\n FIU’S FIRST LOCAL \n __________________<\/p>\n \n \u00a0<\/p>\n \n HOW UFF’S PROPOSALS \n WITH PRESIDENT \n _____________________\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n \n \u00a0<\/p>\n \n Over the past year, UFF and the FIU administration have proposed very different visions of our first local collective bargaining agreement. <\/p>\n \n \u00a0<\/p>\n \n UFF believes a university runs best on principles of democracy and shared governance.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>We have developed our contract proposals after extensive consultation with the members of our bargaining unit.\u00a0 <\/span>We have come to the bargaining table committed to fight for the things faculty and librarians have told us are important.\u00a0 <\/span>Our goal has been to reach agreement quickly, trying to work wherever possible with the already compromised language of the previous collective bargaining agreement\u0097preserving provisions that have worked for almost three decades and seeking improvements in areas we think are most critical to our bargaining unit members.\u00a0 \n \u00a0<\/p>\n \n The administration, on the other hand, has taken a radical approach\u0097aiming to wipe out in a single bargaining cycle most of the contract rights and protections won over almost three decades of bargaining.\u00a0 <\/span>Rather than identifying key problem areas and seeking to bargain improvements, the administration has stubbornly refused even to put on the table proposals for contract language concerning many important terms and conditions of employment.\u00a0 <\/span>It has proposed again and again that rights previously covered by contract be left “VACANT.” Instead, it has demanded discretion to develop policies and enforce them as it sees fit, free of a grievance and arbitration process.<\/p>\n \n \u00a0<\/p>\n \n The underlying message is that the administration is “boss” and employees had better get used to it\u0097used to taking orders and relinquishing control over their professional lives.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Employees are asked to trust that an institution built on principles of shared governance and collegiality will do better if it is managed from the top down.\u00a0 <\/span>Key protections\u0097fair summer pay, due process in disciplinary actions, equitable assignments, fair evaluations according to clear standards, intellectual property rights\u0097all would disappear from the contract if the administration has its way.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Here is a summary of the differences between UFF’s proposals and the adminstration’s.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \n \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t UFF’S \n\t MAIDIQUE’S\u00a0 <\/span>PROPOSALS<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t ACADEMIC FREEDOM:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would define academic freedom broadly to protect faculty in the discussion \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t ACADEMIC FREEDOM:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would only protect faculty employees discussing their “own academic subjects” \n\t APPOINTMENT AND ASSIGNMENT:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Protects contract rights to equitable assignment, expedited grievance in \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t In event of non-reappointment, requires a full year\u0092s notice to employees \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t APPOINTMENT AND ASSIGNMENT:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t No longer any contract right to equitable assignment or to grievance and \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Under proposed policy,<\/b> if an employee feels his assignment is unreasonable \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Proposed policy reduces notice period for \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t BEREAVEMENT LEAVE:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n \n\t Would continue contract right to use reasonable amounts of paid sick leave \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t BEREAVEMENT LEAVE:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would eliminate contract right to use reasonable amounts of sick leave due \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Proposed policy would restrict employee to three days of paid leave for death \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t CONFLICT OF INTEREST\/OUTSIDE ACTIVITIES: <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would protect long-standing employee contract rights to engage in outside \n\t CONFLICT OF INTEREST\/OUTSIDE ACTIVITIES:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would eliminate contract protections for employee rights to engage in outside \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Proposed Policy on Conflict of \n\t EVALUATION AND EVALUATION FILE:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t An employee would have contract rights to a single evaluation file, which \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Maintains criteria for evaluation from previous \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Retains clear protections for faculty with respect to English language \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Protects employees in assistance programs from risking that their attempts \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Clearly defines contract rights of employees to remove anonymous materials \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Sustained performance review must be based solely on previous six years annual \n\t EVALUATION AND EVALUATION FILE:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Contract protections for evaluation and requirements concerning evaluation \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Proposed policy would require that all evaluation files be kept by Human \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t New policy would burden faculty with new evaluation \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Adds to assigned university duties “attending commencement ceremonies.”