Spring survey results: Continued distrust in AU executive and strong strike threat
In June, volunteers with AUFA’s Membership Engagement Committee (MEC) completed the sixth membership engagement survey. This survey included the usual climate questions as well as explored issues related to the recently concluded round of bargaining, the jobs in Athabasca issue (which has since become a significant issue), and AU’s implementation of Netskope surveillance software on members’ computers.
This iteration of the survey was delayed from the targeted April/May timing, which likely impacted response rates. Eighty-two randomly selected members (just under 20% of the membership) completed the call-based survey, with representation across departments and employee types.
Climate Questions
Survey callers asked four recurring questions on the general climate at AU. Overall, members report continued distrust in the AU executive, while AUFA’s work is broadly supported. There is an interesting discrepancy between the 39% of members who reported high morale compared to 77% who reported enjoying starting work in the morning. This likely reflects members’ appreciation for the work they do while also reflecting their frustration with their working conditions.
Looking further at the question of trust in AU’s executive team, there was a slight increase since the last survey (in fall 2021), from 15% to 20% expressing trust, which is still far below the highest rate of 30% who agreed with this question in the very first survey (in fall 2019). There were no clear trends in terms of which member groups are more or less likely to agree or disagree. For example, when analyzing responses based on length of service, new hires reported around the same level of distrust in executive and trust in AUFA as longer-serving staff.
In the comments provided by members regarding AU’s executive, most expressed strongly negative feelings, with the following emerging as themes:
feelings of being mistreated, belittled, or disrespected by the employer
dissatisfaction with the communication and information provided to faculty and staff
perceptions of mismanagement, ineptitude, or hidden agendas
perceptions of a lack of understanding of the university’s culture and values
desire for following through with a vote of non-confidence in the current executive
In terms of factors contributing to these feelings, the employer’s opening position in bargaining featured prominently. Members also spoke about how the various reorganizations at AU—including the IT reorganization and the near-virtual transition—have been and continue to be handled poorly, which is negatively affecting morale.
Contract Negotiations
Having narrowly avoided a strike this spring, MEC queried members’ willingness to have withdrawn their labour. The vast majority of members (88%) indicated were likely to have withdrawn their labour during a strike or lockout, with just 6% saying they were unlikely. This reponse suggests AUFA’s strike threat was a credible one. A credible strike threat enhances the bargaining power of the union.
Members had mixed views about the final contract that was ratified. The largest chunk of repondents (44%) indicated they were “somewhat satisfied”; neutral and “somewhat dissatisfied” responses each received 22%. Very few members indicated they were either very satisfied (5%) or very dissatisfied (about 7%). This distribution of responses suggests that members are feeling rather ambivalent about the settlement.
Survey respondents provided a wide variety of comments on the contract language, but the issue most members identified as concerning was (unsurprisingly) the loss of Research and Study Leave for professional members. Comments were broadly aligned with the discussion among members during bargaining, which includes broad, but certainly not unanimous, support for this benefit.
In addition to the RSL issue, cost of living, inflation, and wages were frequently mentioned. Members broadly felt the cost-of-living adjustment was inadequate. Cost of home office was identified as needing to be addressed.
Jobs in Athabasca
As previously reported, a majority of respondents (73%) supported AUFA’s current position that, while no current AUFA member should be forced to re-locate, AU should make an effort to hire a portion of new staff to the Athabasca area. MEC also asked if AUFA should take a position on this issue at all, and a majority (67%) agreed that it should.
Understanding that, as a union, we are often dealing with multiple priorities, MEC also asked about the relative importance of this issue. There was more disagreement on this question, with only 51% of respondents suggesting it was important that AUFA take a position. That is, there seems to be a portion of members (about 15–25%) who think AUFA should take a position and who agree with AUFA’s current position, but who don’t see this issue as a top concern. There were some identifiable differences when analyzing this question in more detail, so it’s worth taking a look at where some of this discrepancy comes from.
There were some notable differences here when comparing new employees with those who have been at AU for longer. This issue is important to just 31% of employees who have been at AU fewer than 10 years, while 81% of those who have been at AU more than 20 years said this issue was important to them.
It is also worth noting that support for AUFA’s position on this issue varies widely between faculties and departments, with the strongest support in FB, FHSS, and the IT department, and weakest support in FHD, FST, and other departments.
