AAUP, OU reach agreement to extend deadline as bargaining talks continue

By
Posted: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 2:56 pm | Last Updated: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 6:44 pm

View Comments Comments Print This Article Print This Email This Article Email This Tweet This Article Tweet This Add This Article to Delicious Delicious

Oakland University and the American Association of University Professors are still working on contract negotiations a day after the 2009 collective bargaining agreement was originally intended to expire.

The 2009 agreement, which was set to expire on Aug. 15, was extended by 48 hours as both sides continue bargaining.

According to the AAUP, the two sides were hopeful an agreement could have been reached before an extension was necessary.

“We were very hopeful that Mr. Boonin, an experienced and professional negotiator, would calculate the dollars, would weigh how far each side had moved and would make his final moves quickly and fairly to allow us to reach an agreement that would let both sides to come away from the table perhaps scratched and bruised yet able to preserve dignity and continue to work together,” said the AAUP in their bargaining diaries. “Unfortunately, after a long 10-hour day, nothing much was accomplished.”

OU was not available for comment.

The two sides remain divided on three key issues: tuition waivers, health insurance and pay raises.

Tuition waivers
The university has proposed cutting the faculty tuition waiver, which currently allows OU faculty and their immediate family to attend classes at Oakland free of charge.

“Forever the university has given faculty waivers for immediate family and self,” said AAUP President Karen Miller.

Faculty and their family members who used this tuition waiver could not be enrolled in classes unless there was an open spot and they where not taking a “chair” away from a paying student.

Miller said faculty were the ones whose workload was increased by the waiver, since teachers were not paid for teaching a student on a faculty waiver.

“Faculty members are bearing the brunt of these people,” Miller said. “(The) actual loss is negligible (for the university). (Their) cost is an extra handful of people every year in the OC (Oakland Center). The teachers don’t make extra money (by having a faculty members student in their class).”

With OU being in the lowest 17 percentile of the nation in faculty salary, Miller said department chairs used this tuition waiver as a way of attracting new faculty to the university.

“I received a letter from someone (that) said (they) took a $20,000 pay cut to come to this university because (they) had four kids to put through college and (they) wanted them to go to OU,” Miller said. “What do I tell them now?”

Besides attracting faculty to the school, Miller said tuition waivers create a sense of pride by allowing faculty members to send their kids to the school where they teach.

“To throw something like this on the table is such an insult,” Miller said.

Health insurance
The university has proposed to replace the teacher’s current health insurance plan with a performance-based plan.

Under a performance-based plan, individual’s insurance premiums are affected by their health, meaning those with health problems will pay more than those without.

“(There are a) number of very serious concerns that all faculty have about this (proposed) health insurance program,” Miller said.

Faculty, according to Miller, have one of the oldest median ages in the workforce. This is troubling for the AAUP because with age, it becomes harder to maintain good health, she said.

“Some of these plans have stricter (health) standards than Centers for Disease Control and Prevention do,” Miller said. “Three years ago when we looked into these plans, the majority of faculty did not meet (the standards).”

While the university has maintained that the move to a performance-based health plan is designed to keep faculty healthier, Miller has her concerns.

“(The) university says they want to motivate us to be healthier, but it will cost them much less money this way,” Miller said.

However, Miller indicated that the AAUP would not be against a performance-based health care plan.

“We are not unreasonable to where we won’t look at that,” Miller said. “We want people to be healthy. If we can come up with a performance-based health care plan that is affordable, we would consider it.”

Pay raises
Under the university’s initial economic proposal, all raises for faculty would be merit-based and given at the discretion of the university.

Miller said that this merit-based system “doesn’t make any sense in the context of a modern university.”

This merit-based system is, according to the AAUP, almost unheard of at a public university, but does exist in private and for-profit universities.

“(A switch to merit-based raises) will not only hurt the ability to recruit (new faculty), but also to maintain faculty,” Miller said.

Following the university’s proposal, the AAUP sent out notices of what the university had proposed to all of its members. Miller said that 10 percent of faculty responded in the first 10 hours after the notices where sent out. Half of the letters she got back said “we are not valued by the administration.”

“People were angry, people were hurt, people were aggrieved,” Miller said. “The financial offer came out and everyone thought it was 2009 again.”

The AAUP and Miller fear that if the university is able to make the switch to a merit-based system, there would be a “wave of resignations.”
About 20 percent of the letters Miller received from faculty following the university’s proposal said they “were back on the job market.”

Moving forward
OU and the AAUP called in a state mediator on Aug. 9, an in effort to help both sides find common ground.

