Massachusetts Community College Council

NEWSLETTER

Volume XV

June, 1998

Number Nine

NEA Annual Meeting

Delegates to Vote on Unification

This year's NEA Representative Assembly (RA) could be a rendezvous with history. After a discussion encompassing four years, the delegates to this year's annual meeting will vote on a set of principles designed to merge the two national teachers' unions&endash;the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT).

Massachusetts has been especially lucky through these negotiations and deliberations. Ernest Therrien from Springfield Technical Community College and a former NEA Director from Massachusetts has been the only classroom teacher to sit on the negotiating team What follows in an analysis of the Principles of Unity and this four-year process summarized by Therrien.

The 1995 Representative Assembly adopted a New Business item that stated, in part, "the NEA reaffirms its longstanding goal of uniting all education employees in a single national organization . That goal was not merely to create a larger entity; rather, it was to build an organization which would protect, promote, and advance the cause of public education more effectively than current structures and processes allow.

Soon, in an historic moment for both the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, the delegates of the 1998 Representative Assembly will vote on the Principles of Unity, which if adopted, would bring the NEA and AFT together in a United Organization.

The Principles of Unity have evolved from more than four years of deliberations. Their development was guided by existing structures and traditions, yet they are more inclusive and democratic than the current governance documents of either national organization. They expand membership and representation rights of all constituencies, including higher education. The latter would have a direct voice in the governance of the United Organization by means of its own Advisory Council and guaranteed representation on the Leadership Council. Unification of the NEA and AFT would double higher education's membership within a single organization. Greater numbers and a unified voice would then strengthen higher education at both national and local levels, improving its ability to develop a national strategy in dealing with attacks on tenure, abuse of part-time faculty, collective bargaining rights, etc.

The Principles of Unity have received the unanimous support of the NEA Executive Committee, eighty percent support of the NCSEA (the national organization of state presidents and vice presidents), and a two-thirds vote of support from the NEA Board of Directors. In addition the Principles are receiving widespread support from state and local affiliates, including the unanimous support of the MCCC Board of Directors.

Unification Talks

During the unification talks, affiliates of the NEA and AFT were urged to forego membership raiding and to engage in cooperative endeavors to strengthen public education. This state of affairs, however, cannot be maintained indefinitely. Separate organizations will inevitably compete, and the costly representational wars of the past will undoubtedly resume. Between 1973 and 1992, the NEA spent $52 million in representational battles with the AFT. The state affiliates spent approximately $60 million. Ironically, the change in membership affiliation resulting from these costly representational challenges was marginal. Is this an effective use of resources? Does this use of resources promote and advance the cause of public education?

Enemies of public higher education are unified. Higher education members across the national must also unify. Unification will provide the means to develop more effective strategies for the new millennium, a necessity if public education is to thrive and if social and economic justice are to be achieved within our nation. Ernest Therrien.

Three Percent Raise in July

A three percent raise is due to all full and part-time day faculty and professional staff on July 1, 1998. This three percent represents the raise that came with the oneyear contract extension that was ratified on February 12, 1998. All hourly-wage employees in the MCCC unit will also receive a three percent increase.

Because of the ongoing classification study, the MCCC ratified a one-year contract extension so that there would be no crossover between the classification study and negotiations for a successor collective bargaining agreement. The classification came out of the last round of negotiations with the MCCC and the Board of Higher Education agreeing to withhold three and one-half percent from the 1995-1998 agreement and use that money for commissioning a classification study and funding the results.

Since the collective bargaining increases for all state employees will now be funded from a reserve account, the Board of Higher Education had to file a request with the legislature to fund the increases through a supplemental budget. The request has been received by the state Clerk's Office, and the MCCC and MTA are following this bill. Because the increase is not payable until the new fiscal year, it has to be funded in a supplemental budget for fiscal 1999. Since the legislature ends its formal session on July 3 1, 1998, the funding must be completed by middle of July, Regardless of when the money moves, all increases are retroactive to July 1, 1998.

Committees of the MCCC

Dear MCCC Unit Members:

Last year, the Board felt it was time to reevaluate the MCCC's organization and business practices so as to improve the way we operate and respond to members' needs in a changing and challenging environment. We undertook an operational audit, and in March the Board of Directors overwhelmingly adopted the recommendations of the Operational Audit Review Committee.

Increasing membership involvement in the MCCC at all levels has been an important goal. The critical variable in this equation is YOU!

New leadership is the life blood of any organization. By diversifying jobs and responsibilities, we are becoming more inclusive, and giving more members an opportunity to participate. Many members are responding to the requests to serve on committees and to provide assistance with specific tasks. Membership activities are more encompassing than ever.

Following is a list of the MCCC Committees with a brief explanation if the committee's structure. Should vou hear a calling to serve the MCCC, no matter how faint, step up and join the talented ranks of vour fellow activists. Please review this list of committees below and submit an application to serve.