\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Adds an entire section of evaluation criteria based on “contribution to or \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Adds standards to be used for appraisal of progress toward tenure and promotion, \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Under new policy for proficiency in spoken English, faculty would be required \n\t \u00a0<\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t Performance Improvement Plan is added a criterion for annual evaluation of \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Policy would remove protection for employee participation in employee assistance \n\t \u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t Under the proposed new policy, the “Performance Development Process” would \n\t Requires employees to attend mandatory training on the PDP and the use of \n\t \u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t Policy would require that third-year tenure review of progress toward tenure \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Policy would require sustained performance review of tenured employees after \n\t GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would provides contract right to grievance and arbitration process that sets \n\t GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would take away employee grievance and arbitration rights in all but a limited \n\t Under the proposed policy<\/b> for resolution of disputes employees with \n\t INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would protect employee rights in works and inventions except where a specific \n\t INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Gives employees no contractual rights to their works and \n\t JOB ABANDONMENT:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Contract defines \u0093job abandonment\u0094 as absence without authorized \n\t JOB ABANDONMENT:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t No contract protection or definition.\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Proposed \u0093Separations of Employment\u0094 policy greatly reduces previous \n\t \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t LAYOFF:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would protect employees with more than five years service from being laid \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t LAYOFF:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would shorten required layoff notice to two semesters for tenured employees \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t NONDISCRIMINATION:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would add contractual protection against discrimination based on sexual \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t NONDISCRIMINATION:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would eliminate any and all contract protections against discrimination.\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Protection against discrimination (on the basis of sexual orientation would \n\t PARENTAL LEAVE:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would strengthen contract rights to provide for six months parental leave \n\t PARENTAL LEAVE:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t No contract right to any parental leave, paid or unpaid.\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would provide parental leave as required by the FMLA, along with an additional \n\t SALARY: <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would be based on the principle that no employee should be expected to take \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t The summer salary formula would be spelled out in salary article: full pay \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t SALARY: <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Proposed three year deal would lock in low rates for faculty raises based \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Increases of 1% across the board and 2% merit funds would go into effect \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t SICK LEAVE: <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Allows use of reasonable amounts of sick leave to care for spouse, grandparent, \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Upon retirement or layoff, employee with ten or more years’ service has a \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t SICK LEAVE: <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t No contract right to any sick leave.\n\t <\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Policy would not allow use of sick leave to care for spouse\u0092s family \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Policy would end lump sum payment to employees for unused sick leave (only \n\t \u00a0<\/span>SUMMER \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would continue the summer pay formula that has guaranteed faculty the right \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t SUMMER PAY:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would take away contract right to fair summer pay and equitable summer \n\t Proposed policy <\/b>would cut summer pay, leaving pay for first class \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t UNION PRIVILEGES:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would continue contract provision granting facilities and course releases \n\t UNION PRIVILEGES:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would do away with long-standing contract rights, providing no facilities \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t In addition to proposing that many of the rights guaranteed by previous \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Information technology security policy:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t New policy would require employees to promise to adhere to all laws, rules, \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t “New Employee \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would require all employees to attend on first day of employment (non-faculty) \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Professional development policy:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t New policy would require every employee every year to set a Learning Goal \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Policy on Internal Recruitment, Promotions, Demotions, & \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Purpose is to provide employees “internal career-pathing \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Policy on Solicitation, Distribution and \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Would prohibit solicitation for a variety of reasons, including memberships, \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t Political activity:<\/p>\n \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t New policy would require an employee who wanted to run for office to get \n\t \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t If employee wants to take time off from work for political activities, employee
\n COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT WITH FACULTY AND
\n LIBRARIANS<\/p>\n
\n COMPARE<\/p>\n
\n MAIDIQUE’S PROPOSALS<\/p>\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n \n
\n\t PROPOSALS<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n \n \n
\n\t of\u00a0 <\/span>all <\/i>relevant matters
\n\t in the classroom,
\n\t \u00a0<\/span><\/i>scholarship, research
\n\t and creative expression, all matters of university governance <\/i>and
\n\t \u00a0<\/span>individual expressive activities
