TENTATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN USF AND USFFA,
Signed August 24, 2011.
Approved by Policy Board for recommendation to entire
membership on August 24.
THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING TO VOTE ON THIS
TENATATIVE CONTRACT WILL TAKE PLACE NEXT
WEDNSDAY, AUGUST 31 AT 4 PM IN MCLAREN 251.
No Proxy Voting is allowed by the USFFA By-Laws. You will be
able, however, to voice your opinion and post comments on the
USFFA website by early next week.
1. Duration: 3 years for re-openers, 5 year entire contract
Comment: This is our standard practice - all economic items
(salary & benefits) will re-open in June, 2014, plus each side has
the right to open up to three articles in the CBA.
2. Wages
·
2011-12: 3% + steps
·
2012-13: 3% + steps
·
2013-14: 3% + steps
3. Task Force to study the A / B model during the academic year
2011-12 with the option to implement Fall 2012 or 2013 by
mutual agreement.
Comment: The administration never took the A-B Model off the
table, but agreed to negotiate salary separately as long as a task
force would be established to further study possible
implementation at a later date. One could also call this the ABC
model, since it could include a super-step above top step full
Professor. It is important to note that any implementation of the
new model would require mutual agreement by the parties in the
task force, and approval by the entire membership. The mandate
of the task force will be to study possible changes and
improvements to the model. For example, the administration has
already signaled that it would be willing to let schools and
departments write the criteria for advancement from A-B. The
University has also declared that any implementation during the
term of the agreement would be accompanied by an additional
salary increase over and above the locked-in 9% over three years.
Let us stress that the USFFA will participate in all these
discussions and approval of the entire membership would be
needed before any action was taken.
4. Summer and Intersession pay 10% over current PHP rate. (The
part-time Preferred Hiring Pool rate is around $1700 per unit).
5. Article 30.3 (Health Care)
·
·
Cap 19% years 2 and 3
Comment: On health care, we were able to hold back some of the
costly or questionable proposals that came out of the task force.
For example, individual “Health Savings Accounts” are off the
table, for now. A task force will be set up to make
recommendations on further health care reforms. The
administration proposed increases for both Kaiser and Blue
Cross, using what they are calling "salary bands," which means
grouping all employees, across the university, into units
bracketed by a salary range, and then raising or determining copays and premiums based on those salary bands. Under the
original proposal, some of our members would have paid
substantially more in premiums, as much as 40% higher. We
countered their proposal with a demand to put a cap of 15% on
all health care increases (as we negotiated in years past). Once
management agreed to cap future rate increases, they wanted a
limit of 24% annually. Given the current maximum of 15%, in
the end we finally compromised at 19%. The University also
agreed to raise the salary bands by 3% per year reflecting the
salary increase, so that none of our members will incur higher
costs because of a step increase or promotion. The health care
proposal will also include several minor items from the
Sustainable Benefits Task Force, such as incentives to get lab
work done at preferred providers and lower co-pays ($10) for
generic drugs, $20 for formulary and $25 for non-formulary
medications, and step therapy for prescriptions.
We engaged in detailed analysis of management's various
proposals to alter the current healthcare options and rates. As it
is clear that health care costs continue to rise, we wanted to be
certain that USFFA members would not be assuming more than
a reasonable share of the increased costs. After much
deliberation, it was determined that most of the proposals
initially floated or actually proposed by management were
inequitable or unworkable, and we jointly agreed to only minor
changes in the plan designs.
The worst changes, such as multiple means of raising health
premiums on members, were deleted at our insistence. The new
arrangement will have varying medical premiums depending on
salary, principally:
Salary Band
BLUE CROSS PLAN:
1-party
2-party
Family
$55000-82500
$42
$160
$253
$82501-110000
$50
$195
$304
$110001-137500
$59
$213
$350
KAISER PLAN:
1-party
2-party
Family
$55000-82500
$36
$133
$174
$82501-110000
$41
$154
$218
$110001-137500
$46
$170
$250
*Higher and lower salaries have correspondingly higher and
lower premiums
*bands will be adjusted 3% corresponding to the salary increases
*Years 2 & 3 of the agreement will see rates adjusted per vendor
increases, with a cap of 19% in the worst case scenario.
6. Spousal / LDA Surcharge
·
Effective January 2012 $75 Surcharge
·
·
Effective January 2013 $75 Surcharge, $75 Waiver
Effective January 2014 $75 Surcharge if the University reaches
a breakeven point of 85 university employees participating in the
waiver program. Failure to reach 85 will result in the waiver
reverting to $40.
Comment: This provision affects only our members whose spouses or
partners have health insurance, but decide to use the policies
offered by USF. Currently, if a spouse or partner decides to waive
the use of our insurance, they receive a waiver in the amount of
$40 per month. Under this new provision, the waiver would be
raised to $75, but there would be a surcharge if the spouse or
partner decided to use USF’s insurance. Currently 75 employees
across the University take the waiver, and that number would
have to rise to 85 by January of 2014, otherwise USF will revert
to be current system.