Member comments were diverse. Some members noted that requiring candidates live in Athabasca may narrow the applicant pool unacceptably. Other suggested that candidates could be enticed to live in Athabasca through meaningful incentives.
Some members felt AU’s primary role is to educate students, not contribute to the economy of Athabasca. Other members note that AU’s location was chosen for economic development purposes and there is no necessary conflict between providing online education while having a portion of jobs located in the Athabasca area.
Other members were concerned that successive Boards and executives had mishandled this issue (primarily by ignoring it) and that the government was intervening due to political pressure. Some members suggested that the university executive should be expected to model a commitment to Athabasca by living in the Athabasca area, at least part of the time. Others suggested rethinking this issue in order to take advantage of the possibilities a rural campus offers.
While a lot has happened since this survey was conducted in June, the AUFA executive’s open letter points to several ways in which this issue might be resolved in a constructive and mutually beneficial way.
Netskope and Privacy
Members were strongly in favour of AUFA taking steps to protect their privacy after AU installed surveillance software called Netskope on member computers without forewarning or data governance.
Members’ comments provide many insights about their concerns with this program being used on their work computers, with some common themes:
It constitutes a breach of privacy. Members feel concerned about this being a breach to their right to privacy, confidentiality, and security in the workplace.
It creates a culture of mistrust between workers and the employer, as they feel not trusted and feel spied and surveilled by the employer.
Lack of transparency. Members manifested being concerned about not being properly informed on the reasons why this program is being used, about the data that is being collected, and about the implications that this may have for their privacy in the workplace.
It jeopardizes research participants’ right to security, anonymity, and confidentiality. Members who manage and storage research data collected among vulnerable populations (including Indigenous, racialized, and those with precarious legal status) think that the tracking of this information jeopardizes the security of research participants and their right to confidentiality and privacy, making researchers to incur in violations of research protocols.
Lack of informed consent. Members feel concerned about the fact that the decision to install a program to collects information was made on a top-down manner, without previous consultation, proper notice, or consent.
Insecurity in the workplace. Members fear that the information that is being collected can be used to punish those engaged in disputes with the employer.
Threat to safety. Members feel unsafe in the workplace, as they have no clear understanding of what type of information is being tracked and collected, and as they have no clear understanding if this information includes family/personal information.
It affects productivity and morale, as the feelings of being spied “all the time” discourages engagement with the job. It also discourages the search of information that can be seen as “suspicious” from the point of view of the employer.
There are no clear policies and rules governing the use of this software in the workplace.
The AUFA executive is following up with the employer about the use of this software and the timelines for a privacy impact assessment, but have so far received no new information.
The survey also asked members about their use of the AUFA website. This feedback has been shared with the communications committee and will help inform future work to improve the website for members.
MEC extends its thanks to its volunteer callers as well as the members who took the time to answer the survey. The next MEC survey is planned for this fall. If you would like to be volunteer to help with survey calls, please email engagement@aufa.ca.
Rhiannon Rutherford
AUFA President
Upcoming AUFA Elections
Elections for the AUFA Executive and committees will take place at the upcoming Spring General Meeting on Tuesday, May 31, 1:30–4:00pm MST. This blog post outlines the positions that will be elected and highlights other ways to get involved in AUFA.
Nominations for all elected positions will be open until the final call during the Spring General Meeting (that is, individuals can be nominated from the floor during the meeting). However, if you would like to nominate yourself (for any position) in advance and have a candidate statement included in the meeting package, please send this to Brenda Skayman by end of day Friday, May 20.
Executive
The AUFA Executive includes five officers (President, Vice-President, Treasurer, Secretary, and Past President) and up to nine member representatives (also called constituency representatives). Each of these positions, with the exception of Past President, will be up for election as part of the Spring General Meeting. The one-year term will begin on July 1, 2022, and end on June 30, 2023.
The time commitment and scope for these positions varies, as there are few rigid requirements in the current AUFA bylaws. In addition to regularly attending AUFA Executive meetings, officers or member representatives may chair or serve on other AUFA committees, attend conferences or meetings of umbrella or allied organizations, or participate in other initiatives undertaken by the AUFA Executive. For example, the incoming AUFA Executive may choose to pursue projects related to the Equity Audit that is currently underway.
Questions about any of these positions can be directed to Jolene Armstrong, AUFA Past President, who chairs the Nominating Committee.
