Members of the California Faculty Association (CFA) began voting this week on whether to empower their leaders to call a strike if new contract negotiations with the Chancellor’s office fail over the summer.
If approved, the CFA Board of Directors would have the authorization of its members to call for a “rolling 2-day strike” in the fall, which could disrupt classes at all 23 CSU campuses — the largest higher education system in the nation.
Negotiations between the teachers’ union – which represents 23,000 professors, lecturers, librarians, counselors and coaches in the CSU system – and the CSU Chancellor’s office broke down in early April.
The talks are gridlocked over salary increases, class size limits and long-term contracts for temporary faculty. The Chancellor’s office contends these proposals would add “an additional $504.1 million” to a budget already strained by massive cuts.
“These estimates do not include all the potential impacts associated with CFA’s full proposal,” said Gail Brooks, vice chancellor of Human Resources for the CSU. “These demands come at a time when the CSU has had its budget cut by $750 million, with an additional $200 million cut possible at some point in the next fiscal year.”
The union responds the Chancellor’s office spent $6 million on “equity and other raised to around 550 management employees” instead of compensation for faculty.
Erik Fallis, media relations manager for the CSU, said the vote to strike was premature because the teachers will have no legal right to strike until further down the bargaining process, after the Chancellor announces his final offer.
“We want to be clear on the fact that we are facing very difficult times,” said Fallis. “Every one of the proposals we have made would preserve educational quality for the students.”
Jennifer Eagan, CFA chapter president for CSUEB, disagrees with Fallis, saying the Chancellor’s proposals would harm “student experience in the classroom.”
“I don’t see a single thing in their proposal that would preserve educational quality,” said Eagan.
The Chancellor’s proposals include neither pay increases for faculty or limits on class sizes. Temporary faculty would receive a three-year contract after a “positive performance evaluation,” and only at the approval of that university’s president.
Also omitted from Chancellor’s proposals is a guarantee of “academic freedom” for faculty, which the CFA says would help “ensure students can learn a wide range of ideas.”
“This is about the university wanting more power, and we’re just trying to hold onto the rights and benefits we already have,” said CFA field representative Maureen Loughran.
The Chancellor is also proposing to have the CFA pay a higher percentage of the costs associated with union leadership’s leave time.
According to Fallis, CFA President Lillian Taiz — a history professor at CSU Los Angeles — receives a professor’s salary despite being released from all of her classes. According to Fallis, the CSU currently pays for 80 percent of that costs. The proposal would change it to a 50/50 split.
Eagan counters that this argument is misleading because the classes President Taiz would be teaching have been covered by a lecturer who earns less than Taiz’s Ph.D. would command.
Another contentious issue is the Chancellor’s proposal to add high demand classes to Extended Education, which the CFA contends is part of the Chancellor’s strategy to move CSU towards a for-profit model where students pay more, teachers make less, and the CSU presidents have vastly more power.
“Step by step they’re trying to move us into a for-profit model,” said Kim Geron, CFA vice president and chair of the Political Science department at CSU East Bay. “We’re trying to take education back to the master plan of affordable higher education for all students.”
The two sides agreed on Tuesday to resume negotiations, but the CFA is moving ahead with the strike vote in any case. The teachers are willing to vote to empower their union to strike if the Chancellor’s final offer is not satisfactory.
