Workload Increases in the Faculty of Business

It has been brought to AUFA’s attention that approximately thirty tenure-track faculty and academic coordinators in the Faculty of Business have been asked to use a new formula for calculating their teaching workload that will require these individuals to take four to five times their current teaching load. 

AUFA has sent a letter to Provost Dr. Matthew Prineas and President Alex Clark requesting clarification on this new process for workload planning and the resulting workload increase. We have highlighted these important factors: 

This process violates Article 3.3.4 of the collective agreement, which requires workload to be equitable both within and between centres and equivalent academic units, as well as defining workload as no more than “what is reasonably possible for individuals to accomplish in a working year.” 

• These workload changes are happening only in the Faculty of Business. 

• While we don’t have good information about the current distribution of work across AU faculties, the average teaching load is roughly one block, or 32 undergraduate students, along with responsibility for coordinating 3 to 5 courses, in which the registration numbers for individual courses may vary.  

Accompanied by the threat of layoffs for non-compliance to the revised workload demands, Faculty of Business members are unable to negotiate the terms of their workload in accordance with Article 3 in the collective agreement. 

AUFA will support members who are under pressure to agree to unreasonable workloads including interventions on negotiations, grieving conditions of work, etc. 

Please feel free to reach out to AUFA if you have any questions or concerns and/or if your workload is changing significantly. 

Help us to understand teaching workload distribution by completing this form: https://forms.gle/yrcnqRoL2wYnnSjy8 

AUFA in Solidarity with MUNFA and CBUFA Job Action

Monday, January 30th, the faculty association of Memorial University of Newfoundland (approx.. 850 members) joined Cape Breton University faculty association (approx.. 230 members) and went on strike. Like Alberta, their region has suffered targeted cuts to the sector in recent years. AUFA offers our solidarity with their job action. We recognize that when faculty members at one university have the courage to strike, they are fighting on behalf of us all. 

Both universities face similar issues to AUFA: phasing out of tenure-track faculty for increased reliance on contract and lower wage positions and the erosion of collegial governance. AUFA is watching one (of many) especially worrisome bargaining issue that MUNFA is facing: the introduction of a two-tier payment scheme for post-retirement health benefits.  

We also stand with MUNFA in its insistence that faculty have an equal voice in decisions that affect the university community as a whole. The erosion of collegial governance affects us all, and safeguarding bicameral governance works to ensure an equitable distribution of power. 

The administration’s current offer to MUNFA includes a 12% salary increase over four years, and other added benefits. MUNFA’s president, Ash Hossain told the CBC, “We are fighting for principles. It's not about money.” We wish to applaud MUNFA for its commitment to principles and to the welfare of others. MUNFA’s commitment to standing on principle, beyond material gain, to continue fighting for those who still do not have fair working conditions in their union is the backbone of equity. We are grateful that MUNFA recognizes and upholds principles of relationality and mutual support. 

Memorial has a form letter that students and supporters can send to demand a fair and equitable deal. You can sign it here, or post in support on social media with the hashtag #FairDealAtMUN and tag the association @MUNFaculty. 

Bargaining Update: Tentative Agreement Reached

After another marathon day of mediator-assisted bargaining, AU and AUFA have reached a tentative agreement. Employer concessions contained in this new agreement no doubt reflect AUFA members’ strong rejection Monday of AU’s last ‘final’ offer. As a result, the AUFA bargaining team is recommending members vote to ratify this agreement. 

 AUFA is holding a town hall today at 2:00pm to discuss the substance of the tentative agreement, as well as what AUFA’s next steps might look like. In the meantime, this blog post provides a summary of the tentative settlement’s key items. For reference, the entire tentative agreement is attached below.  

