Negotiating Team Members: Linda Buyer, Jamie Daniel, Carla Johnson, Mike Hart, Tony Labriola, Brian McKenna, and Pam Stipanich 2013 GSU-UPI LOCAL 4100.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Understanding MSCHE Expectations for Governance Ellie A. Fogarty, Vice President Middle States Commission on Higher Education 2010 Annual Conference Philadelphia,
Advertisements

Dual Purpose Use of Data by the MSU ADVANCE Project Outline Overview of the ADAPP Project Framework of the Project Use of a Work Environment Survey to.
Tenure is awarded when the candidate successfully demonstrates meritorious performance in teaching, research/scholarly/creative accomplishment and service.
Bargaining Under the New Law. How did we get here? October 2010: ETA members ratify extension of CBA to June 30, 2014 February 2011 : SB 1 (collective.
Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Michigan Education Association Spring 2011.
MRFA General Meeting 27 October Agenda Approvals Approval of Minutes (Sept 27, 2010) Officer’s Reports President Treasurer Audit Completion Part-time.
BRAVO AWARD PROGRAM October Introduction Purdue University’s Bravo Award Program serves to highlight the excellence that exists in all areas and.
APT & Classified Council.  Survey objectives and conception:  Solicit employee feedback to generate agendas  Use data to inform the governance process.
UFF-FSU United Faculty of Florida Florida State University Chapter The Independent Voice of FSU Faculty Jennifer Proffitt, Ph.D. Associate Professor in.
Ken Hawkinson Provost and Academic Vice President Western Illinois University Contingent Faculty In Higher Education April 6 – 8, 2014.
Texas City Municipal Police Association 2012 Satisfaction Survey.
CONTRACT SETTLEMENT THE LANGUAGE Limits on IEP, 504 and PST meetings during planning Planning time for Part Time Teachers Guarantee interview.
Implementing the new Workload Policy Heads of School Workshop April 2010.
Negotiations 2012 CAAT-A. Overview  Faculty includes professors, instructors, counsellors, and librarians  OPSEU represents full-time and partial-load.
OS 352 4/24/08 I. Exam III is on Monday, 4/28, 11:45- 2:45pm, in Science Center /28 Office Hours: 9am-11am, my office. II. HR Scorecard, continued.
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF STAFF IN CROATIAN CIVIL SERVICE Dubravka Prelec Central State Office for Administration Zagreb, November 04, 2008.
Supplemental Salaries. History School Board ask Personnel Policy Committee to look into supplemental pay Personnel Policy Committee formed a Supplemental.
Sex comparisons among science faculty at Hunter College Hunter College Gender Equity Project & Provost’s Office 2007 Science Faculty Survey Department.
SPE Engagement Survey Results Summary Digital Media Group Masek November 2012 Confidential 1.
Non-Academic Staff Compensation Program Employee Presentation 2013.
Standard Four: Faculty Michael Connolly, D.M.A. University of Portland Michael Connolly, D.M.A. University of Portland.
April 23, 2015 Compensation Review Committee. Welcome & Introductions.
Abraham Maslow’ Hierarchy of Needs
Student Education Service QUALITY ASSURANCE QAA Update HEFCE consultation on future of quality assessment arrangements QAA Quality Code Alignment - programme.
Instructors’ Association Proposals for the Next Contract, 1/1/ /31/2008 Principles: 1) “equal pay for equal work” --- correct inequities by using.
ACADEMIC SENATE ORIENTATION 9/3/09 Welcome New and Returning Senators!
Duke Ellington “A problem is a chance for you to do your best.”
MSCHE Expectations for Governance Mary Ellen Petrisko, Vice President Middle States Commission on Higher Education Annual Conference December 12, 2011.
The University of Texas at San Antonio June 19, 2013 Merit Policy.
Office of Faculty Affairs August 25, Office of Faculty Affairs August 25, 2015 Professional.
ARTICLE X, DEPARTMENT OR DIVISION PROCEDURES GOVERNING TENURE, PROMOTION, AND CONTRACT RENEWAL contract, unchanged for
POST-TENURE REVIEW: Report and Recommendations. 2 OVERVIEW Tenure Field Test Findings Recommendations This is a progress report. Implementation, assessment,
FACULTY RELATIONS Overview of the Changes to the UBC Faculty Agreement 1 Faculty Relations.
2005 All-Staff Survey: Survey Results Summary Presentation
1 NC State University 2008 Staff Well-Being Survey Highlights from Overall Results A Presentation to the Staff Senate Nancy Whelchel, Ph.D University Planning.
MCCC/DHE Contract Negotiations. The Negotiations Process BHE and MCCC appoint their bargaining teams, comprised of representatives from the 15 Community.
Faculty Well-Being North Carolina State University March 10, 2009 Committee on Faculty Well-Being.
APSOU CBA Highlights Major changes Article 1: Preamble Contract extension to three years, now to August 31, 2018 More meaningful and clearer academic freedom.
Faculty Governance Survey Results Initial Findings November, 2008.
UFLFA Presentation – 12/18/ Pay Increases Per the Florida House and Senate: Raise funding for filled Faculty and Staff positions: 3.0 % Across.
Welcome.  A workforce that understands, supports and embraces mission, vision, goals, values and focus  Employees driven to contribute to the success.
© All rights reserved Your Voice, Your CC: The Colorado College Employee Climate/Engagement Survey Information Technology.
Kapil Bawa, Ph.D., Professor of Marketing, Zicklin School of Business Micheline Blum, Director, Baruch College Survey Research, Distinguished Lecturer,
Collective Bargaining Contracts with Performance Metrics A “Success Pool” and ”Faculty Excellence Awards” Kent State University NCSCBHEP 39 th Annual National.
© All rights reserved Your Voice, Your CC: The Colorado College Employee Climate/Engagement Survey Advancement.
SACS Governance & Leadership Committee September 26, 2012.
Strategic Resource Planning Council June 26, 2013 Merit Policy.
Michele Winship, Ph.D.  Compliance with HB 153/SB 316 requirements?  Seek out and get rid of “bad” teachers? OR  Improve teaching.
APSOU CBA Highlights Major changes Article 1: Preamble Contract extension to three years, now to August 31, 2018 More meaningful and clearer academic freedom.
Elizabeth Lord Vice Provost for Academic Personnel Winter Quarter Department Chair Forum February 24, 2006.
NTTF Rights and Responsibilities
GETTING TO KNOW OUR CONTRACT
Compensation of Department / Division Faculty Chairs
CLC – AFO Adjunct Faculty Organization
Improved Compensation
PAc-17 Sabbatical Leave of Absence
UFF-FSU United Faculty of Florida Florida State University Chapter The Collective Voice of FSU Faculty Michael Buchler Associate Professor of Music Theory.
Overview Background UPS Operational Policy TC 4
IFO-MinnState Tentative Settlement Information Presentation
The 2015 COACHE Survey YORK COLLEGE Faculty Satisfaction
UFF-FSU United Faculty of Florida Florida State University Chapter The Collective Voice of FSU Faculty Matthew Lata Professor of Music UFF-FSU Chapter.
Faculty Performance Reviews at MSU
Root Gorelick – CUASA President Josh Horton – Communications Assistant
Elizabeth Lord Vice Provost for Academic Personnel
Provost’s Merit Pay Initiative
Presenters: Maureen Chalmers (NWCC) and Steve Krevisky (MXCC)
10+1 Governance and Union Issues: Similarities and Differences
10+1 Governance and Union Issues: Similarities and Differences
Fall 2018 Overview from Curriculum Regional Meeting (11/17)
UPI Membership Negotiations: Tentative Agreement (TA)
Presentation transcript:

