Bargaining Update: Once more, little progress

AUFA and AU met on January 31 for another day of bargaining. The parties signed off on a couple minor items related to administration of the collective agreement and language reflecting the new bi-weekly pay periods.

AUFA presented a counter proposal on the cost-of-living adjustment. On the previous day of bargaining, AU proposed four years of zero increases. AUFA’s initial proposal, presented 10 months ago, was a 3% increase each year of a three-year agreement.

AUFA’s new amended proposal shifts to a four-year agreement. In the first two years, it asks for increases of 2% and 4% to salaries and grids. This proposal approximately matches inflation these last two years (2020 and 2021). AUFA then proposed that 2022 and 2023 cost-of-living adjustments be tied to Alberta’s consumer price index (CPI).

The goal of the proposal is to ensure AUFA members’ salaries approximately match the increase in the cost of living during the course of the agreement. AU has not formally responded to this proposal, although AU’s bargaining lead, external lawyer Chantel Kassongo, oddly proclaimed the offer to be an “escalation”. This assertion is hard to fathom, given AUFA’s proposal reflects current economic realities plus the passage of time caused by AU’s delay in tabling a monetary offer.

AUFA also tabled counter proposals regarding probation and performance of duties for professionals (Article 4), and on occupational health and safety (Article 25). AU has not yet responded to either proposal.

AUFA also presented concerns regarding the process for making changes to Blue Cross benefit entitlements. Specifically, AU has been refusing to consider changes proposed by AUFA at the joint committee tasked with managing the benefit plan. Article 10 (discrimination and harassment) and Article 17 (Association business) were also briefly discussed without resolution.

A surprising amount of time was spent addressing a technical legal matter. AUFA tabled a notice of estoppel regarding the issue of members performing work not in their job description. An estoppel notice is a legal statement to inform the other party that past practice will no longer apply regarding a specific matter.

AUFA was informing AU that, going forward, AUFA would rigorously apply the terms of the collective agreement regarding members performing work not in their job description. This notice is a legal technicality which does not substantially impact bargaining, and thus should have only taken a few minutes to address. Instead, the discussion took almost an hour and a half, in large part due to persistent questioning from Kassongo.

The dragging out of the estoppel notice discussion and AU’s lack of response to AUFA’s proposals suggest that AU is continuing its strategy of “going slow” in negotiations, which impedes progress toward a new agreement.

No further dates are currently scheduled. AUFA has proposed 12 days in February and March for bargaining. We await a reply from AU.

Jason Foster, Chair

AUFA bargaining team

Bargaining Update

The AUFA bargaining team met with AU on December 8 for a round of negotiations. Bargaining had also been scheduled for November 30, but was cancelled at the last minute due to a family emergency for one of the AU team members.

Once again, AU refused to provide their monetary proposals. Instead, the parties discussed two employer counter-proposals and one new employer proposal, which took half a day. When AUFA suggested using the afternoon to discuss the employer’s monetary proposals, the employer refused. The employer offered no explanation for withholding its monetary proposal. The day ended early as a result.

The parties did sign off on one proposal. The employer presented a proposal on Article 16 (Other Leaves) to remove gender-based language regarding eligibility for maternity and parental leave. AUFA agrees this is a positive step and agreed to the new language. The parties had earlier agreed in principle to make the entire collective agreement gender neutral and to address that issue later in the process. Due to that prior agreement, this proposal was unnecessary and duplicative. AUFA’s bargaining team suspects this proposal was just a stalling tactic to further delay the employer providing its monetary offer.

AU presented a counteroffer to AUFA’s proposal on Article 25 (Occupational Health and Safety). Essentially, AU is offering to abide by the OHS Act (which it already must do by law). AU’s counter proposal falls far short of what AUFA is looking for. AUFA is seeking to ensure our members’ safety rights are codified in the collective agreement so they cannot be eroded by changes in legislation. (The UCP recently made changes to OHS legislation that has reduced members’ safety rights.)

AU also amended its original proposal on Article 4, which deals with appointment, probation, performance of duties, and promotion for professionals. The new proposal makes a few tweaks to their first offer, but leaves intact its core trade-off of reducing the probationary period to one year in exchange for a series of concessions, including removing the probation review process and the right to appeal position classification decisions through the collective agreement and giving the employer the right to dismiss anyone on probation at any time for any reason. A shorter probationary period benefits AUFA members but AU’s changes would make the probationary process unfair.

