COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Judge for yourself whether the administration negotiating team believes that recruiting and retaining an outstanding faculty is essential to the vision of advancing Rutgers.

On July 23, 2003, after seven months of delay, the administration team gave us an economic counterproposal, which we summarized to you in an email, July 31 as ZERO NOW, ZERO LATER, a 2-year contract with no increases of any kind in either year. Recognizing the economic realities of this fiscal year, the AAUP made a counterproposal at the next negotiating session on August 7 that is a significant decrease in our demands, especially for this year.

On August 26, at the next negotiating session, the administration team gave us their ZERO NOW, ZERO LATER counterproposal. They made absolutely no change for the faculty in their latest proposal from their earlier one; not one dollar added. To help you judge the full magnitude of the message consider:

1. The cost of living in the NJ area increased by 3% last year and absent an equivalent across-the-board salary increase, real salary for the faculty is reduced. We have proposed a 2% across-the-board increase this year with additional increases back loaded to years 3 and 4 of the contract. Other AAUP proposals will help some faculty keep pace.
2. The State is making changes in deductibles and copayments in the health benefits plans that will increase health care costs for most faculty members. The administration team has never once discussed this concern during negotiations and has certainly shown no inclination to help the faculty meet these additional costs.
3. The State College Faculty and virtually all other state workers have reached four year agreements with the State that increase compensation by more than 20%. These agreements include "back loading" of across-the-board increases into the later years, step increments for those eligible in every year, additional increases for those at the top of their ranges, and other job-related economic benefits. The administration team characterizes the State’s efforts to deal fairly with its employees in this year of fiscal difficulty as "irresponsible."

Beyond their unwillingness to address the needs of the faculty in even the most limited way, consider whether the behavior of the administration team in negotiations is fair and collegial:

• The administration team continues to maintain that two negotiation sessions per month are sufficient. They have told us that there are only two days in September and two days in October when they are available to negotiate. Since they have proposed a salary freeze this year, not negotiating has the effect of a de facto imposition of that proposal.

• The administration team has rejected the AAUP’s proposals as too costly. But they haven’t even calculated the costs of some of our proposals and they have seriously erred in calculating the costs of others.

• The administration team has refused to offer anything for the next three fiscal years. Their reason is that "the future is uncertain," but they won’t provide any data to support their view that the future is likely to be worse and they dismiss all evidence to the contrary.

The AAUP continues to propose fee remission for TA/GAs. The administration team continues to say nothing more than "no" to any remission of fees.

The AAUP continues to propose across-the-board salary increases for TA/GAs. The administration team continues to say nothing more than "no" to any increases.

The AAUP continues to propose health benefits for part-time TA/GAs. The administration team continues to say nothing more than "no," despite telling us that they don’t know what the costs would be.

But the administration team has proposed to implement the movement on last year’s salary tables for last year’s TA/GA I’s and II’s, if the AAUP drops all its proposals for any salary increases for TA/GAs this fiscal year. While the $110 increase for these continuing TA/GAs would offset the rent increase in graduate student housing for as much as 2 months for a few, we judge that it is important to improve the economic situation of all TA/GAs to a level appropriate for a top research university.

In the Bargaining Bulletin we sent you before the summer we described some of the proposals that we have made to strengthen faculty rights, promote shared governance, and enhance other core academic values. We also described some proposals made by the administration team that would reduce faculty input and decision making in areas where the faculty at Rutgers has until now played a prominent role.

There is virtually no progress to report on any of these matters. The administration team continues to make narrow legalistic responses to all of our attempts to approach problems collegially or expeditiously. Their counterproductive approach has manifested itself inter alia over negotiations about procedures for suspension without pay, distance learning, computer policies, and retirement transition and incentives.

Attempts by the AAUP to work with the administration team to make academic improvements have been similarly rebuffed. The AAUP proposed procedures to limit and regulate conversion of full-time faculty positions to part-time ones. The administration team responded by telling us that they were "not interested" in negotiating about such procedures. There are more such examples.

The administration team continues to press proposals on us that represent substantial departures from established practices and traditions at Rutgers.

What do we see as the resolution to all of these problems? That depends on you. All the decision-makers must know what you want.

One of the most effective things you can do right now to support our efforts to achieve a fair and equitable contract is to become a member of the AAUP, rather than merely a payer of the representation fee.

As always, we value your ideas, advice, and criticism. Do not hesitate to communicate with any member of the AAUP negotiating team directly.