Faculty compensation at CCSF

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Renee L. Wallace Associate Vice President Academic Personnel Services August 9, 2013.
Advertisements

AGREEMENT BETWEEN The Robbinsville Board of Education and The Robbinsville Education Association
Sonoma County Junior College District Proposed Budget Presented to the Board of Trustees September 14, 2010.
Impact of GASB 45 on Chesterfield County Employees
Ohio University January 27,  OPERS has a long history of proactively addressing issues as early as possible (examples include the Choices Health.
Ken Hawkinson Provost and Academic Vice President Western Illinois University Contingent Faculty In Higher Education April 6 – 8, 2014.
Faculty Performance-Based Compensation Presentation to Academic Senate August 30, 2006.
Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study Summary Findings
Salary Findings April 25 th, 2011 Faculty Senate Budget Committee.
Differentiated Pay Plan Wilson County Schools. Why the Change? Additionally, the state has adopted a new salary schedule. State law [T.C.A § (h)],
CAS survey results1 CAS WTE faculty compensation survey results Spring 2008 N = 73 completed survey 54.9% (40.3%) response rate Spring 2008 N = 73 completed.
Princeton Public School Bargaining Unit Contracts Special Meeting of the Board of Education May 20, 2015.
District Salary Committee Update March 2005.
PBIM SUMMIT August 29, TODAYS INFORMATION  State Budget Highlights  Peralta’s Final Budget  Funding Sources  Unrestricted General Fund.
Planning Time & Florida’s K-12 Comprehensive Reading Program Contractual Provisions.
Tentative Agreement Between the Kern Community College District and the Kern Community College District Community College Association/ California Teachers.
PBIM - Summit August 26, Agenda State Budget Peralta’s Final Budget OPEB.
Board of Trustees Presentation ADOPTED BUDGET Public Hearing August 31, 2009 Mike Brandy, Interim Chancellor Andy Dunn, Vice Chancellor, Business.
Tentative Agreement to Faculty Contract July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2014.
Instructors’ Association Proposals for the Next Contract, 1/1/ /31/2008 Principles: 1) “equal pay for equal work” --- correct inequities by using.
First Session of the Annual Meeting Deliberative Session February 5, 2015.
Academic Program Units (APUs) Presentation to the Executive Committee February 9, 2006 Revised and Presented April 20, 2006 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN.
2015 Police and Firefighter Pension Law Enrolled CS/SB 172 Bonni S. Jensen Klausner, Kaufman, Jensen & Levinson
Pension Reform: What ’ s Next? September 30, 2011.
Budget Workshop August 17, Agenda State Budget Peralta’s Tentative Budget.
APSOU CBA Highlights Major changes Article 1: Preamble Contract extension to three years, now to August 31, 2018 More meaningful and clearer academic freedom.
Governor’s January Budget “Best Case Scenario” Budget Package Entire package assumes voters will approve a $12 billion tax package (measure on June ballot)
Collective Bargaining Contracts with Performance Metrics A “Success Pool” and ”Faculty Excellence Awards” Kent State University NCSCBHEP 39 th Annual National.
APSOU CBA Highlights Major changes Article 1: Preamble Contract extension to three years, now to August 31, 2018 More meaningful and clearer academic freedom.
2017 SEBAC Framework and UCHC-AAUP Collective Bargaining Agreement
Compensation, Benefits, and Certification after EHB 2242
Request for Adjustment to Westford Teacher Salaries
Seattle Colleges Budget Proposal Fiscal Year
Where the CBA Meets Curriculum
Compensation of Department / Division Faculty Chairs
Introduction to SMC’s Online Flex Tracking System
MCCC Day Unit Salary Grid
Negotiations Update May 2017.
Nuclear Medicine Workforce Study
EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY STEP BY STEP FACULTY SUMMER PAY SUMMER 2017
Comparing the AFT and District budget scenarios
The Superintendent’s Role in Collective Bargaining Negotiations
CUTTING KEEPING THE PROMISE PENSION SYSTEM CRISIS
Negotiations Update May 2017.
Compensation, Benefits, and Certification after EHB 2242
IFO-MinnState Tentative Settlement Information Presentation
Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study Summary Findings
Academic Program Units (APUs)
Board Proposal vs. MAREA Proposal
TEAP XXV/8 Task Force Report
FY Approved Budget.
Budget Development & Issues &
First Quarter Financial Status Report
Office of Sponsored Programs & Research
Assembly-Board Joint Worksession- KPBSD’s FY14 Budget
Mid-Year Payroll Changes
Supreme Court Case Janus v. AFSCME
Title I in the FY19 ESSA Consolidated Grant Application
Public Hearing Proposed Changes to Tuition Rates
New Federal Guidance MCW negotiates its fringe benefit rates with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) annually. Based on direction from.
ON! What is Impasse? Impasse is a declaration that future bargaining would be unfruitful. The parties can declare impasse together or individually. If.
2018 UNC System employee engagement survey
Distance Learning Benchmarking
SENSE: Survey of New Student Engagement
Full-time Faculty Obligation
FY20 House 1 Budget Overview
Full-Time Faculty Contract
Peralta CCD Proposed Final Budget
Comparing the AFT and District salary proposals
Presentation transcript:

Faculty compensation at CCSF What the new contract achieves

Historically, we have compared CCSF salaries with the “Bay 10 Historically, we have compared CCSF salaries with the “Bay 10.” The Bay 10 are CCSF and the nine other Bay Area community college districts. The stated goal, for at least three decades, has been to have CCSF salaries above the Bay 10 median. Since 2007, this goal has not been met.

