Bargaining Updates

This page lists regular updates for NASA members on our current round of negotiations. These weekly reports from the Focus Group will be online by Mondays at 1 p.m. (we hope!) and are listed from the most recent report to earlier ones. You might want to Bookmark this particular "Bargaining Updates" page so you can reach it directly in the future.

Back to Focus on Bargaining

Back to Page One

April 23, 1998

With "operating" negotiations complete, our attention will now concentrate on the incorporation of the "trust" sector of the staff into the collective agreement.
On March 30, NASA met with the Employer to discuss the issue of retro pay for trust employees. Numerous enquiries have been made to the NASA office on the application of the compensation portion of the collective agreement and whether trust employees would receive the retro adjustment outlined. These questions are coming from both trust employees and trust holders.

It is NASA's positon that all trust employees who took the rollback, must also receive the increase for the period of April 1, 1997 to March 31, 1998. This is in keeping with the collective agreement and the Employer's policies applying to trust. The Employer has advised NASA that no Trust Employees were deducted during that period. If you have had deductions made or if you were required to use your vacation during the Christmas period please contact NASA office and the issue will be pursued on your behalf.

The Employer has circulated a document (dated April 17, 1998) to all academic departments encouraging the trust holders to make a similar 2.75% increase for general support trust staff as is in the newly-signed collective agreement. Check with your Trust Holder to see if a decision has been made on this issue. If your Trust Holder advises you that you will not be getting this increase please contact the NASA Office for followup. You are entitled to this increase.

NASA is planning a meeting for May 6, 1998 to update the membership about these negotiations which are currently scheduled to commence May 13, 1998. As well, the Focus Group continues to seek out interested staff to be involved in the ongoing discussions as we move into this next phase of bargaining. If you have any questions or concerns, or better still, if you would like to get involved, please do not hesitate to contact me by phone at 8942 or via e-mail at joy.correia@ualberta.ca.

March 23, 1998

It was pointed out to me that you (as all our members) may not know that the retro-pay will -not- appear on our March cheques after all. Apparently, Payroll is having problems with that. I believe that the unpaid days deduction will be removed this month (ie. there will be no deduction for the unpaid days on the March cheque). The retro-pay should be on the April cheque.

Correction to the ratification numbers: Sorry, but my posting to last posting to the web contained a couple of typos. Over 1,500 voted in total, 1,275 in favour, 176 "no" and 62 spoiled. Thanks to Art for pointing it out to me.

The March Report from the Focus Group Chair is now available here on the Web Site. (This report was circulated earlier by campus mail to all members and it will be discussed at the upcoming General Meeting.) The Focus Group continues to function and will be advising on the Trust negotiations.

March 20, 1998

Members, I apologize for the delays in informing you about the ratification vote results. There were some last minute concerns with the language of Article 20 and the application of seniority in the event of lay-off. As a result, although the ballots were counted on Tuesday, March 10th, those involved were asked to keep the results confidential until this matter could be resolved.

More than 1,600 members of our bargaining unit of approximate ly 3,200 staff sent in their ballots. Of those, 1,475 voted in favor of the contract, while 176 voted "no". There were 62 ballots considered "spoiled" for a variety of reasons.

The Focus Group is now heading into preparations for "trust" bargaining. Staff who work in a "trust" situation are encouraged to get involved with the Focus Group. Your input is vital as we head into this phase of bargaining. I do not anticipate us meeting more than a couple of times a month at this point. As the negotiating begins in earnest, meetings will be held more frequently. I fully expect to see improvements in the communications that will happen between our four-member Bargaining Team and the broader Focus Group during this round of negotiations.

If you are interested — even to get involved in a small way — please do not hesitate to contact me via the telephone at 8942 or by e-mail at
joy.correia@ualberta.ca.

March 9, 1998

Members, there are only two days of contract information/discussion meetings left (see schedule on previous update). Just to remind you, your ballot has to be at the NASA office by 4:30 pm on March 10th (that's tomorrow!). You can take your ballot to the meetings and vote there by placing it in the ballot collection box or you can walk it over (750 University Extension Centre) if you're not sure campus mail will get it there in time.

The "trust" Bargaining Team has been meeting to go over the results of the surveys and we are planning for information meetings shortly. Barbara Surdykowski, our Acting Business Manager has some late-breaking news regarding implementation of the 2.75% pay increase effective April 1, 1998 for the "trust" sector of the bargaining unit (see below). There will be a mailout to Trust employees about this but we want to get the news out to the Trust employees as quickly as possible. Please advise any trust employees who may not have access to the website of this information.

The Focus Group is still looking for more members to get involved. Please consider joining us. Our meetings are mostly once a week, during the noon hour, but I don't anticipate needing to meet quite that frequently quite yet. If you would like to volunteer, or would like more information, please call me at 8942 or e-mail me at joy.correia@ualberta.ca

* * * * * * * * * *

To NASA Members:

In early January, NASA approached the University to begin talks about the negotiated April 1, 1998 increase and it's application to the trust employees. NASA advised the employer that it was our position that the increase would and should be applied to trust employees. The application of this increase would lessen the intensity of Trust negotiations and allow for both parties to have significant discussions regarding the trust employees' and trust holders' concerns regarding job security.

