Bargaining Bulletin #7

Elbows Up!

With deep frustration, GMUFA acknowledges that informal mediation has failed to produce a draft collective agreement for its members. Throughout the bargaining process, sights have been consistently set on reaching a fair deal for MacEwan’s faculty, one that would leverage their passion and dedication to Teaching Excellence, while recognizing the growing burnout that they face amid the “perpetual motion” of Strategic Vision 2030. The GMUFA bargaining team has proposed creative solutions to both a) achieve a reasonable conclusion to collective bargaining, and b) recognize the fiscal realities imposed by the Provincial Bargaining and Compensation Office (PBCO). In the latest round of informal mediation on May 15, GMUFA’s negotiating team brought forward proposals that incorporated feedback from the previous informal mediation sessions, and throughout the day continued to modify and pivot positions in the hopes of getting a deal across the line. The Board’s team, by contrast, did not table a single draft of new language, or propose a single novel suggestion to possible or existing language. It simply said “no.” These signals suggest that the Board is not interested in negotiating a deal at this time.

The mediation process has been long and not inexpensive. It has yielded some modest results, including signing off on Article 13, which reduces a Chair’s workload from 40% to 33% of their regular teaching or professional practice load. The mediation process did also clarify and focus interest around Tenure and Promotion in Article 9 and 10, and GMUFA’s negotiating team still believes it can continue collective bargaining on those items and bring them to a place of mutual agreement and sign off in the very near future. GMUFA’s key interest here would permit members applying for tenure to submit a written response to the Provost to accompany their dossier and application, where the decision by a Tenure and Promotion Committee is negative. In lieu of a formal peer-driven appeal mechanism, this provision affords the member a path of action should they believe their application was unjustly adjudicated. Finally, both parties appear to be in a place where agreement on a basic monetary framework, in line with other settlements emerging in Alberta’s public sector, is also achievable at the table. Of course, any monetary framework requires approval by the PBCO, but current discussions have not highlighted any major stumbling blocks. Besides salary, the GMUFA’s other major interest is workload; on that front the two sides remain far apart.

The crux of the matter is this: the administration wants to decimate basic workload protections in a way that would fundamentally violate past practice and install sweeping “management rights” that treat faculty as workers to be controlled rather than as respected teachers and scholars who are the stewards of the academy. As “Smash the Calendar” continues to roll out, and as the administration pursues fantastical enrollment growth—for which MacEwan lacks the physical space and human resources—management wants the power to squeeze every last drop from its faculty. Management wants the right to assign teaching on weekends, in the evenings, and year-round without agreement from the member. It wants to deny members any recourse to dispute, question, or protest unfair or inappropriate workload assignments. In particular, the Board wants to entirely gut the Workload Review Panel, which has long operated at MacEwan—both before and after our transition to university status—and which has equivalent exemplars across the sector. (The Board’s stated rationale that opening the tap on additional course releases would increase the appeals heard by the WRP fell apart when the board rejected proposed language that would prohibit appeals of course release decisions; this suggests administration’s other intentions could be more nefarious.) The new language the Board wishes to impose could mean that a member who normally teaches 3 classes in the Fall and 3 in the Winter, on a MWF schedule, could now face—entirely against their will—a dramatically different work assignment. They might now, for example, be assigned to teach 2 courses in the Fall and 2 in the Winter, perhaps on the weekends or in the evenings, and then might be required to continue teaching another 2 courses in May-June and/or July-August. The Board’s team even tabled language early in mediation that would allow Deans to unilaterally reassign workload type—changing a member’s courseload from 6 to 8, for example—perhaps to informally penalize members, or perhaps because amorphous “operational demands” necessitate it. The Board seems to think it is reasonable to trade permanent and long- established workload rights and protections that all members currently receive—and that form the basis for what a university is and how it functions—for the temporary promise (one yet to be formalized with acceptable language) of extra course releases available for select faculty whom they define as “eligible”.

MacEwan faculty are among the lowest paid in the sector, and academics, in general, make far less money than they would in industry or the private sector. What compensates for lower pay is autonomy over time, along with uninterrupted periods of focus and concentration during which faculty pursue scholarship, curricular revisions, and other academic opportunities. This is what the Board wants to deny faculty—at a time when they are already burnt out, when their fuel tanks are empty, and when their earning power is being hammered by inflation.

The Board’s quest to fundamentally erode basic working conditions for faculty will ultimately prove counterproductive. It will harm students and compromise the goals of Teaching Greatness that the Board has set for MacEwan, an institution faculty have come to love and invest in greatly. From GMUFA’s perspective, the posture and negotiation tactics of the Board’s team show a fundamental lack of respect for the faculty who make this institution as grand as it is, and they threaten to undermine a long history of cordial relations between the GMUFA’s thousand-plus members and university leadership.

MacEwan’s success thus far has been premised on buy-in from its faculty, and from a “can-do” and “will-do” attitude. Faculty choose to discharge their professional responsibilities in a variety of ways; there is great diversity in what makes for effective teachers and productive scholars and servants of the academy. Faculty do not need to volunteer their time at student research day or supervise Independent Studies and course-based Work-Integrated learning. They do not need to organize panels at the C2U Expo or coordinate the Interdisciplinary Dialogue Project. They do not need to develop new courses or pursue innovative pedagogical practices. Such activity largely operates according to the initiative, passion, and good will of our members, and their dedication to the principles of Strategic Vision 2030. The employer’s stated attitude that these examples of volunteerism are not “required” misses the point entirely and threatens to undermine the spirit and commitment all employees at MacEwan bring to their work—which would be a great loss to everyone. Respect and good will are earned, and if the Board continues its present course, it may well find itself in a new era of faculty relations—one in which the caring and giving faculty at our beloved institution begin to raise their elbows.

In the coming weeks, GMUFA’s negotiating committee will remain committed to trying to reach agreement on Articles 9 and 10, and the specifics of a monetary framework that can be taken to the PBCO. They will also work on finalizing an Essential Services Agreement, which must be filed with the Labour Board in preparation for Formal Mediation, and for a possible lockout or strike. Finalizing a deal that does not erode our basic working conditions will depend upon the collective strength and unity of us all.