Bargaining Session 3 | August 4, 2022

Our third bargaining session with The New School administration laid bare our commitment to reaching a new agreement - while we were prepared with a thoughtful and comprehensive proposal on job security, the university showed up empty handed.

The zoom bargaining session opened with a sea of blue and white ACT-UAW Zoom backgrounds, in front of which sat approximately 40 New School part-time faculty participants and observers. Five New School representatives attended: Sonya Williams, Maggie Koozer, Geycel Best, Kate Evanishyn, and Jennifer Penley. Jennifer, Senior Director of Employee and Labor Relations, spoke for the university team.

40 new school part-time faculty participants? Why so many? Open bargaining! It means you get to sit in on the bargaining session, hear the part-time faculty bargaining team make its proposals, and hear the university respond. This is YOUR contract; YOU deserve to know what it will look like. If you are a union member, you can come! Sign up here to attend a session.

The union has made 14 proposals. The university has not responded to any.

Annie Lee Larson, Part-Time Faculty Unit Chair and lead negotiator, asked Jennifer and her team if they had any new proposals or counters to the 14 proposals the union passed to the university weeks ago. Once again, Jennifer replied no.

Annie explained that the part-time faculty have not had a new contract since 2014 or a pay increase since 2018, and it took over 2 months to schedule the first bargaining session after the committee reached out to the university to start bargaining on April 28th. The part-time faculty want a new contract now and they have been ready to bargain for months. With the vast majority of the union’s non-economic proposals already on the table, Annie pointed out that making counter-proposals is a sign of bargaining in good faith. 

Jennifer was speechless. 

Union Proposal on Article XIII

Annie went on to summarize the proposal that the union bargaining committee was making on Article XIII, one of the most important articles in our contract. Article XIII covers job security for new and long-time faculty, base loads, seniority, multi-year status, and when faculty receive their appointments. At the end of this post, find a brief summary of the most major changes the bargaining committee proposed on Article XIII.

Evaluations Proposal

After Annie summarized the union’s proposal, the university asked to caucus and review the bargaining committee’s proposal. Upon returning from caucus, the university declined to ask questions about the proposal we had just passed. 

Instead, Jennifer asked 1 or 2 questions about each of the union’s previous proposals, often demonstrating a complete lack of understanding about our on-the-ground working conditions. For example, regarding our proposal on Evaluations, which the union passed to the university earlier in July, Jennifer asked if there had ever been an instance of a negative student evaluation being used against a faculty member. Our team held our poker faces in check, as Annie responded that yes, in fact individual negative evaluations are often singled out in investigatory meetings while hundreds of glowing reviews are completely ignored.

Conclusion

Before the bargaining session ended, Annie confronted Jennifer about her team’s refusal to meet with our bargaining team after business hours. Many part-time faculty work other jobs and have no control over their teaching schedule at The New School. The university should accommodate part-time faculty schedules so they can participate in the bargaining process.

Attend the Next Bargaining Session

The next bargaining session will be Friday, August 12 at 9:30am.

Sign up here to attend!

Summary Article XIII Proposal - Faculty Appointments

Titles

  • Change the title for probationary faculty (newer faculty) to “Assistant Professor, (part-time).”

  • Change the title for annual and multi-year faculty to “Associate Professor, (part-time)” and “Professor, (part-time)” depending on the faculty member’s length of service.

Job Security, Reappointment Rights, and Baseload

  • Propose that new faculty gain job security in the 4th semester as opposed to having to wait 10 semesters, as they do currently. This would prevent the university from hiring faculty for nine semesters only to terminate them right before they earn reappointment rights.

  • Propose to end permanent base load reductions for long-time faculty. This proposal would prevent the university from slowly reducing the number of courses it offers to faculty over time.

  • Propose that the university periodically increase the number of courses it offers to experienced, long-time faculty. Faculty who have devoted many years to the university and have cultivated expertise in their field should not be punished with fewer courses over time; instead, the university should offer them more courses over time.

Multi-Year Appointments

  • Propose to make the multi-year application process simpler and more fair.

  • Ensure faculty have more time to prepare their multi-year application.

  • End the requirement that faculty re-apply every three years. Once you apply and are accepted, you should not have to repeatedly reapply.

Appointment Letter Timeline

  • Ensure that faculty receive their appointments sooner than they have in the past to ensure faculty have adequate time to prepare for the next semester.

  • Propose a “rush-fee” if the university issues a faculty member their appointment letter late.

The summary above is not comprehensive. If you have questions about the fine details of the proposal, please get in-touch!

Previous
Previous

Bargaining Session 4 | August 12, 2022

Next
Next

Bargaining Session 2 | July 15, 2022