I am pleased to say that the University has now agreed with this position and has sent out a message to trust holders to encourage them to apply the 2.75% increase effective April 1, 1998 "where possible". If you do not receive this increase, please contact the NASA office so that this matter can be addressed. Your concerns regarding a Trust Holder's ability to pay will be an issue for discussion and your information will be valuable.

In the meantime, please watch for a meeting date for Trust employees as we begin negotiations. I anticipate this meeting will be held soon. We are currently reviewing the survey response we received, along with how that input fits with the proposed new collective agreement provisions.

NASA has also proposed discussions with AASUA to problem-solve the concerns of Trust Holders while protecting the rights of the trust employeess. A meeting is being set up at this time.

If you have any questions or information you wish to provide the trust bargaining committee, please contact me directly.

Barbara Surdykowski
Acting Business Mgr., NASA

March 2, 1998

The Electronic version of the Tentative Agreement is now on the website.

February 27, 1998

The long-awaited electronic version of the Tentative Agreement (TA) has finally arrived. There's some work to be done on it to prepare it for the Council website, but the Council Chair promised he will have it up and available some time later this weekend. Although we can assume the text was from the negotiations and is complete, it is a copy from management. Until our Bargaining Team reviews and actually endorses this electronic version, please consider it as less than a completely authorized edition. If you want, you can still get a photocopied version of the TA from the NASA office by calling 439-3181 or by dropping by to 7-50 Extension Centre.

The information meetings start next week Please do try to come out to one (or more) and contribute to the discussions. This agreement is going to govern your working life into the next millenium so it's vital that you understand it. You may vote at the meeting as there will be collection boxes for the envelopes there. The same rules apply (re: signing the envelope, printing your name and dept., etc.) so please complete your ballot carefully!!

SCHEDULE OF CONTRACT INFORMATION MEETINGS

Monday at noon (CAB 369) is also the first meeting that the Focus Group (FG) will be taking a critical look at the process for the "trust negotiations". I would encourage all members that are employed from grants to consider getting involved in the FG. We normally meet on a weekly basis during the lunch hour. Your input would be especially valuable during this process.

If you would wish more information, or would like to join the group, please do not hesitate to call me at 8942 or contact me by e-mail via joy.correia@ualberta.ca

February 17, 1998

The Focus Group is currently working on the ratification package that will be mailed out to NASA members and Trust employees. It will include a summary of the changes to the Collective Agreement as well as some comments on the results of negotiations. We plan to have this package in your hands later next week. As soon as we receive it from Human Resources, the complete text of the new articles will be available on the web site, or, upon request, from the NASA office.

The Focus Group is also arranging information/discussion meetings for the first week of March. These will be held across campus and at different times during the day to accommodate your schedule. Locations will be announced in the mailout but will also be posted on Friday this week here on the Council web site. We can also try to arrange to have departmental/area meetings if there is a demand.

Deadline for sending in your contract ballot will be March 10 at 4:30 pm to the NASA Office (7-30 Extension Centre). Those attending information meetings can bring their ballot (and envelopes) and vote at the meetings if you wish.

If you wish any further information, please feel free to contact me Joy Correia by e-mail (joy.correia@ualberta.ca) or by phone (8942).

The Bargaining Teams of NASA and the University of Alberta have released the following Joint Communique:

University of Alberta / Non-Academic Staff Association Collective Agreement Negotiations

February 11, 1998

The University of Alberta and the Non-Academic Staff Association are pleased to announce that a tentative agreement has been reached in collective bargaining. The negotiating committees have agreed to recommend the 3-year agreement to their principles for ratification at the earliest opportunity.

The parties believe that the interest-based negotiation process has produced effective, mutually beneficial solutions to many long outstanding issues.

It was agreed to apply the agreement retro-actively to April 1, 1997, that will result in the return of the monies deducted for a previous seven(7) unpaid days (i.e. 2.69%) provision and the unpaid days deduction will cease. The agreement also provides for a 2.75% increase in base pay effective April 1, 1998, and a 2.25% increase in base pay effective April 1, 1999. There is a possible further .85% increase in base pay effective October 1, 1999, if the allocated funds or portion of funds is not required for benefit costs.

The parties have made substantial changes to provisions dealing with benefits and disability management costs, employee types, position disruption and employee displacement, and dispute resolution processes.

The parties have also agreed to introduce a new workplace representative system. Details of the settlement will be made available prior to ratification.

The ratification process is expected to take place in March 1998.

Implementation of the agreement is expected to occur approximately one month after ratification by both parties.

Signed:

NASA Negotiating Committee,
Board of Governors Negotiating Committee

February 11, 1998

Members, at long last, we have a tentative agreement with the University for the "operating" sector of the membership. The agreement was signed at midnight last night! So far, I do not have any details, but I will get them to you as soon as I have them. The Council web site will have a complete version as soon as we get that from the University. Hard copy editions will be made available to each member as well.

The Focus Group will be organizing Information Meetings to allow the membership to ask questions about the changes to the contract and to debate the relative merits of what has been initialled by the Bargaining Team. Please be patient. We'll get everything organized and have this critical information out to you as soon as possible.

joy.correia@ualberta.ca.

February 5, 1998

Those darned unpaid days: The word from the various sectors of the University who will have to deal with implementing any change to our salary schedules is that they are unable to process simultaneously (as in for the same pay period) both the return of monies for the unpaid days deduction as well as to correct (ie. not pay you) for any unpaid days taken. What that means is that when all is said, done, signed, and ratified, members will have their retro pay on one cheque, and the following month they will have a deduction for any unpaid days taken.

