
NOV. '05 -
MARCH '06
BULLETINS
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
|
|
|
Oct. 18, 2005
update
Barbara
Bowen's Sept. 29
Address
Sign
the
Ad
More
on the
Contract Campaign
2002-05
Negotiations Timeline
|
MARCH 31
"The Legislature’s agreement
on higher education represents a major victory for the PSC.
We took a strong stand in support of restoration of public
funds and against making higher education even less
affordable for CUNY students. The union proposed that
funding could be increased without further privatization in
the form of increased tuition. The Legislature has accepted
the PSC’s position, rejecting requests for increased tuition
by both the Governor and the Chancellors of CUNY and SUNY."
|
back to
top |
|
March 31, 2006
Dear Colleagues and PSC Members,
I write to update you on the
contract—and ask you to take action today in support of the
Legislature’s proposal for increased CUNY funding. We are in
the final week of the State budget process, and the Legislature
has presented to the Governor the best budget for CUNY in more
than a decade. The PSC played a major part in achieving the
Legislature’s budget; now we need to ensure that the Governor
does not turn it down. I’ll say more at the end of this letter
about what the budget would mean for us and what we can do to
support it, but I start where most faculty and staff are
focused: the contract.
At the bargaining session on
March 1, the PSC identified a short list of items—fewer than
ten—that must be resolved before a settlement can be reached.
As I noted in my last report, these are not minor items. The
knottiest and most important of them is ensuring sufficient
increased contributions to the Welfare Fund. We continue to
work on that issue, primarily with the City, to maximize the
available money for Welfare Fund benefits. Other unresolved
issues include the precise economic values of several elements
in the contract, final discussions on the Educational
Opportunity Centers and Hunter Campus Schools, and the funding
of research time.
ONLY A FEW ISSUES
REMAIN
Many of the issues have now been
resolved; only a few remain. The PSC bargaining team is working
to narrow the differences between the two sides and reach
resolution on each issue in preparation for a final bargaining
session. Our aim is to come to the table as soon as possible
with solutions to each issue already in place. The process has
involved an intense schedule of meetings, conference calls and
one-on-one discussions with the representatives of CUNY
management, the City and the State. After three-and-half years
of tough negotiations, we are redoubling our efforts in this
final stage so we can be certain that we achieve the fairest and
most advantageous settlement possible in this round of
bargaining. We are working at a level of detail that includes
discussion of hundredths of a percentage point as we seek to
obtain the full value of the economic package for the faculty
and staff.
Several members of the PSC
leadership have attended chapter meetings during the past few
weeks. We have listened hard to the issues you raised and have
learned from you. Some of the comments you have made have been
incorporated into our discussions with management and have been
very helpful as we work to finalize a settlement. I want to
thank you for your comments, even when they have been critical:
the union bargaining team invariably benefits from hearing from
you.
When union and management reach a
tentative agreement on a final settlement, I will announce the
outline of the tentative agreement, and it will be submitted to
the PSC Executive Council and Delegate Assembly for their
recommendation. The next Delegate Assembly is on April 27.
Delegates have the responsibility of voting whether to recommend
a proposed settlement to you for ratification; if they do,
ratification takes place through a secret ballot vote among the
entire membership. Any proposed settlement would also have to
be ratified by the CUNY Board of Trustees before becoming
final. I will update you as soon as we have news of further
developments in bringing this long process to a close.
SEND A FAX TO PROTECT
LEGISLATIVE GAINS
Meanwhile, I ask you to take five minutes
and send a letter to Governor Pataki urging him to maintain the
Legislature’s proposed increases for CUNY in the final State
budget. Visit the union website and have your letter sent
directly to the Governor by clicking
here. While the contract is the
union’s primary arena for advancing the economic interests of
the faculty and staff, the CUNY budget also has a direct effect
on our professional lives. Five years of systematic work by the
PSC on the budget have paid off. For the first time in more
than a decade, the two houses of the New York State Legislature
have agreed on a budget proposal for public higher education
that contains significant increases for CUNY—and does so without
increasing tuition.
The Legislature’s agreement on
higher education represents a major victory for the PSC. We
took a strong stand in support of restoration of public funds
and against making higher education even less affordable for
CUNY students. The union proposed that funding could be
increased without further privatization in the form of increased
tuition. The Legislature has accepted the PSC’s position,
rejecting requests for increased tuition by both the Governor
and the Chancellors of CUNY and SUNY.
The Legislature’s proposal
provides a total of $66.2 million in additional operating
support to CUNY’s senior colleges and an increase of $4.7
million in base aid to the CUNY community colleges, or a $75
increase per FTE. This will mean more money for new full-time
lines and increased support for the daily operations of the
colleges. The Legislature’s agreement also provides a 10%
increase in funding for SEEK and College Discovery (after years
in which we scrambled just to avert cuts) and an additional $700
million in capital funding for SUNY and CUNY. The capital
funding will allow CUNY to complete desperately needed new
buildings and long-overdue renovation. In addition, the
Legislature rejected the Governor’s cuts to TAP and created a
new plan for TAP for part-time students—a proposal advanced by
the PSC.
While the Legislature’s budget is
far from a perfect solution to fifteen years of underfunding, it
takes the first major step in providing adequate public support
for CUNY. And, critically, it recognizes that a public
university should be publicly supported—not dependent on
“tuition indexing” or increases in tuition and fees. We applaud
the Legislature for their groundbreaking budget and call on the
Governor to approve it in its entirety.
The next week is critical; Governor Pataki
has a short period in which to accept or veto the Legislature’s
proposal. We cannot allow the breakthrough achieved in the
Legislature to slip away. Hearing from hundreds of CUNY faculty
and staff could make the difference. Please send your letter
now:
http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/PatakiLegislature.
