By Teri Bernstein

The Negotiating Council has brainstormed lately about the possibility of accepting the District’s offer, or of trying for a one year contract, but in good faith, we can’t. The District’s offer is unconscionably low. They obscure the hideously low value of their offer by making promises for the future. But here is a breakdown of what they are offering faculty for the 98-99 school year.

[As you read this, please remember that the District is receiving more than 13% in additional unrestricted money this year]:

Has the District forgotten something? Teaching faculty are the REVENUE PRODUCERS. We’ve deserve our fair share of the money we bring in. How does the Board justify allocating so little to faculty?

Don’t forget we’ve fallen from 5th in the state to 20th in the state in terms of salary ranking. Our average class size (40) is well above the State average (26). And part time faculty now teach 51.3% of our sections, increasing the work load per full time faculty member. How can we “just say yes” to a District proposal that offers so little?

If the District is dead-set on only paying us the equivalent of a 2.4% raise, they should be willing to put part of their windfall on the table for other items. But they have refused to let part time faculty maintain their benefits if their assignment shifts from semesters to intersessions. And they spit in the face of faculty nearing retirement by refusing to extend even the possibility of a golden handshake. Part time faculty have lost a year of state-subsidized office hours. And, if we were to settle now, department chairs would lose forever the possibility of this year’s intersession pay counting toward retirement.

Moreover, the District has unilaterally reclassified to administration several faculty positions, and they just want them removed from the contract, without giving up a thing--not even the dollars attached to the positions. They’ve also radically changed our working conditions for 99-00 by eliminating an activity hour, without bringing the change to the bargaining table to “trade” it for something we requested.

In addition, they are flagrantly violating the 50% law, spending less than the legal minimum on faculty salaries. To make the calculation work for this year, they have to spend at least as much additional money on faculty as they are spending additionally on administration plus classified plus consultants plus supplies. Plus make up for prior year deficits. They just aren’t doing it. It is beyond our comprehension why they don’t want to settle the lawsuit we’ve filed to force compliance. How do they think they are going to get away with spending so little of their new money on faculty?

We can’t settle for this. We just can’t. Especially since we haven’t tried everything yet. We have to hang in through impasse and fact finding, the 50% lawsuit, and the PERB unfair labor practice cases. We have yet to pursue any job action, or expose in the press or to the local politicians and business owners much of what we have discovered.

2.4%? NO. the District can afford more.

If they can afford new administrative positions, increased expense accounts, new buildings, repeat remodeling, junkets to South Africa and more, they can afford part time office hours, increased part-time benefits, department chair and coordinator improvements, and they can give us retroactivity to the beginning of the academic year.