At the table: Bargaining sessions continue to deal largely with the question of the Benefits Cost Containment and compensation. The University has proposed a three-year deal that would see small salary increases (in the order of 2.5-2.75%) in each year as well as an even smaller percentage increase that is used to pay for benefits cost overruns. NASA's position is that whatever deal is signed, we must not come out of it still owing money for benefits. We are also looking at having the benefit plans more accountable to us, and to have more input into how they are used. The most expensive of these is LTD (Long Term Disability plan). Early intervention and general accommodation have been suggested as strategies for getting people back to work sooner.

From the Benefits Cost Containment Committee: The Difference between Benefits Cost Containment and Disability Management "Benefits Cost Containment" was an attempt made by a joint committee of NASA and the University to deal with the annual escalating costs of our benefit plans (due to inflation and increased usage). The University insisted that plan design changes be instituted to either maintain or decrease the cost of the overall benefit plans. The cost of the plans in 1994 ($2944.00 per member) was set as the target figure for the committee.

Since many of the plans are entwined with the Collective Agreement between NASA and the University, it was necessary to make any Benefit Cost Containment Committee a subcommittee of the Bargaining Team (now known as the Focus Group).

Disability Management (DM) seeks to support and assist employees who are suffering from psychological or physical conditions to return to, or, continue working. The University is taking steps to establish such a program. DM encourages modification of work duties or workplaces to enable employees to return to work. The success of this type of program is dependent on the involvement of the employee, the staff association, the supervisor and the manager in the intervention and return to work process. These programs usually have an overall positive impact on the health of the workplace and its employees.

You can reach us: The Focus Group continues to meet every Friday at noon in CAB (most often room # 369). We encourage the membership to make their view known and so have included the e-mails for some of our membership at this web site, or you can contact me by phone at 8942 or by e-mail at joy.correia@ualberta.ca.

January 29, 1998

Greetings to all NASA members from the Focus Group! I know I haven't been in touch with you for a while and some of you have asked why no updates concerning current negotiations have shown up on this web site. The fact is there has been little to report since I spoke at the General Meeting in December (see that report and the recommendations below). However, things are picking up again so I hope to get back to you more often in future.

Negotiations Continue: This temporary lack of webnews doesn't mean negotiations have broken off. Following the Christmas break, our four-person bargaining team has continued to meet with management in two-day sessions every two to three weeks. Their current discussions revolve around compensation (including Benefits Cost Containment which we are hoping to convert into Disability Management). The issues are complex and not yet resolved, and so, discussions continue.

The Focus Group, for its part, continues to meet every Friday at noon in CAB where we are currently reviewing the articles that have been initialed by the Bargaining Team. (I'll ask them for a complete updated list of those articles and try to have that up here next week.)

Trust and Operating: After considerable "encouragement" from the Focus Group, Trust representatives are now participating in negotiations (they are there as observers and we've asked that they also be included in the Bargaining Team's strategy sessions). We remain convinced that the only workable solution, in the final analysis, is one contract covering all university employees — operating and trust — that the ALRB recognized as properly being covered by our union.

At a special meeting of the Focus Group, January 13, 1998, the Bargaining Team reported they felt they had reached an impasse with the University's team over the issue of bargaining for the entire membership at once. They recommended NASA accept completing negotiations for the "operating" sector of the staff before proceeding to develop the "trust"-applicable modifications for the agreement. It was their opinion that the bargaining process would halt if this course of action was not followed. The Focus Group and NASA Reps (who kindly shortened their meeting so we could hold our discussions) spent over an hour and a half discussing the ramifications of this action, how it would affect negotiations, and what the message would be to the members of our bargaining unit who are paid from trust accounts. The motion to endorse that move was finally passed by an extremely slim margin, but there was considerable controversy and I, along with many other members of the Focus Group, spoke against this motion. We felt that this move was divisive and was contrary to our position that as one bargaining unit, we should all ratify one contract at the same time. This also removes any incentive for the University to complete "trust" negotiations and opens the door for the erosion of benefits and rights for trust employees. It could also result in a further delay in "trust" negotiations.

Unpaid Days: As to the issue of the unpaid days which is of prime concern as the fiscal year draws to a close, I have been told that reimbursement for the unpaid days deduction on our paycheques is part of the offer for year 1 (they are working on a 3-year deal). That means that if you do take those days off, you will have to "pay" them back - either with your holidays, overtime, or come to some other arrangement with your department. However, one of the staff I work with came up with the suggestion that these days could easily be "paid" back by deducting them from the retro-pay (ie. rather than get retro-pay for seven days, you would get it for four). The choice is yours.

One Hour, Once a Week: The Focus Group continues to meet every Friday at noon in CAB where we review the progress in bargaining and advise the Bargaining Team. Is your voice being heard? If you or anyone in your department would like to participate, please contact me, Joy Correia by phone at 8942 or by e-mail at joy.correia@ualberta.ca.

Focus Group Report to NASA General Meeting, December 18, 1997

Purpose of the Focus Group

The NASA Focus Group (FG) on Bargaining was set up at our January 1997 General Meeting to increase "openness" in the negotiating process.

The FG's efforts were directed at communicating with the membership about bargaining and advising the smaller "direct" bargaining team that actually attends negotiations with management representatives.

