|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volume XIV |
|
Number Seven |
|
In This Issue: |
|
Remember 1991? William Weld was the new governor. Keeping a campaign promise to bring the budget in line, the governor furloughed state employees. The number of furlough days were based on a person's salary. Since the faculty was deemed essential, the state gave them two options-work without pay and get money back upon retirement or work without pay and take out a loan from the state. The professional staff and other 12-month employees could choose one of those two options, take additional vacation days, or take no-work, no-pay. Rather than go back to the table like the MOSES and NAGE unions and agree to be furloughed, the MTA and most of the other state unions decided not to capitulate. They instead pursued legal action either through the contract or through the courts.
On April 5, 1991, the MTA instituted a civil suit in Superior Court on behalf of higher education unit members. Elbert Tuttle, the presiding judge, heard arguments from MTA that the furlough impaired the union's rights, salary, and retrenchment provisions of contracts, and therefore, it was a violation of the U.S. and Massachusetts Constitutions. The MTA wanted this issue to go to arbitration; the employer did not. Judge Tuttle found for the MTA and remanded the case to arbitration. Each local then proceeded to arbitration.
The MCCC arbitration was heard on June 6, 1991, and on October 22, 1991, Arbitrator Marc Greenbaum issued his decision that not only was the case arbitrable, but the furlough was a violation of our collective bargaining agreement. Greenbaum ordered that "the employees be made whole for the injuries resulting from the violation of the Agreement and remanded the matter to the parties to best implement the details of the Award." MCCC Grievance Coordinator, Dennis Fitzgerald and MTA General Counsel Ann Clarke represented the MCCC at that arbitration.
Since that time, Sandra Quinn, the MTA attorney assigned to this case, has worked on the settlement with the Attorney General's Office. "Over the past four years," says Quinn, "this case was pretty much straight forward- -arguing the merits. However, the negotiations of the settlement have been more difficult than all the previous years put together." Judge Tuttle ordered that negotiations conclude by August 1996.
Six years later, Attorney Quinn has reached a tentative agreement with the Attorney General's office. Higher Education members will be made whole!
Even though the state returned our furlough money in January 1992, members were still damaged as they did not have use of their money for a period of time. The basis of the settlement is for unit members to be made whole as if they had never been furloughed.
An important factor in this settlement is the provision that the lost interest will be compounded over a four year period, March 1991 to December 1995. "This makes the settlement unique," states Quinn. "Unless provided for in a contract, an arbitrator does not typically award interest, let alone compounded interest."
Below are samples of the options. Keep in mind that they are examples and are not exact figures, but they are in the ballpark. The salary represents the salary in 1991. The interest rate is six percent compounded to 12/95.
The agreement should be executed by the middle of March. Administration and Finance (A&F), or the appropriate office, will calculate the exact cost of the settlement. Once that is complete, A&F must submit a supplemental request to the governor for his submission to the legislature. The safety net in this settlement is that if the Commonwealth of Massachusetts does not pay MTA by the end of this fiscal year (June 30, 1997),then interest begins to run again. Attorney Quinn estimates that the settlement for higher education is approximately $1.5 million.
It is the responsibility of the colleges to notify employees who are no longer working at the college that they have money coming to them.
The MTA and especially Attorney Sandy Quinn did an extraordinary
job of representing the higher education unit members. Hundreds and
hundreds of hours of work over the past six years have gone into this
settlement. Please send a note of thanks to Attorney Sandra Quinn,
MTA, 20 Ashburton Place, Boston, 02108 for her perseverance.
In January 1994 the legislature established an Optional Retirement Program (ORP) which allowed faculty and presidents in public higher education to "opt" out of the state retirement system and join TIA-CREF, Lincoln National Life Insurance Company, or VALIC. The ORP program is administered by the Board of Higher Education (BHE), and it is supposed to make monthly contributions to the appropriate participants.
It recently came to the attention of MTA that while the employees' contributions have been made on a monthly basis since the effective date of the ORP, January 27, 1996, the employer has made only one single lump sum payment in September 1996 and apparently, no subsequent monthly payments. Attorney Sandra Quinn has been assigned by MTA to handle this case. She has written a letter to Chancellor Koplik requesting the names of the participants, their respective plans, and copies of quarterly confirmations showing earnings and rates of return. Quinn has put the BHE on notice that if, in fact, payments have not been paid on a monthly basis, the MTA expects the Board to compensate the affected faculty for loss in investment for its failure to contribute according to the law.