Negotiating Team Members: Linda Buyer, Jamie Daniel, Carla Johnson, Mike Hart, Tony Labriola, Brian McKenna, and Pam Stipanich 2013 GSU-UPI LOCAL 4100 MEMBERSHIP SURVEY SUMMARY AND IDENTIFIED ISSUES

SURVEY RESULTS

Thank-you, Thank-you, Thank-you 235 people responded to the membership survey Approximately half of the respondents (N = 101) answered at least some of the demographic questions at the end of the survey 69.3% identified themselves as Unit A faculty, 19.8% as Unit B Faculty, and 10.9% as Academic Support Professionals (ASPs). The distribution of the membership into these categories is Unit A = 56.7%, Unit B = 33.3%, and ASP = 10.0%.

Survey Results We asked, article by article and appendix by appendix, how satisfied with the current contract you were. We also asked a few additional questions about issues that crossed articles. First, the good news: % Satisfaction: Articles 26, 27, and 32 and Appendices A, B, D, E 80-89% Satisfaction: Articles 11, 12, 22, 24, and 30 and Appendices F, G, K and the question about contract numbering/indexing 70-79% Satisfaction: Articles 10, 15, 18, 20, 23, 25 and Appendices C, H, N 60-69% Satisfaction: Articles 13, 14, 19, 21, and 31 and Appendices I, J, L and “Unit A”/”Unit B” language, and Post-tenure review questions 50-59% Satisfaction: Question re Credit for Teaching, Service and Research in 6 years prior to tenure

Survey Results More good news: % Dissatisfaction: None 80-89% Dissatisfaction: None 70-79% Dissatisfaction: Article 17 (Eval. & Eval. Criteria), PAI Inequity & CUEs as “scrip” questions 60-69% Dissatisfaction: Articles 28 (Salary) and 29 (Additional Comp.) 50-59% Dissatisfaction: Article 16 (AODs/Work Plans), Appendix M (parking & walkways), and questions re use of “Exceptional”, etc. in Articles 18 & 19 and the Excellence Awards Dissatisfactions are not as strong as satisfactions. Number of things you are dissatisfied with is small and “hangs together”.