\n\t unrelated to university duties.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n\t in the classroom or performing assigned<\/i> service
\n\t activities.\u00a0 <\/span>Would not
\n\t <\/b>protect faculty from discipline for individual expressive activities
\n\t if they were not part of assigned
\n\t duties.\u00a0 <\/span>Would not <\/b>protect
\n\t employees speaking out on issues of university
\n\t governance.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n \n
\n\t case assignment is unreasonable, and employee\u0092s rights to determine
\n\t where and when to carry out unscheduled
\n\t activities.\u00a0 <\/span>Annual evaluation
\n\t must be based on assignment.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t with more than two years service, and a semester\u0092s notice for employees
\n\t in their first two years of service.\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t arbitration process to resolve disputes over unreasonable or unfair
\n\t assignments.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t or arbitrary, he \u0093should proceed to address the matter through the
\n\t Provost\u0092s review process.\u0094\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t non-reappointment.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Those
\n\t with 3 or more years of continuous service are entitled only to two consecutive
\n\t semesters notice.\u00a0 <\/span>Less than
\n\t three years of service means only one semester\u0092s notice of
\n\t non-reappointment.\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t if there is a death in the immediate
\n\t family.\u00a0 <\/span>What is a reasonable
\n\t number of days would depend on circumstances, including such factors as travel
\n\t time required or responsibilities for making funeral arrangements.\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t to death in family.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t in immediate family, no matter the circumstances.\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t activities, both paid and unpaid, for purposes of service, extra income,
\n\t or increasing professional standing.\u00a0 <\/span>Employee would be required to report only those activities
\n\t that employee reasonably believed to create a potential conflict of interest,
\n\t and could engage in activities unless they were deemed to be a conflict in
\n\t an expedited grievance procedure.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n
\n\t activities.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t Interest:<\/i>\u00a0 <\/span><\/b>Would require
\n\t employee to fill out a Report if considering any outside activity<\/i>
\n\t (defined as any activity, compensated or uncompensated, which is not part
\n\t of the employee’s assigned duties and for which the University provides no
\n\t compensation).\u00a0 <\/span>This broad new
\n\t language appears to create an absurdity we doubt was intentional\u0097literally
\n\t every activity not included in the assignment would be covered\u0097from
\n\t brushing one’s teeth at bedtime to meeting one’s spouse for dinner and a
\n\t movie.\u00a0 <\/span>The previous contract
\n\t language avoided this absurdity by specifying that employees make a reasonable
\n\t judgment about what might be expected to create a conflict of
\n\t interest.\u00a0 <\/span>The administration
\n\t team insists, however, that it cannot agree in plain language to leave this
\n\t to employee judgment, but that employees will know what to
\n\t report.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Employee could
\n\t not engage in any outside activity until it has been
\n\t approved.\u00a0 <\/span>Would require a report to be filed annually, whether
\n\t or not there is any outside
\n\t activity.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Would prohibit
\n\t employees from compensated employment or service on BOT of any other colleges
\n\t or universities except under special
\n\t circumstances.\u00a0 <\/span>No expedited
\n\t grievance procedure to resolve disagreements between employees and supervisors.
\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t the employee would have the right to examine and paginate, and copy free
\n\t of charge.\u00a0 <\/span>Clear rules would
\n\t govern about the contents of the file (no anonymous material, dates required
\n\t on material placed in the file, materials would have to go into file within
\n\t a reasonable time after receipt by custodian of the file, and materials shown
\n\t to be false could be removed from the file).<\/p>\n
\n\t contract.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Would not allow
\n\t new and ill-defined criteria to be used as a basis for evaluation or tenure
\n\t or promotion decisions or burden faculty with entrepreneurial responsibilities
\n\t or meeting subjective core values or “collegiality”
\n\t requirements.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t proficiency, including requirements that university provide and pay for resources
\n\t to help faculty improve English language skills if testing determines there
\n\t are deficiencies.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t to improve performance will be used against them as evidence of
\n\t deficiencies.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t from evaluation file and clearly defines the processes to be used for evaluation
\n\t by supervisors, peers and
\n\t students.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t evaluations.\u00a0 <\/span>Employee with
\n\t satisfactory annual evaluations must receive satisfactory sustained performance
\n\t evaluation.\u00a0 <\/span>Performance Improvement Plan only allowed where performance
\n\t has been consistently <\/i>below satisfactory in one or more areas of
\n\t assignment.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n\t file would disappear.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t Resources and a charge for copies of materials in the file. There would be
\n\t no rules about what kinds of material could go into the
\n\t file.\u00a0 <\/span>Another proposed policy,
\n\t however, seems to allow \u0093anonymous\u0094 complaints.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t criteria.\u00a0 <\/span>For example, learning
\n\t objectives and outcomes assessment would be added as a basis for evaluation
\n\t of teaching.\u00a0 <\/span>Publication in
\n\t “professional journals” would change to publication
\n\t in\u00a0 <\/span>“professional refereed
\n\t journals.”\u00a0 <\/span>Instead of providing
\n\t that “research and creative activity that has not yet resulted in publication,
\n\t display or performance” could be taken into account, the proposed policy
\n\t would restrict the evaluation to “research and creative activity that has
\n\t resulted in publication, display and
\n\t performance.”\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t further development of the University or community enterprise, including
