PSUMTA - UMA - Negotiation Reports

The most contentious issue is professional development. The Commonwealth has stated that all professional development dollars must come from the University’s operating funds. Last week the faculty union was offered a 1% professional development pool. We were not!

The union is arguing:

We, as professional staff, need professional development money for classes, conferences, equipment, travel, etc. to further our professional development.
We need it in this contract, since the University’s commitment to providing professional development funds in the last contract never materialized. If we go another contract without PD money our likelihood of ever getting it back is dim.
Past practice: we have always received the same amount of PD money as has the faculty.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

We need your words on this subject. Please email the union at: psu@external.umass.edu with your comments on how and why professional development money is important to the work that you do – how it’s been good for you and your department/program in the past and how you might use it over the next year. We will use your comments to argue our position both at the table and outside the table.

Bargaining is scheduled to resume Monday, August 13. Our goal is to finish this contract before the start of the school year.

5/22/07: We held our ninth bargaining session with management on Tuesday, May 22, 2007. We have now moved definitively beyond the preliminary stages of bargaining. Tuesday's session was spirited and somewhat contentious, and arguably the most substantial discussion we've had to date, not only about particular proposals, but also about the principles behind how the issues we're negotiating affect the members of PSU, the administration, and UMass as a whole. We have now also finally received a financial proposal from management.

At this session, management brought forth the following financial proposal:

A 1 year contract (instead of our traditional 3 years);
A 2.5% cost of living increase during that 1 year, with a 1% merit pool;
An increase of $1, to $13, per member per week, in payments to the Massachusetts Public Employee Fund.
No retroactive payments if negotiations go beyond June 30, the official date of the end of the current contract.

Management also seems to expect us to back off from much of what we have proposed to date. According to Kevin Barrett, Chief Negotiator for the University: "...[it is] not realistic, given the time frame, to go through the entire list of proposals that have been raised." Of the 41 proposals currently open, 32 of them have come from PSU. It's not clear which, if any, of their own proposals they expect to back off from in this effort.

Mr. Barrett did leave open the possibility of an alternative three-year
proposal, which would include:
3.5% [total COLA plus merit, same as in the one-year proposal] in the
first year;
2.5% [total COLA plus merit] in the second year;
2.5% [total COLA plus merit] in the third year;
No wage re-opener.
This was not formally proposed, but Barrett mentioned it as another possibility after questioning on the original one-year proposal by the PSU team.

Nothing was offered in terms of the reasoning behind these offers, or their justification in light of our bargaining history. So at this point we have only our own speculation as to how the administration expects their proposal to be of benefit to anyone.

This offer has come as a great disappointment to the Negotiating Team. We are determined to continue to work through this and iron out a better agreement than what management currently seems to envision. Of course, we had been waiting for the day when we would finally hear what the monetary proposals of the Governor's office would be. It is disheartening in the extreme that this type of proposal could come from an administration that had significant electoral support from labor, especially, and significantly, from the MTA. But this is not over yet.

The remainder of the day Tuesday was spent discussing the Salary Administration Program and the Performance Review Process. No agreements were reached on either of these subjects.

Between now and June 30, the end of the current contract, we have now set up six more meetings:
Tuesday, May 29th
Friday, June 8th
Tuesday, June 12th
Tuesday, June 19th
Thursday, June 21st
Tuesday, June 26th

A synopsis of bargaining through the 8th session was presented at the Annual Membership Meeting on May 9, by Kevin Skelly, member of the Negotiating Team. The slideshow from that presentation is available here. (Powerpoint)

Also of interest is the slideshow by PSU staffer Paul DeMarco, which was shown to management on April 10, and which presents a very clear analysis of what has happened to our salaries and our salary ranges at the hands of management's policies over the recent years, as well as what measures PSU thinks would address the problems Paul enumerates. These thoughts of ours have of course been incorporated into the proposals we have put forth to management at the bargaining table. Paul's slideshow can be accessed here. (Powerpoint)

4/3/07: The Professional Staff Union Negotiating Team has now had five bargaining sessions with management. Union and management have agreed that all proposals will be put across the table by April 10th. As we enter into the final stages of proposal development, we want to update our members about the proposals we are making and the overall themes that have been guiding our proposal development.