2022 04 07 PROPOSED MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT (Tentaive Agreement) (00160919).pdf

The agreement uses the mediator’s report as the basis for most of the agreement. Most items in that report remain unchanged, including: 

• Cost-of-living-adjustment:  

  • The Government-mandated COLA increase of 1.25% (April 1, 2023), 1.5% (December 1, 2023) and an increase of 0.5% (retroactive to December 1, 2023) contingent on provincial gainsharing formula remains unchanged. This 3.25% COLA increase over the life of the contract appears to be pattern across most of the Alberta public sector. 

• Working-from-home allowance payments:  

  • Anyone who has not received the full $2000 for home office start-up will receive a ‘top up’ to make up the full $2000;  

  • Home-based staff with six years of service (and who received $2000 upon hiring) will receive an additional taxable $800 immediately. 

  • All AUFA members will receive an increase to their monthly allowance for internet and other office-related expenses from what it had been (roughly $61 per month for academics and roughly $50 per month for professionals) to $35 biweekly. 

• Joint committee to study Article 3: Academic Promotion and Tenure 

• Improvements to Compassionate Care Leave  

• Improvements to Occupational Health and Safety language 

• Language to include Joint Equity Committee in development of EDI framework and pay equity review 

• Withdrawal of employers’ outstanding concession demands 

The main changes in the tentative agreement relate to Research and Study Leave (RSL) benefits for Professional members. The proposed agreement removes Professionals’ eligibility for RSL going forward, with the following conditions: 

• No RSL days will be accrued going forward. New hires will not be eligible for RSL. Approved RSL leaves will be honoured. 

• Professionals will earn 30 days professional development leave per year (up from 21). Twenty-one days can be accrued per year to a maximum of 126 days (6 months). 

• Members can apply for leaves up to a maximum of six months. Members will need to apply for leaves longer than 21 days under new language that replicates the current process under RSL Leaves. If denied once, a second application will be given priority and not unreasonably denied. 

• Professionals with more than six months leave accrued will retain that leave, with no deadline on usage. Until their accrual drops below six months, they will only receive 21 PD days per year without accrual.  

• When a professional has fewer than six months RSL accrued, the leave will be converted to PD leave according to the formula in Schedule F and added to their PD bank. 

• Librarians will continue to be eligible for RSL. 

For clarity: in return for giving up RSL leave going forward, professionals will earn an additional 9 days of PD per year and will be able to accrue up to 21 days per year to a maximum of 6 months. Current RSL accruals above 6 months will be retained and others converted with a formula equivalent to receiving 100% pay for RSL leave. 

The bargaining committee recognizes this deal does not provide a full return for professionals on the value of their RSL entitlements. It does, however, provide more than the original mediator’s report in that it retains accrued leave at full value and provides professionals with 9 additional PD days per year going forward. This equates to a value of 3.6% of annual income. 

AUFA’s bargaining team is recommending this deal because we believe it is the best that can be achieved under current circumstances. The provincial government’s secret mandate has seriously undermined the basic integrity of the bargaining process, and severely limited what can, and cannot, be achieved at the table. This is especially true in terms of matters involving money. 

As always, of course, any final decision on whether to accept this tentative agreement rests solely in the hands of AUFA members. This is, after all, your collective agreement, and AUFA’s bargaining committee works for you.  

 On behalf of the Bargaining Committee, 

Jason Foster 

Bargaining Update: AUFA Presents Counter-Proposals

AU and AUFA met for a part day of bargaining on March 2, as AU representatives were unable to make themselves available for much of the afternoon. AUFA used the limited time to present its own package of counter-proposals in an effort to move toward a fair deal. This update provides highlights of AUFA’s proposals. An analysis of where things stand as we move into formal mediation next week will come in the following days.

AUFA continues to reject the list of concessions demanded by AU, including reductions to professionals’ rights, cuts to research and study leave, the removal of Deans from the bargaining unit, and negative changes to grievance and appeals processes. Our new package reflects this stand.

AUFA made a counter-offer on the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). AU’s proposal on Monday offered the settlement given to AUPE (2.75% to 3.25% provided late in the contract).