Thank you for your support of
this important budget initiative, and I will inform you as soon
as there is more news to report on either the budget or the
contract.
|
MARCH 16
"Throughout the last two weeks, union and
management representatives have been meeting in sidebar
sessions and holding informal discussions to resolve as many
issues as possible before returning to the bargaining
table. We have made some progress, and the union is
pressing hard to move to final negotiations quickly. There
was no formal bargaining session last week, but we are
working constantly through conversations on individual
issues to prepare for a session that would bring the
negotiations to a close. "
|
|
March 16, 2006
Dear PSC
Members and Colleagues,
As I
reported in my last message about the contract, the PSC
bargaining team on March 1 made a comprehensive counterproposal
to reach a settlement. The onus is now on management to come to
the table and resolve the remaining issues. Meanwhile, the
union is doing everything it can to push the process to
completion.
Throughout
the last two weeks, union and management representatives have
been meeting in sidebar sessions and holding informal
discussions to resolve as many issues as possible before
returning to the bargaining table. We have made some progress,
and the union is pressing hard to move to final negotiations
quickly. There was no formal bargaining session last week, but
we are working constantly through conversations on individual
issues to prepare for a session that would bring the
negotiations to a close.
At every
stage, the PSC has had to push CUNY management to treat our
contract as a matter of urgency. This stage is no different.
It took Chancellor Goldstein two years to put any economic offer
on the table, and when an offer finally materialized, it was for
a total of 1.5%. That was December 2004. (Meanwhile, he had
accepted a 40% raise for himself.) Since then union pressure
has increased CUNY’s offer and defeated such concessionary
demands as removal of department chairs from the bargaining
unit. But we still have battles to win.
You
might want to refer to my earlier contract reports, all of which
are available on the PSC website at
http://www.psc-cuny.org/Winter05_06bulletins.htm
for a summary of our most recent proposals. Here I’ll highlight
the major features of the union proposal and summarize the
issues that remain to be resolved.
Not Minor Issues
Although the
union identified fewer than ten remaining issues, they are not
minor ones, nor are they issues that affect only small
constituencies of members. We are tenacious because we are
determined to achieve the most beneficial contract we can within
the economic constraints imposed on us by City and State power.
Until we are prepared to mount the kind of campaign it would
take to defeat that amassed power—and CUNY’s alignment with
it—we will continue to have to work, as creatively as we can,
within the same constraints that have been imposed on every
other public-employee union in the City and State. I look
forward to starting that campaign once this contract is settled,
but in the meantime we are doing everything we can to produce a
contract that responds to the needs you have identified.
Salary Increases and Welfare Fund Stability
The union
counterproposal includes annual across-the-board salary
increases identical to those achieved by SUNY faculty in this
round of bargaining: a one-time, non-recurring sum of $800
(pro-rated for part-timers) in the first year; a percentage
increase of 2.5% in the second year; an additional 2.75% in the
third year; and a further 3% in the fourth year, for a total
percentage increase of 8.48%, when compounded. In addition, the
proposal includes $800 (pro-rated for adjunct titles) added to
base salary on the last day of the contract. The value in
percentage points represented by $800 on base salary differs, of
course, depending on one’s salary—it’s a 2% increase for someone
earning $40,000 and a 1% increase for someone earning $80,000.
An average figure for the total value of the salary increases is
9.5%.
Under the
union’s counterproposal, stability for the Welfare Fund would be
created by devoting a portion of the collective retroactive pay
to the Welfare Fund reserves. There would still be retroactive
cash as part of the settlement, but collectively we would get
more value for our money and more lasting value if we direct
some of it, pre-tax, to the Welfare Fund reserves. Additional
money in the reserves—plus the recurring increase we have
proposed—would mean no reduction in current prescription drug
benefits.
One of the
major issues on which we need management to move in order to
settle this contract is an increase in recurring contributions
to the Welfare Fund. On March 1 the union proposed that the
City work with us on providing more than two-and-a-half million
dollars in increased contributions on an annual,
recurring basis to the Fund. As I mentioned in an earlier
message, the City’s proposal to increase the contribution rate
would mean that the Welfare Fund gets 58 cents for every dollar
we take out of our total economic package. In making this
proposal, the City is relying on a formula for valuing welfare
fund contributions to municipal unions that it has used with all
unions for many years. This formula doesn’t work for the PSC,
and we need to settle this issue before coming to a final
agreement.
Research Support and Equity
Other
unresolved issues include the union’s proposals to increase
research support through enhanced sabbaticals and a full year of
research time for future faculty, if the longer tenure clock
comes into effect. We have made progress in discussion of both
of these subjects, but agreement has not yet been reached. The
increase in junior faculty leave, if it is part of the final
agreement, will not take effect until the contract is ratified
and the State Education Law on time-to-tenure is changed.
The final
group of issues includes equitable application of the various
increases to salary; conclusion of the discussions about the
Hunter Campus Schools and the Educational Opportunity Centers;
and resolution of the two equity provisions that were part of
our November framework and were dropped from management’s
February 16 offer. None of these is trivial. They represent
significant steps forward and a lifting of concessions made by
union leadership in the 1990s. Together with the salary
increases and increased Welfare Fund contributions, they would
make this a contract that provides some imaginative and
long-sought improvements in professional life at CUNY, despite
the politically-driven constraints within which we are working.
When even a
transit strike that shut the city down for three days did not
immediately succeed in breaking through these political and
economic constraints, it’s clear that we will need concerted
labor action, with the support of the communities we serve, to
set a different political and economic agenda. Every contract
for public employees in this round has either been below the
level of inflation or included major give-backs, such as deep
cuts in the starting salary for future employees. A hallmark of
the PSC’s proposal is that it does not include such cuts, and
that it continues to press ahead on issues such as sabbaticals
and research leave that go right to the heart of a university’s
intellectual vitality.