Thank you. Susan Dole, MCCC President

Standing Committees of MCCC Bylaws

*Executive Committee:
Composition:	4 MCCC officers and 3 Board members elected by the Board.
Time frame:	annual election at June Board meeting; term of office July to June
Responsibility/ Charge:	to provide direction to the Board and act as grievance committee

Finance Committee:
Composition:	MCCC Treasurer and 5 members
Time frame:	September 1 of appointment year for two-year term of office
Responsibility/ Charge:	to provide equal access and treatment to candidates and to conduct elections

Delegate Assembly Credentials Committee:
Composition:	3 Board members
Time frame:	appointment prior to Delegate Assembly term of office expires at conclusion of said meeting
Responsibility/ Charge:	to pass on credentials, hear appeals on credentials, and establish quorum

Nominations and Elections Committee:
Composition:	3 members
Time frame:	September 30 of appointment year for two-year term of office
Responsibility/ Charge:	to provide equal access and treatment of candidates and to conduct elections.

Bylaws and Rules Committee:
Composition:	5 members
Time frame:	September 1 of appointment year for two-year term of office
Responsibility/ Charge:	to review proposed amendments to the Bylaws and Rules

Personnel Committee:
Composition:	5 members
Time frame:	September 1 of appointment year for two-year term of office
Responsibility/ Charge:	Broadly, to prepare Job descriptions and evaluations and to administer and recommend personnel policies

*Day Negotiations Committee:
Composition:	MCCC President and 15 members, one from each campus
Time frame:	prior to bargaining. Fall, 1998
Responsibility/ Charge:	to develop a survey procedure on contractual priorities and an initial negotiations package

Day Negotiations Team
Composition:	MCCC President and Vice President and minimum of 5 members
Time frame:	a few months prior to negotiations to the expiration date of the agreement
Responsibility/ Charge:	to negotiate with the employer on hours, wages, and conditions of employment

DCE Negotiations Team
Composition:	MCCC President and Vice President and minimum of 5 DCE members
Time frame:	a few months prior to negotiations to the expiration date of the agreement
Responsibility/ Charge:	to negotiate with the employer on hours, wages, and conditions of employment

Joint Study Committee:
Composition:	President and 3 full-time day members
Time frame:	September 1 of appointment year for two-year term of office
Responsibility/ Charge:	to meet with the employer and to try and resolve labor/management issues

Ad Hoc Committees of the Board of Directors

*DCE Grievance Committee
Composition:	DCE Grievance Coordinator as Chair and 15 chapter DCE Grievance Coordinators
Time frame:	September 1 to August 31
Responsibility/ Charge:	Broadly, to provide support, training, and empowerment to DCE Grievance Representatives

Joint Day/DCE Distance Education Bargaining Team
Composition:	MCCC Vice President as Chair; MTA Consultant as Spokesperson: 2 representatives from the Day Negotiating Team and 2 representatives from the DCE Negotiating Team
Time frame:	September 1997 to completion of charge
Responsibility/ Charge:	to negotiate an agreement with the college presidents on the issue of distance education

Structure of Collective Bargaining Process Committee
Composition:	1 representative of the current Day Negotiating Team; 1 representative of the current DCE Negotiating Team; 1 mem ber of the Executive Committeez; 1 mem ber of the Board; and 1 MCCC past president
Time frame:	January 1997 to completion of charge
Responsibility/ Charge:	to review alternative models for current negotiating team and committee structures, explore joint bargaining strategy, and develop a process for mid-term bargaining

Policy on Negotiations Committee
Composition:	undetermined
Time frame:	November 1997 to completion of charge
Responsibility/ Charge:	to review and/or clarify organizational policy on negotiations, addressing decisional, impact, and contract bargaining

MCCC Awards Committee
Composition:	2 Board members; 1 chapter president who is not a Board member
Time frame:	March 1998 to completion of charge
Responsibility/ Charge:

Policy Manual Development Committee
Composition:	3-5 members recommended to the Board by the president
Time frame:	September 1998 until completion
Responsibility/ Charge:	to collect, assemble, and publish an MCCC Policy Manual

Membership Survey Committee
Composition:	3-5 members recommended to the Board by the president
Time frame:	September 1998 until completion
Responsibility/ Charge:	to prepare and execute a survey of the entire MCCC membership

Organizational Audit Review Committee Recommended Committee

*Day Grievance Committee
Composition:	Day Grievance Coordinator as Chair; 15 chapter Day Grievance Coordinators
Time frame:	undetermined
Responsibility/ Charge:	Immediately, to develop a work plan to achieve stated goals. Goals include developing a contract training program, broadening the base of experience in contract enforcement, and ultimately certifying grievances for arbitration

Nota Bene

MCCC Delegate Assembly

The MCCC Delegate Assembly will be scheduled for the end of September. MCCC President Susan Dole will notify all chapters at the end of August of the date, time, and place.

