Negotiations Recap for November 9, 2012
This recap details the ninth bargaining session between the UW and AFT.
AFT put forth several counter-proposals, which included alternative language surrounding the sexual harassment policy, bargaining unit description, and contract duration, among others.
Key Points of AFT’s Counter-Proposal
- Union Rights
- AFT proposed that one extension lecturer receive 33 percent paid reassigned time each quarter to act as a union representative. AFT also proposed that in cases where a substitute is necessary because an extension lecturer plans to be absent due to union-related activities, the union would reimburse IELP for a substitute.
- University Closure
- AFT declined UW’s proposal to require extension lecturers in certain programs to make up classes missed due to University closure, specifically those programs which have defined requirements for days or hours taught.
- AFT declined UW’s language affirming its commitment to bargain the impacts of outsourcing should it ever occur, and maintained its original proposal to prohibit IELP from outsourcing any programs or courses.
- Contract Interpretation
- AFT declined UW’s proposal to allow the IELP Operations Manual to govern in cases where contract is vague or silent.
- UW Policy Directory
- AFT proposed language clarifying that if a change to the UW Policy Directory alters a mandatory subject of bargaining, the effects of this change must be bargained with the union.
- Article 3: Union Security
- The parties tentatively agreed to language surrounding the payment of union dues and fees. Within 30 days of employment, extension lecturers must initiate payment to the union either in the form of dues for members, or a representation fee of equal value.
- Article 23: Successor Agreement
- The parties tentatively agreed to language outlining the process by which either party may initiate negotiations for a successor agreement.
- Quarterly Roster
- AFT asked why UW has proposed sending the union its extension lecturer roster after the third pay period of each quarter instead of after the second, as the union proposed.
- UW explained that this accounts for changes that are common early in the quarter and gives time for the roster to settle, which typically yields the most accurate information. This is consistent with the UW’s contract with UAW, representing academic student employees at the University.
- Probationary Period
- AFT requested the rationale behind UW’s proposal to require extension lecturers to teach one quarter in the Campus Intensive English Program (IEP) in order to complete their probationary period.
- UW explained that Campus IEP constitutes half of IELP’s activity. Given this, IELP is greatly disadvantaged if extension lecturers are not confident and competent teaching academic English in this setting.
The next UW/AFT bargaining session is scheduled for November 16.