The PSC has
put on the table a proposal that would bring us to a settlement
in the next bargaining session. We have worked in a principled
way within the economic package offered by CUNY, the City and
the State. It’s time for management to come to the table with
the final issues resolved. The PSC bargaining team is working
daily and tirelessly to make that happen; we appreciate your
continued support.
In
solidarity,
Barbara
Bowen
President
Click
here for
printer friendly version |
MARCH 2
“Obviously,
this must be the beginning of a serious political discussion
in the union. If management agrees to our proposal, the
proposed settlement would go first to the union’s Executive
Committee and then the Delegate Assembly before it is
submitted to you for ratification. At every stage of that
process we will take the opportunity to have open debate
about the political choices that led to our presenting a
proposal that falls short of the goals that thousands
of people fought for.”
|
|
March 2,
2006
Dear CUNY Colleagues,
The
PSC bargaining team met yesterday, March 1, with representatives
of Chancellor Goldstein, together with the New York City
Commissioner of Labor and his staff.
Speaking for Goldstein, Vice Chancellor Brenda Malone rejected
the union’s proposal that management provide additional funding
for enhanced sabbaticals. Despite Goldstein’s repeated claims
about his concern for the faculty, the truth is that he has
failed to come through. His representatives offered nothing but
the substandard economic package that has been the norm in this
round of bargaining with the City and State. Their repeated
message was that they are not willing or able to go beyond the
“pattern” of collective bargaining settlements for public
employees. It makes no difference to them that this pattern
damages the University. Nor, apparently, does it matter to the
City and State that the parameters that may be acceptable to
other unions—whose members are not recruited through national
searches—are ruinous at CUNY. I am not the only person whose
department is finding that job candidates who express a strong
preference for CUNY eventually turn us down because of the
impossible salaries and workload.
Management also said there was little flexibility in getting
full value from the 1.5% we are willing to take from our package
for the Welfare Fund. Because of the City’s historical way of
valuing Welfare Fund contributions as part of contract
settlements, the proposal made by management would provide only
58 cents on the dollar of Welfare Fund money. The union cannot
accept that.
In
responding to management, the union voiced the anger felt by
CUNY faculty and staff—first at the unconscionable delay in this
contract, and second at the failure of our collective bosses to
offer anything like an appropriate settlement. Despite having
agreed in November to an imaginative framework that (while far
from perfect) would have met many of the union’s needs, CUNY
management has now aligned itself with the punitive contract
settlements that no union in this round has yet been able to
defeat.
The
PSC negotiating team, then, was faced with the decision of
either working within this inadequate framework or walking away
from the table with no contract. As you can imagine, this was a
difficult choice, but the majority position of the negotiating
team was to try to work within the parameters in the most
principled and imaginative way we could to fashion a
settlement. In this spirit, we offered the following
counterproposal as a way to reach final resolution:
· First,
the Welfare Fund reserve would be restored, providing stability
to the Fund, by using a portion of the retroactive pay,
including some of the retroactive amount in year two.
· Second,
we proposed that the City would agree to allocate a smaller
amount than 1.5% on a recurring basis to the Welfare Fund, but
that this amount would go into the Fund at its full value. The
result of this would be stability for the Fund, but probably not
enough money to enhance the dental benefit.
· Third,
we proposed that the remaining funds from this 1.5%, plus the
value of the $500 management had offered to employees with
“permanent” status, be used to create the necessary funds to
provide sabbaticals, with no cap on the annual number, at 80%
pay. We argued that using the $500 in this way creates a
lasting benefit for permanent employees, and that unlike the
$500 bonus, it would not be lost when each individual leaves or
retires.
· Fourth,
we proposed that because of the impact on future faculty of the
legislative change in the tenure clock, junior faculty should
have access to the equivalent of a full year of paid research
time to prepare for tenure. Thus we proposed that the
additional research time for future junior faculty (to begin
when the tenure change begins) would be 15 hours at the
community colleges and 9 hours at the senior colleges.
· Fifth,
we indicated that the settlement would need to include the two
additional “equity” items to which we had agreed in the fall.
They are the provision of paid sick days to the hundreds of
part-time College Lab Technicians and non-teaching adjuncts; and
the groundbreaking new proposal for 100 full-time positions
reserved for eligible CUNY adjuncts.
· Sixth,
we said that the $800 added to base salary on the last day of
the contract would have to be applied to all members of the
bargaining unit, including Continuing Education faculty.
· Finally,
the union reminded management that we also represent the four
Educational Opportunity Centers and the Hunter Campus Schools.
We need to have the across-the-board raises applied to the EOCs
and to resolve some professional issues at the Hunter Campus
Schools.
This,
in addition to some questions and technical points we raised,
was our proposal. It leaves unchanged the annual salary
increases of $800 in cash in the first year, 2.5% in the second
year, 2.75% in the third year, and 3% in the fourth year, with
an additional $800 on base salary on the final day of the
contract, after an extension of ten months. It also includes
flexibility of up to three days on the starting-date for the
fall semester; the equity items to which we had already agreed;
and the provision that the union would support legislation
changing the time to tenure from five years to seven (except for
CLTs and Hunter Campus Schools teachers).
Management responded that they would consider each of the
elements of the union’s proposal, and did not foreclose the
possibility of agreement. They also provided answers to some of
our technical questions, and a further technical meeting is
scheduled for today, March 2. We got a commitment from CUNY and
the City to return to the bargaining table for a full session
next week.
