

MARCH 2005
CONTRACT UPDATE

Click here to sign up for the contract campaign
Click here for bulletin on management's initial offer

 
April 22 bulletin

February 16 bulletin

January 27th PSC-DA resolution on Contract State of Emergency

January 5 & 24 bulletins

December 20, 2004 bulletin

December 7, 2004 bulletin on management's contract offer

   
Above: Packing the gallery at the Feb. 28 B.O.T. monthly meeting, fifty faculty with a cumulative 1,000 years of CUNY service displayed placards reading "We're Not Dead Yet/ Save Our Welfare Fund/ I've Worked at CUNY for __ years."
 

FEB. 28/MARCH 1
2005 UPDATE

Collective bargaining has continued on a fairly intensive schedule during February.  The union’s main objective remains increasing the size of the total economic package, thereby creating enough funding in the contract for raises, stabilizing the Welfare Fund and making some long-overdue improvements in working conditions.  Although individual bargaining sessions may focus on specific areas of the contract or on the needs of a particular constituency, the overriding issue is the economic settlement.  Part of our aim this month was to clarify the priorities of both sides and to try to resolve as many issues as we can so that we can move quickly if and when we reach an economic settlement that is acceptable.  Management’s offer, however, remains 1.5%, and the Chancellor’s representatives persist in demanding “increased productivity” as a condition of reaching a settlement.   

January 26

In this session, management modified their initial proposal on Article 14.1 regarding annual leave in the summer for full-time faculty to demand that annual leave end on August 20 instead of August 30.  “We’re interested in improved efficiency and productivity,” they explained.  Heated discussion ensued.  The PSC voiced our strong opposition to the proposal, especially in the context of an economic offer vastly below the level of inflation.       

The PSC offered counterproposals on issues of annual leave and professional reassignment leave for full-time faculty in Library departments.  The two sides discussed the PSC proposals on ending the abuse of the contractual workweek for employees in the Higher Education Officer series.  The final issue was the PSC’s proposal that Article 8 (Non-Discrimination) include “armed service veteran status.” 

February 1

The parties discussed how to address both sides’ demands on Grievance and Disciplinary procedures.  The union placed emphasis on PSC demands to expand the entitlement to presidential reasons in the case of a non-reappointment.  The union also offered a new counterproposal on annual leave and professional reassignments for Library faculty in an effort to reach resolution on this issue.   

The balance of the session was spent on a detailed response by the PSC to management’s counterproposal on our demands for part-time faculty and staff.  We emphasized a critical unresolved demand for part-time faculty and staff: for adequate sick days and accrual of sick days from one semester to the next.  Finally, we presented a non-economic proposal for seniority in assignments for adjuncts.   

February 9 and 15

For these two sessions, the PSC agreed to an invitation by management to try smaller, exploratory sessions as a way to make progress toward a settlement.  Such sessions are typical at this stage of bargaining, and can sometimes help the two sides to clarify differences and make faster progress.  Discussion in these two sessions was informal and off-the-record.  No formal proposals were made.   

February 16

The PSC was joined at this session by the General Secretary of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), Roger Bowen, who spoke of his support for the PSC’s bargaining agenda and his shock at the 1.5% offer.  Speaking from a national perspective, he commented on the damaging effect of such a low offer.  Roger Bowen also expressed concern about the “hollowing-out” of the profession, as universities like CUNY continue to rely on underpaid part-timers. 

The PSC pressed management for clarification on a set of demands concerning Article 1, Recognition, which specifies titles included in and functions excluded from the bargaining unit represented by the union.  On another topic, PSC proposed a resolution of issues for both sides that were outstanding from the last contract.  Management agreed, subject to working out details of implementation.    

Barbara Bowen

President



Add your voice of protest about management's economic offer by sending the Contract Now! letter from this website by clicking here. The letters make
a difference.

To sign up to receive regular Instant Updates on bargaining sessions, email your contact information to drosato@pscmail.org.

 

Click here to go to Contract Now
Click here for previous bulletin