Settlement in Child Care Careers Institute

A joint day/DCE settlement was reached with management concerning the STEPS (Serving Teens by Educating Providers Statewide) Program. This agreement allows STEPS to operate within narrow parameters, protects the work of unit members, the integrity of the collective bargaining agreements, and does not serve as a precedent for such ventures in the future. The parties recognize that this program is not intended to divert students from community colleges nor is it intended to substitute its courses for the courses offered by community colleges. The colleges' administrations will not recruit the students for this program. In addition, the colleges will not cease to offer early childhood education courses for the sole reason that the courses are available through the Child Care Careers institute but will cease participation in the program prior to initiating the retrenchment of an Early Childhood full-time faculty member. The MCCC reserves the right to bargain over any impact that may arise from the participation in this program. This resolution settles an MCCC day unit unfair labor practice charge and unit determination petition and a DCE unit arbitration and an unfair labor practice charge.

This dispute arose when the Child Care Career Institute approached a number of public and private colleges and universities to participate in a state funded program to train child care workers. The arrangement called for the organization to pay a general fee and $60 per credit to the colleges that, in turn, would allow the STEPS Program to award college credit for courses offered by this Institute. Students would enroll in the program and then determine the particular college from which their credit would be awarded. The instructors are hired by the Institute and are not considered employees of the college. As a result, there is virtually no academic oversight by the colleges other than approving the course description.

Originally, the colleges participating in this program were Berkshire, Bristol, Massasoit, Middlesex, No. Shore, No. Essex, and Quinsigamond, However, No. Essex, Bristol, and Middlesex have ceased participation. At No. Essex the arrangement has been changed so that it is consistent with our collective bargaining agreement and ensures academic oversight. The college now treats these courses as DCE contract courses, and the instructors are MCCC unit members.

Although this settlement resolves along standing disagreement relative to contractual and unit determination issues, the matter of the academic integrity of the STEPS Program remains unresolved. Even when good intentions and educational accessibility are the motives, do the ends justify the means? The most salient question still remains. Should a college sell its credit granting authority to another organization that is not so certified?

Have You Visited the MCCC Web Page?

Take a stroll through the MCCC Web Page at http//:www.tiac.net/users/mccc that MCCC Vice President Phil Mahler has created and maintains. He has done a superlative job. It has taken countless hours to collect the information let alone do the layout. You can read the read the bylaws, look at old MCCC Newsletters, view the committee structure, get information on upcoming events, and much more. Take a moment and stop by. You will enjoy the high quality of the MCCC's page. If you would like to e-mail Phil Mahler, you can do it either through our web site or at mahlerp@middlesex.cc.ma.us. The MTA's web page address, that has a link to the MCCC's, is www.massteacher.org

Classification Study

The individual interviews with professional staff will end on June 26, 1998. These interviews, held across the state, have gone very well. At the next meeting of the classification committee, the MCCC Team anticipates that Griffiths will have some preliminary information on the faculty component of the study. The responses from the faculty and professional staff on getting their questionnaire completed has been excellent. To date, only about 30 are outstanding.

The MCCC Board voted to hire a consultant to work with the Classification Team if it appears that a certain expertise will be needed to shepherd the results of this study through the bureaucratic red tape that is inextricably tied to the process when money is involved.

When our last contract (1995-1998) was completed and the MCCC and the members were speaking to legislators about the funding, the classification piece was also discussed. Both Charles Baker, Secretary of Administration and Finance and Chancellor Stanley Koplik agreed that this study was needed in the community colleges. On December 12 1995, Baker wrote to a number of state representatives that, "In the long run, this [the classification study] will make it easier to compare Mass. Faculty salaries with salaries in other states, and will bring additional salary support to faculty members who have been inappropriately treated by the existing system."

Both Baker and Koplik wrote that they supported the funding of the results of the classification analysis.

On July 8, 1998, there will be a meeting with Griffiths at which time the MCCC will have an indication of the breadth and scope of the faculty component of the study. The entire study must be completed by the end of August at which time the MCCC has 45 days to bargain over the proposed changes or recommendations.

June 15	Professional Staff summary evaluations due
June 15	Part time faculty student evaluations due
June 15	Sabbaticals request to Sabbatical Leave Committee
June 24	Professional staff summary evaluation rebuttals due
June 27	Professional staff post evaluation conferences (for 1997-1998)
July 1	Professional staff pre-evaluation conference (for 1998-1999)
July 1	Professional staff work assignment received
July 15	Professional staff vacation days released
July 15	Sabbatical Committee recommendations
Aug. 4	Part-time teaching assignments due
Aug. 27	Earliest a professional day can be assigned

N.B. Dates may vary depending on first day of classes. Also, most of these dates are "last date" standards. In many instances, the action can he accomplished before the date indicated.