Obviously, this must be the beginning of a serious political
discussion in the union. If management agrees to our proposal,
the proposed settlement would go first to the union’s Executive
Committee and then the Delegate Assembly before it is submitted
to you for ratification. At every stage of that process we will
take the opportunity to have open debate about the political
choices that led to our presenting a proposal that falls short
of the goals that thousands of people fought for. The
mobilization for this contract is the best this union has ever
done; never before have we had this level of membership
commitment and fight, this kind of organization on the ground,
this network of over 400 picket captains. Your effort, led by
the union’s Executive Council and chapter activists, is what
forced management to move beyond its previous economic offers,
agree to several important advances for faculty and staff, and
take off the table such demands as reduced job security for HEOs
and removal of department chairs from the union.
Now,
however, it’s clear that it will take far more than even that
mobilization to break through the punitive contract patterns
being forced on unions by the City and State—and now embraced by
CUNY. When we reached an acceptable framework for an agreement
with CUNY, they failed to gain City and State approval. The
question the union faces together is when and how the PSC is
best positioned to undertake a breakthrough fight. Members will
take different positions on that question, and the discussion
will call on us to analyze exactly what political forces we’re
up against and what it will take to wrest from them a
transformative contract.
As
soon as we hold the next session, I will report to you on
whether management has agreed to a settlement. Thank you again
for your support, your comments and what is sure to be an
important discussion in the coming weeks.
In
solidarity,
Barbara Bowen
President
Click
here for
printer friendly version |
FEBRUARY 16
"CUNY management came to
the table with a proposal that was substantially different
from the conceptual framework on which union and management
had agreed in November. The PSC negotiating team registered the members’ anger at receiving a proposal
that differed in major ways from the conceptual framework,
but in an effort to bring this contract to a fair
conclusion, we offered a counterproposal. The
representatives of CUNY management, the Mayor and the
Governor agreed to consider our counterproposal and to
return to the bargaining table quickly."
|
|
February 16, 2006
Dear PSC Colleagues, Members and Friends,
The
result of our long day of bargaining today is that negotiations
will continue, with the goal of reaching a settlement. CUNY
management came to the table with a proposal that was
substantially different from the conceptual framework on which
union and management had agreed in November. The PSC negotiating team registered the members’ anger at receiving a proposal
that differed in major ways from the conceptual framework, but
in an effort to bring this contract to a fair conclusion, we
offered a counterproposal. The representatives of CUNY
management, the Mayor and the Governor agreed to consider our
counterproposal and to return to the bargaining table quickly.
A technical meeting on details of costing is scheduled for
tomorrow morning at 8:30
a.m.; all the parties have agreed to work on scheduling another
full bargaining session before the end of next week.
PSC Negotiators
Buoyed by Spirited Rally
The
union bargaining team entered the session energized by the
support of more than 200 members who turned out in front of the
City’s Office of Labor Relations on Rector Street. Anyone who
knows the caverns of lower Manhattan can picture the effect of
scores of red signs, whistles and chants on that narrow street
as PSC members from across the University marched in protest. Your demand for
a fair contract clearly helped to create a sense of urgency
throughout the bargaining session. (Photos of the protest are
up on the PSC website: www.psc-cuny.org.)
Substantial
Differences from the Agreed-Upon Framework
As we
predicted, the proposal advanced by CUNY management, the City
and the State differed in major ways from the conceptual
framework that the PSC and CUNY had worked out in
November. The key difference arises from an unwillingness to
use an additional office hour for full-time faculty to add to
the value of the package, as had been agreed in the November
framework. More than 3% had been added to the economic package
in return for an additional office hour per week. Without that
amount, the proposal contained less money for salary increases
and no provision for the increase in sabbatical pay to 80% that
was part of the November framework. In addition, the proposal
included an inadequate solution to the Welfare Fund issues, and
did not come through on the complete list of equity improvements
we had agreed to in November.
Collective bargaining for public employees is a political
process—it’s about power, not logic or worth or quality
education. Both the Mayor and the Governor have been explicit
about their political goals of extracting more give-backs from
unions—whether it be lower starting salaries or cuts in
healthcare or pensions, as with the transport workers. The
representatives of the Governor made it clear that they were
unwilling to agree to a salary settlement for the PSC that goes beyond the salary agreements they have reached with other
State unions. The proposal management advanced today included
exactly the same annual across-the-board increases as were
negotiated with the SUNY union, UUP: a one-time lump-sum amount
of $800, pro-rated for adjuncts, in the first year; 2.5% in the
second year; 2.75% in the third year; 3% in the fourth year; and
an additional $800 on base salary (pro-rated for adjuncts) on
the final day of the contract. The total across-the-board
increase is, on average, about 9.4%.
The Union
Response
The
union bargained in good faith to reach the November framework.
Today we made clear our disappointment, after three years of
bargaining, at management’s unwillingness to hold to that
framework. We pressed hard for the full package to which we had
agreed, and urged management to reconsider the office hour
proposal, especially as a benefit to our students. The PSC team spoke about the history of salary erosion at CUNY and the critical
importance of improving salaries, benefits and sabbaticals if
CUNY is to continue to attract and retain top-quality
instructional staff. As part of our discussion of management’s
proposal, we also presented a series of detailed questions about
individual issues of economic value. Some were answered; some
await further discussion in the technical meeting on Friday
morning. But we had made a commitment to our members to see if
we could arrive at an acceptable settlement across the
bargaining table, so we came back to the City, State and CUNY
with a proposal for reaching closure. The outline proposed by
the union centers on three issues.
First,
we need a full solution to the issues facing the Welfare Fund:
while management’s proposal today represented some additional
contributions to the Fund, it is not sufficient to meet our
members’ needs. We made a proposal, working within the economic
package management presented today, to meet that need.
Second,
the union is committed to funding the entire list of equity
items on which we reached agreement in November. These include
such issues as a removal of a 1998 concession on the workload
for faculty counselors, a reduction in teaching load at New York
City Tech, and the creation of 100 new full-time lines for which
only long-serving adjuncts would be eligible to compete. We
proposed a way to fund the complete list within the economic
package offered today.