In addition, the AUFA Executive includes non-voting positions: the two AUFA staff members (Executive Director and Professional Officer) and the AUFA representative on the AU Board of Governors (who is currently one year into a three-year term).
Elected Committees
Also up for election will be several committee positions. The AUFA bylaws state that both the Equity and Social Committees will “normally” consist of five members each, though in previous general meetings the AUFA membership has extended more flexibility to these committees to expand this number. The terms for elected members of these committees will be one year, from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023. For more information, contact the AUFA office to be connected with current committee members.
As well, there are two committees outlined in the collective agreement that will be up for election this year, each with two-year terms (from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2024):
Professional appeals: Five non-probationary, full-time professional staff members—three primary members, two alternates. See Article 9.5.10.a in the collective agreement for more.
Professional appeals with respect to position evaluation: Five non-probationary, full-time professional staff members—three primary members, two alternates. See Article 9.6.4 in the collective agreement for more.
There is also an academic appeals committee (Article 9.5.10.b in the collective agreement), but this committee is currently in the middle of a two-year term and will be up for election in 2023. Contact the AUFA office or Jolene Armstrong for more information about these committees.
Appointed Committees
There are also a number of committees that are appointed by the AUFA Executive.
The AUFA Executive is currently seeking interest in serving on the Occupational Health and Safety committee. Two members are required to serve on the single, central joint committee that includes employer representatives as well as representatives from each bargaining unit (AUFA, CUPE, and AUPE). These positions are appointed by the AUFA Executive; contact the AUFA office or current OHS representatives (Rhiannon Rutherford or Bob Barnetson) for more information.
Other appointed committees include the Grievance, Membership Engagement, and Joint Benefits committees. Contact the AUFA office for more information on these committees.
Jolene Armstrong
AUFA Past President
Chair, Nominating Committee
Analysis of University of Lethbridge Settlement
The University of Lethbridge Faculty Association (ULFA) recently ratified a new settlement following a lengthy strike. This blog post provides an overview of the ULFA settlement. Overall, this settlement extends the public-sector and PSE wage pattern but with some additional monetary and language improvements.
Term and Money
This four-year deal has a term of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2024. The cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for all salaries and grids is as follows:
| July 1, 2020: | 0% |
| July 1, 2021: | 0% |
| July 1, 2022: | 0% |
| April 1, 2023: | 1.25% |
| December 1, 2023: | 1.5% |
| Additional increase December 1, 2023: | 0.5% (not guaranteed) |
The additional increase scheduled for December of 2023 is contingent upon the province achieving a real GDP for the 2023 calendar year that is at or above 2.7% as of February 2024. If this condition is met in February of 2024, U of L will retroactively apply an additional 0.5% COLA to December 1, 2023. If this condition is not met, then no additional increase will be forthcoming.
This means the ULFA settlement could see an (uncompounded) COLA increase of between 2.75% and 3.25% over its four-year term. Even with the addition of gain-sharing payments, this settlement will not maintain the purchasing power of ULFA salaries over time. For example, year-over-year inflation as of January 2022 was 5.1%.
The ULFA settlement matches the COLA agreed to by AUPE for its government services bargaining unit, the Mount Royal Faculty Association (MRFA) settlement from late February, and the Association of Academic Staff: University of Alberta (AASUA) from early March. This appears to be the current “secret’ financial mandate issued the government.
Extra Compensation
In addition to the COLA settlement, ULFA was able to negotiate some additional changes. Key changes that have clear monetary implications include:
Grid floors rise: Effective July 1, 2022, sessionals will see an 8% increase to the minimum stipends. Assistant and associate professors and some librarian grids will see a 10% increase to their grid floor. Assistant professor and one category of librarians will also see a 2% increase in salaries.
Benefits: The employee and family assistance plan will be extended to cover sessional and term staff. A flexible benefit spending plan of $250 per year for all members except sessional or term staff was created.
The value of this additional compensation is unclear. Additional compensation in non-salary form is also a feature of the AASUA, MRFA and United Nurses of Alberta deals.
Language
There were a significant number of language changes which vary across categories of employees. Of relevance to AUFA members include improvements in equity language that include:
An expansion of the definition of service to better recognize work often done by members of equity-seeking groups,
A larger equity committee with clearer terms of reference and purpose,
A requirement to perform regular EDI studies, including pay equity studies, with redress of inequities normally within 12 months,
Clearer language on what medical information is required for an accommodation, and
New Indigenous evaluation language.