In order for us to have a cohesive and informed approach in bargaining, members on NASA bodies that could be considered "bargaining" committees — including the Benefits Cost Containment Committee (BCCC), the Trust Employee Advisory Committee (TEAC), the Pension and Benefits Advisory Committee, and the Pensions and Benefits Appeals Committee — were amalgamated into the FG.

Since our last report at the July Annual General Meeting, more members have volunteered to serve on the FG (see the list below for current membership). However, to be most effective we need NASA members from across campus to ensure as broad a representation as possible.

Trust Issues and the Focus Group

In January 1997, the Alberta Labour Relations Board endorsed NASA's long-standing claim (first made in 1981) that Trust employees should indeed be represented by our union. While the ALRB decision occurred just as we were going into bargaining, it was not until September that we were finally able to reach agreement with the University as to who from the trust community would be included as part of the NASA bargaining unit.

NASA's firm position is to have one contract — a contract that recognizes many of the unique situations faced by Trust Employees just like it recognizes Temporary or Recurring Term workers at the U of A. But the new agreement has to serve operating and trust staff equitably.

In order to begin integrating trust directly into the ongoing discussions on the overall collective agreement — a contract which will affect all NASA members including the Trust — members of the TEAC were added to the day-to-day "direct" bargaining team. The FG also established a sub-committee from TEAC members (Joy Correia, Anne Neild, Dean Schieve, and Kevan Warner) to deal with specific trust issues in bargaining. They will be sitting in on the current negotiating sessions as observers to the process in preparation for trust-specific negotiations. Following a short break, negotiations with Management resumed on December 15^th.

Practical questions on how NASA bargaining must respond to changing circumstances between General Meetings were addressed at recent Focus Group meetings. We are making the following recommendations:

• Any strategic discussions should include the larger negotiating team, including alternates. For those sessions to be effective, they should be held at times reflective of the work schedules for those not in direct bargaining (alternates do not get time off for these meetings). This allows everyone who may eventually be involved in bargaining sessions to stay current and would result in a trained "pool" of negotiators from which to draw.
• The FG is the body responsible for the selection of alternates. (This statement re-affirms the intent of the January General Meeting Bargaining policy.)

Communications

As a first time effort to increase the flow of information about bargaining to the membership, the Focus Group has engaged in a number of activities including:

• placing updates on the website (http://www.ualberta.ca/~rcouncil);
• submitting items to Hot Topics;
• developing surveys for both operating and trust employees; and
• holding bargaining information meetings.

Four of these meetings were held the week of November 24th — three during the middle of the day and one in the late evening. Approximately 60 staff (in total) attended these meetings and a variety of concerns were raised. Discussions centered around the benefits plans including Long Term Disability Income (LTDI) and Supplemental Health. Concerns were also raised about the length of the current round of negotiations.

As is common with the introduction of new approaches to increase member involvement, differences on implementation arise. For instance, there have been some frustrating experiences for the FG members who don't sit on the 4-person "direct" bargaining team. Initially, irregular attendance at the FG by the bargaining team made it difficult for the Group to evaluate bargaining and to receive consistent reports. The July AGM adopted an accountability policy that states: "All Bargaining Team members shall normally be required to attend Focus Group meetings." With this in mind, we've worked to improve coordination of meeting times and have seen some improvement in attendance of FG meetings by the BT. There also appears to be a reluctance on the part of some members of the bargaining team to convey information in the absence of the chief spokesperson (Kevan Warner). We feel the flow of information is still not what it should be in order for the FG to get a clear understanding of the process and allow us to debate developments during negotiations. To this end, the FG would ask that this general meeting re-iterate its request for open negotiations by endorsing the following statement:

NASA's negotiations are carried out by the Bargaining Team (BT); the Focus Group (FG) is responsible for advising the BT throughout this process. This bargaining must be carried out in a manner that allows the BT to be able to effectively negotiate and not have their "hands tied".

At the same time, we recognize that the Focus Group must be provided with sufficient information on negotiations on the key articles and issues. This starts from the development of NASA's initial positions, as our positions develop, and before the positions are close to initialling. This approach allows the FG to best advise on the further actions of the BT on these matters. This information is best presented in the forms of written documents and proposals and made available in a timely fashion to the FG members.

Bargaining serves NASA best when members are aware and confident of our bargaining efforts. Informing the membership shall be first done through its representatives on the FG on all issues related to and influencing bargaining. The FG remains responsible for communicating to the membership and for organizing activities to obtain membership feedback on negotiations as they progress to completion.

Summary of Issues:

1. Ratify revised Focus Group members listed below.

2. Endorse the FG Statement on bargaining.

As Chairperson of the Focus Group, I move adoption of my report.

Joy Correia

*******************

Focus Group Membership as of December 16, 1997:

Mike Abley (Renewable Resources)

Betty-Anne Jansen (Physical Plant)

Lynda Achtem (Libraries)

Peter Matilainen (CIUS)

Shirley Alleyne (Oral Health Sciences)

Heather Mercer (Oral Health Sciences)

Phil Baker (Oral Health Sciences)

Anne-Marie Mclean (Oral Health Sciences)

Desiree Brown (Mod. Lang. & Comp. Stud.)

