Bargaining Update #9

With this Bargaining Update, we want to give you a more detailed update on where we currently stand, especially as we are at the main stage of discussions on compensation.

When we started our negotiations, based on surveys, general membership meetings, bargaining retreats, subcommittee feedback, as well as input from Departmental meetings, we came up with a set of core demands that reflected our members’ most important concerns. These included:

1. Adequate and fair compensation, especially considering our concessions over the last few years with low raises and the recent high inflationary pressures.

2. Flexible work arrangements that would be ensured in contractual language.

3. Keeping health care costs (premiums, copays, deductibles) in check.

4. A cost-of-living adjustment provision.

5. Bargaining for the common good by addressing student housing emergencies. 

6. Changes to language in certain articles.

We have been meeting regularly as a team since last August and bargaining in earnest since March 8 this year, and here is a general update on where we are today.

Contract extension: The current Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) expired June 30, 2024. An extension is in place until July 31, 2024. Additional extensions will occur as we move forward.

Articles: Of the 37 articles in the current contract, we have reached Tentative Agreements (TAs) on some 30 of them (note that these only take effect once the contract is ratified). The TA’d articles will be posted online shortly, watch your email for a link or check the Bargaining Blog. These articles reflect those in which there was no change, minor changes, or, in some cases, major changes. We are in the final exchanges on Articles XIII and XX. This will leave Articles XII and XXIV (Compensation and Professional Duties) to deal with as the last ones. We will provide a summary of the changes in these Articles as we finalize them, but here are a few highlights:

• Academic Freedom: We have incorporated a statement on academic freedom into the contract based on guidelines from the American Association of University Professors (AAUP).

• Flexible Work Arrangements (FWA): After many weeks of back-and-forth discussion, we have agreed on language, which will constitute a new article in the contract. The article will only become final once both sides agree to a final compensation package.

• Bargaining for the Common Good: We proposed language for a new article and provided the administration with a framework for how we would jointly administer a program that would assist students facing housing insecurities while attending the University. Administration proposed a committee with various stakeholders to study this over the next year. We countered with a proposal that would allow the work to start more immediately as a pilot program, with a review after an initial period. We also proposed modest funding from the University for this purpose. We await the administration’s response. 

• Non-Tenure Track Faculty Non-Renewal Notices: The Administration proposed that non-tenure track faculty would get shorter notices of non-renewal than negotiated in the last contract. We have pushed back on this and are close to a tentative agreement that would maintain adequate notice of non-renewal and increase contract lengths. 

• Academic Staff: We added clarifying language in Articles XX and XXI for ESS transfers between units and created an opportunity in Article XX, for time to count, when moving from a subsidy to an ESS-track position.

Compensation and Health Care

Our initial ask for compensation increases was for average raises of about 8.5% each year for three years. In an effort to improve inequities in income, we also proposed that the raises be based on a banded system with 5 salary ranges (salary bands). By this method, lower wage earners would see a greater percentage increase in their raises compared to raises for our high wage earners, even though higher wage earners would still receive substantial and higher dollar amounts for their raises.

We also asked for a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) of 1.5% to 4% to help with inflation, proposed increases to the amounts received for promotion, requested to keep the childcare subsidy pool, argued to move existing FWA policy language into the contract, and proposed a program to help address student housing insecurities and housing emergencies for the Common Good. All this would result in the University investing some $40 million into its major asset — us — its faculty and academic staff.

So far, we have received three different proposals from the administration, all of which have rejected COLA, lowered our proposed raises substantially, and added new costs tied to health insurance. Regarding health insurance, the administration has argued that based on its projections, health care costs will be going up substantially and that they need to pass some of those increases to us. 

Although it is likely that health insurance costs to the University will increase, it is still entirely unclear what the actual increases will be and what the University will be able to negotiate with providers. As your team, we have been trying everything to minimize health care related increases, including meeting with industry experts. 

The administration’s first proposal was a compensation package that offered average raises of 3% across salary bands, included some merit raises (as a bonus in the first year and additions to base in years 2 and 3), increases to promotion amounts starting in 2025, agreement on FWA, and a childcare subsidy pool of $160,000 a year. This proposal also included increases in premiums, increased deductibles, increased copays, increased prescription drug costs, and a new idea, coinsurance. The latter would mean that members would be responsible for 10% of the costs above their deductibles up to a fixed dollar amount ($6,350) after which their insurance would cover everything. We rejected this proposal.

In our counter, we offered lower raises of 8.1% and lowered our COLA demands to a maximum of 3%. We also rejected all health care cost increases.

The administration’s second proposal increased average raises to 3.5%, rejected COLA, dropped coinsurance, copays and prescription drug costs, but kept deductibles which would now go up five-fold. Premiums would be decided later in the year, and we would have no say over them. The proposal no longer had merit or increases to promotion amounts. It still had the childcare subsidy pool and FWA. We rejected this proposal but were willing to discuss it further if deductibles could be removed from the discussion, if we could have some clarity on premiums, and if a one-time bonus of $3,000 could be part of the mix.

The administration's third proposal had essentially the same pieces as before, but now included an average raise of about 3.4%, rejected COLA, but offered a one-time bonus of 0.5% of a member’s salary. Additionally, deductibles would still increase five-fold, but the increase would be spread over three years as opposed to two as in their earlier proposal. This proposal also included FWA and childcare, but no merit or raises in the promotion amounts.

These discussions on compensation have taken a month.

In all the proposals, University administration has committed a total of only $18-19 million over three years in continuing money, representing across the board raises (and does not include one–time bonuses or monies that are not added to base). The administration has also proposed different salary bands (less than 100k, 100k-180k, more than 180k) to what we had proposed (less than 70k, 70k-100k, 100k-130k, 130k-220k, more than 220k).  

We are about to submit our latest counter which will include raises in line with our original salary bands, increases in promotion amounts, increase in childcare subsidy amounts, meaningful bonuses, and FWA. We will also counter that any discussion on healthcare needs to be based on actual numbers as opposed to projections, although premiums remain an important issue (based on our CBA, the University covers 70% of the costs while the members pick up 30% — in 2024, these figures are roughly $19.9 million and $7.4 million, respectively).

If we are to get meaningful raises, the University administration must commit more money than it has been willing to so far. Its original budget had raises of 3% with a total compensation commitment of about $19 million, and in all the variations of offers they have made to us in these negotiations, they have stayed very close to what they had initially budgeted. The University budget would have to be changed and increased in order to reach the fair compensation package we are demanding. We are still far apart.

In the midst of all this, the Board of Governors approved the University budget for 2024-2025 based on the 3% raises for personnel that the administration has always budgeted. It should be noted, however, that the Governors entered into the record a statement that an amicable Collective Bargaining Agreement with WAU would allow for an amendment of the budget.

Merit raises, retirement, other items:

So far, we have agreed in principle, or are close to agreement to set up joint committees to look at a) the merit process, so as to bring it in line with other institutions where merit is rewarded in a meaningful way, b) retirement benefits and early retirement incentives, c) return to duties following long-term disability leaves with an acknowledgment that with advances in modern medicine, recovering from conditions that seem impossible are not only possible, but more likely. One item we would like to discuss is a committee to look at future health care costs and coverage given how things are changing in the health care industry.

We are not sure how much longer our bargaining with the administration will take. We certainly hope that we are in the final stages of negotiations, but we remain substantially apart in amounts for raises, and health care issues still loom. A number of entities have a stake in seeing a resolution to our contract negotiations, but we are bargaining for the best interests of our 1,684 members and roughly 1,200 union members who will vote on the final contract. Your continued support will be invaluable as we continue working toward the best possible contract for everyone.