You can read the full ratification package online.
ULFA and the U of L also negotiated a returned-to-work protocol (a common thing after a strike). This protocol includes Board agreeing to allow ULFA members to purchase their pensionable service during the period of the strike as well as the Board agreeing to pay travel, professional, and research/grant expenses incurred during the strike. The U of L also agreed to destroy all surveillance data collected during the strike, and that ULFA members will face no strike-related disciplinary measures, reprisals, or legal action.
Analysis
The ULFA agreement provides a cost-of-living increase of between 2.75% and 3.25%. This mirrors the provincial and PSE wage pattern (and the government mandate). This is the same deal that AU offered AUFA on February 28 after filed for mediation. Additional compensation, in the form of benefits, grid, and salary improvements, adds to the overall improvement of compensation.
ULFA also appears to have achieved some language improvements, particularly around equity issues. Notably, the ULFA deal does not appear to contain any of the massive language rollbacks that AU is trying to push on AUFA members.
To get this deal, ULFA was required to strike for approximately 40 calendar days. The U of L was not available to bargain for the first 23 calendar days. One way to read this delay by the U of L is as a form of punishment for ULFA striking.
Social media comments by ULFA members also suggest that the government was very much involved in the structure of the eventual agreement. This includes reports that the U of L negotiator had to call to get permission from the government to agree to certain outcomes. Whether this was actually the case or whether this was some sort of elaborate “talking to the manager in the back” ruse is unclear.
ULFA’s language improvements likely reflect that, in order to get ULFA to accept the government’s lousy wage-mandate, the U of L had to agree to some of ULFA’s other proposals. Time will tell if AU prefers this option to a work stoppage.
Jason Foster, Chair
AUFA Bargaining Committee
Bob Barnetson, Chair
Job Action Committee
Strike preparation update
As bargaining has moved to mediation, AUFA continues to prepare against the possibility of a strike. A credible strike threat is important because it shows AU that failing to negotiate an agreement will entail financial and reputational costs.
This short update addresses picketing preparations in Edmonton and Calgary, banking info for strike pay, and how to talk to students about the possibility of a strike.
Edmonton and Calgary picketing committees
The committees that are organizing flying (i.e., in-person) picketing events in Edmonton and Calgary have had preliminary meetings to discuss potential actions and logistical questions. A committee in Athabasca has been established and will meet shortly.
Banking info for strike pay
Last week, all AUFA members should have received an email requesting banking information so that AUFA can set up direct deposits for strike pay. We are collecting this information now because of the work required to set this up. If you have questions, please contact Gail Leicht, Treasurer, at treasurer@aufa.ca .
Talking to students about a possible strike
The Job Action Committee (JAC) has developed some talking points for AUFA members about how to talk to students about the possibility of a strike. You can find these talking points on AUFA’s website under the strike information tab.
Bob Barnetson, Chair
Job Action Committee
AUFA begins collecting banking info for strike pay
If there is a work stoppage, AUFA members will be eligible to receive strike pay. Strike pay is set at $88 per calendar day commencing on the fourth day of the work stoppage. You will also continue to receive your existing health, dental, vision, and life insurance benefits.
In January, AUFA members ratified (92.2%) three criteria that members must meet to receive strike pay:
Members must provide contact and banking information (a practical requirement),
Members must withdraw their labour as asked, and
Perform 10 hours per week of strike activities.
Due to the lack of progress in bargaining, the strike finance committee has decided to begin collecting members’ banking information to facilitate direct deposit. Later this week, you will receive an email with a secure link to provide this information.
The information we will be asking for includes:
Your name,
A non-AU email address,
Banking information.
The banking information we require is a series of numbers that include your Bank/Institution Number, a Transit Number, and your Account Number. These appear on a cheque as follows:
You can provide this banking information by entering your banking numbers, uploading an image of a voided cheque, or uploading a direct deposit form you can get from your bank (or online banking site).
The strike finance committee recognizes that some AUFA members will be uncomfortable sharing this information. This information only allows AUFA to deposit strike pay. AUFA will have no other access to your account. Banking information will be:
Collected using a secure form.
Stored on a password-protected spreadsheet.
Available only to the AUFA Treasurer (who will personally process payments).
Destroyed once a new collective agreement has been ratified.