“Calling in a mediator at this point isn’t a big step,” said AAUP Chief Negotiator Michael Latcha. “It’s just an effort to get more help to move towards an agreement.”

Miller said the mediator is helping both parties make progress on the negotiations.

“I am not sure forward momentum would be happening without her,” Miller said. “She has spent huge amounts of time with both teams.”

Both sides are hopeful that an agreement will be reached before the 48-hour extension on the 2009 agreement runs out.

“The university hopes that Thursday will be the last day needed to reach a tentative agreement, but in light of the association’s current table position, (we are) reluctant to express cautious optimism,” said the university’s bargaining diaries.

EMU


  • Enough

    No, in the light of the administration’s current table position.  If there is a problem, it will be the administration’s responsibility.  They have been completely unreasonable, unfair, and uncaring in their demands of the faculty.  Faculty who can, will leave.  Attracting good faculty will be impossible, because the remaining OU faculty will make sure that any applicants know that the administration’s initial offer is not worth the paper it is written on.  One point – tuition goes up and up.  But the faculty does not see this in their compensation.  It goes to, well, one wonders.  Why should the faculty give back, so that the administration can employ more administrators, support pet projects, and subsidize the Medical school.

  • Caboti

    I am currently a student at OU. The English and History departments at OU have such remarkable faculty that I chose to do my Masters degree at OU. These changes to the contract – in my opinion, will make good faculty look elsewhere for jobs and keep good candidates away.  Here is a suggestion: Rather than reduce the quality of life for your faculty and allow students to suffer – come up with some creative ways to increase revenues – if people have 10s of thousands even millions of dollars to spend on political campaigns find a way to get them to fund education. Tap-in to sports figures and other extreme wealth. Leave the faculty alone and allow them a healthy and financially stable future. Ultimately it is the students who suffer – good faculty will look elsewhere. As will good students, such as myself.

  • Derek

    I am an alumni of Oakland University. I went on to get my Masters degree at another university, and I can tell you first hand that nothing compares to the faculty/professors at Oakland. They are truly excellent at their jobs and respected in their fields. I have long lasting relationships with many of the professors as I had at Oakland as they steered me along my career path and in life. The leadership at Oakland University needs to acknowledge that people come to that school to get a degree that means something. Without the faculty to provide the teaching, that degree is not as valuable. Oakland University is doing just fine they are growing and expanding and this would not be possible without the wonderful faculty they have. I still have fond memories of many of my classes Support the faculty. They are the backbone of your University. 

  • Anna

    I go back and forth between encouraging people to attend Oakland University because of the PHENOMENAL professors from whom they will receive a great education and encouraging people to never EVER step foot on the campus because of the horrible administration. My professors made OU great for me, even as the tuition increased by more than I care to remember every single year. Not a penny of that tuition went to raises for those great professors but Gary Russi, the president of the University, received a $100,000 salary increase just before cutting wages, benefits, and hours from most tenured professors in 2009.

    The amazing professors at Oakland University deserve better. If I could do anything more than say thank you for the education you helped give me, I would.

    Future students, pick a different school. Don’t give your tuition money to the OU administration. It should be going to the professors from whom you’ll receive your education, and at OU you can be sure it won’t.

  • Enough again

    OU claims to be committed to the health of the faculty and staff, and so promotes the “healthy living” health insurance.
    Consider the following:

    1. OU provided access to the Recreation Center for faculty and staff in early 2012. For ten years, OU faculty had to pay for this out of pocket. It is obvious that OU did this, so that they could say that they provided access as part of new contract negotiations, and not because OU cares about the health of faculty and staff.2. OU does not provide any healthy eating options for faculty and staff on campus, and does not have healthy options in vending machines.
    3. OU still has a second hand smoke problem. Entering virtually every building on campus during term time there are smokers on the steps.
    Why are these issues? Because they are requirements laid out by the insurance companies for the employer to provide for employees who have this type of health insurance. OU doesn’t meet the providers’ requirements, and wants to prevent faculty from paying the extra to have proper health insurance, which faculty have earned through their work before coming to Oakland, which faculty were recruited with as part of a benefits package when they came to Oakland, and which they continue to deserve through their dedication to OU through their teaching, research and service.

    OU is opening a state of the art new Health building, and welcoming the second year of medical school students. It claims to be building a center of excellence for medicine and health care education and research. And as part of that program, it wants to take away choices from faculty and staff for health care insurance, while some groups (administration, deans and medical school keep those choices).