In This Issue:

Distance Ed Agreement Signed 403(b) TSA Plans Permitted In Memoriam Classification Update

Letters to the Editor Editorial Return to Delta Dental

Distance Ed Agreement Signed

Twenty-five percent of higher education faculty nationwide are currently engaged in distance education modalities, according to a National Education Association study reported in the October 1998 Advocate.

As early as 1993-95 the MCCC had been involved in impact bargaining with Cape Cod and Bristol CC regarding innovations in video courses and development of Pic-Tel technology in conjunction with UMass Dartmouth. (See October 1996 MCCC Newsletter) With BHE seed monies, videoconferencing consortiums and other permutations of distance learning mushroomed across the state in the mid-90's.

This accelerating emergence of the new teaching technologies in the Commonwealth's community colleges, and the proliferation of contractual issues they entail, led to the formation, in 1996, of a Joint Distance Education Committee representing the MCCC, and the college presidents. The discussions and recommendations of this committee were reported in 1997, and the committee then moved into a negotiation phase leading to the Distance Education Agreement signed in September of 1998 by representatives of both parties.

With Joseph Rizzo as chairperson, Timothy Trask of Massasoit, Will Roberts of Greenfield, Vincent Yacavone of Springfield Technical CC, James Bradley of Northern Essex, Charles Shairs of Bunker Hill CC, MCCC Day Grievance Coordinator Dennis Fitzgerald, and MTA Consultants Michelle Gallagher and Dan Donahue represented the MCCC on the Labor /Management Distance Education Committee.

Chairperson MCCC VP Phil Mahler, Rick Doud of Middlesex CC, James Bradley of NECC, DCE Grievance Coordinator Joseph Rizzo and NITA Consultant Michelle Gallagher constituted the MCCC Joint Day/DCE Distance Education Bargaining Team in the negotiation phase.

The resulting five-page document establishes guidelines for compensation, intellectual property, class size, student access, and faculty participation and evaluation. Points of the agreement follow...

Day division Course Assignment - Distance education course assignments shall be compensated as a part of the regular workload and salary of a day division faculty or professional staff member.

DCE Course Assignment - Distance education course assignments shall be compensated in accordance with the per credit rate in the DCE collective bargaining agreement.

Course Adaptation - Preparation of course materials has always been, and will continue to be part of the contractual and professional responsibility of a faculty member assigned to teach. In recognition, however, of the potential for labor-intensive effort which may be required to adapt a course to a distance education mode, including any training required to do so, those duties with regard to distance education courses shall either be incorporated into the regular workload of a day division faculty or professional staff member by either course reduction or reduction in noninstructional duties, or the payment of a stipend or both. The form of compensation shall be at the option of the College.

Should the College offer a stipend for course adaptation and included training, without any workload reduction, the stipend shall be no less than $500 per credit for the course being adapted to the instructional mode. Should the stipend be offered in conjunction with workload reduction, the stipend will be no less than $250 per credit.

Intellectual property rights - Ownership is addressed in section VIII in terms of college and commercial use. If the college pays for an adaptation with either stipend or work reduction, it may use the materials for three years with another teacher(s) for a three year period for $500, renewable three times. If materials developed by a faculty with college compensation achieve commercial value, the net proceeds will be split 50/50 between the author and the college, unless negotiated otherwise.

Class size - The first two offerings of a distance ed. offering are limited to 25 students, with an ultimate cap governed by provisions of the collective bargaining agreement. Enrollment is determined by the aggregate number of students, regardless of sites, enrolled in the section.

Evaluation - No evaluation in either Day or DCE sections occurs during those first two offerings.

Participation - Distance education involvement is voluntary. Participating faculty are required to file a student access plan for all distance ed. offerings detailing their availability to students that may include office hours, e-mail and phone number.

Maintenance -A statewide implementation committee, with representatives of the MCCC and the employer, will deal with programs in progress and develop evaluation instruments appropriate for distance education faculty. The agreement mandates local distance education committees to allow appropriate MCCC input into opportunities and initiatives at the fifteen community colleges.

Joe Rizzo, queried about the significance of the agreement responds, "It is a good start that preserves the principles we entered the negotiations committed to maintain. It may also be viewed as an opportunity for members to engage in an interesting new medium of instruction with some piece of mind concerning their rights. They may also be able to earn a bit additional to their regular salary while having a stimulating and challenging experience".

Recognizing the distance education landscape continues to evolve, the Agreement concludes, "The parties to this agreement recognize that technology is advancing rapidly, and the current systems experience with various forms of forms of distance education is limited. Therefore, the parties agree to reopen negotiations on the terms of this agreement upon the request of either party after June, 2000."

The MCCC has appointed Joseph Rizzo to lead its Statewide Distance Education Implementation Team, also including Louise Deutsch from Cape Cod CC, and Peter Flynn from Northern Essex CC, and MTA Consultant Michelle Gallagher as spokesperson.

Joe Rizzo and Michelle Gallagher are preparing a pamphlet, which will summarize and clarify the agreement and provide formulae for calculating compensation for permutations of credit, hour, and preparation. Contact Joe at m3c-dce@msn.com, or 603-898-6309 with questions about the agreement. The full text of the agreement is posted on the MCCC Web page (http:// www.tiac.net/users/mccc).