7. Dental: Status Quo
Comment: The administration originally proposed a two-tiered
dental plan. The so-called high plan would have increased the
annual maximum coverage to $2000 (from current $1500), and
improved coverage for orthodontia. But for the first time we
would be paying monthly premiums for this coverage, which in
the future would likely go up, and therefore reduce the
advantages of this plan over time. The low plan would have
imposed a restricted network of dentists, which would have
meant that many of our members would have to switch from
their current provider. For all these reasons, we rejected the
Two-tier plan and were able to convince the university to leave
our dental plan at status quo without any employee premium or
co-pay.
8. Retirement: auto-enroll 3%, January 1, 2012. Status quo current
contributions.
Comment: The University's original proposal would have
reduced the USF contribution from the current 10% of salary to
8%, but then matched dollar for dollar up to 3% of employee
contributions, making a maximum University contribution of
11%. The University rejected our proposal to implement
matching contributions on 4% and maintain the current 12%
USF contribution for income over $106,800, the FICA
maximum. We were considering simply looking at 11% with
matching, but USF's dropping to 8% was worrisome for those
members who might not appreciate the benefits of putting
income aside, be in a tight financial situation or be saving
towards retirement in another manner. However, before we
could resolve this matter, the University offered to return to the
status quo of 10%/12% and study this matter over the next three
years using a Task Force. Given that there may be additional
legislation either mandating or encouraging a matching scheme
in the next 3 years, we may be better off proceeding with the
status quo for now and considering midterm changes that are to
our advantage. The auto-enroll clause means that all members
will be automatically enrolled at 3% in their 403(b) accounts as of
January, 2012 unless they opt-out. USFFA encourages all
members to save as much as possible toward retirement.
9. Tuition Remission: Task force to convene to review impacted and
online programs. All other components of the University’s
proposal to be implemented January 1, 2012.
Comment: Currently our members receive full tuition remission,
less fees for all University courses, except full time Law School
which has been deemed “impacted” (CBA 30.9). The University
had proposed a list of restrictions on tuition remission. We
objected in particular to the provision that the Provost could
unilaterally declare programs as “impacted.” We were successful
in modifying that provision so that now a Task Force will review
and approve requests to have programs declared impacted, and
decided by mutual agreement. We did agree to following changes:
- A Waiting period of 1 year after hiring for spouses and LDAs to
begin courses.
- Sign off by dean or supervisor on requests to take courses.
- Librarians restricted to taking courses outside of normal
working hours
-One degree maximum for spouse or LDA.
- No degree restrictions on programs for dependent children.
- A 5 year limit to complete undergraduate degree.
10.
Librarians
The administration opened Article 24, Librarians’ Hours and
Working Conditions. They proposed minor reductions in vacation
and sick leave for new hires, as well as increasing the
requirements for promotion to full Librarian. We modified their
proposals and were able to increase the length of Professional
development Leave in exchange for the increase in promotion
requirements. The administration also included librarians in a
general employee policy of paying salary for not more than 10
days of jury duty. This restriction does not apply, however, to
full-time faculty members. The librarians will be receiving a
separate memo with details on all changes made to benefits.
11.
Article 26 Faculty Bereavement Leave
Article 26.7 was amended as follows:
The University shall grant three working days off in the event of
the death of an immediate family member. However, faculty
traveling outside of the nine Bay Area counties to attend a
funeral may be granted an additional two working days off with
pay. The immediate family shall include the following: spouse,
registered domestic partner, child, sibling, parents, parents-inlaw, step-father, step-mother, legal guardians, grandparents,
stepchildren, foster children living in the home, daughter-in-law,
son-in-law, grandchildren, or any other relative living in the
family Council. Additional unpaid leave of absence may be
requested if necessary and approved by the Dean. It is the
intention of this provision that persons who take such leave shall
actually attend the funeral of the member of the immediate
family and/or attend to pre-or post-burial matters.
12.
30.14 LDA Benefits – Current LDAs grandfathered. Move to
Registered Domestic Partners January 1, 2012.
Comment: This was a hard concession to swallow. The University
insisted strongly that the all future hires, who would currently
claim LDA (Legally Domiciled Adult) status, register instead as
domestic partners. Although this applies to future members, as
current LDAs are grandfathered into the agreement, LDA
benefits are broader, and include taking care of an elder or a
dependent child in the household, and under management’s
proposal those benefits will disappear for new hires. It is ironic
that the university championed its embrace of the LDA concept
and is now backtracking entirely. This was one of the last issues
to be resolved in final negotiations, and it turned out to be a deal
breaker for the university. We therefore took the unwelcome step
of accepting their proposal, in order to save the rest of the
contract. We fully realize that some of our members will be very
unhappy about this provision. We hope that in the long run they
will understand that painful concessions are part of any
negotiation. It is important to stress that all current LDAs are
not affected by this change.
13.
Term Positions
·
Increase cap to 85.