AUFA had offered 11 dates that it was available to bargain in January, but AU only agreed to January 21 and 31. In addition to growing frustration at the lack of AU’s full opening offer (after 8 months of bargaining), AUFA is concerned that the employer’s unwillingness to provide bargaining dates is a further effort by AU to avoid concluding bargaining in a timely manner.

If bargaining reaches impasse, the next step will be formal mediation. If mediation is unsuccessful, then AUFA will need to hold a strike vote by the membership. The exact timing of any strike vote is contingent upon too many factors to provide a firmer date than the spring, but the Job Action Committee has been instructed to be ready to strike as early as March 15.

Jason Foster

Chair, AUFA Bargaining Committee

New Member Preliminary Survey Results

In November, AUFA’s Membership Engagement Committee (MEC) sought feedback from new AUFA members about their experiences of joining AU. This short survey was the first step in what will be a deeper look at the needs of new AUFA members.

Thirty-three AUFA members who were hired after January 1, 2019 responded, with an even split between new academic and new professional members. With one exception, the results were similar for academic and professional members. Key themes include:

• New AUFA members did not have enough information to effectively negotiate an offer.

• AU provided inadequate orientation to their jobs and to the organization.

• New AUFA members struggled to self-orient because of inadequate and incorrect documentation and the absence of mentors.

• Social isolation has intensified the challenges faced by new AUFA members.

In the spring, MEC members will be undertaking more in-depth interviews with AUFA members about their onboarding experiences.

Negotiations at Hire

Q1. During your hiring, did you have enough info to negotiate an offer effectively with AU?

The vast majority of members identified that they lacked information during the hiring process, and this affected their ability to negotiate. Negotiations are important because starting salaries are the pivotal factor in life-time earnings.

In their comments, respondents reported that AU would not answer questions, was unwilling to meaningfully negotiate, and refused to provide support to members having to relocate. Members also flagged that, when they became aware that their starting salaries were inequitable, there was no meaningful remedy available to them.

Orientation to Job

Q2. During your first two weeks on the job, were your job specific duties adequately explained to you?

Q3. Do you know the criteria against which your performance will be judged at the end of your probationary period?

In their comments, many respondents emphasized that their orientation to their jobs was inadequate. This included tasks, duties and how their work fit into the organization which was not explained or shifting as time went on. What information was provided was provided in an overwhelming volume without adequate context. Respondents also repeatedly emphasized that organizational documentation was often out of date, they often had no one to ask questions of, and the answers to questions often conflicted (depending upon who one asked).

Orientation to Organization

Q4. Do you know what you need to do to take a few days of sick leave?

Q5. Do you know what your PD account can and cannot be spent on?

Q6. Do you know how to book a vacation?

Q7. Do you know how to get help with IT problems?

In their comments, respondents also identified that their orientation to the organization was inadequate or non-existent. Many struggled to understand their entitlements, actual processes almost never matched written policies and procedures, how different parts of the university worked and interacted were unclear, and they struggled to find anyone who could answer their questions. Over time, new AUFA members navigated processes by trial and error.

Isolation and Workload

In their comments, new professional and academic members noted that the isolation created by COVID and the near-virtual model intensified their difficulties understanding their jobs and the organization. There have been few opportunities to develop informal connections and social networks and AU has made no effort to address this issue.

Staff (mostly professional) also identified rising workloads as a significant problem. These comments are, in part, related to AU’s disastrous IT Optimization process, but workload concerns are not restricted to only IT and course production staff. Enrollment growth, additional job responsibilities or workload volume (often associated with the move to working from home), and delays in staffing were factors contributing to workload problems.

Next Steps

In the spring, the New Member Research Committee will be conducting more in-depth interviews with new AUFA members. A final report is due in June. This report will include identifying areas for improvement for AU (which is primarily responsible for orienting new staff) as well as for AUFA.

As interim measures:

• In June, AUFA posted a new member handbook providing a basic overview of rights, entitlements and processes. Based upon member feedback, AUFA will be reframing this as simply a member handbook in the near future.

• In September, AUFA began phoning all new members on a go forward basis and providing an orientation to the union and the collective bargaining agreement. New or long-serving members who wish to receive such an orientation can email engagement@aufa.ca to set up a call.

• In December, AUFA will be developing a 2022 calendar of important dates for AUFA members.

Your Turn

The New Member Experience Committee would appreciate any further feedback you have on this topic as it prepares to commence interviews.

Corina Dransutavicius, Eloy Rivas Sanchez, Susan Cake, and Bob Barnetson

AUFA New Member Experience Committee