Anne Nield (Computing Science)

Betty Burak (Oral Health Sciences)

Randy Nonay (Chemistry

Dorothy Buschkiel (Libraries)

Debra Owens (Human Resource Group

Gheorge Caldararu (Housing and Food Services)

Tony Paget (Physics)

Tanya Churchill (Bookstore)

Dennis Pohranychny (Materials Management)

Art Clarke (Building Services)

Tim Southernwood (Materials Management)

Joy Correia (Biological Sciences)

Dean Schieve (Biochemistry

Mary Daly (Linguistics)

Kevan Warner (Book and Record Depository

Lynne Dorland (Oral Health Sciences)

Rod Wolfe (Energy Management

Barry Haverstock (Technical Resource Group)

Effie Woloshyn (Biological Sciences)

November 20, 1997

The following is the "Quick Overview on Bargaining" that appears in the latest Hot Topics mailout to the membership.

Don't forget that the union is also holding information meetings next week on negotiations:

There will be members of the bargaining team there to provide further updates on bargaining and to answer any questions you may have.

* * * *

A Quick Overview of the 1997 Bargaining Process

The following overview of bargaining of the last few years has been included in this issue of Hot Topics in order to provide some understanding of why this round of bargaining is taking so long.

In very general terms, this round of bargaining is dealing with subjects that have been "in discussion" for many years, as well as employing a process which is different from the normal NASA/Board bargaining.

Many of the items being dealt with in this round were referred to committee in previous rounds in order to achieve a settlement. Because of the significance and complexity of these issues, it was hoped that dealing with them outside of the normal negotiations would lead to resolution. Examples of these are articles 19 (Seniority), 20 (Layoff and Recall), 28 (Maternity and Adoption Leave) and 38 (Grievance Procedure) which were initially opened in bargaining in January of 1993 with a deadline of December 1993 for arbitration on them. The teams met, exchanged information and developed further understanding of each others’ positions. The arbitration date was set aside because it was felt that progress was being made. These matters were finally referred to arbitration in January 1996, with the University filing a proposal that was less than what had been on the table. That hearing was postponed at the last moment.

In the meantime, the University closed our Food Services, Printing Services and contracted-out portions of Building Services. As a result, a number of grievances were filed. As well, based on more than five occurrences, NASA filed several grievances on issues related to the application of service and temporary employees with more than 12 months service.

Interest-based bargaining (also known as mutual gains bargaining) was suggested to us by the new Associate Vice-President (Human Resources) responsible for non-academic staff relations, payroll and benefits. Ms. Wetterberg told the NASA executive at her first meeting with them that it was critical to develop a new relationship between the parties. She suggested that we move into ‘mutual gains’ bargaining and suggested a facilitator she was aware of. After some discussion NASA agreed to both the concept and to Jay Spark as facilitator. (NASA also placed an initial cap of $12,000.00 on the process.)

At the onset of bargaining both teams identified nine (9) items that were time-sensitive - E.I. rebate, unpaid days, Article 20 (Layoff and Recall), exclusion from the union, Article 38 (Grievance Procedure), trust employees, compensation, market supplements, and benefits costs. Discussion began on the first three of these and the development of a new discipline practice at the University.

In opening bargaining in 1997, Article 20 was central and crucial to the first phase. Discussion on article 20 was prioritized to avoid a pending, costly artitration. Discussions were split into two parts. First, there was detailed discussion on retroactive severance for those laid off since Article 20 was opened (1993). Eventually, since the Food Services employees group was identified as deserving some severance. In total, the University agreed to some retroactive severance that would not otherwise have existed.

The next phase of discussion was to agree upon a new ‘form’ for layoff and recall (Article 20). The name changed to Position Disruption. The new wording accomodates changes in the wording that covered off both technological change and non-layoff changes. We also had insisted on and now incorporated the option of severance. The new Article 20 includes such concepts as job families which derives from the pay equity implementation (1988). NASA and the University discussed job families and agreed to a four family system (Clerical/Administrative, Computing/Technical, Health and Medicine and General Support) We then voiced our concerns that an appeal mechanism was necessary. Article 20 was provisionally agreed to subject to agreement on seniority units and job families but incorporating the retroactive severance. Approximately five cases of layoff in 1997 revolved around the use of re-occurring and post-twelve-month temporaries. Unable to agree on a treatment for this group it was agreed to refer the cases to a non-binding mediation. That was heard on July 30, 1997 by David Jones. It resulted essentially in a 4-0 agreement with the University’s interpretation of the present contract language (service for temps is counted from the first day of the 13^th month of employment; NASA’s position was that it should start from the first day of employment).

Discussions on the E.I. rebate were necessitated by the Federal government indicating that our present illness leave plan was not in compliance. The parties waited until late August, 1997 for the Federal government to approve the necessary wording for the contract.

The parties then tackled the Grievance Procedure (also left from 1993). In this instance, the parties had agreed on a provisional or interim procedure that had incorporated a ‘fast-track’ sole arbitrator option. The parties had also agreed on a roster of 5 arbitrators who could act. This, however, was exercised only once in the four years with David Jones being the mediator. The parties met first in sub-committee (John Wevers and Joan Mason) and then later in full session. The interim procedure was used as the basis for discussing the new process. NASA identified representation rights as critical and those were incorporated into the process. The University wanted to clarify grievance types and so we agreed to group, policy and individual grievances. Of the list of agreed-upon arbitrators, only David Jones remained acceptable to the University. The University also insisted on the ability to take policies to an arbitration board rather that sole arbitration. This was also incorporated and with the exception of the list of arbitrators, the parties had largely agreed on the new process (now known as Dispute Resolution) by the summer of 1997.

