By Fran Chandler

On September 11 the District was served with an unfair labor practice charge for failing to bargain a schedule change that could extend the work day for many faculty. The change, announced by District Vice President Randy Lawson at a meeting of the Department Chairs, would have abolished the 11 a.m. activity hour on Tuesdays and Thursdays, beginning Spring 1999. The department chairs were told to duplicate the Monday-Wednesday schedule, on which afternoon classes begin at 12:45 rather than at 12 noon.

As a result, all faculty club advisors as well as all Association and Senate officers, committee chairs, and elected departmental representatives and senators who have meetings almost every Tuesday and Thursday would have had to begin their afternoon classes 45 minutes later than what they are able to do currently.

Some fear this change would prevent many faculty from fulfilling their professional responsibilities by participating in the Senate and the Association meetings which are scheduled through June 1999. As stated by one faculty member, "What incentive would there be for me to continue donating my time in meetings while the rest of the faculty in my department are getting paid to teach courses and go home early."

Further frustration has been expressed by faculty who say their 11 a.m. T/Th office hours are prime times to meet with students. Classified staff have said that computer labs are mobbed with students at 11 a.m. because that is the only time many labs do not have classes scheduled in them.

While there are, no doubt, many employees and students who are in favor of the change because it would help alleviate the shortage of rooms on the main campus and because it would increase the District's per pupil compensation for FTE (full-time equivalent student), the impact on our already over-crowded parking lots must also be considered.

The unfair charge, filed with the California Public Employee Relations Board (PERB), requests that PERB order that the Activity Period be restored and grant other relief as PERB deems proper. The Faculty Association wants the District (a) to meet its obligation under the Rodda Act to bargain such a change in working hours with the Faculty Association and (b) to meet its Education Code-mandated shared governance obligation to consult with and rely upon the advice of the Academic Senate, the Association, students, and classified staff on such matters.

Reacting to strong opposition to the proposed time change, Dr. Robertson has announced the postponement of the schedule change until Fall 1999. In addition, her memorandum, sent to the College's Coordinating Council, stated that the one-semester experiment would be for a full year. In addition, she announced the appointment of a task force (with no indication of who would do the appointing) of the various constituencies (not specified) chaired by two District vice presidents and charged with making a recommendation (about what? the schedule change she announced would definitely start next year?). Note: As of this writing, the Association has not been contacted by the District to participate on this task force although the Academic Senate and the Classified Senate have been asked to appoint participants.

They just don't get it, do they? This administration is clueless about shared governance and the processes mandated by AB1725 ten years ago. They appear to be no less cognizant or respectful of their responsibilities in the collective bargaining arena as established by the Rodda Act.

However, you may be sure that until they do finally "get a clue" the Faculty Association will continue to drive the point home.

People in administration are wondering what shared governance means. First of all, it means NO SURPRISES! No surprise, costly administrative reorganizations, no new buildings being purchased, no secret negotiations about teaching SMC classes out of the country, no hiding of information. NO SURPRISES! -Teri Bernstein