AUFA’s new COLA offer is:

• July 1, 2020: 0%

• July 1, 2021: 0%

• July 1, 2022: An average of 2.5% increase to base salary awarded as flat dollar amount per-member, pro-rated for FTE.

• July 1, 2023: An average of 2.5% increase to base salary awarded as flat dollar amount per-member, pro-rated for FTE.

AUFA’s COLA proposal is designed to increase equity among all AUFA members. If COLA is distributed as a percentage, as it has been for years, then members higher up on the wage scale receive a larger wage increase in real dollar terms than do those lower on the wage scale. For example, a 2.5% COLA for someone earning $75,000 equals $1,875. For someone earning $150,000, that same percentage increase equals $3,750. In contrast, AUFA’s proposal ensures that each AUFA member receives a COLA of approximately $2,600 in each of the last two years, based on AUFA members’ current average salary. AUFA’s proposal is meant to correct the inequities inherent in AU’s tendency in recent years to lowball new hires on starting salary.

AUFA’s latest proposals maintain our existing requests expanding appeals rights to disputes over workload and performance, securing fair work-from-home allowances and improvements to equity language, creating four floating vacation days, and ensuring protections against the de-designation of AUFA members. We also renewed our call for a joint pay equity review process.

Finally, AUFA amended its proposals for stronger occupational health and safety language and new contracting out language. Both remain on the table for discussion.

AUFA’s package did not include a counter-offer to the employer’s proposal on tenure and promotion processes (Article 3). AUFA is still deliberating on its response to that item.

AU has not yet responded to the package. The parties enter formal mediation on March 8.

On behalf of the bargaining committee,

Jason Foster

Chair

Bargaining Update: Small Moves But Huge Gulf Remains

On February 28, the AUFA and AU bargaining teams met for a day of regular bargaining in advance of formal mediation. AUFA’s decision to apply for formal mediation seems to have had an impact, as AU came to the table much more focused and with a different tone.

AU presented a full “new” package for consideration. Most of AU’s package remains unchanged from their January 31 position, but there were a few significant changes. This post offers the highlights of the new package. The committee will provide a fuller analysis following another day of bargaining on Wednesday, March 2.

It is noteworthy that AU’s offer was made without prejudice, meaning AU can withdraw this offer at any time and revert to it January 31 position. This is a common bargaining tactic to allow the parties to explore settlement without committing a new position. A party can also use this tactic to apply pressure. For example, if AU and AUFA make progress at the table but then come to impasse, AU can threaten to return to its January 31 position in the hope that AUFA will knuckle under to avoid losing any progress towards an agreement that was made.

AU’s January 21 proposal was for four years of no COLA increases. The February 28 offer saw AU alter its cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) proposal. AU’s proposal is now:

• July 1, 2020: 0%

• July 1, 2021: 0%

• April 1, 2023: 1.25%

• December 1, 2023: 1.5%

• An additional 0.5% applied February 29, 2024, retroactive to December 1, 2023, if forecasts for Alberta GDP are above 2.7%

AU’s new proposal matches the agreement AUPE signed for its core government services members and is similar to Mount Royal’s agreement. That said, Mount Royal also made some financial gains in other areas amounting to approximately an additional 1% in members’ pockets (a fuller analysis of the MRU deal will follow later this week).

AU also doubled down on its proposal to make professional staff ineligible for research and study leave (RSL). AU has added a proposal promising to make a one-time payment to professional staff to sign-away their accrued leave days (earlier they promised to honour those accrued days).

Specifically, AU is proposing a one-time payment to each professional who has accrued days owed. They have allotted $2.1 million for this payment. Currently, they propose an equal payout to each eligible member, which amounts to between $8000 and $10,000 (depending upon how many eligible members there are). This proposal expires March 31 if no tentative agreement is reached.