\n\t evidence of initiative in identifying, developing and bringing a vision to
\n\t life, with an end result of creating a new venture, formed under conditions
\n\t of risk and considerable uncertainty.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>Entrepreneurial (or intrapreneurial) activities” become a new basis
\n\t for evaluation of faculty.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t including evaluation of “collegiality” as a basis for tenure.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t to \u0093establish proficiency.” The previous contract prohibited administration
\n\t from evaluating employee as deficient unless tests showed
\n\t deficiency.\u00a0 <\/span>Policy would
\n\t provide\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>no specifics for
\n\t procedures to be followed for correction of deficiencies, and would do away
\n\t with the requirement that administration make language instruction available
\n\t at no cost to employee found to be deficient in spoken
\n\t English.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t tenured employees, when applicable.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t program from being used as evidence of a performance deficiency.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t become part of the annual
\n\t evaluation.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Described
\n\t as a “year-round process,” this would provide “input for merit pay and reward
\n\t programs.”\u00a0 <\/span>Allows supervisor
\n\t to “solicit feedback” from a variety of sources, including peers, students
\n\t and “other constituents.”\u00a0 <\/span>Provides
\n\t no procedural safeguards for how this feedback is to be used or whether employee
\n\t has the right to know who provided information, because the former contract
\n\t protection against anonymous materials in the evaluation file would no longer
\n\t exist.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t the Performance Impact software tool.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>Requires that each faculty employee be evaluated using FIU’s Values
\n\t and Core Competencies, including Diversity & Respect, Honesty &
\n\t Integrity, Knowledge Excellence, Operational Excellence, Service Excellence,
\n\t Communications Skills, Critical Thinking Skills, Efficiency Management,
\n\t Leadership Skills, Personal Effectiveness Skills,
\n\t and\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Team
\n\t Skills.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t would result in\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>either
\n\t notice of offer of further employment or notice of non-reappointment.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t five years, instead of after seven
\n\t years.\u00a0 <\/span>Does not provide the
\n\t protections provided in the previous
\n\t contract.\u00a0 <\/span>Does not insure that
\n\t sustained performance evaluation be based on annual evaluations or that a
\n\t tenured employee with satisfactory annual evaluations will be given a
\n\t satisfactory sustained performance
\n\t evaluation.\u00a0 <\/span>“Below satisfactory Sustained Performance Evaluation
\n\t in one or more areas” would result in imposition of Performance Improvement
\n\t Plan, and failure to meet goals established in plan could result in termination
\n\t of tenured employee.<\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t clear rules for review of administrative
\n\t decisions.\u00a0 <\/span>Proposed procedures
\n\t minimize harm to employee-supervisor relationships by allowing adequate time
\n\t for employees to work with UFF grievance representatives to define issues
\n\t and propose resolution prior to filing a formal
\n\t grievance.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n\t number of circumstances.\u00a0 <\/span>Time allowed for employees to file grievances would
\n\t shrink to ten days, reducing the possibility of informal resolution.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t problems would be told to try to work problems out by talking with their
\n\t supervisors: their court, their ball, their
\n\t rules.\u00a0 <\/span>Ironically, this is called
\n\t “FAIR”\u0097an acronym for “fast and impartial resolution” of
\n\t problems.\u00a0 <\/span>We admit it sounds
\n\t fast.\u00a0 <\/span>But how impartial can
\n\t it be when the same supervisor who made a bad decision is the one who is
\n\t asked to review that bad
\n\t decision?\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>A grievance
\n\t process provides an avenue for review before a truly impartial third party.
\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t written agreement gives the university an ownership interest or share of
\n\t the revenues derived from an employee’s invention or creative
\n\t work.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n
\n\t inventions.\u00a0 <\/span>Proposes policy
\n\t for disclosure requirements and procedures to be followed by employees concerning
\n\t establishing ownership and revenue rights from their creative works and
\n\t inventions. <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t leave for twelve <\/i>or more consecutive
\n\t days.\u00a0 <\/span>If employee notifies the
\n\t university that absence is for reasons beyond employee\u0092s control, the
\n\t employee will not be considered to have abandoned the
\n\t position.<\/p>\n\n
\n\t protections. It would allow an employee to be absent without leave only
\n\t three<\/i> days before being automatically
\n\t terminated.\u00a0 <\/span>If employee notifies
\n\t the university that absence is for reasons beyond employee\u0092s control,
\n\t university will decide whether employee is considered to have abandoned
\n\t position.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t off before more recent hires.\u00a0 <\/span>Would give any employees who are laid off the right
\n\t to a year’s notice and two years’ recall rights.\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t and as little as one month for non-tenured
\n\t employees.\u00a0 <\/span>Makes no distinction
\n\t in layoff protection between employees with more than five years service
\n\t and new hires. Recall rights would be reduced to one year.\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t orientation to the protections against discrimination that have long been
\n\t protected by the collective bargaining agreement, not subject to unilateral
\n\t change and enforceable through grievance and arbitration.\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t be a matter of policy<\/b>\u0097subject to change by administrators who
\n\t may have different views on human rights or face changing political
\n\t pressures.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n \n
\n\t at full pay during fall or spring semester and at .33 FTE during summer semester.