There is no practical alternative to direct deposit given resource limitations and security concerns. AUFA will not be issuing hard cheques or providing strike pay through e-transfer.
Please watch for an email containing a link to the secure form. We are hopeful that all information can be collected by March 15.
Gail Leicht, Treasurer
Concordia strike ends in faculty victory
Ten days ago, 89% of the Concordia University of Edmonton Faculty Association (CUEFA) voted in favour of a new collective agreement, bringing Alberta’s first post-secondary strike to a quick and positive conclusion after 11 days. This blog post outlines what we know about the settlement, and provides some analysis for AUFA members. It concludes with an update on bargaining at Lethbridge and AUFA strike preparations.
Concordia Settlement
Through a combination of solidarity within Concordia and widespread support from outside the institution, CUEFA made crucial gains in both workload and salary. It was also able to retain member ownership over intellectual property, and to avoid rollbacks to disciplinary language.
Concordia’s administration agreed to reduce annual instructional loads for teaching faculty by 25%, from 8 courses to 6 courses, thereby enabling CUEFA members to manage increasing university expectations around research and research outputs.
Like our members, CUEFA members receive annual merit increments (the CUE term is “steps”) based on satisfactory job performance reviews. These annual increments continue to operate under the new agreement. The CUEFA deal also contains two types of additional wage increases during the four years of the agreement (July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2025).
Inflationary adjustments: Over the four years of the agreement, salaries and grids will be adjusted as follows: 0%, 0%, 0% and 1.5%.
Salary adjustments: On both of July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2023, CUE members will receive an additional (or “bonus”) salary increment.
Together, the inflationary and salary adjustments in this agreement will improve CUEFA members’ salaries by 4.39% to 6.85% (varies by member). CUEFA members will also continue to receive their normal annual salary increments.
Analysis
The CUEFA agreement will result in immediate salary increases greater than the increase contained in the autumn AUPE government services deal (2.75% to 3.25%). The AUPE deal appears to match the current provincial mandate in PSE.
That said, as important as CUEFA’s salary gains are, they’ll still likely result in a modest net loss of CUEFA members’ purchasing power over the life of the agreement. Alberta inflation from January to December, 2021 was 4.8%. Inflation is projected at 3% in 2022 and 2.5% in 2023.
Further, while it is important to note that monetary gains in the CUEFA deal increase member salaries, the top step of the CUEFA salary grids only move up 1.5% (in the fourth year of the deal). That is to say, the top of the CUEFA grid does not move up with inflation.
What this means is that the purchasing power of the maximum salary that CUEFA members can earn will be significantly eroded by inflation. For unions (like AUFA) that have a defined-benefit pension plan, stagnant grids also reduce the value of members’ eventual pension benefits (because the maximum annual salary is lower). To avoid such outcomes, most unions seek increases that apply to both salaries and salary grids. For example, AUFA’s opening offer is a 3% increase to salaries and grids in each of the proposed three years of the deal.
Overall, CUEFA resisted what would have been devastating rollbacks, and won significant and immediate gains for its members. CUEFA’s circumstances were slightly different than those facing AUFA. For one thing, Concordia is a private institution, and therefore was not bound by secret government mandates. And for another, Concordia is rolling in cash.
Acknowledging those differences, the CUEFA strike tells us that it is possible to make big gains if a faculty association is prepared to strike. It also tells us that, if we’re not prepared to fight, we will be stuck taking rollbacks.
CUEFA applied operational, financial, and reputational pressure to Concordia to get a deal. The strike forced administrators to cancel all classes, and, consequently, lose out on tuition revenue and suffer significant reputational harm. Strike support from groups of Concordia students (although notably not from the students’ union) intensified the reputational pressure.
AUFA’s Job Action Committee is presently exploring the forms of pressure AUFA can exert on AU to reach an agreement. For example, AU’s sponsorship of the Tenth Pan-Commonwealth Forum on Open Learning in Calgary from September 14 to 16 presents several opportunities to exert reputational pressure on AU.
Mediation unsuccessful at Lethbridge
Meanwhile, the University of Lethbridge Faculty Association (ULFA) announced Monday night that formal mediation with the University of Lethbridge had concluded without a deal. The mediator declined to recommend a settlement because the parties were too far apart.
The conclusion of mediation triggers a 14-day “cooling off” period (during which time the parties can continue to bargain if they wish). At the end of the cooling off period (February 1), the union can apply to take a strike vote. Once ULFA members have authorized a strike, a strike can begin at any time with 72 hours notice.