Third,
we said that we would be willing to support the major structural
change of extending the time to tenure if management restored
the enhanced sabbatical pay that had been part of our November
framework. (The additional paid research time we had negotiated
for junior faculty affected by the tenure change remained a
feature of management’s proposal.) We asked that the City, the
State and CUNY management seek ways to fund the enhancement of
sabbatical pay to 80%, as an addition to the economic package
they presented today. We argued that the longer time to tenure
is typical of colleges and universities that provide much more
research support than CUNY; improved sabbaticals, along with
additional reassigned time for future junior faculty, should be
part of this change.
The
union’s arguments were grounded in a commitment to creating a
university in which real teaching and learning can take place—a
university that offers the best education possible to the people
of New York. In response, the management side of the table
agreed to look seriously at our counterproposal. They explained
their difficulty with different pieces of it, but did not rule
out working toward an agreement. They agreed to come back for
another full bargaining session as quickly as possible, and made
a commitment to try to do that within a week. I will let you
know as soon as we set the date for that session.
My
thanks to PSC members for the full-throated support today, and for the rich,
challenging and supportive comments you have made during the
last few weeks on email and in person.
In
solidarity,
Barbara Bowen
President
Click
here for
printer friendly version |
FEBRUARY 2
"You will
find on the union website letters to the Chancellor, the
Mayor and the Governor demanding that their representatives
come to the table and stay at the table until a fair
contract is finalized, and that they honor the November 14
agreement on a conceptual framework. I urge you to take the
time to let the other side know how you feel prior to the
February 16 negotiating session. Go to
www.psc-cuny.org and click on the
box that says 'Act Now!'"
|
|
February 2, 2006
Dear PSC Members, Colleagues
and Friends,
The union negotiating team
welcomes Chancellor Goldstein’s news that on February 16 CUNY
will come to the bargaining table with the City and State to
continue negotiations on the conceptual framework for an
agreement that CUNY sent to City and State officials on November
14, 2005. February 16, however, is three months after the
framework was agreed on and three years after the
expiration of our contract.
It’s time for CUNY to
commit itself to continuous negotiations. The PSC negotiating
team calls on CUNY, the City and the State to remain at the
table and negotiate until we finalize a fair contract.
We will listen carefully
to what CUNY, the State and the City have to say on February 16,
and we will evaluate what Goldstein calls CUNY’s “modified”
proposals. While the union has had indications that CUNY has
had problems gaining approval from the City and State for the
framework on which we agreed at the bargaining table, Chancellor
Goldstein has not, as of this writing, shared with the union the
formal proposal CUNY plans to present on the 16th.
If CUNY’s “modifications”
of the framework deviate significantly from the November 14
agreement, negotiations may be difficult. With your support, we
are committed to staying at the table as long as it takes to
settle a contract that is consistent with the goals you
identified and fought for in this round of bargaining.
The document CUNY sent to
City and State officials on November 14, 2005 was titled “Draft
Conceptual Framework for an Agreement between the PSC and CUNY.”
Yet Goldstein’s February 1 letter pointedly avoids the word
“agreement”; instead, he refers repeatedly to “understandings.”
What we reached with CUNY was more than an understanding; it was
an agreement—with costs detailed to the hundredths of a
percentage and details of contract language resolved.
As I explained in my last
message, much of significance was accomplished leading up to the
November 14 framework for the contract. Bargaining in good
faith, the PSC engaged in the process of give-and-take to reach
agreement with CUNY. Proposals were offered, demands were
withdrawn, and detailed resolutions were reached. CUNY
negotiators represented to us that they had the authority to
negotiate such agreements. We agreed in good faith to a
framework for a settlement, and we expect that framework to be
honored.
I ask for your continued
support as we move into this final phase of negotiations.
Starting February 3, you will find on the union website letters
to the Chancellor, the Mayor and the Governor demanding that
their representatives come to the table and stay at the table
until a fair contract is finalized, and that they honor the
November 14 agreement on a conceptual framework. I urge you to
take the time to let the other side know how you feel prior to
the February 16 negotiating session. Go to
www.psc-cuny.org and click on the box
that says “Act Now!” With the strength of the membership at our
backs, we will remain resolute as we work to bring this round of
negotiations to a close.
In solidarity,
Barbara Bowen
President, PSC
Click
here for
printer friendly version |
JANUARY 27
"The union
bargained in good faith. We expected CUNY to do the same.
I am writing now to tell you how the "conceptual framework"
was reached, the major elements it includes, and how the
union plans to respond if we find that CUNY has failed to
gain City and State approval for the framework we reached."
|
|
January 27, 2006
Dear Members,
Colleagues and Friends,
Thank you for the
patience and support you have shown during this long fight for a
fair contract. I write to report to you on the status of
negotiations.
On November 14,
2005-three years after the expiration of the last contract-the
Professional Staff Congress and CUNY management reached a
tentative agreement on a framework for a settlement. Since
then, the City and State have been reviewing the settlement
prior to giving it their approval. On January 13, 2006-two
months after the union and management came to an agreement-CUNY
Vice Chancellor Brenda Malone wrote in a letter to me: "the City
and State expressed concerns about some items and requested
additional information about others." We do not yet have a formal report on those "concerns," but as
members, you have waited long enough, and I wanted to write
immediately after discussing the contract last night at the
union's Delegate Assembly.
The union bargained
in good faith. We expected CUNY to do the same. I am writing
now to tell you how the "conceptual framework" was reached, the
major elements it includes, and how the union plans to respond
if we find that CUNY has failed to gain City and State approval
for the framework we reached.