403(b) TSA Plans Permitted

Massachusetts teachers, college faculty and other eligible education employees are the beneficiaries of a state income tax change initiated by Rep. Thomas J. O'Brien (D-Kingston).

Chapter 175 (Section 8) of the Acts of 1998, signed into law July 21, permits education employees to purchase Tax-Sheltered Annuity (TSA) plans, more commonly known as 403(b) retirement plans, on a "pre-tax" basis. A 403(b) plan, so named because it is part of the federal tax code, is the public school and public college equivalent of the 401(k) plans for private sector employees.

Both plans enable an employee to deduct up to $10,000 annually from gross income before federal income taxes are calculated. Before Chapter 175, only contributions to private sector 401(k) plans were deductible from the 5.95% Massachusetts state income tax. Now public school employees can use up to $595 annually, previously deducted as state taxes, for further investment or other purposes. This tax deduction is retroactive to January 1, 1998. In filing 1998 state income tax forms next year, affected educators should check instructions in order to properly exclude their 403(b) contributions for 1998 from state taxable income. Questions on how your employer will implement the law should be addressed to your campus Personnel Officer. If they have not heard about this latest change in the tax treatment of your 403(b) plans, they should be advised to contact the Massachusetts Department of Revenue for guidance.

"While most may reinvest the amount saved, the magnitude of the savings can be seen when many members realize that it more than pays for their combined NEA, MTA and local association dues" says MTA lobbyist Jack Flannagan. (for full original text: http://massteacher.org/hot/Taxchange.html )

In Memoriam

Margaret (Duggan) Ryckebusch, a professor of Speech and English at Bristol Community College, died on October 14, 1998. Margaret had come to Bristol with a B.A. from Stonehill and a Masters in English Literature from Boston College 30 years ago. When she retired in June 1998 she had been chair of the Department of Modern Languages, Fine Arts, and Humanities for almost a decade.

Throughout her nearly 20 years of involvement in the MCCC, Margaret was recognized as someone who cared deeply about peoples' rights and their dignity. She not only spoke openly and passionately on issues, but she expressed her ideals with bumper stickers and buttons on her jackets. Her '89 Chevy Blazer represented her politics. No one was ever at a loss to understand how Margaret felt. She believed that political activism was the way of ensuring a quality life for everyone.

At Bristol Margaret worked closely with the college administration to build a relationship of trust. Margaret was chapter president from 1982-1986 and a co-president from 1992 to 1994. She had served on the MCCC Board since 1990 and the Executive Committee for two years. Her closest friend and union colleague from Bristol, Joe Murphy, said, "She gave the chapter and the college clear information, a clear sense of purpose, and the spirit of determination."

Her political activism for local candidates was expansive. She was a member of the AFL/CIO Labor Council at U.Mass Dartmouth, and she worked tirelessly for candidates for the state House and Senate who supported public higher education. Tom Parsons, former MCCC President, worked the closest with Margaret on political action for the MCCC, said, "I could always count on Margaret to get her members involved. Whether it was a political campaign or an MCCC activity, Margaret's passion and energy would elevate the participation of her members. The MCCC and the community colleges have lost an extraordinary woman."

On October 14, 1998 a rare disease, amyloidosis, ended the life of this rare woman.

Eileen Farley, president of Bristol Community College said, "Margaret was always passionate and wholehearted in everything she did. As a result, she was an outstanding teacher and an outstanding union leader."

Donations in her memory may be made to the BCC Foundation -The Margaret Ryckebusch Faculty Development Fund. written by Cathy Boudreau

Classification

Verification Process Nearly Complete

written by Cathy Boudreau

The professional staff are in the process of returning their verification sheets to each college's Human Resource Office. Once the verification process is completed, the consultants, DMG, will begin the process of finalizing its report. The tentative schedule provides for an interim faculty report by the middle of November with a final report by the beginning of December. The interim report for professional staff is due at the beginning of December with a final report due by the end of December. Both interim reports will be embargoed for ten days. In addition, DMG will be sending to all professional staff members a "Classification Specification" sheet that will outline the general duties of each job category. This is not to be confused with individuals job responsibilities as outlined in their E-7's.

After receipt of both interim reports, the MCCC, BHE, and presidents' representatives will review and analyze the information used to create this study and will be provided the opportunity to make additions, deletions, or changes. By the beginning of January 1999 DMG will deliver its final classification report.

The MCCC, with the assistance of the MTA, will be working with a classification specialist to help the MCCC Team analyze the classification study results. Once the parties receive the final report, the MCCC will have 45 days to bargain over the impact of the recommendations.

Editorial Comment

Subtleties of the Workload Issue

written by Peter Flynn

Forty years ago high minded appointees of His Excellency Foster Furcolo sat around a table and banged Out a workload formulation for faculty in Massachusetts's version of the public community colleges which were sprouting across the United States. Likely the job description fixed upon was modeled on that of faculty in the super-successful, overburdened four year state colleges established as two year schools at the turn of the century to train teachers for the demands of universal public education.