A strong strike vote can sometimes result in renewed bargaining as the employer confronts the possibility of a strike. At Concordia, a strike vote triggered movement by the employer on workload language. Nevertheless, a strike was still necessary for the employer to agree to reasonable salary improvements and a complete withdrawal of unfair language rollbacks.
AUFA bargaining
At Wednesday’s AUFA strike prep meeting, 283 attendees (65% of members) received a brief update on bargaining. Two items of note from the meeting are:
Vote on picketing plan: An electronic membership vote on the proposed picketing plan passed. There were 259 votes cast (~59% of the membership), with 206 in favour, 20 opposed and 33 abstentions. Discounting abstentions, 206 of 226 is 91.2% in favour. JAC will now move forward with strike planning.
Essential Services Agreement: On January 4th, almost 4 months after AUFA applied for an essential services agreement (ESA) exemption, AU finally agreed to AUFA’s proposal. AUFA and AU are currently completing some paperwork on that matter. AUFA hopes an ESA exemption will be issued in early February. Receiving an ESA exemption allows AUFA or AU to apply for formal mediation. Formal mediation is one of the last steps before AUFA is able to proceed to a strike vote. The timing of such a vote is uncertain but the Job Action Committee is working towards a March 15 strike-readiness deadline.
Toronto-area flying picket
AUFA members in Toronto are organizing a flying picket. If you are interested in participating in such a picket during a strike or lockout, please email torontoaufa@gmail.com.
If you are an AUFA member outside of Athabasca, Edmonton, Calgary, and Toronto who is interested in organizing a local picket during a strike, please contact Bob Barnetson (barnetso@athabascau.ca).
Strike Callers Wanted
The Membership Engagement Committee is recruiting 40 AUFA members to act as callers during any upcoming work stoppage. Callers would be responsible for making weekly phone calls to other AUFA members to check in with them, pass on information, and solicit feedback.
Time spent calling would count towards a member’s weekly strike service. If you are interested in volunteering, please contact Rhiannon Rutherford (rhiannon.rutherford@athabascau.ca). Half-day caller training sessions will be held February 11 (almost full) and repeated on February 18. This workshop is open to all AUFA members and does not obligate you to participate as a caller.
Jason Foster, Chair
Bargaining Committee
Bob Barnetson, Chair
Job Action Committee
AUFA to investigate needs of new members
Up to 50 new members join AUFA each year. New members have raised concerns about a range of issues that they face during the hiring and orientation processes. AUFA’s Membership Engagement Committee (MEC) has begun documenting these experiences in order to identify key issues and potential solutions. This blog outlines what we know so far and concludes with a brief survey for new AUFA members (<2 years) to complete.
Types of Issues and Present State
The issues raised by new AUFA members fall into three categories. In some cases, these categories overlap a bit.
Information needed by potential AUFA members during the hiring process to understand their offer and negotiate with the employer.
Information needed by new members to understand and realize their rights and benefits as an employee.
Information needed by new members about their job duties and how to perform them.
In terms of present state:
AUFA provides information to potential members passively (via the new member information on our website) and reactively (when candidates contact AUFA with questions).
AUFA provides info about rights and benefits to new members passively (website), reactively (fielding member questions), and, more recently, actively (by phoning new hires within a month of starting).
AU is responsible for providing new AUFA members with an orientation to their jobs and job duties. AU does not appear to have a consistent onboarding process. AU often delegates this work to other AUFA members. Orientation is hampered by AU processes that are highly idiosyncratic, fluid, and poorly/incorrectly documented.
Next Steps
MEC has struck a committee to examine the experiences of new AUFA members and document their needs. The new member experience committee is composed of Corina Dransutavicius, Eloy Rivas Sanchez, Susan Cake, and Bob Barnetson.
The committee anticipates using both surveys and interviews to collect data. A report should be completed and available in June of 2022. This report will include recommendations for improvements.
Your Turn
To kick of the committee’s data collection efforts, we have a short scoping survey for AUFA members who joined AUFA after January 1, 2019. The committee will aggregate and anonymize these results and report them back to the AUFA membership.
Corina Dransutavicius, Eloy Rivas Sanchez, Susan Cake, and Bob Barnetson
AUFA New Member Experience Committee