Re-published from Jan 2020 Confluence, Vol 9 – Issue 3, by Mark Kunen with edits & updates by Lynelle Yutani
Next spring, the CCFA Negotiating Committee will enter a new round of bargaining that may, in some unpredictable ways, change the collective agreement that defines our salaries, benefits, and, to a large extent, our working conditions. The collective agreement is in large part a record of the results of efforts by a procession of dedicated and determined union bargainers and of the values of the CCFA membership as reflected in many achievements and some hard decisions along the way.
Scheduled Development is a good example. Most continuing faculty members are entitled annually to two uninterrupted months free of regular duties for professional, instructional, and/or organizational development work.
It was not ever thus.
In 1980, faculty members were assured of two months every five years for professional development. That was a start.
Starting in 1988, two rounds of rigorous negotiations over five years led to the current framework. The next big step was the provision in the 1988 collective agreement of two months of development time every three years for faculty members with five years or more of service. The 1992-1995 bargaining round led in 1993 to the current pattern of entitlement, referred to as Faculty Development at that time.
A confluence of circumstances made the annual two -month entitlement possible. It was kind of the opposite of a perfect storm. What are the words for that?
These were the key ingredients:
– The Negotiating Committee’s commitment to an inclusive goal.
The Committee considered trying to increase development time piecemeal, starting with the segment of the faculty for which the increased cost would be minimal (mostly instructors in University Transfer programs), but the committee took a collective deep breath and decided to shoot for the jackpot of equitable development time for all. Yet, there is still ground to cover for the small number of non-teaching faculty members whose entitlement is one month per year, and it remains true that faculty members on term contracts lack any scheduled development time at all.
– A courageous Camosun president.
The late Dan Cornish, the Camosun president, chaired the administration’s bargaining committee. He understood the professionalism of faculty members and was willing to break new ground and to persuade the Board of the value of this investment.
– Patience, mutual respect, and something bordering on friendship at the bargaining table.
That bargaining round lasted two years. It was trying, but it was buoyed by a growing sense of collegiality and community between the two sides. There was time and willingness to enjoy and learn from conversations about current events, diets, books, and families, among other things.
– CCFA members knew what they cared most about.
Each gain in SD cost CCFA members money. In 1988, the CCFA let go of the right to cash in unused sick days at retirement. At that time, faculty members were allotted 1.5 sick days per month (18 days per year.) Available sick days could accumulate to a maximum of 250 over a career, and unused sick days at retirement could be cashed in at a rate of 50% per day, i.e. to as much as 125 days’ pay. To help pay for the increased development time, the CCFA retained the accumulation process but relinquished the pay-out rights, though not retroactively. For better or worse (I think better) the change removed any financial incentive to come to work sick. A spike in sick leave use that some administrators worried about did not materialize, as far as I know.
More startling from today’s perspective was the members’ unequivocal acceptance in 1992 of two years without a salary increase in exchange for the expanded faculty development opportunities. And the ratification vote wasn’t even close. In subsequent years, by joining the Common Table, The CCFA was able to bring its salary scale in line with the provincial norms.
– The generosity of CCFA members who valued collective fairness over individual needs.
Members who already had de facto access to two months per year free from regular duties nevertheless supported the new agreement enthusiastically. As stated above, those were mostly instructors of University Transfer courses and programs with eight-month teaching assignments which left them with two months of unassigned time in May and June.
– The CCFA was able to bargain the 1992-1995 Collective Agreement entirely locally.
Back then, there was no pre-set government mandate, and no PSEA to commandeer the Employers’ bargaining decisions. My memory isn’t clear about whether the CCFA chose to bargain only locally for that round or if there was no common table option. In any case, increased development time had not been a priority in provincial bargaining, and so the CCFA’s chances of making a breakthrough in this area were stronger with local bargaining. when Local bargaining was really local! Now the line between local and provincial bargaining is so blurred it isn’t always clear who we are bargaining with. The government has a firm grip on both formats. It is doubtful that any one union could break new ground the way the CCFA did in 1993 in regard to development time. To date, as far as I know, no other FPSE union has scheduled or professional development language as strong as ours.
Collective Agreement language on faculty development has changed in several ways since 1992. The CCFA accepted certain administration-proposed changes. For example, in 2001 the two sides changed the term Faculty Development to Scheduled Development, deleted some useful statements of principle, and agreed that most unassisted leaves of absence would reduce SD time. But the CCFA stood fast against proposals that would have eroded the core of the program.
Last round, in our 2022-2025 contract negotiations, we successfully bargained to restructure the SD clause to make it easier to read and understand. We also were able to include the table of dates for intents and proposals within the clause. Sadly we still haven’t’ been able bargain the full two months allocation for all members with duties not based on enrolment (often referred to as non-teaching faculty), even though we try every round. Who knows what will arise this year, but I am confident that your Negotiating Committee, of which I am a member, will continue to protect the current entitlement and hopefully achieve some improvements.
Not everything is up to the Negotiating Committee though. It’s important that faculty members understand their rights per Clause 10.01 of the Collective Agreement. There is a right to two straight months of SD free of regular duties. That includes Chairs and Program leaders and it is up to you to plan your department’s assignments to allow for it. Proposals summitted by the relevant submission deadline must not be unreasonably denied. Our employer may suggest SD projects, but they may not order faculty members to undertake specific SD work. People whose proposals are denied are not required to accept the Deans’ preferred alternatives and should contact the Union for help to resolve any disputes about SD. Just a reminder, it is in the Collective Agreement that you need to submit your report on SD by the last day of your approved SD period. However, we did remove the language that tied approval of a faculty member’s next project to the report on their last project.
Faculty Development is most effective when initiated by the faculty member in an institutionally supportive environment; [and is] designed and operated by faculty, in concert with their coordinators… and their deans….
-Historical Clause 10.01 quoted from the 1992- 1995 Collective agreement
Unfortunately, these words are not in today’s agreement, but their spirit and purpose can still be detected in the current language. As we’re wrapping up the Winter semester and many of our colleagues are poised to begin their SD period, it seemed like a good time to re-publish this article and remind us all that vigilance by all faculty members who value SD is necessary to keep that spirit alive.
Negotiations will commence next spring, so it’s back to work time for your Negotiations Committee.
Mark Kunen
Committee Member, Contract Management & Negotiations Committee
[…] our employer attempts to restrict or reduce our access to Scheduled Development! Read this Blog Post to learn more about how we Bargained for this important right. Be sure to fill out our bargaining […]