These early planners must have included academics who recognized the numbing and de-professionalizing effects grinding out fifteen teaching hours would inevitably have on scholars. They decided to require instructors to carry four three-credit hour courses, and to codify the balance of the workload as a mix of advising, office hours, obligatory meetings and community and college service.

This rule-of-thumb standard workload has provisions for adaptation to four credit science lab courses, English composition classes demanding heavy and detailed composition correction and rewrites, and other extraordinary course structures. It allows for additional workload to prepare new "from scratch" courses and consideration for the increased work in preparing several, rather than two, preparations.

The majority of community colleges around the country have shorter, less detailed contracts that define workload more simply in terms of fifteen classroom hours. Close reading of these contracts finds stipulated class sizes are smaller, closer to a standard of 25, rather than our 35, maximum students per class. The actual faculty/ student ratio translates from the 15 hour a week New York State community college contracts to be exactly the same as our Massachusetts contract. Additionally we have found that, although there are some folks in other systems who actually teach fifteen hours, very many receive course reductions in exchange for any and all committee work, advisement of student activities, producing college publications, professional development activity, and community service. These are activities we are contractually obligated to perform as "community and college service" (recorded each semester on contractually stipulated C.C.S.P.D. forms).

James Carlin, waving a red flag woven by Pioneer Institute types on the BHE is representing faculty as underperforming based on slanted and selective descriptions of workload. His success is reflected in a January 16^th 1998 Globe editorial by usually thoughtful David Nyhan. In that editorial Nyhan regurgitated uncritically all the pap of Carlin floated at the Boston Chamber of Commerce speech in December. We have, you see, free parking spaces, health club memberships, discounted lunches... and free tuition for our progeny. No matter that tuition is less than 20% of the expense of sending our scholar away to a public university.

In the mid-seventies the legislature of the Commonwealth put Public Law 150E. in effect requiring faculty and professional staff, and other units of 'common interest" to select a collective bargaining agent. After we selected the Massachusetts Community College Council, the existing workload descriptions and exceptions became contractually crystallized, and like salaries, subject to negotiation. Managers obtusely complain; "the union won't let faculty teach at night". Working conditions are valuable elements of the contractual formula. Asking a workforce average age past fifty to ratify a change to working evenings might be a difficult and or expensive negotiation.

... Which is a segue to another problem with this demand to shift to a fifteen-hour class week. The current work force ("aging" as Nyhan inserts in a listing of faculty faults) is past the midpoint of its career, and entrenched in its ways. Straw polls reveal little interest in increasing credit hours regardless of compensation adjustments. The lowest paid of community college faculty in ten industrialized states, we nevertheless have mortgages, college tuitions, and car payments budgeted. Additionally many have developed alternate sources of income supplementation, which are richer than the likely offer to buy an increased teaching load. And finally, but significantly, negotiation history suggests what the Commonwealth might offer now in compensation, will be recouped by niggardly future contract compensation adjustments.

Another aspect of the negotiation that cannot be neglected is non-teaching workload. Should the bargaining result in a shift to a 15 classroom-hour contract, which elements of the non-teaching workload would be eliminated? Wouldn't the college need to buy back non teaching services with course reductions as appears to be the practice in state systems with fifteen hour teaching contracts?

Administrations of each community college have set up advising centers in the last eighteen months or so. The development of these centers is apparently in preparation to leverage working condition negotiations. The centers themselves are more essential than other administrative initiatives in student support. They remedy the "registry of motor vehicles" experience of the colleges' registration and enrollment processes. They do the part of advising that faculty never handled very well. Why doesn't Intro to Humanities count as a Humanities elective? Will Merrimack transfer my Abnormal Psychology if I'm not majoring in psychology? Faculty have always been most effective in advising students majoring in their particular discipline. The advising center cannot substitute for an engineering professor or a film instructor in advising students aspiring to those respective vocations.

If MSCA negotiations are indicative, the employer's agenda will be to erase any vestiges of entitlement in college governance from our contract, codifying the de facto co-option of governance by administration in recent years.

English Composition faculty will skewer me if I fail to mention the importance of accommodating the need to cap the overall reading-grading load associated with effectively teaching these courses should the fifteen hour standard item become tenable. The current maximum of students per semester carried by 'comp' instructors would need to be distributed across more sections. (same number of students in more meeting hours).

A minority of faculty has regularly taught DCE courses of necessity to supplement salaries shrunken in buying power. Workload redefinition could mean significant pay increase and improvement in their positions toward retirement without changing substantially their actual teaching hours.

Administration is aware of the problems they'll face if the contractual classroom hours are increased to fifteen. Fewer DCE sections will dramatically decrease the colleges' lucrative source of discretionary income, and retrenchment in divisions suffering low enrollments could mean the loss of the recent hires, retraining programs, and general chaos.

Like the gubernatorial debates, discussion of workload has generated more heat than light. Superficial formulation as more work for more dough ignores systemic ramifications. Carlin has insisted he alone will be at the table for the employer. Who, then, shall inform him of the subtleties?

Letters to the editor are welcome, and will be printed as space and relevance permits. Author and school must accompany each piece. Electronic format favored.