Tentative Agreement – passed 174 Yes, 19 No
Summary of Negotiations Spring 2019 by Sue Loring (via all faculty email):
“First, I’d like to thank you all for approving the 2018-2019 TA. I know it’s not the salary increase we wanted (or deserve) but it was the best we could do in the timeframe we had. Jennifer Tarabochia, the Redding CTA representative, kept stressing to us the importance of getting something settled immediately. She said our chances of seeing any increase for 2018-2019 would be minimal if negotiations continued past the end of the year. Plus, we were cognizant of the fact that our retirees needed to have an increase applied to their salaries before the end of the year for it to count toward their retirement earnings.
The negotiations team met with the District for 6 hours on Thursday May 23rd and for 5 hours on Friday, May 24th. The District is motivated to substantially increase beginning salaries because they’re having a difficult time recruiting faculty. Unfortunately, they’re not as motivated to increase current faculty salaries to the same degree. They continue to insist that our pay is adequate compared to other colleges (i.e. Bay Area colleges) when adjusted for cost-of living differences. They seem to ignore the fact that the same comparison shows our beginning salaries are also adequate. There are many, many reasons why the “cost-of-living adjustment compared to Bay Area colleges” argument doesn’t work, but it’s one of two arguments the District continues to use for not improving our salaries. The other is that the District doesn’t have the financial certainties required to pay us higher wages.
Anyway, during those last two sessions the District proposed restructuring our salary schedule in such a way that the beginning salaries and ending salaries would increase quite a bit, but those in the middle would increase very little. They offered us a two-year deal (2018/19 and 2019/20) for a schedule that would result in an average increase for faculty of 6%. (Keep in mind that 6% is approximately COLA for the same two-year period). When we looked at their proposal closely, we found that approximately half of all faculty would receive less than COLA – some as little as 0% – although the administration did offer to offset the lack of a salary increase with a 3% one-time payment for those faculty. Although a restructured salary schedule always benefits some faculty more than others, accepting a two-year deal that didn’t amount to COLA for more than half our faculty was unacceptable. The District then proposed a two-year modified salary structure, in which steps 5-28 would increase by 6%, and steps 2-4 would increase by a higher amount, and they also wanted to include a few language changes to certain sections the contract. That offer still amounted to no more than COLA for almost all faculty, and we didn’t have time to negotiate any language changes, so we rejected that proposal, too.
To protect the District from the “uncertainties” it kept mentioning, the negotiating team offered a two-year deal using the District’s proposed modified salary structure with an increase in steps 5-28 at a percentage equivalent to the percent that the college’s funding from the state increases over the two-year period. With such a deal, faculty would get the same proportionate share of the budget that we received in 2017-2018 (which was about 0.4% lower than the average share of the budget we’ve received since 2011). The District told us they do not, and do not plan to, operate on a revenue sharing basis. We then offered a two-year 8.1% increase on the modified schedule with no language changes (8.1% being the expected minimum increase the District anticipates for the two-year period), but the District rejected that offer, too. At that point we let the District know we didn’t think a two-year deal was feasible and we ended up with our current 3.5% across-the-board one-year deal.
We still have a lot of work to do next year if we’re going to improve our compensation. As Cliff mentioned in his email, the huge turnout at the board meeting really made a difference. Up until that point, the District had held steady offering a 2% increase for 2018-2019 that would start in July with no retroactive payments for 2018. At least our final outcome was an improvement on that scenario.
Sorry for the long email but wanted to share what occurred at the end of the year for those interested. Hope you all have a great summer!”
“Tom’s 2 Minutes” Current Video
|Distance Education (1)||Debra Griffin|
|Arts, Communications, Social Sciences (1 of 2)||Liz Waterbury|
|Arts, Communications, Social Sciences (2 of 2)
|Business, Agriculture, Industry, Technology, Safety (BAITS) (1 of 2)||John Livingston|
|Business, Agriculture, Industry, Technology, Safety (BAITS) (2 of 2)||Jay Davis|
|Health Sciences (1 of 2)||Michelle Morris|
|Health Sciences||Elaine Carmena – At large member|
|Physical Education and Athletics (PEAT) ( 1)||Bryon Hamilton|
|Science, Language Arts, Math (SLAM) (1 of 2)||Tim Shelton|
|Science, Language Arts, Math (SLAM) (2 of 2)||Scott Croes|
|Part-Time Faculty (1 of 2)||James Crockett|
|Part-Time Faculty (2 of 2)|
|Counselor (1)||Rob McCandless|
|Economics Workforce Development (1)||Dhabih Hendershot|
|Library (1) (2 currently on FA Board are from Library)||VACANT|