Up until the 2016/17 academic year, the CCSF salary schedule had 6 columns and 16 steps. For each step, the salary increases. Once the top step is reached, the salary stays the same. The columns indicate different levels of education, and the steps are pay increases that result from increasing years of service to the college. The schedule shows the salary for each column, and each year of service, from 1 to 30. The result is a set of 180 salary cells.

As we entered the current round of negotiations, the bargaining team continued to address these issues: the effect of low starting salaries on recruiting, the effect of salary stagnation on faculty morale and retirement income, the effect of the cost of living in San Francisco on eroding the living standards of faculty, and the need to address various load factors. Unlike the previous round, the District has been more open to discussing all of these issues.

The CCSF salary schedule currently has 17 uniquely different salary levels, or “steps.” Some the districts in the Bay 10 comparison have fewer steps and some have more, with the minimum being 12 and the maximum being 23, which also occur at different points in a 30 year career. The dollar amount of salary steps vary by district and, within districts, by salary column. In addition, some districts have fewer columns.

Notice that only CCSF and Contra Costa do NOT have PhD step Notice that only CCSF and Contra Costa do NOT have PhD step. Only three districts have separate F+60 and PhD steps. So much for the argument that CCs only need MAs! Different districts have different numbers of salary columns, and the requirement for moving between columns is also different.

The salary increases that occur between columns varies by district, but what is very clear is that the increases at CCSF are the smallest.

Notice, Marin has smaller step increases but more of them Notice, Marin has smaller step increases but more of them. Rising slower but longer. Takes longer to reach top salary.

This chart shows the our rankings as we started into this new round of negotiations. It reflects the CCSF salary increases that occurred in years 2 and 3 of our current contract and the salary increases that have occurred at each of the Bay 10.

This chart shows all of the 180 cells in the CCSF salary schedule at the start of negotiations, compared to the Bay 10 median in one chart.

In year one of the proposed contract, all salary cells will get an increase of $2,700. The increment between F to F15, F15 to F30, and F30 to F45 will increase by $445, and the increment between F45 and G will increase by $1335 to $2670. In addition, a new “longevity step” will occur at step 25. The value of that step will be $8010. The calculation of the step position is very simple: Take the hire-in step, and add the number of years of service. In year one, all faculty members will receive a salary increase greater than the COLA amount approved by the Governor. Remind them that, just like in the individual charts, as education level of the faculty rises, they fall further behind the Bay 10.

In year one of the proposed contract, the effect on our rank in the Bay 10 is: Remind them that, just like in the individual charts, as education level of the faculty rises, they fall further behind the Bay 10.

In year two of the proposed contract, all salary cells will get an increase of $2,500. The increment between F to F15, F15 to F30, and F30 to F45 will increase by another $445. In addition, a new “longevity step” will occur at step 23. The value of that step will be $5340. The effect on our rank in the Bay 10 is: Remind them that, just like in the individual charts, as education level of the faculty rises, they fall further behind the Bay 10.

In year three of the proposed contract, all salary cells will get an increase of $2,200. The increment between F to F15, F15 to F30, and F30 to F45 will increase by another $445. This results in increments between all columns of $2670. In addition, a new “longevity step” will occur at step 20. The value of that step will be $2670. The effect on our rank in the Bay 10 is: Remind them that, just like in the individual charts, as education level of the faculty rises, they fall further behind the Bay 10.

This chart shows the our rankings after all of the provisions of the proposed contract are implemented. Note that 99% of the salary cells rank in the top 3 of the Bay 10, relative to current Bay 10 salaries.

We know that other districts will be negotiating new contracts We know that other districts will be negotiating new contracts. Our survey of other districts indicate the median salary increase in the Bay 10 for next year will be only 1.5%. If this continues for each of the next three years, more than 80% of salary cells will still be above the Bay 10 median in year three, and those below the median will be only slightly below the median.

The new contract achieves much more than just increases in compensation. It also: Provides a new Step 14 in Year 2 to Part-time steps, and provides a new Step 15 and Step 16 contingent on meeting fund balance (budget) goal. Provides pro-rated increases to 86% pro-rated part-time and overload scales Raises load factor for clinical labs in nursing and Allied Health from .75 to .85. Eliminates the pay differential for labs previously designated as “Conference” Allows AFT/District to continue meeting over District budget with possibility of additional improvements in salary and lab load factors if CCSF budget goals are met. Obligates AFT/District to conduct extensive study of hours of faculty work, impact of lowering workload on curriculum, impact on part- time assignments, etc for non-credit faculty. For a full description of all of the provisions in the new contract, go to: http://www.aft2121.org/May-2-2018-tentative-agreement-explanation/