One of the obvious spin-offs of the discussions on grievances was a review of discipline. This was ‘spun off’ to a sub-committee, which met periodically for several months, eventually rejoining the teams at the table in August, 1997. The parties took the opportunity to remove these discussions from Article 36 (Discipline, Demotion and Dismissal) resulting in the creation and division of a new discipline policy. While as a policy it may be less enforceable (policy would not be part of the collective agreement), by the end of the summer the parties had agreed on the policy and some new wording Article 36 (Discipline).

Essentially, by the end of the summer, the first phase of bargaining had largely concluded talks on Article 20(Position Disruption AKA Layoff and Recall), Article 36 (Discipline), Article 38 (Dispute Resolution AKA Grievance Procedure) and resulted in the signing of the necessary words for an E.I. rebate program.

The second phase was the introduction by NASA and the University of wording and discussion on compensation (inclusive of days off), job families and seniority units along with job evaluation, service accrual for temporaries, maternity leave and transfer. Included in that was an attempt to limit contracting-out and to regularize jobs available to regular employees. The University introduced their concept of fixed term employees, a revision on their terms for job evaluation, appeals, and total compensation.

On the compensation side, the parties had agreed in 1994 to follow the AAS:UA pattern on cost containment. As a result NASA agreed to either pay or have the cost deducted over a baseline 1994 figure per member on benefits costs. Accounting practices were revised requiring the University to track a liability pool. The total sum required at the end of the first year was larger than NASA could afford in one year so 50% LTD was deferred. This resulted in NASA paying some $207,000.00 (reduced due to projected savings in the plan) and a carry-forward of $400,000.00. For this and other reasons, the University now claims a sum owed for benefits. NASA’s position is that the accuracy and completeness of these numbers is untested, and that the University owes back dues from the Trust employees (from the 1980’s) and that as Article 31 (Benefits) is not open until 1998, the amounts are immaterial. NASA also contends that the failure by the University to meet on Benefits Cost Containment has voided the contract. The technical merits of these arguments, however, are also untested and the issue is still there and needs resolution.

The parties also concluded a fairly standard rollback of days without pay, of which benefits were only a part. This places an additional catch-up burden. Specifically, a roll forward of 2.68% plus the return of time (2.69%) and the 3.19% required against benefits overruns might seem an impossible catch-up zone.

NASA has expressed concerns about the categories of workers (e.g., casual, contract, temporary) that should be permitted to be paid from operating grant funds. On top of the Jones mediation, NASA has also expressed concerns over the University’s use of ‘non-established positions’. The parties need to deal with job security issues where funding is unsecured.

Discussions of service so far have tended to a status quo approach on service, but this (as well as other parts of the collective agreement) is likely to be impacted by the inclusion of Trust employee issues in the 1997 bargaining process. NASA’s bargaining team now also includes the members of the Trust Employee Advisory Committee who will be meeting as a whole to caucus on all issues affecting bargaining. A sub-committee of this group has been formed to deal directly with the inclusion of trust employees’ issues into our contract. NASA hopes to initiate these discussions shortly.

Also, the acting Manager and the Focus Group (which is the umbrella body for bargaining) have developed a brief survey included in this mailing. We ask that you take the time to fill it out and return it as promptly as possible.

The NASA negotiating committee remains committed to:

• Return of lost wages
• Increase in pay
• Job security
• Integration of Trust Issues into the collective agreement

To achieve a good contract and to reach these goals will take some time. Your patience and support is crucial.

Your negotiating team

November 13, 1997

As you are all well aware, the bargaining for a new contract has been going on for over six months. The University was pressing for a completion date of November 15th to resolve all the outstanding issues or to put them aside.

This round of bargaining has led to the resolution of a number of significant outstanding issues (including Lay-off and Recall, the Grievance Procedure, etc.; for more information see the Bargaining Overview in this mailing). To try to shortcut that process would result in an incomplete discussion of the remaining key issues in order to reach agreement on compensation. Among the remaining significant issues is that of incorporation of the trust employees into the collective agreement. As you know, NASA's position is that if we are one bargaining unit working for one employer, then we should have one collective agreement. This is not a trivial matter and requires that thoughtful and precise language be included in our contract in order to serve the interests of the Trust community.

To this date, the University has not made a substantial offer in terms of compensation. It would, therefore, not be beneficial to any of the membership to halt discussions now. This means, unfortunately, that the issues will certainly not be resolved soon, and that there will be no extra money on your December paycheque (which may have been possible if the talks ended today). The Christmas closure of the University will take place as scheduled and the days will be unpaid (as has been the case since 1994). The issue of the unpaid days still remains on the table, and until an agreement is reached, the status quo is in effect.

The Focus Group is holding Bargaining Information meetings as follows:

There will be members of the bargaining team there to provide further updates on bargaining and to answer any questions you may have. Please take this opportunity to get informed.

If you would like to be involved with the Focus Group or are willing to coordinate a meeting for your department, please do not hesitate to contact me by phone (8942) or e-mail (joy.correia@ ualberta.ca)

October 6, 1997

Although the face-to-face bargaining meetings have been brought to a halt, communication still exists between the parties as proposals continue to be exchanged in written form. Unfortunately, there is very little to report on the compensation front -- only that the University has promised that there will be a "positive variance" in the final agreement.

