What Has the Union Done for You Lately?
by Barbara Hanfling, Executive Director, FA, AFT 6157

Saving Sabbaticals

Who would think that our Sabbaticals would need saving. They are part of our collective bargaining agreement; the PRC (Professional Recognition Committee made up of: faculty: Chair: Michael Divinia, Joseph King, Sterling Warner, Joy Chase, Martha Hardin and Pat Nguyen, (and administrators Pat Gerster, Jonathon King and Maricela Disch) determine by the contract which sabbaticals are granted based on their merit only.

2003 History

Believe it or not, the Union had to rescue Sabbaticals again. Why again, because in 2003, under the leadership of Mike Hill and Geri Evans, the District tried to take away our sabbaticals by taking them off the consent agenda and deciding that due to budget constraints, Sabbaticals would not be granted. In 2003 the Union immediately requested a legal analysis and of course the attorney stated correctly that:

1. Sabbaticals are a bargainable part of the contract, they cannot be unilaterally changed.

2. That the PRC made the decisions whether or not a sabbatical would be granted. The President, Chancellor and Board could determine based on the merits of the application that there was more information needed or a more in depth analysis for the Sabbatical should be presented.

3. That case law was clearly on the Union’s side that sabbaticals could not be eliminated based on economic conditions. The courts had ruled that contracts and in particular programs that may enhance the education and pedagogical expertise of faculty could not be unilaterally rescinded.

2009 History Repeats Itself, But in A Different Design

After the October Board meeting, the union received a phone call from the Sandi Dillon Acting Vice Chancellor of Human Resources to inform us that in closed session the Board had agreed that it would not offer Sabbaticals in 2010-2011. This was quite a shock. This was the District’s rationale:

1. The Board made the decision to save time and energy so that faculty did not need to put forward their proposals: FACT-this decision was only made 2 weeks before the Sabbatical packets were due. Most faculty have already formulated their plans.

2. The Board was told that Sabbaticals are costing the District $500,000 a year: FACT-most years Sabbaticals cost under $200,000. This year there were more faculty the cost was closer to $300,000. Still the Board was given misinformation.

3. The Board was told that this was not a negotiable issue and that they could make the decision in closed session. FACT:-Article 14 is clearly negotiable and again the Board was given wrong information.

4. The Board was told that the Union wouldn’t mind this change. FACT-the Union feels very strongly that faculty need to continue their sabbaticals to stay up to date on their pedagogical and teaching ability. FACT-the Union was not part of this process.

The Union immediately went into full action and stated the following:

1. We immediately contacted the Chancellor Rosa Perez; Vice Chancellor Jeanine Hawk and the 2 presidents. We were told that this decision to eliminate Sabbaticals for 2010 without Faculty Union input had come from the colleges-David Coon and Michael Burke.

2. Within 3 days we had meetings with all the high level administrators. David Yancey and I expressed our outrage at decisions made without involving the Union.

3. We requested information on the real cost of sabbaticals which gave us the cost at considerably less than the Board was informed.

4. We also met with a number of the Board of Trustee members to find out how this decision was agreed upon.

5. It was clear that the Trustees had been misinformed and we were able to stop ill conceived attempts at budget savings without slowing the process of sabbaticals for 2010-2011.

Sabbaticals Are a Go for 2010-2011

After only about 72 hours, apologies were coming at the Union from all levels of the administration. Some examples of response we received are as follows:

1. At the bargaining table, the Chief negotiator for the District Donna Williamson expressed her concerns and apologies for this decision; she stated that it was seriously an error that this decision had been made without discussions, input and buy in from the Union. She stated that the contract had been misinterpreted and that clearly sabbaticals were approved by the PRC.

2. At the meeting with President David Coon, he admitted that he had not involved the union in his thinking about Sabbaticals and regretted that this decision had come down as a top down decision like it did. He expressed concern about hurting the important relationship that had developed between the District and Union in shared decision making in the interests of all parties.

3. The Union met with Vice Chancellor Jeanine Hawk and Chancellor Rosa Perez and they both reiterated their commitment to a shared positive working relationship where decisions are discussed; where accurate data is generated from the colleges (not the case in this instance) and committed to continuing to improve and enhance the relationship between the Union and administrators.

4. And finally David Yancey, Frank Espinoza and Barbara Hanfling met individually with Board of Trustee members Richard Hobbs, Ron Lind and Mayra Cruz (more meetings scheduled) and let them know how this decision that they had been asked to make had really set the relationship backwards with the administrators. There was frustration on their part that they had not received accurate information and that they had probably acted hastily with the assumption that the Union had been a part of this decision.

So with all this information, Sabbaticals are a go for next year. Please note that the Union does take very seriously the financial crisis in the state and the impact on our District. That is why we have made decision regarding changes in medical benefits; understand the need to cut back on our class offerings thus laying off our adjunct faculty and cancelling intersession and parts of summer school, all of which are part of share of budget crisis.