On Wednesday, AU provided AUFA with a draft of a new designation policy. The effect of this proposed policy will be to remove 67% of AUFA members from the union. Specifically, the proposal appears to exclude all professionals, academic coordinators, deans, associate deans, and managers. By providing AUFA with the draft policy, AU has begun a process of consultation with no clear timeline. Once consultation is complete, the policy will be implemented.
Designation
The Post-Secondary Learning Act (PSLA) gives the Board the power to determine which individuals or groups of individuals are considered academic staff (and therefore who is an AUFA members).
This “designation” power is unusual, but not unheard of. The membership of most unions is determined by the Labour Relations Boards. Decisions of the Board of Governors about designation can be appealed to the Labour Relations Board.
AU’s current designation policy dates back to 1983. It designates all academic positions as well as all professional positions as “academic staff”. (There are a small number of exceptions, such as executive officers, certain directors, and a small number of professional staff in HR and finance.) Consequently, AUFA’s membership is (roughly) half academics and half professional. Designation as academic does not mean the employee is an academic by profession, only that they have been designated into a faculty association.
AU has been working on a new designation policy since 2018. Earlier this year, AUFA asked President Neil Fassina if this new policy would exclude professionals from the AUFA bargaining unit. His response was “I’d like to think the current Executive has demonstrated a savviness beyond that.” AUFA took that to mean that AU was not considering de-designating professionals and thereby removing them from the AUFA bargaining unit.
Policy Changes
On Wednesday, December 11, AU provided AUFA with a draft of a proposed Designation policy. The proposed policy includes a definition of academic as workers who perform research, service, and teaching functions in credit programs. This definition appears to exclude professionals (who do not teach) as well as academic coordinators (who are not required to do research) from the definition of academic:
“An AU Academic is generally a terminally credentialed expert and specialist who is responsible for the delivery, quality assurance, maintenance and development of Ministry-approved credited programs and courses of study in their primary area of specialty or relevant discipline, and who prioritizes and maintains an active professional research/creation practice and who by way of service positively enriches the vitality of the University and the social and economic fabric of the communities of which it serves. More specifically, an AU Academic supports the agile and scalable digital learning environment of the University by way of academic participation in research and scholarship, service, and teaching and learning.
To inform and assist the transparent and consistent application of the Board’s authority to designate, except from designation, or change the designation of individual employees or categories of employees the following objective criteria will be used to define an “academic” at the University:
Research and Scholarship is a vital function of the University; an AU Academic will:
· Independently conduct or direct original research that advances the knowledge of their specific and relevant discipline;
· Conduct funded research that leads to peer-reviewed publications and other scholarly publications; and
· Conduct research that leads to enhanced instruction through the scholarship of teaching and learning or conduct or direct research with business, industry or other organizations to create technological or social innovations.
Service through participation in the life of the University and the community of which it is a part; an AU Academic will:
• Contribute to the academic governance of the institution (i.e., reviewing and recommending academic policies and programs development) that contribute to the vitality of the University mission and the expansion of knowledge; and
• Contribute to the professional academic environment through the modelling of the highest ethical standards and service, such as providing applied research peer review, participation in academic peer advisory hiring committees.
Teaching and Learning extend beyond merely providing academic support to learners; an AU Academic will:
• Develop credit curriculum and programming, including the development of learning outcomes;
• Combine scholarship and research in the individuals specific and relevant discipline and incorporate the latest research, knowledge and theory in instruction and delivery;
• Retain overall accountability for the quality and integrity of curriculum development, delivery and assessment towards the goals of the University, the program and the course;
• Maintain responsibility for the evaluation of student performance. While an academic may delegate student evaluation the ultimate accountability for controlling the quality and standard of all course-related marking/assessment rests with the academic;
• Write, or assist with the preparation of, proposals for new or revised courses in approved programs; and
• Teaching, assessing and supervising graduate students.
Together these three pursuits – Research and Scholarship, Service, and Teaching and Learning comprise the role of an Academic at AU. The definitions of the above three pursuits are not exhaustive and are meant to illustrate the nature of these pursuits.”
The proposed policy also explicitly excludes deans, associate deans and managers from the bargaining unit (these positions are currently in the AUFA unit).
In her email that accompanied the proposed policy, AU’s HR director Charlene Polege framed these changes as designed to give greater clarity to designation decisions:
In order to discuss whether or not an employee ought to be designated as ‘academic staff’, it is important that there be some clarity regarding the objective criteria used to make that assessment. The attached policy and procedure were prepared in large part further to the above and contains a proposed criteria.
Obviously these changes do more than provide clarity.
AUFA met with AU on Thursday for a preliminary discussion of the proposed policy.
The employer’s rationale for the policy is that Labour Relations Board decision requires a defined consultation process for resolving designation challenges. However, narrowly defining designation criteria in a way that excludes most AUFA members is the employer’s decision alone. The implication is that a professional who doesn't fit the criteria is not an “academic” and therefore wouldn't be designated as such, but that AUFA was free to take the issue to the labour board to let them decide. The glaring absence of any mention of professionals in the policy suggests that they will removed from AUFA.
When asked if the intent of the policy was to de-designate professionals, HR’s response was that staff members who do not fit the criteria would not be designated.
Analysis
The proposed policy will have the effect of excluding 67% of current AUFA members from the bargaining unit. Presently, AUFA has approximately 425 members. Our initial analysis suggests the proposed policy will exclude:
185 non-managerial professionals
60 academic coordinators
35 deans, associate deans, and managers
It is unclear what will happen to these current AUFA members if they are de-designated. Our initial assessment is that:
• Professionals would not automatically fall into the AUPE unit (which presently represents only general support staff). Professionals could be organized by another union. Or the university could voluntarily recognize another union as the bargaining agent of these members (e.g., AUPE).
• Academic coordinators would fall into the CUPE bargaining unit, which currently represents “all non-designated academics”.
• Deans, associate deans, and managers would likely be excluded employees with no union representation.
Carving 67% of AUFA members out of the bargaining unit will have three main effects:
It will financially cripple AUFA. This effect could be offset by a doubling or tripling of dues.
It will reduce AUFA’s bargaining power by radically reducing the impact of any strike by remaining AUFA.
It will reduce the bargaining power of former AUFA members by leaving them without union representation or in unions that have traditionally done worse at the table than AUFA.
These effects suggest this policy proposal is the next step in AU’s long-term union-rejection strategy which, to date, has included:
impeding the union’s access to the worksite,
refusing to meet with the union,
being unreasonable in the negotiation and administration of the collective agreement, and
running up the union’s legal bill.
AU may also be hoping to use this policy as leverage in the upcoming round of bargaining. For example, AU might offer to maintain its current policy if AUFA agrees to salary rollbacks and other concessions. Alternately, AU may simply break up the unit and extract concessions from the remaining AUFA members and former AUFA members in a piecemeal fashion.
Next Steps
This proposed policy is a form of union busting and is intended to intimidate AUFA members as we head into bargaining. This attack is yet another mis-step by the Fassina administration, which has already driven staff morale to unprecedented depths.
Over the winter break, the AUFA executive will be strategizing about how to respond to the both the proposed policy and, if the policy is enacted, the de-designation of 67% of the membership.
We will communicate developments as soon as possible. In the meantime, the executive thanks you for you patience as we deal with this latest employer attack on our rights. Please be assured that we will be exploring many options to mitigate or prevent damage to the unit.
Jolene Armstrong, President