The Focus Group is going to take this break to thoroughly review the articles on which there has been substantial agreement. These include the articles on NASA Representation, Time Off for NASA Business, Discipline Policy (new), Dispute Resolution Procedure (aka Grievance Procedure), Layoff and Recall, Market Supplements, and the E.I. Rebate (which is the only thing that has been signed off).

Work also continues on the questions for the membership canvas as well as planning for area bargaining information meetings for late October, early November. Please note that these area meetings will be held in departments with representation on the Focus Group as these members normally coordinate the meeting for their own department.

If you would like to be involved with the Focus Group or are willing to coordinate a meeting for your department, please do not hesitate to contact me by phone (8942) or e-mail (joy.correia@ ualberta.ca)

September 26, 1997

There have been some interesting developments in bargaining.

On Tuesday, September 23, the Bargaining Team, the Executive and the Trust Advisory Committee met to review the current state of the negotiations with the University re: the inclusion of trust employees in the bargaining unit. To this date, the work has been directed to determining WHO should be included in the unit. The University invited us to negotiate a collective agreement for the trust staff, and we, therefore, took steps to put the Trust Advisory Committee on the Bargaining Team. This step was taken because it is NASA's understanding that everyone in the bargaining unit is governed by the same collective agreement. We wanted trust employees represented in the negotiations process as quickly as possible.

NASA had bargaining sessions set up for the 25th and 26th of this month. The Bargaining Team was waiting for the University to table their compensation package for discussion on Thursday. When the University learned of NASA's position re: negotiations for trust employees they suspended face-to-face meetings pending the decision of the mediator with regard to the need for a separate contract for trust employees.

The Focus Group is planning to canvas the entire bargaining unit about outstanding issues. We encourage ALL support staff to let us know directly or via the NASA office of any concerns they may have about bargaining and melding the trust employees into the unit. Feel free to comment at any time, but please also watch for a survey coming your way.

University of Alberta/NASA Interest Based Bargaining and Trust Updates
September 26, 1997
Joint Communique

The University of Alberta and NASA have continued interest-based bargaining during the month of September. The parties continue to be committed to the process. Subject to some minor wording details, the parties now have an agreement in principle on Article 36 (Discipline, Demotion and Dismissal) and have finalized a new Discipline Policy. In addition, the parties have had extensive discussion on Article 1 and 2 (Employee Types), Article 4 (Time off for NASA Business/NASA Representation), Article 19 (Seniority), Article 39 (Job Title Administration), and Article 40 (Job Evaluation Review and Appeal). When agreement on theses [their typo, not mine - JC] articles and Compensation is reached the The University of Alberta and NASA have continued interest-based bargaining during the month of September. The parties continue to be committed to the process. Subject to some minor wording details, the parties now have an agreement in principle on Article 36 (Discipline, Demotion and Dismissal) and have finalized a new Discipline Policy. In addition, the parties have had extensive discussion on Article 1 and 2 parties will have substantially reached conclusion on a new collective agreement.

Notwithstanding the positive negotiation process and results indentified previously and above, the parties have temporarily placed face-to-face negotiations in abeyance. The parties need to focus on resolving significant "trust general support group" issues. The parties are committed to resuming negotiation meetings as soon [as] these trust issues are resolved.

Essentially, the parties have yet to resolve the appropriate process for negotiating specific terms and conditions for the "trust general support group". In addition, the parties have not yet afteed upon "who" may fall within the proposed "trust general support group" and it is recognized that it is difficult to negotiate specific terms and conditions without knowing to whon themse terms and ocnditions will be applied. Therefore, at this time the parties have agreed to give priority tot he appropriate process and the terms and conditions, with the assistance of the mediator, Colin Taylor, in an attempt to reach a mutually agreeable solution. It is anticipated that these discussions will occur over the next three week period."

As you can see, although we are in a hiatus, the mood appears very positive for continued, fruitful negotiations. Negotiating sessions were planned for October (15, 16, 17, 29, 30, 31). Whether they will take place as planned will depend on how quickly the "trust issues" can be resolved.

If you have any comments or suggestions, please feel free to contact me by phone (8942) or e-mail (joy.correia@ualberta.ca).

September 3, 1997

The parties have issued a joint communique as follows:

University of Alberta/NASA-Interest Based Bargaining Update
August 26, 1997
Joint Communique

"The University of Alberta and NASA have continued Interest-Based Bargaining over the summer. This demonstrated the strength of the commitment to the new process as it survived substantial turnover among NASA staff. The parties have essentially achieved agreement on two of the most significant articles in the collective agreement - Article 20 (Layoff and Recall) and Article 38 (Grievance Procedure). As well, the parties have settled and signed agreements on Market Supplements and Employment Insurance rebates, the latter to be implemented immediately.

Bargaining is continuing on other substantive, outstanding issues such as Compensation, Time Off for NASA Business, issues surrounding Benefits Cost Containment and the Job Evaluation System. Because of recent mediation outcomes, the teams will also be considering further the application of employee service.

While hope in the community is for an early settlement, the bargaining teams are cautioning their principals that a quick settlement would not be beneficial, given the number of significant issues yet to be concluded.

The Bargaining Teams and the Facilitator agree that an improved relationship has been achieved through Interest- Based Bargaining. Although the parties recognize that several challenging issues are outstanding, we remain confident that a positive outcome for NASA members and the University is within reach. Further bargaining sessions are scheduled for September."