CUNY management
began to negotiate seriously with the PSC only after we exerted
constant membership pressure, including a new level of
mobilization as we prepared for a possible referendum on a
strike. Remember, it took CUNY 18 months to make any economic
offer at all, and that offer was for 1.5% over four years. The
intense membership pressure leading up to the September 29, 2005
mass meeting, coupled with a series of contract settlements for
other public-employee unions in New York City, pushed CUNY to
increase its economic offer in early November. By November 3,
the deadline the union had set, the PSC Executive Council
determined that we had an acceptable framework for a settlement. Negotiations accelerated in the next two weeks, and we hammered
out details of costs and language. It took us two weeks of
intense and often heated bargaining sessions, but by November 14
the PSC and management arrived at a framework whose cost was
worked out down to hundredths of a decimal point. Each
provision, both economic and non-economic, had been discussed in
detail; points as fine as contractual language had been
settled.
The PSC bargained
hard and in good faith. We didn't think the agreement was
perfect, but we believed it held true to the principles we had
articulated and members had fought for. While the PSC
bargaining team is aware of the legal requirement for City and
State approval of our contract, we expected CUNY to come to the
table each time with the authority to close the deal.
The union identified
and organized for three goals in this contract: 1) salary
increases of at least 10%; 2) stabilization of the Welfare Fund
and a restoration of the dental benefit; and 3) improvements in
equity and working conditions. It's a measure of the hostile
political climate we face that those relatively modest goals are
absurdly difficult to achieve. We also took a strong stand
against a contract based on concessions. The PSC refused to
sell out "the unborn," as new workers are sometimes called, or
to sell out those who might be called "the reborn"-retirees, who
depend on the Welfare Fund for prescription drugs. We demanded a principled contract that recognizes the work we do,
improves rather than cuts our health benefits, and advances our
individual and collective professional lives.
In addition, we
pressed for direct assistance from the State of New York to
preserve supplemental health benefits through the Welfare Fund.
The State provides more than 80% of the government funding for
CUNY, and has intervened in the past with other union welfare
funds to ensure that benefits are preserved. The PSC leadership
has also sought to have the City cover health insurance for
part-time instructional staff who meet eligibility requirements,
just as the City covers health insurance for other part-time
employees.
During the summer of
2005, the context for public employee bargaining in New York
began to shift. The police union received an arbitration award
that offset higher salaries for current workers with deep salary
cuts for new employees, and the UFT settled a contract with the
City that included higher salaries as well as "productivity
increases" and "reforms" sought by the City. In this context,
the PSC negotiating team agreed to consider some proposals
management introduced late in the bargaining-as long as they
would lead to substantial salary increases and other real
advances in working conditions. As part of the conceptual framework, we agreed to support a
change in the time to tenure from five years to seven, and to
have full-time faculty hold one additional office hour per
week-in exchange for salary increases above 12%, a doubling of
reassigned time for junior faculty, substantially improved
sabbatical pay and other gains.
In addition, we got
management's demand to remove department chairs from the union
off the table, and we resisted a number of other concessions,
such as cuts in holidays for HEOs and CLTs, and the weakening of
HEO job security. We moved management off their demand to end
annual leave on August 22, and instead agreed on a formula for
starting the fall semester up to three weekdays before August
30. Meanwhile, we also won agreement on an array of
improvements in equity, including a reduction to 24 hours of the
teaching load at New York City Tech, the introduction of paid
sick days for non-teaching adjuncts and adjunct CLTs, the
restoration of faculty counselor annual leave, a professional
development fund for adjuncts, reassigned time for research for
junior faculty in Library and Counseling, an increase in the
starting pay for CLIP faculty, and the creation of 100 new
full-time lines for which only experienced CUNY adjuncts would
be eligible to apply.
These are the
elements of the framework we negotiated in good faith. I
understand that there are major changes here, and issues about
which people will take different positions. The union
leadership would like to have a much more extensive discussion
with the membership of the issue of time to tenure (though the provision we tentatively agreed to would not affect current junior
faculty and would also not affect CLTs). The union leadership
has taken the position that time to tenure is a subject CUNY had
to negotiate with us, not impose unilaterally, and that an
increase in the untenured period had to be accompanied by a
significant increase in support for research. We would also
like to discuss with you the issue of an additional office hour:
the negotiating team believed that in the context of a good
economic settlement we could support a provision for four office
hours a week. I want to emphasize, however, that none of these
elements is final. I share them with you because I feel you are
entitled to know why this contract has taken so long and what is
under discussion.
Of course everything
changes if the City and State fail to approve the conceptual
framework. We have had several indications that the framework
will not be approved. The union negotiating team remains
prepared to listen to the presentation by CUNY, the City and the
State, but we cannot accept major changes on such issues as
office hours and time to tenure if the settlement as whole does
not represent a significant advance.
Last night at the
Delegate Assembly, PSC leaders unanimously passed a resolution
calling on members to demand that CUNY, the City and the State
come to the bargaining table immediately and settle a fair
contract with the PSC. A bargaining session is currently being
scheduled, but we need immediate movement toward a settlement. If CUNY does not deliver on City and State approval for the
conceptual framework, the union is fully prepared to take all
necessary action to achieve a settlement consistent with our
goals.
PSC members have
fought hard for three years-too hard to give up under pressure
from City and State governments that have demanded
ever-increasing concessions from public employees. You have
held out because you believe that faculty and staff at New York
City's public university are entitled to decent pay and working
conditions. That is what the negotiating team is committed to
achieving. With your support, I believe we can.
