2:55 pm: Still getting settled for today's bargaining session in Lillis 112. Nice to see undergraduate support from Ducks Like You! Today is the last day to vote in the ASUO elections (voting closes at 4pm), and Ducks Like You is a great option for both grads and undergrads who care about the status of students and student workers at UO.
3:05 pm: The University is offering a counter-proposal for drug testing. They want the ability to send GTFs who are not enrolled in the GTFF healthcare plan to University services. We want to look into finding other places GTFs can go if they feel uncomfortable with using the same services that their students might be using.
3:12 pm: The University is clarifying that they do not want GTFs to clean their workspaces more than any other employee. They are saying that our FTE (full-time-equivalence) is related to tasks assigned to GTFs, and that cleaning could go beyond this allotment. Fancy Lawyer referred to GTFs as "a salaried professional" which seems to be a step up from his earlier portrayal of GTFs as mere recipients of UO's supreme beneficence.
Please keep in mind though that our contract CLEARLY STATES that we should not be required to work over a specified number of hours.
3:16 pm: We want the language about cleaning to include an emphasis on the fact that GTFs are employed under a specific FTE to avoid abuses of GTF working time. We think that GTFs should not be required to work more hours than they are paid for (like any other employee). This does not mean that GTFs shouldn't be tidy with their work-spaces; rather, it is about making sure that GTFs aren't working for free.
3:22 pm: Fancy Lawyer is saying that FTE and GTF workloads are "a flexible system."
3:26 pm: We are now discussing Article 21 concerning workload, which is not currently on the table for revision. Fancy Lawyer assumes that every GTF who works 5 minutes over FTE emptying a recycle bin will file a grievance, which has never happened. And because of this, the University does not want any language requiring grads to not go beyond their FTE hours in the cleaning and safe workspace clause.
3:32 pm: The GTFF is looking at FTEs from a more structural perspective. Grads who are forced to work overtime are grads who do not have time to clean their work-spaces. If there is no time to do this, then FTEs are being constructed in an unsustainable way for that department. The idea that a GTF would grieve over taking recycling out for 5 minutes is a hobgoblin constructed to disrupt agreement over a straightforward article and slow down the bargaining process.
3:41 pm: A GTF is currently talking about workload and fractional calculation sheets. Many courses are designed by professors in a way that makes GTFs unable to teach even close to their FTE hours, and GTFs are often expected to work for many hours beyond what they are paid. Fractional calculation sheets would provide a systematic way to ensure that GTFs are not forced to work for free.
3:51 pm: Fancy Lawyer thinks that fractional calculation sheets would be too difficult to craft in an accurate way before the start of the term in the context of a research position, and wants to see what one looks like. One of our GTF representatives at the table has already been managing research time with their adviser, and this would be very doable.
We are stressing that Fractional Calculation Sheets are a way to plan courses so that they do not result in grievances. This would avoid putting grads in an adversarial position when forced to grieve against the faculty who they depend upon for recommendations and positions.
Fancy Lawyer has been pretending that GTFs want the ability to abuse the grievance system, when what we really want to do is prevent courses from requiring grievances in the first place. This would make UO a better place to work for both GTFs and the people who employ them, as foresight and accountability would be built into the process.
We are stressing that being put into a position of having to grieve in order to attain equitable working conditions is a very difficult place for GTFs to be forced into. Fractional Calculations Sheets could be a continuing source of collaborative dialogue between GTFs and their bosses throughout the term that avoids abuse and contention.
4:04 pm: We are also emphasizing that we have designed the language around Fractional Calculation Sheets to be flexible, which will encourage collaboration between GTFs and their bosses. GTFs can give feedback on the time that they spent on a course which will improve the situation of future GTFs who teach for that course.
4:10 pm: The University is concerned about the time it will take to create Fractional Calculation Sheets, and how flexible they can be. They are still concerned about Fractional Calculation Sheets for research, but are admitting that they feel better about the idea after hearing the GTFF's descriptions at the table. We will provide the University with examples of Fractional Calculation Sheets that are currently in use by some departments at UO.
