More than 500 YUFA members attended a Special General Membership Meeting on July 23, participating in a wide-ranging discussion. Immediately after the meeting online polling began on a strike mandate vote.
The changes the Employer is proposing to the Collective Agreement in the current round of bargaining have pernicious impacts on collegial governance, workload, and YUFA members’ ability to have a say about unit restructuring at York. Half of the Employer‘s proposals facilitate the imposition of workload-increasing unit restructuring plans without collegial consultation. By arguing that these are ‘non-monetary’ provisions, the Employer is disguising its agenda.
Of the Employer’s 40 bargaining proposals, half involve concessions – that is, reductions of YUFA’s rights under our Collective Agreement. Twenty-seven of the forty proposals were presented to YUFA after the Employer called for Conciliation on June 21. Blaming YUFA for the pace of negotiations is disingenuous, given that the Employer itself had presented fewer than half of their proposals before calling for Conciliation.
Besides its deplorable salary offer of no salary increase for 2024-25 and an average of just 1.93% over three years, the Employer wants YUFA to accept the following changes:
- Removing the requirement that unit teaching load documents be made available to members each year, with explanations where any member’s assigned teaching differ from the unit’s normal load (Article 18.01.1).
- Allowing Deans/Principal to impose workload agreements within 6 months for “new units” (Article 18.08.1)
- Removing the JCOAA (Joint Committee on the Administration of the Collective Agreement, which includes YUFA representatives) from the consultation process on new workload agreements (Article 18.09)
- Cutting the facilities and services provided to YUFA members down to a “shared or dedicated” office, with no telephone and no secretarial, technical or other support services (Article 18.39).
- Removing the Letter of Intent regarding Librarians’ and Archivists’ workload (Appendix I), and language requiring retirees’ replacement (Article 15.06)
- Deleting Article 7.09 which established a joint committee to consider Tenure & Promotion and continuing appointments of Librarians and Archivists.
- Increasing the paperwork required for filing grievances and making it possible to extend the time limits for grievances (Article 9.12 and 9.13 and 9.22).
- Making the joint Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC) optional, by agreement of both parties, rather than a normal mediation process for attempting to resolve grievances prior to expensive and lengthy arbitration. (Article 9.14). This removes a low-cost mediation option for the Employer and YUFA.
- Making it more difficult to transfer from the Teaching Stream to the Professorial Stream and between Faculty and Professional Librarian positions. Transfers would be allowed only in exceptional circumstances and with the Dean’s approval (Article 12.13).
- Weakening recruitment practices to de-emphasize seeking intersectionally-qualified Canadian candidates (Article 12.16)
- Limiting the compensation and eligibility of retired faculty members who supervise graduate students (Article 1402e).
- Requiring a normal annual teaching load for most Teaching Stream colleagues of 3.5 Full-Course Equivalents, superseding previous Teaching Stream workload agreements (Article 18.10).
- Deleting most of Article 18.13 and 18.14, thus eliminating the Joint Committee on Teaching Load and Class Size which considers and makes recommendations concerning a range of pedagogical questions including ‘alternate modes of delivery’, class size, credit for course cancellations, exceptional course preparation, workload distribution, etc. The committee must also be informed of “any relevant plans or intentions that might have an impact on teaching load, including class size.” This proposal would remove a collegial process for considering restructuring with input from faculty members concerned.
- Removing decisions to pause or suspend student admissions from consideration by the Joint Subcommittee on Long Range Planning, which reviews significant academic restructuring (Article 18.29).
- Deleting “emergency leave” from Article 19.01.
- Reducing life insurance coverage for members starting the year they reach age 65 (Article 26.07).
- Adding new limitations on members’ use of PER funds when they are on Long Term Disability (Appendix D).
Four of the ER’s seven ‘monetary’ proposals all involve cuts to YUFA members’ work-related tools and expenses:
- Reducing the Computer Renewal Program allocation from $1500 every 3 years to the same amount every 5 years;
- Cutting conference travel funds from $400K to $200K per year and removing carry-overs from one year to the next;
- Removing carryovers in the Teaching-Learning Development Fund and the Release Time Teaching Fellowships; and
- Limiting PER carryovers to $6,075 instead of $9,000 and no longer putting colleagues’ unused PER funds into Conference Travel and Research Grant funds.
The Employer’s ‘monetary’ proposal is that YUFA members receive salary increases averaging just 1.93% per year for three years – far below current and estimated inflation, and much below salary increases at other Toronto universities. For example, TMU faculty are receiving across the board increases as follows:
2023-24: 3.5%
2024-25: 3.0%
2025-26: 3.0%
The Employer’s monetary proposals represent significant cuts in the terms and conditions of employment of members –- totally antithetical to building York University’s reputation, strengthening post-Covid morale, retaining faculty members, and encouraging stable academic planning and decision-making over time. The Employer is not listening but rather is opposing the right of YUFA members to engage in discussions and decisions, in favour of hiring expensive external consulting firms.
Many of the Employer’s proposals will raise the university’s operating costs, putting the lie to their ‘crying poor’ in negotiations. For example, the Dispute Resolution Committee the Employer is proposing to limit is the least expensive way to resolve workplace disputes and avoids expensive legal proceedings. For another example, allowing YUFA members to purchase computers, software, and maintenance plans that suit their specific needs would be more efficient than requiring use of the Employer’s more expensive and restrictive program.
On July 23, YUFA presented a focussed package of proposals to move toward a negotiated settlement. In reply, the Employer put two new proposals on the table that significantly limit physiotherapy and extended healthcare benefits. YUFA is extremely disappointed that the Employer has chosen to make additional concessionary demands rather than seeking to negotiate an agreement.
Hard-won provisions and support for research and teaching and related work that YUFA has fought for and won in earlier rounds of bargaining could be lost if we don’t protect them.
Support our bargaining team by voting YES in the online strike mandate vote. Balloting ends at noon on Friday, July 26.
If you have not received a ballot, please check your spam, other, and junk mail folders for it first; then contact YUFA at [email protected]