In solidarity,
Barbara
Bowen
President
Click
here for
printer friendly version
|
DEC. 15
"The union
negotiating team reached a series of tentative
understandings with management that made progress toward two
of our main goals: increases in salary, and improvements in
equity and working conditions. The third goal—enhanced
contributions to the Welfare Fund—has still not been
resolved. The PSC negotiating team has told management that
we will not settle this contract without resolving the
crisis in the Welfare Fund."
|
|
December
15, 2005
Dear PSC
Members, Colleagues, and Friends,
The next
few days will be critical in the effort to finalize our
contract. I am writing to update you and ask you to send a fax
to the Chancellor’s Office by Monday, December 19 on the
importance of reaching a settlement that ensures adequate
contributions by management to the Welfare Fund.
The
pressure you created earlier this fall drove the bargaining
process throughout November. The union negotiating team reached
a series of tentative understandings with management that made
progress toward two of our main goals: increases in salary, and
improvements in equity and working conditions. The third
goal—enhanced contributions to the Welfare Fund—has still not
been resolved. The PSC negotiating team has told management
that we will not settle this contract without resolving the
crisis in the Welfare Fund. It is outrageous to expect us to
continue working at CUNY without adequate benefits.
We have
a few days, before a series of crucial meetings next week, to
deliver that message. We will not accept a contract that
does not stabilize the Welfare Fund. You can use the PSC
website to send a fax directly to the Chancellor: go to
www.psc-cuny.org and click on the box
that says “Act Now!” For a stronger message, edit the letter to
reflect your own situation or add comments at the end on why
such issues as prescription drugs and an improved dental benefit
are crucial to you.
In my
last message I explained that part of the reason for the delay
in concluding this contract was CUNY’s need to gain approval
from both the City and the State for the framework we
negotiated. It’s a complex process, one that’s both political
and technical, but there is no excuse for taking this long. We
negotiated in good faith at the bargaining table, and reached a
tentative framework for a settlement. It’s time to finalize
that conceptual agreement and add to it the necessary support
for the Welfare Fund.
As I
write this, much of the city’s attention is focused on the
possibility of a transport workers’ strike. The same State and
City governments that are holding up our contract are refusing
to share the MTA surplus with the transport workers and seeking
crippling fines for TWU members. Whatever happens with the
transport workers’ contract, their struggle illustrates how much
force it takes to break through a politics deeply hostile to
working people.
I am
still hopeful that the PSC can achieve a good contract—one that
meets our strong agenda—using the framework we have negotiated.
But we need your active support.
The PSC
has said we will not accept lower salaries for new workers and
we will not settle for a contract that fails to move us forward
in salaries, working conditions and benefits. Even that
straightforward agenda requires tremendous fight in this
ideological and legal climate. Powered by your support, the
negotiating team is continuing that fight, and we ask you to
give us additional strength by sending a fax by Monday.
In
solidarity,
Barbara Bowen
President
|
DEC. 2
"...Discussions have largely moved to the
level of the City and State, where we are seeking approval
for the tentative agreements we reached with CUNY management
and support for the full economic package we need."
|
|
December 2, 2005
Dear PSC
Members and Colleagues,
I write to
update you on the progress on the contract. Since my last
update, of November 18, discussions have largely moved to the
level of the City and State, where we are seeking approval for
the tentative agreements we reached with CUNY management and
support for the full economic package we need. There are still
some major points of discussion, but real progress has been
made.
PSC
negotiations are unusually complex, because CUNY is funded by
both the City and the State; our contracts must have both City
and State approval. Whereas the UFT needs to reach agreement
with the City and the Department of Education (which is now a
mayoral agency), and the transit workers need to reach agreement
with the Transit Authority and the State, the PSC agreement
involves CUNY management, the City and the State. Both
the union and CUNY management are now pressing hard for a
resolution, and the City and State are fully engaged in the
process. We have also had substantial support from our
statewide affiliate, New York State United Teachers, and from
the New York City Central Labor Council.
I cannot give
you a date for completion, but the union is working constantly
to bring this to a close. We are determined to push for
resolution soon, but also to achieve a contract that meets our
major needs on salary increases, Welfare Fund benefits, and
improvements in equity and working conditions. At this stage,
the work is primarily conversation-often many times a day-with
CUNY management, the City and the State, to try to hammer out a
settlement.
The one thing I
can say with absolute certainty is that the momentum you
developed throughout the fall is what has propelled us this
far. In a sense, the momentum shifted from the public spaces of
the mass meeting or the campus protest to the bargaining table,
where it fueled six weeks of intense negotiations. Doors that
had been closed for three years opened during the two weeks
after the mass meeting. We do not yet have an agreement, and
nothing is final until everything is final, but the progress is
clear.
As we move into
what I hope are the final weeks of this process, it is crucial
to keep the pressure on CUNY management. They need to
understand the urgency we feel about settling this contract.
PSC activists turned out in force at the November 28 meeting of
the Board of Trustees, holding signs that said: "1,124 Days:
Settle Now!" The
letter I delivered to the Board that day is
attached (click
here). What you can do right now is make the pressure local:
call or e-mail your own college president today with the message
that the faculty and staff at your college cannot wait any
longer for a good contract. It's important that the message be
heard from every sector of the University.
The PSC
negotiating team will continue to do everything in its power to
bring the negotiations to a close and reach a contract worthy of
your engagement and your work. I will notify you as soon as
there is further news; thank you for your support.
In solidarity,
Barbara Bowen
PSC President
|
NOV. 21
"The union has made substantial
progress toward reaching a contract agreement with CUNY
management.... The bargaining involves interlocking
pieces, each dependent on the others, and nothing is assured
until everything is assured.
We have made enough progress, however, that we are now in
conversation with the City and the State about bringing the
negotiations to a close. There are still some difficult
issues, but I hope we will be able to resolve them and reach
a good settlement. "
|
|
November 21, 2005
Dear Members,
I'd like to
bring you up to date on the developments this week on the
contract. The union has made substantial progress toward
reaching a contract agreement with CUNY management. Tentative
agreements have been reached on many issues, but because
everything remains tentative until the whole contract is
resolved, it would be premature to discuss any individual
issues. The bargaining involves interlocking pieces, each
dependent on the others, and nothing is assured until everything
is assured.