Survey Results Because the answer to a question sometimes depends on how is it asked, we also asked for you to identify the three articles/appendices you would most like to see stay the same and the three that you’d most like to see changed in the next contract The articles most often found in the “stay the same” category were: Article 13: Grievance Procedure (14 votes) Article 18: Retention (11 votes) Appendix A: Certification of Representative (9 votes) Article 20: Tenure (8 votes)

Survey Results Because the answer to a question sometimes depends on how is it asked, we also asked for you identify the three articles/appendices you would most like to see stay the same and the three that you’d most like to see changed The articles most often found in the “stay the same” category were: (from the item by item questions listed earlier) Article 13: Grievance Procedure (14 votes) (69.2% satisfied) Article 18: Retention (11 votes) (76.6% satisfied) Appendix A: Certification of Representative (9 votes) (97.1% satisfaction) Article 20: Tenure (8 votes) (73.5% satisfaction)

Survey Results The articles most often found in the “should be changed” category were: Article 28: Salary (37 votes) Article 16: Assignment of Duties/Annual Work Plan (31 votes) Article 29: Additional Compensation (22 votes) Article 17: Evaluation and Evaluation Criteria (18 votes) Article 19: Promotion (12 votes) Article 21: Additional Evaluation… (11 votes) Article 31: Compensable Fringe Benefits (8 votes)

Survey Results The articles most often found in the “should be changed” category were: (from the item by item questions listed earlier) Article 28: Salary (37 votes) (61.4% dissatisfied) Article 16: Assignment of Duties/Annual Work Plan (31 votes) (54.3% dissatisfied) Article 29: Additional Compensation (22 votes) (66.7% dissatisfied) Article 17: Evaluation and Evaluation Criteria (18 votes) (73.6% dissatisfied) Article 19: Promotion (12 votes) (61.6% satisfied) Article 21: Additional Evaluation… (11 votes) (60.0% satisfied) Article 31: Compensable Fringe Benefits (8 votes) (64.4% satisfied)

Survey Results Again, because the answer to a question sometimes depends on how is it asked, we were concerned that all of our “checkboxes” might be limiting what you told us about your concerns The last contract question was “Please tell us what your single biggest concern is about the new contract that we have been tasked to negotiate” and was open-ended. We coded the written responses we received as to the concerns that they mentioned. 17 different things were mentioned more than once as your primary concerns:

Survey Results Salary (N = 22) Equity (N = 20) Teaching CUEs/Load (N = 19) Research Expectations/CUEs (N = 15) Service Expectations/CUEs (N = 14) Increased Expectations (N = 9) Unit B Inequity (N = 8) Decisions by Administrative Fiat (N = 7) Percentage vs. Fixed Increases (N = 5) Shared Governance (N = 5) (This one includes Excellence Awards decisions) Benefits (N = 4) Transparency (N = 4) ASP Inequality (N = 3) Evaluation Processes/SEIs (N = 3) Academic Quality (N = 2) Faculty Autonomy (N = 2) Overload (N = 2)

First step in the Modified Traditional Bargaining Process is to Exchange Issues with the Administration Team ISSUES WE IDENTIFIED AFTER REVIEWING SURVEY RESULTS

Your Issues: Identified 6 Major Issues: How can we reconfigure workload such that the CUES and/or work plans are more equitable across constituencies? How can we keep compensation and work assignments appropriately in line with changing expectations? How can we provide more regularized and accountable evaluation processes? How can we adjust the reward system such that everyone is eligible for recognition of excellence? How can we assure that the contract is being acted upon? (Reportability/Reporting Structure) How can division criteria be brought into greater alignment with the GSU UPI contract time line?

Your Issues First Question: Do you have a concern that does NOT fit into one of the issues we identified?

Your Issues First Question: Do you have a concern that does NOT fit into one of the issues we identified? Second Question: Do we have the right ordering of the issues (most to least important)?

Your Issues First Question: Do you have a concern that does NOT fit into one of the issues we identified? Second Question: Do we have the right ordering of the issues (most to least important)? Last Question: Are you going to be eligible to vote to ratify the new contract? “Fair share” members are NOT eligible to vote See Carla Johnson (D34102) or Pam Stipanich (G184) to fill out a membership card (membership is same cost as fair share)

Again, thank you for helping to inform our negotiations We will make every effort to keep the lines of communication with you open as we engage in the negotiation process

Stay Tuned: AFT.ORG/4100/563/HOME OR AFT.ORG/4100/563/CONTRACT- NEGOTIATIONS