Currently the contract allows for 60 term positions. The
university insists that as USF grows it needs to hire more
fulltime term faculty and rely less on part-time faculty. This is a
difficult issue, because on the one hand we would prefer all new
positions to be tenured or tenure-track, but on the other hand we
would rather have term positions than have more of our courses
taught by part-timers. For us, the more important issue than the
raw number of terms is for the university to remain committed to
the promise of using term positions in an appropriate manner,
that is “not used for the purpose of replacing tenure-track
appointments.” (Article 17.2.3 E). We intend on scrutinizing the
use of these new positions very carefully. In the end we did agree
though to allow the university to hire an additional twenty-five
term positions, with the understanding that the current contract
language as to the appropriate use of term positions will remain,
and in fact be strengthened.
14.
Article 17.2.5 (Notice Dates for Term Faculty): A term
faculty member who is not renewed after six years of continuous,
full-time service may be terminated by the University by a
written notice given to him or her on or before June1st of that
year. The termination shall be effective as of June 30th of the
subsequent year. The University may elect on or before June 1st
of the year in which notice is given to make the termination
effective as of June 30th of the year in which the notice is given by
paying severance (equal to ½ year’s salary) on the date of
termination.
15. Article 22.1.4 (Term Release Time): Term contract faculty may
apply for course release(s) for teaching and or professional
development. Such release shall be granted at the discretion of
the Dean.
16. Term positions up to 7 year contracts. (17.2.3. E)
17.
Term Faculty seniority /office space and parking.
Comment: Items 14-17 refer to improved conditions for term faculty,
timely notices of hire and non-renewal, course release for
professional development, longer contracts, up to 7 years, and
seniority for purposes of office space allocation and parking.
19.
Program Review (Article 21)
The following language will replace Side Letter B in the 2008
contract and will be added to article 21:
21.9 Each School or College shall undertake periodic,
comprehensive reviews of each of its programs and departments.
A. The particulars of the review process shall be set forth in a
document entitled, “Guidelines for Academic Program Review,”
produced by the Provost’s office in consultation with the
respective School or College Councils.
B. In addition to the criteria for selecting members of the threeperson external review teams set forth in the Guidelines for
Academic Program Review, the external reviewers shall be
selected by the Dean of the school or college according to the
following principles:
i.
At least one member, but no more then two members, shall be
selected by the Dean from a list of candidates nominated by the
faculty of the program or department, provided these nominees
satisfy the qualifications set forth in the “Guidelines for
Academic Program Review.”
ii.
iii.
iv.
At least one member, but no more than two members, shall be
selected by the Dean from a list of candidates generated
independently of the faculty of the program or department.
The Dean shall inform the Department or Program, in writing,
of the composition of the external review team to be invited to
campus. Should the department or program wish to discuss the
proposed review team membership with the dean, the
department chair or program director may request such a
meeting, in writing, within 10 working days of having received
the Dean’s notification. The purpose of the meeting shall include,
but not be limited to offering an explanation of the basis on
which the program or department reviewers were selected.
The provisions of this article shall not be subject to the grievance
and arbitration provisions of this agreement, except for the
specific issue of whether the Dean fulfilled the requirements
pursuant to subparagraph 21.9 B.iii, above.
20.
21.
22.
Joint Committee Parking
Joint Committee Health Care
Joint Committee Retirement
Comment: We agreed to three joint study committees to deal with
parking/transportation issues, health care, and retirement
improvements. The association believes that if these committees
operate in good faith improvements can be made such as
increasing the number of parking spaces, implementing a BART
shuttle, limiting future medical increases and improving
members' retirement prospects as well as broadening investment
choices.
21.
Article 36.2 (Mortgage Assistance): the total number of
revolving mortgage fund lines will not exceed 20, of which at
most three are available to term faculty.
Comment: The number of mortgage lines has been effectively
doubled and the three lines for term are a significant new benefit
for our term faculty.
23.
Article 29.16 (Clipper Card) $65 with a $5 Employee Match.
Comment: Use of the Clipper Card will free faculty up from hiking
to Lone Mountain, since the refill of value will be accomplished
electronically. Hikers who previously perceived a benefit from
climbing up to Lone Mountain may continue to do so just for fun.
The University will pay the $3 administrative fee for the new
card. The card is available to all members who do not have a
parking permit and can be used for most forms of public
transportation in the bay area.
24.
Emeriti – University drops the $10 monthly fee.
25.
Adoption Benefit – Increased from $2,000 to $4,000
26.
Course Banking: - Add to 22.1.4: The dean of each school or
college shall have the right at his or her sole discretion to allow
course banking.
Comment: Even though the deans retain the power to grant such
requests, we succeeded in adding this language to the contract, in
order to make explicit that our members have the right to
request course banking. If granted, the units from courses taught
in summer and/or intersession would be subtracted from the
normal teaching load.
27. Faculty Lounge – University will consult with the USFFA
on improvements to the facility lounge.