AUFA has had to deal with multiple grievances relating to AU’s so-called ‘IT Optimization’ strategy, including layoff language forcing members into new jobs, coercive language, and the exclusion of AUFA members from the bargaining unit. Most recently, AU abandoned the mediation that it had proposed to resolve many of these issues.
The IT department, as a result of this upheaval, is in a bad state.
Current State
The problems in IT are complicated, but are broadly categorized into issues with backward planning, unclear job descriptions, inadequate transition plans, and absent training. Normally, completion of a major reorganization would rely on documenting the current state of the department and establishing transition and training plans.
AU instead completed the major reorganization first, and then tried to coax the current state of the department into establishing transition and training plans. The expectation from IT leadership was that this ought to be accomplished in 2 – 4 months.
Not surprisingly, a smooth transition has not happened. As of writing many AUFA members are dealing with multiple jobs, confusing squad assignments, poor communication on training, inappropriate job descriptions, and a lack of management over their old work. This is particularly true with members moved from the Faculty of Business, whose original jobs were not understood at all by the central IT department. There is no indication of progress on resolving these issues. Nothing is documented, and service from the IT department is suffering.
The most recent message to members from IT deputies is that transitions can’t happen until all new hires are complete. This is the third time the goal posts have moved on transition plans, which have only been communicated verbally with no acknowledgement of the past timelines.
IT leadership have thus far refused to acknowledge any problematical issues, and statements from HR and the employer’s legal counsel have reinforced the belief that the IT department is working well, and that staff are happy.
Results from a recent survey sent to IT members last month suggest otherwise.
Grievances and Mediation
AUFA has launched multiple grievances due to problems in the IT department:
The use of layoff language to force staff into new jobs without consultation
A “take this job or quit” approach to redeployments
The exclusion of IT middle managers
Denial of Research and Study Leave (despite repeated claims all requests will be honored)
Denial of leave time for AUFA duties (historically always granted)
A reclassification request that was never processed by HR for two years
A harassment complaint that was ignored by IT management and HR
Every issue in this list has been forwarded to arbitration. The employer’s lawyer contacted AUFA over the first four issues and requested mediation. AUFA requested VPIT Jennifer Schaeffer attend this mediation.
She refused.
Nevertheless, the first day of mediation was productive. We discussed a potential settlement that would walk back aspects of a grievance in exchange for a commitment from IT management towards documented, accountable solutions for issues in the department. Unfortunately, just one day before the second meeting, the employer pulled out of mediation, claiming entirely unrelated posts on the AUFA blog as a reason. This continues a pattern of the employer refusing to engage in good faith collaborative measures with AUFA, and instead push every issue to arbitration no matter the cost to AU.
Everything is being overruled and nothing is documented
In the new IT department, the average staff member reports to a manager, director, deputy, and then the VPIT. None of these four layers of management appear to have any power within the department; every request related to IT Optimization problems goes directly to the VPIT.
And there it is typically overruled.
There is now a familiar pattern of members raising issues: getting ‘buy-in’ from managers up the chain, followed by a period of awkward silence before news of the rejection arrives.
IT’s hierarchy seems to exist solely to keep staff away from the VPIT who, it’s worthwhile noting, only appears in once-monthly staff meetings where recordings are not shared and questions are not permitted.
There is also a dire absence of documentation in the department. The way the new model works—assurances for training, transition timelines, and so on – is mostly done verbally. New roles such as Technical Lead, for instance, require management-level work from AUFA members, and yet their actual duties were only ever communicated in a brief introductory presentation of the model earlier in the year.
With nothing documented, the promises and timelines from IT management are fluid and can change constantly with no memory to the past. As a result, the department is stuck in place and unable to advance. Without documented plans, accountability, and empowered managers, there is no way forward.
What’s Next?
AUFA will continue to pursue its legal strategy as it brings multiple grievances in IT to arbitration. This is a slow process, and although we hope for a positive outcome, results will take time. In the meantime, the status of the IT department continues to worsen. IT leadership has shown no interest in even admitting to, let alone resolving, issues as they have been repeatedly raised by AUFA and AUFA members in every possible venue.
It takes two parties to negotiate. Going forward, AUFA will continue working with members of the IT department on member-driven solutions to these issues.
Solidarity,
David Powell
AUFA President