Bargaining Bulletin #7: A New Day

If you missed my last bargaining bulletin on the Bad Faith ruling at the LRB, read it here.

Hi friends,

Many thanks to the seven observers who came yesterday to our first day of bargaining since June 2025. As expected (and as directed by the Labour Board), the Employer finally tabled a response to our one-year rollover wage proposal of 3.6% that we tabled last spring. It was…underwhelming.

This is a longer update than I intended, so here’s a short summary:

1. We rejected the Employer’s offer of a four-year rollover agreement with a 3% salary increase in each year and a reduced flex allocation fund of 0.4% total.
2. We proposed returning to bargaining our full slate of proposals as tabled on June 9, 2025 (and the Employer agreed).
3. We invited the Employer to pressure its government partners to ensure that Camosun receives the full value of the offer given to other public sector unions: a 2% total flex allocation fund.
4. We begin bargaining two proposals from our Indigenization pillar next Monday, March 23: Indigenous Elder support at grievance meetings and a large-scale reform of our Faculty Appraisal process.

Here are the details:

An unserious offer

As previously explained, our one-year rollover was meant to give faculty a raise they deserved while giving both parties time to solve the challenges facing faculty and the College at the bargaining table while resetting labour relations. The Labour Board ordered the Employer to counter our proposal.

They responded with a four-year rollover agreement with a 3% wage increase in each year, plus a 0.2% flex allocation fund in years two and four.  They offered retro pay only to faculty employed on the date of ratification. You can see the offer itself on our open Bargaining Discord Channel.

This offer looks like it was designed to be rejected. Why? Let’s break it down:

1. It’s way too long for a rollover proposal.

Longer terms favour employers, because they reduce labour unions’ ability to alter working conditions and limit their leverage, which is always greatest at the bargaining table–when the Employer is obligated to hear their concerns and they have legal recourse to job action and other tools. A four-year rollover is even worse: it means no change in working conditions from the beginning of our current agreement (2022) to the end of the term (2029). That’s seven years without the changes that we needed a decade ago.

This is not lost on the Employer–they know this all too well and chose to deliberately miss the point of our one-year rollover proposal (which we have explained many times both at the bargaining table and at the Labour Board).

2. A 3% raise increase each year is literally the least they can do.

Look, we could all use a raise right now. But this wage increase is now guaranteed by the government’s mandate to employers. We can’t receive less than this. 

3. It’s not enough.

A “flex allocation” is a percentage of our total wage bill that our Bargaining Team can use to spend toward non-wage improvements in our contract. In the past, we have used this money for benefits and other improvements like the Alternative Transportation Fund (uPass). The Employer’s proposal offers 0.4% total flex fund over four years.

The Employer claims here that this is part of the government’s “Balanced Measures mandate”; however, we know that other public sector unions like BCGEU, BCTF, and PEA have all received what is sometimes being referred to as an “enhanced mandate”: 0.5% flex fund in each year (a total of 2.0% over four years).

The Employer knows we want at least as much money as the other public sector unions (that is supposed to be the benefit of the public sector mandate system, after all) because we discussed it extensively at the Labour Board hearing.

4. A refusal to pay retro to former employees is insulting.

This is actually the least bad part, even though it looks unkind: no retro pay for faculty members who were laid off, retired, or didn’t have their term contracts renewed. We are never surprised at unreasonable offers–the Employer wants to save money, and this is one way to do so. If the rest of the deal were palatable, we would respond and eventually secure retro pay for all faculty entitled to it. It’s a shame we have to do this dance every year, but that’s bargaining. Here, however, it’s not even worth expressing our contempt because the rest of the deal was never serious in the first place.

We rejected it, obviously.

After a discussion with our observers, we agreed that we would seize this opportunity afforded us by the Labour Board to bargain 14 dates over two months while our Vice Chair oversees our progress. The Employer is obligated to discuss in good faith our proposals on workload, job security, Indigenization, and Collegial governance & transparency. We proposed returning to our full slate of proposals as tabled way back on the first day of bargaining in June 2025. The Employer agreed.

We advised the Employer that we know about the enhanced mandate and we encouraged them to speak to their principals in the Public Sector Employers’ Council (PSEC) to advocate for getting the extra flex allocation allotment for our College–because who wouldn’t want more money for service improvements at Camosun? This is a mutually beneficial move, but we need the Employer’s help. (I think you will hear more about this from us in the coming weeks.)

Observers make a difference

We are back at the table Monday, March 23 in the Paul Board Room and we would love to have you there. We will reach out soon with more info about attending, but please consider sparing an hour or so to observe–especially if you are interested in improving the broken faculty appraisal process. We are very excited at the potential changes proposed, and we want to make sure your views are reflected. Revisit our original proposal (posted on Discord in the Open Bargaining channels) and tell us what you think!

While we don’t see eye-to-eye with some members of the Employer’s bargaining team, there are others who we believe are committed to finding mutually beneficial solutions for faculty, students and our community. The more we show them how united we are, the more influence these Employer committee members will have at the table. I promise you it will make a difference.

Thank you again for all your support and trust for our bargaining team. It means the world.

In sol,

Michael

P.S. Please congratulate and welcome Ruthie Anderson from Nursing as our newest member of the Contract Negotiations Committee. We are so lucky to have her! Maybe you’re next???