This proposal is a classic employer strategy of dangling short-term cash in trade for a long-term loss. The time limited nature of the offer also suggests it is a pressure tactic to force a quick deal. The AUFA bargaining team believes this offer significantly shortchanges professional members over the long term. At present, professionals earn 2 months of research and study leave entitlements (at 80% of salary) for each year of service. This means a professional with an annual salary of $80,000 would earn roughly $10,666 in RSL leave entitlements each year.

Other changes to AU’s proposal include:

• AU has tabled specific language to Article 3, which addresses academic appointment, tenure and promotion, and determination of duties. The changes are sweeping and include merging the tenure and promotion processes, and establishing a university-wide Faculty Evaluation Committee mandated to review tenure and promotion applications. AU’s proposal institutes a much more detailed set of criteria for tenure and promotion. They also create a separate tenure process for Academic Coordinators and weaken provisions around determination of duties.

• AU has offered to withdraw their proposals to amend Article 11, Academic and Professional Freedom, and have resorted to the status quo.

• AU has offered to accept much of AUFA’s proposal regarding compassionate leave for dying or serious ill family members. They have accepted an extended leave of 27 weeks (which matches current legislative provisions), but still restrict it to risk of death. AUFA will continue to push for a broader scope.

• AU has offered to withdraw proposals regarding external professional activities, agreeing to maintain status quo.

• AU has also offered to withdraw a proposal for new language allowing for temporary lay-off of professional staff.

Again, keep in mind this “progress” can be undone at any point because AU has made its offer on a without prejudice basis.

As mentioned, the bulk of their new package retains their existing positions on key issues. AU continues to demand significant concessions from professional staff, including exclusion from RSL leave, stripping access to appeal processes, weakened layoff provisions, and undermining probation review processes. They also retain their cuts to academics’ RSL provisions and continue to reject proposals to improve equity provisions in the agreement.

The parties meet again on Wednesday March 2, where AUFA will present its own renewed full package in an effort to find a deal. Formal mediation is slated to start next week.

On behalf of the bargaining committee,

Jason Foster

Bargaining Committee Chair

Bargaining Update: AU finally tables opening offer

The parties met to bargain on January 21. After months of pressure from AUFA, AU finally presented their monetary proposals. This post will outline the major items in their proposals and offer an analysis. You can find a copy of the employer’s full monetary offer here.

Their proposals can be grouped into two categories. First, they offer some general monetary items. These include:

• A four-year agreement, expiring June 30, 2024

• No cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) over the life of the contract (0%, 0%, 0%, 0%)

• Changes to the probation and promotion rules and process (not fully specified at this time)

• Restricting the right to appeal merit increment decisions to academic staff members only

The second group of proposals include sweeping changes to Research and Study Leave:

• Eliminating the right of professional staff to take research and study leave (existing banked days would be honoured)

• Renaming research and study leave to “sabbatical”

• Reduce academic staff’s remuneration while on research and study leave to 90% of salary

• Increase the time before eligibility for research and study leave from three years to six years

• Require that research and study leave be for a 12-month period only and capping accrual to a maximum of 12-months

• Require that upon completion of research and study leave, staff members must “present” outcomes to the university community

• Require staff members returning from research and study leave to commit to remaining in the employment of AU for a period of time equal to the leave or else repay salary paid during the leave (proportionate to the time not worked)

• Make approval of research and study leave conditional to “operational requirements”

There are a number of other minor and ancillary changes which won’t be discussed in this post. In addition to receiving AU’s proposals, AUFA presented a counter-proposal on Article 8 (Grievance Procedure), but the parties did not discuss it. An analysis of the key items of AU’s proposals will be offered below.

Zero Wage Increase

AU is proposing that AUFA members take another four years without a COLA increase. This proposal would mean AUFA members would go seven consecutive years with no COLA increase. For context, Statistics Canada reports that inflation was 4.8% in 2021. Notably, the offer is below where many other public sector agreements are landing regarding wages. In their presentation, AU indicated that they could have proposed rollbacks but chose not to, implying that AUFA members should be thankful.