\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t six months unpaid leave (employee may use accrued leave if
\n\t available).\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n \n
\n\t a pay cut to fund merit raises for
\n\t others.\u00a0 <\/span>All employees would
\n\t receive a 4.5% increase in base retroactive to the first pay period in the
\n\t 2004-05 fiscal or academic year, as applicable, to adjust for the inflation
\n\t that has eaten away at our salaries since our last across-the-board raise
\n\t in October\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>2002.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>In addition,
\n\t the proposal calls for funds of 1% of payroll to distribute for merit
\n\t (retroactive to 11\/1\/04) and 2% of payroll to distribute for market equity
\n\t increases (retroactive to 11\/1\/04), with .5% available for administrative
\n\t discretionary increases for special achievements, counteroffers and other
\n\t increases.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t for summer courses.\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t on a bad budget year.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Worse
\n\t yet, proposed raises would not be effective until 3\/4\/05 (which leads us
\n\t to believe the administration has been dragging its feet on negotiations
\n\t in part as a budgeting device).\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>Proposal would give across the board increase of 3% and 1% for merit
\n\t money.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t in 11\/1\/05.\u00a0 <\/span>And a year later,
\n\t employees would receive another 1% across the board, with 2% in merit
\n\t funds.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t parent, brother, sister, child, grandchild of both the employee and the spouse
\n\t and dependents living in the household.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t contractual right to lump sum payment for up to 480 hours of unused sick
\n\t leave.\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t members.\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t those with at least 10 years service on effective date of policy would be
\n\t grand fathered in).<\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t PAY:<\/p>\n
\n\t to fair summer pay for each and every summer class and the right to equitable
\n\t summer assignments.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n\n
\n\t assignment.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t intact for now, but giving deans discretion to decide what to pay those teaching
\n\t a second or third summer course and to assign extra duties for no extra
\n\t pay.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n
\n\t necessary for union officers to represent bargaining unit employees, including
\n\t bargaining and enforcement of contract rights through the grievance process.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n\n
\n\t or course releases for union representation and instead forcing union to
\n\t purchase facilities and course releases.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n \n \n
\n\t contracts be eliminated and replaced by policies, the administration has
\n\t proposed a number of new policies that increase burdens on employees already
\n\t being asked to do more with
\n\t less.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Here are some examples:<\/p>\n
\n\t regulations and policies pertaining to computer security and protection of
\n\t electronic information resources.\u00a0 <\/span>Compliance requires familiarity with at least 18 federal
\n\t and state statutes and four different FIU policies on computer use listed
\n\t in the policy.\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n \n
\n\t Experience.”<\/i><\/b>\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t or first available session following first day of employment
\n\t (faculty).<\/p>\n\n \n \n
\n\t and take part in a minimum of 20 hours of professional
\n\t development.\u00a0 <\/span>Nothing in the
\n\t policy requires FIU to pay for this training.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n \n \n
\n\t Transfers:<\/p>\n
\n\t opportunities.”\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Provides
\n\t for a Compensation Manual to be used in raising or reducing salaries, depending
\n\t on the direction of an employee’s internal “career path.”\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n \n
\n\t Posting:\u00a0
\n\t <\/span><\/p>\n
\n\t except in non-work areas during the non-work time of all
\n\t involved.\u00a0 <\/span>Distribution of any
\n\t literature prohibited.\u00a0 <\/span>Posting
\n\t of materials on bulletin boards only with approval of
\n\t HR.\u00a0 <\/span>We can’t help but wonder
\n\t if this was drafted with employee union membership in mind.
\n\t <\/p>\n\n \n \n
\n\t prior approval from the university
\n\t president.\u00a0 <\/span>If the president
\n\t decided this would interfere with duties, the employee would be forced to
\n\t take a leave of absence or resign.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>Establishes no process for appeal of the president\u0092s
\n\t judgment.\u00a0 <\/span>\n\t <\/p>\n
\n\t must get approval from your supervisor.\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>New policy doesn\u0092t define what it means by participation in political
\n\t activities (is voting included?).\u00a0
\n\t <\/span>Nothing in the policy seems to provide a check on supervisor’s discretion
\n\t in approving or denying this request for time
\n\t off.\u00a0 <\/span>What if only employees
\n\t whose views the supervisor agrees with are granted requested time for political
\n\t activities?<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n \n