N.B. The MTA has filed legislation again to expand
the ORP to professional staff and other 12-month employees.
The Governor's Budget: Increase or Decrease
The governor's proposed budget (House 1) for public higher education looks like an overall increase in campus funding of approximately 1.3%. Upon further inspection, however, a new provision appears that proposes to take 4% of each segment's appropriation and put that money in a reserve account at the Board of Higher Education (BHE). Once that money is removed from the campus appropriation, the 1.3% increase disappears. This money would not be released to the segments until there is an agreement on "institutional performance pursuant to performance and compliance standards promulgated by the board of higher education."
Other budget and language changes in House I include:
Now we wait for the House Ways and Means budget due out in
mid-April.
MLRC Probable
Cause
Did Community Colleges
Subcontract Unit Work?
The Massachusetts Labor Relations Commission (MLRC) has issued an unfair labor practice complaint against No. Essex and several other community colleges. The Commission has found probable cause that these colleges have violated the law by subcontracting faculty work.
An organization entitled the Child Care Institute received a $250,000 grant from the state of Massachusetts to provide child care training to a targeted population. The Institute then approached a number of state and community colleges and invited them to participate in this program. The Institute pays a flat $1800 plus $60 per credit to the colleges. In turn, this allows the Institute to teach and subsequently award college credit for courses offered and operated by the Child Care Career Institute. The students enrolled in these courses may choose which of the participating colleges will give them their credit and issue their transcript. Although the students receive credit from the college of their choice, the colleges do not recognize the instructors as MCCC unit members. This program was unilaterally implemented by the employer without notification or negotiation with the MCCC.
Faculty, concerned about this "partnership," notified the MCCC. A serious academic question was raised by faculty-are the colleges selling the authority to grant college credit to a non educational organization.
The MCCC filed two complaints: one on behalf of the full-time unit
and one on behalf of DCE. Other colleges involved in this care are:
Berkshire, Bristol, Bunker Hill, Massasoit, Middlesex, No. Shore, and
Quinsigamond.
In the January issue of the Newsletter, it was reported that the Request for Proposal (RFP) went out on January 21 , 1997. Though the mailing date was delayed, all other dates remain intact.
On March 14, 1997, the bids will be opened, and the Committee will select a consultant.
The next activity that affects faculty and staff is the questionnaire. Though the MCCC will not know what the questionnaire will look like until the consultant is hired, it is necessary for all full- time faculty and professional staff to make sure their files are in order and up to date. The questionnaire will ask for responses in five areas: identification of job duties, academic credentials, experience, seniority, and responsibilities for professional staff. Emphasis for full-time faculty will be credentials, seniority, and experience. Emphasis for professional staff will be credentials, seniority, experience, and assigned responsibilities. Professional staff must make sure E-7's are complete and in the personnel file. In addition the consultant will review existing positions and job postings. All questionnaires will be reviewed by the immediate supervisor. If there are any changes, the supervisor must consult with the unit member. Validation by the consultants will consist of comparing questions to documentation, comparing positions to documentation, and conducting interviews.
MCCC Team Chair Dennis Fitzgerald's comprehensive report should have been distributed to all full-time unit members.
The 3.5% ($2.75 million) of our contract earmarked for this
classification study must come from a supplemental appropriation. If
this amount is insufficient to pay the entire cost of the
classification, another supplemental request will be necessary.
Colleges within Community Colleges
More and more, the community colleges are beginning to see an infusion of other colleges, businesses, and/or "partnerships" coming onto the campuses and offering courses and programs. These courses, in some instances, have a negative impact on the full-time faculty by shifting work to another entity. Though some of these programs and courses are an excellent addition to a comprehensive community college, the chapter leaders must be diligent in monitoring what kinds of courses and programs are being offered.
