March 26, 2024
“We don’t see the need to make fundamental changes” - Mark Bennett
Today’s session opened with our lead spokesperson, Ashley Farmer (CJS), asking for introductions by all Table Team members, and stating our expectation for counter-proposals. ISU admin’s representative, Atty. Mark Bennett (Laner Muchin), presented a proposal that is quite short, noting “we believe that things are operating well from our perspective, there is no need to make fundamental changes in many areas”.
Bennett went through the administration’s proposals, noting the intention behind them, which included a new proposal on Management’s Rights. After completing the presentation of proposals, Bennett noted that we should not interpret this as a refusal to bargain - their position is that many of UFISU’s proposals are best left to current policy, rather than collective bargaining. He did note that we may still convince them otherwise. While the administration noted that this is their starting position, we have a lot of questions. In principle, there is a lot we cannot accept. As a member stated “they offered nothing”.
During a break to caucus, bargaining members commented that they feel dismissed, disrespected, frustrated, and insulted because the administration team’s proposals undermine the expertise and the historically central role of faculty in delivering higher education. One comment noted “Thank you for clarifying that administrators are ultimately the ones in charge… It does not address what is broken about ASPT, or the ways in which faculty currently direct curriculum and programs.”
Getting back to the bargaining table, Ashley asked a number of questions about admin’s proposals, to better understand their intent and the role that admin see faculty as playing. Bennett noted again that the provost’s office ultimately decides everything. Ashley closed the session by noting that “this union formed because the majority of our faculty feel that many existing policies are not working. We will get back to you with explicit examples in our next meeting.”
A member noted: “It's almost hard to believe Admin could spend 90 min presenting a proposal that had not one single constructive solution to the myriad problems we detailed. They could not even come up with any improvements or implementations for our proposed solutions.”
Another commented that “their [admin’s] grievance procedure is a rewriting of current ASPT. They want to control it and keep it as is.” Another member stated “I don’t understand the refusal to recognize that workload is an economic thing - that is our job. That we won’t talk about economics right now is incredibly problematic”.
We return to the table on April 10th with additional proposals, and hope you do the same, particularly on economics. Your homework as UFISU members is to tell everyone what you see. Keep conversations going with your colleagues. Stay in contact with us!