Themes
In the excellent responses that we received to the contract survey, as well as from our own experiences and reports from union leadership about their experiences under the current contract, some common themes emerged. We take our commitment to the University seriously and we want to be respected and recognized for that commitment. We want our contribution to be recognized in our pay and benefits, but we also want recognition in other ways, too:

We want UMass to be a place where we can grow professionally, where we can work and support our families;
Many of us see UMass as a place where we want to build a long-term career, but we want to have that longevity honored and we want to have opportunities for development along the way;
We are committed to doing our jobs, but we want those jobs to be reasonable and we want to be treated fairly.

Improving respect, support and value for professional staff seemed to be at the core of many of the issues that came forward. Finding ways to build respect, support and value for professional staff into our contract guided our contract review and our proposal development.

Summary of Union proposals:
To date, the union has put forward 25 proposals to management. We expect to have a few additional proposals that we will put forward in our next bargaining sessions. Some of the proposals that have gone forward include:

• 4% cost of living increase: In this proposal, we are seeking to fill the gap between the inflation that has occurred in the last 10 years and the raises we have received. We are proposing an initial 4% cost of living adjustment to address the gap that has occurred. The faculty and classified unions are proposing the same thing. The state has not put forward any economic parameters at this time, so it is too early to gauge where this proposal is in relation to what management will propose.

• Tuition and fees: A major issue for all unions on our campuses has been the steep decline in the value of employee tuition benefits – particularly benefits for our dependents. As we all know, the overall value of this benefit has eroded greatly in the last several years as tuition has held steady, but fees continue to increase. In concert with the other unions, are proposing that the University waive tuition and fees for employees and their dependents and that full tuition for continuing education courses be covered (currently 50%). We have also proposed that the University join the national Tuition Exchange Program.

• Family-friendly benefits: We want UMass to become a great employer for people with families - of all kinds. We, along with the faculty and classified staff, have proposed that our Family Medical Leave benefits be extended from 12 to 52 weeks. In order to address the impact on workloads when an employee is on an extended leave, we've also proposed that the University establish a pool of funds that departments could access if a member of their staff is on an extended paid leave." We are also working on proposals aimed at getting additional resources and improved facilities for childcare for UMass employees on both campuses.

• Salary Administration Program: As part of our commitment to a fair and equitable salary system, we have proposed the elimination of the salary maxima and have proposed that upward adjustments to salary scales must be made across all levels. We have also put forward language that would allow professional staff to request periodic reviews of their jobs, even if they are not assigned new duties, to insure that their positions are appropriately graded. We have proposed changes to the appeal process language which would make the appeals more viable.

Additional proposals have been made that would improve processes around lay-offs and bumping, create longevity bonuses for long-term employees upon retirement, improve additional compensation language for members who teach or coach, and provide professional development funds for our members. We will have more proposals coming around remaining issues, including: salary, merit, and parking. We will make a full listing of all our proposals available when we have completed them.

What happens next:
So far, our bargaining sessions have focused on the two sides putting forward proposals and seeking clarifying information about them. We have not said yes or no to anything and neither has management. As we reported before, management is putting forward very few proposals and we don’t have the financial parameters from the state yet. After the April 10th deadline for proposals, we expect that real bargaining about the different proposals will begin. We will know better then where management stands in response to our proposals, what issues may be easy gains and what issues we may have to fight for.

As with any bargaining, we know that all proposals aren’t created equally, and we will need to prioritize with you those things that we really need to fight for. When we do that, we will need the support of our members to make the strongest case possible. We hope and expect that we can make real improvements and that we will strengthen our contract. We are committed to staying at the table until we are confident that we have made some real gains in addressing the issues that matter to us.

We will keep you posted and we will need your help!

3/19/07: The management team has responded to several of our information requests, providing some of the information we have requested, and promising more to come at our next meeting.