Salem State College and U. Mass./ Lowell advertised in their brochures about "cooperative ventures." Yet, to this day, the community colleges do not realize that they have a legal obligation to notify the union about these programs. Chapter presidents should notify Joe Rizzo, DCE Coordinator ( 603 -8C)8-6309 ) of any courses or programs offered at a college through an entity other than the college so he can determine what needs to be done, if anything. Be watchful that these "partnerships" are not subcontracting our unit members' work.
Recently, two related grievances were settled concerning the operation of Salem State College at No. Essex and U. Mass. / Lowell operating at No. Shore, Middlesex, and No. Essex. The agreements reached establish a procedure of notification and consultation prior to the implementation of the four-year college courses at these community colleges. The process will be as follows:
Over the past couple of months, a number of questions have arisen concerning the "Rule of 90." If a person's combined age and years of service add up to 90, then that person can retire with maximum retirement benefits.
The Rule of 90 was but one of many early retirement bills that were filed for pre K-l 2 teachers over the past two years. Since there were so many bill last year, the legislature allocated $100,000 for a study. The Teachers Retirement Board (TRB) recently came out with its recommendations.
The report does not recommend that the state fund any early retirement program. It mentions, however, that if lawmakers wished, they could offer a one-time Rule of 90 early retirement incentive, but the employee would have to pay. The state would not make additional contributions to the pension fund in order to offer an early retirement proposal.
Presently, if the state were to allow a Rule of 90 for pre K- 12, the cost to the state would be $89 million a year. If the state were to offer a one time Rule of 90, the cost to the state would be $73 million.
The MTA and the Massachusetts Federation of Teachers (MFT) have filed Rule of 90 bills, and a tentative hearing date before the Public Service Committee has been set for May 13, 1997.
MTA's Rule of 90 bill (House 365) requires the state to assume the additional costs of this benefit, affects every member of the TRB, and provides maximum benefit of 80% of the average of one's highest three years salary.
MFT's Rule of 90 bill varies in that if the age and years of service total 90, then the years of service would be multiplied by a factor of 2.5%. With this calculation, a teacher 60 years of age with 30 years of services would receive 75%(30 x 2.5%). In addition, the MFT's bill provides that the teacher would pay additional pension contributions for the benefit, and a teacher would have to choose to participate but no teacher would be eligible for this choice if he or she was within three years of retirement.
Both MTA and MFT are working together to achieve some kind of early retirement incentive. MTA is recommending that when members speak to their legislators, they ask them to support the "Rule of 90" retirement legislation for teachers. If the bill is reported out of the Public Service Committee and gets to the I-louse floor, it can be amended.
How about higher education?
The two "Rule of 90" bills affect only K-12 employees. The goal is to get a bill on the floor for debate. If an early retirement bill were to pass for K-12, then higher education might have a better chance of getting a bill.
Other Retirement Issues
Report your Blue Cross Dental Woes?Anyone having a complaint or concern about the Blue Cross Dental plan and coverage should direct his or her comments to Abe Sherf, He is the community college representative on the Health and Welfare Trust Fund. |
|
The vacancies within the
community colleges are easily accessible on the MTA Bulletin
Board System (BBS) (1-800-523- 8883). You can read, download, and/or
print these vacancies at your terminal. If you do not have access to
a modem, a printout can be faxed to you. Fax your request to the
Communications Coordinator at 617- 236-0448. You must include the
name of the college(s) where you work.
|
Mar. 5 |
Leave of absence applications due |
|
Mar. 15 |
Title change recommendations due from dean |
|
Mar. 15 |
Unit Personnel Practices Committee and administrative recommendations for tenure |
|
Mar. 30 |
Department chair evaluation |
|
Mar. 30 |
Preferred schedule and courses submitted by faculty |
|
Mar. 31 |
Department chair vacancies announced |
|
Catherine A. Boudreau MCCC/MTA Newsletter |
The MCCC Newsletter is a publication of the Massachusetts Community College Council. The Newsletter is intended to be an information source for the members of the MCCC and for other interested parties. The material in this publication may be reprinted with the acknowledgment of its source. For further information on issues discussed in this publication, contact Catherine Boudreau, Massasoit Community College, Brockton, MA 02402. |
 TOP of NEWSLETTER |
|
|
|
|