JUNE 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:
WHAT’S AT STAKE IN OUR CONTRACT?
|
JUNE 2005
CONTRACT UPDATE
Click
here to sign up
for the contract campaign
Click here
for bulletin on management's initial offer
|
May 26, 2005 DA resolution authorizing job action referendum May 2005 Clarion update April 22, 2005 bulletin March 31, 2005 DA resolution creates a defense fund. February 28, 2005 bulletin February 16, 2005 bulletin January 27, 2005 PSC-DA resolution on Contract State of Emergency January 5 & 24, 2005 bulletins December 20, 2004 bulletin December 7, 2004 bulletin on management's contract offer |
JUNE 2005
UPDATES ON THE MAY 24,
On May 24, CUNY invited the PSC to a bargaining session at which representatives from the labor offices of the City and State would also be present. We were assured beforehand that we would receive a proposal to meet the union’s needs. Instead, we got a proposal that included an additional 1% on the final day of the contract, October 31, 2006, that would be converted into increased contributions to the Welfare Fund. The rest of the proposal, for 6.25% over four years in salary increases, remained the same. While it was a victory for us to have management recognize the need for significant, recurring increases to the Welfare Fund, the proposal as a whole fell far short of meeting the union’s needs. Rather than presenting a way to settle a fair contract, the representatives of the City and State reinforced the message that the offer they were making was the maximum proposal they were willing to entertain. What we have been offered is exactly the same total economic package that was agreed to by the CUNY locals of District Council 37. The PSC negotiating team gave fair consideration to management’s offer. When we met with management on June 14, we noted that management had for the first time acknowledged their responsibility to increase contributions to the Welfare Fund. After months of blaming the members for the Welfare Fund deficit, CUNY management finally admitted that they would have to provide increased annual contributions. But their solution was to take the Welfare Fund contributions out of salary increases, reproducing the settlement the City is trying to force on other unions, but with Welfare Fund increases subtracted from raises. The union’s position from the start has been that we are entitled to both raises and health benefits; one cannot be sacrificed for the other. At the June 14 session, the PSC also presented management with a demand to bargain on intellectual property rights, following the state appellate court ruling that CUNY violated the law in refusing to bargain on the issue. Eager not to waste time at this stage in the negotiations, we suggested a series of intensive sessions away from the bargaining table. Management refused. They announced that their position on negotiating about intellectual property policies remained unchanged. The PSC presented a counterproposal to CUNY management at a collective bargaining session on Wednesday, June 22. We approached the session eager to reach a settlement-but not a settlement that means lower salaries, weaker benefits and loss of annual leave. Thus we presented a counterproposal that indicated movement on several non-economic issues but refused to reduce our economic demand. We also refused to accept management's concessionary proposals for a reduction in annual leave for full-time faculty and the removal of department chairs from the union. With a $3.5 billion surplus in the City budget, this is not a period of fiscal constraint: there is no justification for a contract that keeps salaries down and forces other concessions. Management's response was disappointing. Instead of taking the position that CUNY faculty and staff are entitled to fair pay and working conditions, the Chancellor's representatives align themselves with the City's anti-worker agenda for labor contracts. Management insists that CUNY faculty and staff are entitled to no more than the below-inflation raises agreed to by the other locals. The PSC representatives argued that CUNY management is happy to take credit for the work of the faculty and staff in strengthening the University-but not to secure the funds necessary for a contract that rewards and supports that work. Management also refused our request to engage in detailed discussion of the non-economic issues remaining on the table. The PSC negotiating team proposed that we try to make progress on these issues, even if we remain apart on the economic package. Management refused even to discuss the issues, saying they had heard enough about them. The PSC counterproposal includes a demand for the same economic package as our May proposal. On salary it calls for across-the-board increases of 10.6% over four years, plus an $800 increase in base salary for all, and a $500 longevity increase. On the Welfare Fund it proposes increased contributions to stabilize the Fund and restore the dental benefit. Other demands include: improved sabbatical pay; progress on paid parental leave; due process rights for adjuncts and professional staff, equity in annual leave for Library faculty. The demands we withdrew are issues on which we seek to make progress but are willing to defer in an effort to reach closure. Barbara Bowen
Click
here to go to
Contract Now |
