Late last week, AUFA received a revised designation policy from AU. The revised policy incorporates some of the feedback provided by the unions. Nevertheless, the policy continues to define academics narrowly and, thus, still threatens to remove two-thirds of AUFA members from the union.
Issue Re-cap
In December, AU proposed a new designation policy. The effect of the policy would be to remove 67% of present AUFA members from the union. This would include all professionals, academic coordinators, deans, associate deans, and managers. This policy appears to be part of AU’s longstanding union-busting efforts.
This proposed change would have significant negative effects on de-designated members. AUFA, AUPE and CUPE spent the next six months in consultations while hundreds of AUFA members took direct action to express their disagreement with this policy (e.g. signed petitions, shared personal stories, sent emails).
During consultations and in dialogue with our members, AU representatives have repeatedly stated that there is no way to know the outcome of this policy, despite it being obvious that academic coordinators and professionals do not fit their criteria. Consultation concluded on June 29.
Revised Policy
On July 24, AU provided a revised version of the policy to the unions for comment. At a high level, the revised policy:
Continues to define academic as someone who performing teaching, service, and research work. This excludes professionals and academic coordinators for the unit.
Continues to name deans and managers (many professionals are managers) as excluded from the unit.
No longer excludes associate deans from AUFA.
AU has added a new section to the policy that gives the Board of Governors (BoG) latitude to consider four factors in designation decision:
The history of collective bargaining with the university,
The nature of the functional relationship (if any) between the subject employee(s) and AU academics,
The presence of any conflicting goals in collective bargaining, and
The impact of a designation decision on an employee or category of employees.
These factors could be used by the Board to justify the designation of academic coordinators and most professionals as academics (deans and managers remain specifically excluded). That said, the revised policy is very carefully written such that the Board is not required to consider these factors or give them any real weight.
This policy is scheduled to be voted on by the BoG on September 11.
Implications
It is difficult to know what to make of the addition of the four new criteria. On the one hand, they give BoG the option to keep non-managerial professionals and academic coordinators in the unit. This may signal a change in AU’s intentions (perhaps as a result of member pressure).
On the other hand, if BoG’s intention was to leave professionals and academic coordinators in the unit, they could have just named them as designated groups. Or, even simpler, abandoned this proposal and reverted to the old policy.
The four criteria may also be an effort to try to bleed off the pressure that AUFA members have been putting on AU. For example, including the four criteria creates a plausible, albeit pretty improbable, argument that AU’s intentions are entirely innocent, and nothing will necessarily change for academic coordinators and professionals who aren't managers. It is unclear how AU will define who is and is not a manager.
Recalling the context is helpful in deciding how to view this change:
AU has engaged in a protracted behaviour that is consistent with union busting,
AU has refused to discuss how the policy will be operationalized,
AU’s assertion that policy changes are required by a 2018 Labour Board decision are demonstrably false, and
the very high stakes for both individual members and AUFA.
This context suggests that, absent a clear indication that widespread de-designation isn’t going to happen, the best way to protect the interests of AUFA’s members is for AUFA and its members to continue to oppose both the policy and any de-designations that flow from it.
Next Steps
AUFA will be providing written feedback on the revised policy (AU has not scheduled any in-person meetings). It is expected this policy will go before the BoG on September 11.
Prior to the BoG passing a new policy, AUFA will be focused on further member action designed to maintain AUFA’s current membership. MEC will continue to lead that work.
If the policy passes, AUFA’s executive will implement AUFA’s legal strategy to oppose de-designations (that will begin with the deans and managers). Depending upon how AU chooses to proceed with de-designations, this may be a protracted fight.
Dave Powell, President