The union made several proposals, regarding the sections on Layoffs and
Bumping, Sick Leave, Personal Leave, Vacations, Health and Welfare,
Retirement, side letters on Sick Leave, and Domestic Partners, and a new
proposal to improve the availability of Child Care on both campuses.

Currently, we have a total of 22 proposals on the table, 8 from
management, 14 from PSU. Some of these proposals are technical
corrections to the language of the contract, and some of them are very
involved and complicated changes to multiple parts of lengthy contract
sections.

In the March 6 session, one of the members of the management team, Mark
Preble, was replaced by two other members. The management team now
consists of the following:

Kevin Barrett, Associate Director for Human Resources, President's Office

Juan Jarrett, Asst Vice Chancellor for Human Resources, UMA

Nick Marshall, Labor Relations Administrator, UMA

Clare Poirier, Director of Personnel Services, UMB

Phil Quaglieri, Dean of the College of Management, UMB.

We meet again on Tuesday, March 20. We are close to the deadline for submitting new proposals, which is our first meeting in April.

2/13/07: The negotiation team had our first meeting with management on Tuesday,
Feb. 13. The meeting was a positive initial session. We agreed on some ground rules that allow open communication with the membership of the union, and the possibility of having some meetings on the campuses.

Representing the University are:

Kevin Barrett, Associate Director for Human Resources, President's Office

Juan Jarrett, Asst Vice Chancellor for Human resources, UMA

Nick Marshall, Labor Relations Administrator, UMA

Mark Preble, Asst VC-Human Resources, UMB

We received a set of 8 proposals from the management team, having to do
with

A proposal to remove certain high-level positions from the bargaining unit.
Two changes in the search process: one would allow electronic
submission of applications; the other would permit electronic
submissions to be sent to the search committee chair instead of
Human Resources.
The right to require an employee to see a physician of the
University's choosing, in cases where an exam is needed to
determine the employee's fitness for work.
Replacing the Bunker Hill Day floating holiday with the day after
Thanksgiving for the Amherst campus.
The option to mail paychecks instead of distributing them on campus.
Continue the side letter regarding the Professional Staff Salary
Administration Program (PSSAP) Committee.
Delete from the PSSAP Handbook the requirement for regular review
of all positions in the bargaining unit every three years.
The University intends to make a proposal regarding merit pay at a
later date.

The University team also said that they are hoping for a financial package from the state soon, but did not have it in hand at our meeting.

The PSU team is currently researching the possible implications of the Universsity's
proposals, and developing a set of proposals to be given to the
University at the next meeting.

The parties mutually agreed to a deadline of the first session in April
for submitting new proposals. The deadline may be moved back by mutual
agreement. The expressed intent on both sides is to settle the new
contract before the current one expires on June 30.

The next meeting with the University is scheduled for Tuesday, February 27.

Your PSU Negotiating Team:

Kathy Rhines - Co-Chair (UMA)	karhines@uhs.umass.edu
Tom Goodkind - Co-Chair (UMB)	tom.goodkind@umb.edu
Anneta Argyres (UMB)	anneta.argyres@umb.edu
Stephen Ball (UMA)	sball@math.umass.edu
Sarah Barlett (UMB)	sarah.bartlett@umb.edu
Diane Dujon (UMB)	diane.dujon@umb.edu
Jane Lynch-Gilbert (UMA)	jelynchg@housing.umass.edu
David Markland (UMA)	markland@admin.umass.edu
JoAnne Martone (UMA)	jojo@oit.umass.edu
Dale Melcher (UMA)	dmelcher@lrrc.umass.edu
Bill Perry (UMB)	bill.perry@umb.edu
Donald Roy (UMA)	droy@admin.umass.edu
Kevin Skelly (UMA)	kskelly@oit.umass.edu

Hot Topics:

Educators for a Democratic Union

PHENOM

FLSA (overtime eligibility)

Labor-Management Workplace Education Program

SERV: State Employees Responding as Volunteers Program

MTA Member Benefits

PSU Structure:

Joint Executive Council

Executive Committee

Chapter Board

Delegate Council

Negotiating Committee

Membership

Communication

Organization & Education

Elections Committee

Salary Administration

Sick Leave Bank Committee