We have made
enough progress, however, that we are now in conversation with
the City and the State about bringing the negotiations to a
close. There are still some difficult issues, but I hope we
will be able to resolve them and reach a good settlement.
What made the
difference between the stalemate of many months and the intense
activity of recent weeks? Organizing. Whatever the union is
able to achieve will be because you have organized. The
solidarity you showed in opposition to management's austerity
offer of last spring, the unprecedented turnout at the September
29 meeting, and the one-on-one organizing this fall have given
the negotiating team power.
In what I
hope will be the final weeks of this process, I ask you to
sustain your organizing networks. The honeycomb structure of
member-organizers we developed on the campuses allows us to be
ready if we need to take further action to bring the
negotiations to a close. It is also a structure for the long
haul; this round of bargaining has taught us how much
organization it takes to break through the regime of austerity
for public employees and public university students.
I will
contact you if we need to organize further action, and I ask you
to be ready to respond quickly. In the meantime, you can help
to secure a victory in another higher education labor battle
that would have huge implications for us. The graduate
employees at NYU are in the second week of a strike for the
right to organize as a union. Hundreds of full-time NYU faculty
are holding their classes off campus because they refuse to
cross a picket line. Join the strikers on the picket line-as
scores of PSC members already have-or take a few minutes to send
a message to NYU president John Sexton at
john.sexton@nyu.edu. A
union victory at NYU would help to change the climate in which
we bargain, so I urge you to take the time to write.
Watch for
further updates as news on our own contract develops, and thank
you for your continued support.
In
solidarity,
Barbara Bowen |
"The
PSC is going back to the bargaining table today. At the
meeting of the Executive Council last night, the union
leadership decided that enough progress had been made to
justify continuing intensive negotiations. At the same
time, however, we will maintain our readiness to conduct a
referendum should we decide to call one.
"
|
|
November 4, 2005
Dear
Colleagues, Members and Friends,
The PSC
is going back to the bargaining table today. At the meeting of
the Executive Council last night, the union leadership decided
that enough progress had been made to justify continuing
intensive negotiations. At the same time, however, we will
maintain our readiness to conduct a referendum should we decide
to call one.
The
pressure you have created since the September 29 mass meeting,
coupled with the November 3 deadline, has changed the climate of
negotiations. After months of stalemate, management has finally
moved to consider our core demands. We have met repeatedly over
the last few weeks, with sessions and discussions nearly every
day. While the two sides remain separated on several issues, we
have advanced in our discussion of ways to increase the economic
package. The PSC continues to press for a non-austerity
settlement, one that meets our needs of at least 10% on salary,
a solution to the Welfare Fund crisis, and improvements in
equity and working conditions. We feel that we have made enough
progress during the last two weeks to continue accelerated
negotiations.
Since
September 29, literally thousands of members have shown new
levels of support for the union’s position. Over two thousand
of you signed the public statement demanding a fair contract
that appears as an ad in recent issues of The Village Voice
and The Chronicle of Higher Education. Hundreds
participated in informational picketing across the university on
October 19 and 20. And thousands more have spoken and written
to their campus picket captains, who are seeking to reach every
PSC member for a conversation about the contract. Meanwhile,
hundreds of students have expressed their support; they
understand that the fight for our contract is a fight for their
future.
Together
with the movement on other settlements with City workers, this
upsurge of engagement has created new possibilities in the
contract talks and convinced management that we are serious
about our demands.
The task
now is to keep that pressure on as the negotiating team tries to
bring the negotiations to a close. That means continuing to
prepare for a referendum on job action, even as we do everything
we can to reach a settlement at the bargaining table. I am
asking the hundreds of picket captains, or member organizers, to
continue their essential one-on-one conversations, and asking
all members to be ready to participate in a referendum if that
is the course we need to take. With your strength at our backs,
the union negotiating team has the strongest chance of reaching
a good settlement through negotiations and advocacy with the
City and State. I am hopeful that we will succeed.
Thank
you for the outpouring of support, for the questions you have
raised, and more personally, for the many individual messages
you have sent expressing your commitment to our shared fight. I
will write again as soon as there is news to report.
In
solidarity,
Barbara Bowen
President |
NOV. 9TH
"We are
making progress but still do not have agreement. Both sides
are considering a broad range of possibilities to reach an
improved economic package and meet other needs. The union
continues to insist on our core needs of salary increases,
Welfare Fund benefits and improvements in equity and working
conditions. "
|
|
November 9,
2005
Dear Colleagues,
I want to update you on the
contract negotiations between the PSC and CUNY management.
Since November 3, we have been in nearly constant negotiations.
Management responded to the pressure of the November 3 deadline
and the possibility of a referendum by entering into much more
intensive bargaining. The two sides met until
7:00 in the evening on Friday, and
then again all day on Monday and Tuesday.
We are making progress but still
do not have agreement. Both sides are considering a broad range
of possibilities to reach an improved economic package and meet
other needs. The union continues to insist on our core needs of
salary increases, Welfare Fund benefits and improvements in
equity and working conditions.
This is a tough process, made
tougher by the prevailing politics of austerity for working
people. Your engagement in the process as members, however, has
been essential in strengthening the union’s position. I would
ask picket captains to continue their work: make sure your
colleagues know that management has entered into intense
negotiations in response to our November 3 deadline—and continue
to build union networks on campus.
Thank you for your ongoing
support. I will provide further updates as we make progress.
In solidarity,
Barbara Bowen
President
|
|