The AU team asserted that AU is in a difficult financial situation at the moment. The parties have not yet discussed the wage proposal, but the AUFA team will express skepticism at this claim when the opportunity arises. AU has been mostly spared from government cutbacks compared to other institutions in the province. While enrollments are currently down, they are down from record highs during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Plus, AU has a track record of mid-year reports of deficits only to come out at the end of the fiscal year with surpluses.

That AU’s opening proposal is significantly lower than agreements elsewhere suggests to the AUFA team that AU’s offer is not reflective of the current provincial government secret mandate and they are seeking additional sacrifices from AUFA members. AUFA will be offering a counter-proposal soon.

Changes to Research and Study Leave

AU proposes sweeping changes to research and study leave, which they propose be re-named to sabbatical. By far, the most significant change is to remove from professionals the right to take research and study leave. This proposal is a continuation of their persistent attacks against AUFA’s professional members. In this bargaining round, AU is proposing to revamp professionals’ promotion and performance review process, remove professional freedom from the agreement, and lower the requirement for laying off professionals. On Friday, AU added to this list removing professionals’ right to appeal not receiving a merit increment.

During bargaining, AU’s team has regularly diminished professionals’ role at AU. AU’s bargaining lead, external lawyer Chantel Kassongo, described professionals’ rights in the collective agreement as “outliers”. They believe that professionals at AU do not deserve research and study leave, professional freedom, or layoff protection. The AUFA bargaining team will continue to defend our professional members against this attack.

AU’s proposed changes also negatively impact academics. Academic staff on leave will only receive 90% of their regular salary, a significant pay cut. AU justifies this by claiming it is an attempt to “incentivize” academics to seek out external funding for their leaves. This claim conveniently forgets that most funding agencies forbid applicants from collecting salary from their grant. Unless AUFA members were to commit fraud, this proposal is simply another salary cut.

Other changes will require AUFA members to wait longer (six years) for each sabbatical, limit the accrual of sabbatical leave, and remove the flexibility of determining the length of sabbatical. The new reporting and return-to-service requirements also place new, unnecessary burdens on members.

Academic Promotion and Tenure

AU also presented a suggestion regarding the reform of academic promotion and tenure (Article 3). They did not present specific language, but instead offered an overview of a possible direction for change. The parties had a productive discussion about the ramifications of such a suggestion.

AU suggested creating a “Faculty Evaluation Committee” responsible for handling probation and promotion applications, and possibly also handle merit increment and research and study leave decisions. This would centralize many of the decisions that currently take place in a decentralized fashion. AU argues it would also make it easier to implement consistent standards. AUFA raised concerns about how a central process might affect equity and recognition of diverse approaches to research and publishing.

Also, they presented the possibility of merging the tenure and promotion processes for assistant professors (i.e., requiring assistant professors to apply for both at the same time). At present, most assistant professors are able apply for early promotion, which also confers tenure. The AUFA bargaining team sees both pros and cons to such a reform. Finally, AU floated granting tenure to newly hired full professors at the time of hire.

The discussion was wide-ranging and AUFA team members asked many questions and raised concerns, including how the proposal might affect issues of equity. The discussion was limited by the lack of detail provided – the AU team was not in a position to answer many questions and, with issues such as this, the devil can lies in the details. The next step will be for AU to table specific language regarding their proposal.

The AUFA bargaining team recognizes issues related to tenure and promotion of academic members are complex and that AUFA members may hold diverse views about how the process should be structured. We also recognize that the lack of detail to date makes it difficult to offer a clear assessment. Members are welcome to offer their feedback on this matter.

The parties meet again on January 31. As always the AUFA bargaining team will keep working to find a fair deal for AUFA members.

Jason Foster

Chair, Bargaining Committee