4:14 pm: Jeff is acknowledging that the idea of Fractional Calculation Sheets is not very dissimilar from current GDRS requirements, and could provide a useful source of GTF feedback on courses. We are stressing that Fractional Calculation Sheets will be a source of conversation that is more specific for courses than the GDRS and will benefit both sides of the arrangement.
4:17 pm: And then...Fancy Lawyers says perhaps Fractional Calculation Sheets might be "using an elephant gun to kill a mosquito." And perhaps this is how the abuse of our time looks to him: small.
You know, I would be quite concerned about a mosquito if it was giant and able to suck all of the time from my life.
4:23 pm: I would like to take a moment at this point to address *HOW COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS* it is that the University is spending THIS AMOUNT OF TIME addressing REALLY STRAIGHTFORWARD, reasonable proposals.
I wonder how intentional this is. It will be easier for them to dismiss parental leave, healthcare, and wages IF WE NEVER GET TO TALK ABOUT IT.
4:30 pm: As I write this, I realize that I am starting to catch the flu that has been going around among my students. I really wish we had sick leave, but I suppose I will have to do my standard procedure of sitting near a trash can and warning my students that I might throw up at some point during our discussion.
4:34 pm: Still talking about Fractional Calculation Sheets. Oh, let's hear another "hypothetical example!" Story time with Fancy Lawyer.
4:38 pm: There is going to be a roughly 10 minute caucus about the Article.
4:40 pm: I would like to take this time to quickly thank everyone who made sure we had another full room of concerned GTFs and allies today! It's a beautiful day in a beautiful state, and nobody is forcing them to be here.
4:50 pm: Caucus over. Discussing giving non-covered GTFs more options for drug & alcohol testing than going to a place where their students might also be.
4:54 pm: It looks like we will TA the article on drug and alcohol testing.
4:56 pm: We are expressing our concern about the University not giving us a counter on wages at this point in the term, as the Summer quickly approaches. We are wondering why this has not happened yet.
4:58 pm: Fancy Lawyer is saying that this is the time of year that the University is putting together its 2015 budget. Apparently this means that "financial proposals are the last ones to get fixed" because the University will not know their financial situation "until late" in the year.
Apparently our lack of knowledge about proposals based on the University's funds is because the University also doesn't know its own funds.
5 pm: "Fiscal uncertainty is the primary factor", we are told.
5:02 pm: The University is also still concerned about GTF healthcare premiums. They want the GTFF to pay for increases over 10%. They are saying the uncertainty about increases are their primary roadblock for approving anything (including wage increases).
5:04 pm: Fancy Lawyer says "If we can agree on some way to cap healthcare costs...the University is more than willing to move that money over to...salary." Are we are being asked to choose between increased wages and increased healthcare (dental and vision)?
5:13 pm: We are discussing healthcare premiums and caps.
Fancy Lawyer: "The University's finances are tight." The room bursts into laughter.
We are discussing the University's record endowment profits, and the continued inability to present us with evidence that the University is in such dire straits.
5:17 pm: If the University is going to claim that it cannot afford anything, we want evidence of this.
5:19 pm: The room just broke into applause for Amber, who will not put up with the University's continued inability to craft an argument and provide evidence for their inability to adjust their budget.
5:22 pm: We are asking them to bring some counters next week, including their proposed healthcare cap. We would like to see movement in the bargaining process, and having concrete counters will allow this to happen. Enough of this vagueness! We need to work towards concrete movement at this point in the process, with concrete data to back it up.
5:25 pm: Bargaining has concluded for the day. Now they are talking logistics for the next meeting. Because the EMU is being renovated, it is difficult to find rooms this term.
5:25 pm: Thank you to Amber and the GTFF Bargaining Team for their hard work and perseverance!
No comments:
Post a Comment