(signed)

Kevan Warner
(Chair, NASA Negotiations Team)

Bruce L. Anderson
Chair, University Negotiations Team

As you can see, the work continues. Bargaining sessions of August 21-22 revolved around the Dispute Resolution Procedure (aka the Grievance Procedure) and the Discipline Policy as well as the production of the above statement. The University is preparing a final draft of the Dispute Resolution Procedure for the teams to review in September. This article and the Discipline Policy will also be reviewed by NASA’s Grievance Committee and our office staff as well as the Focus Group.

A Discipline Policy is being developed by the negotiating teams, not as an article for the body of the contract, but as an attachment to it (where we currently have other letters of understanding). The stated purpose of this policy is "to provide guidance to both supervisors and employees with regard to the discipline of NASA members."

The next dates for bargaining have been scheduled for September 15, 19, 22, 25 and 26 with the agendas currently set as follows:

Sept. 15: NASA Representation/Steward System, Time-Off for NASA Business

Sept. 19: Employee Types, Definitions/ Determinations/Applications of Service

Sept. 22: same as for the Sept. 19th.

Sept. 25-26: Compensation

Job Evaluation and Job Titles Administration, Service (definitions and determination of application), Personnel Files/Electronic Surveillance, Employment Security, and the S.U.B. Plan have been selected as the next items to be discussed.

As bargaining continues, the Focus Group continues, also, to welcome all questions and comments as well as participation from the NASA membership.

Joy Correia

August 25, 1997

As you all probably know by now John Wevers is no longer with NASA. He played a key role in our negotiations. The NASA Executive approved a Human Resources Committee recommendation that we obtain the services of a labour resource person from the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees. (This is quite common in the union movement. In exchange, NASA will "lend" them assistance on other matters when they need it.) As a result of this move, our Bargaining Team is continuing negotiations but now have the technical assistance of Mac McNaughton (a negotiator from AUPE).

The last few sessions of bargaining have left the Bargaining Team feeling optimistic with the Interest-base Bargaining process. They feel that sufficient progress is being made to continue especially in the area of non-arbitrable items. For instance, the University has come to understand the need for the addition of a severance option to Aricle 20 - Layoff and Recall (to be called Position Disruption). There is also agreement developing on sections of Article 38 - Grievance Procedure (to be called Dispute Resolution Procedure). NASA has the option, of course, at any time in the bargaining process, to go to arbitration. However, the Bargaining Team feels strongly that at this time such a move would not be prudent.

The E.I. Rebate issue has been largely resolved. In the past, the University would get the employer's share of the Rebate, and NASA would get the employee's share, using it in any manner each saw fit. Now, these funds will no longer go into general revenues, but rather, will be used to offset the cost of the non-academic staff benefits package. Also, to bring our contract into compliance with the new federal regulations, agreement has been reached on changes in the sick leave provisions, so that sick leave still counts for calculation of sick leave entitlement, but not for other things (eg. vacation, seniority). This leave will revolve around the calendar year. What remains to be settled is the exact dollar cost for our package and who it covers (because of the trust employees debate).

The whole issue of Employee Type (part of Article 20) was the subject of discussions at the sessions of August 13 and 14. These two sessions dealt mainly with the development of the definition of Temporary Employees - the teams are currently looking at about 5 categories of them. Taken into consideration in these set of sessions was the result of the David Jones arbitration of July 30 which said, in part, that service for temporary employees would begin on the first day of the 13th month of their employment.

We have also responded to the University's compensation offer (woefully inadequate) identifying all the bargaining issues we feel are connected to total compensation.

The Dispute Resolution Procedure was the main topic of discussion August 15th. The parties are working from the premise that they each have duties and responsibilities to work towards "foster[ing] a collegial and productive working environment", and that any problems in the workplace should be dealt with as quickly as possible in order to re-establish harmony in the workplace. The majority of the discussion centered on the definition of the type of grievance and the time limits for the various stages of the process.

The question of how best to incorporate stewards into our organization and into our agreement has been referred to the NASA's Grievance Committee. If any members would like to help in developing this very important, and new, component of our union, please contact myself or Lynn Chandler on the Grievance Cttee.

NASA has also gone to AUPE for someone to handle the negotiations on the trust issue. Ken Derksen is filling in for John Wevers in the mediation process with Colin Taylor (mediator) and Bruce Anderson.

Further bargaining sessions have been scheduled for September 15, 19, 22, 25 and 26 with agendas as yet unknown.

The next meeting of the Focus Group is scheduled for Wednesday, August 27 at noon in CAB 297. I urge you all to seriously consider involving yourself in the negotiating process at this level or as a contact person for your area. Please feel free to bring any questions or concerns you or your colleagues may have about bargaining to me via phone (8942) or e-mail joy.correia@ualberta.ca.

July 28, 1997

July 23,24, and 25 bargaining sessions dealt with Article 20 on Layoff and Recall, with a little discussion on stewards and the grievance procedure. On Article 20, discussion took place on the matter of seniority units and our need for them to be fixed and determined. The University is to respond to this. Training for disrupted staff was also discussed - the University and NASA are close on developing a training formula but need an appeal mechanism. The training component is a non-arbitrable issue. On the matter of Job Families, the University and NASA have so far agreed on four job families - clerical /administrative/business, technical/computing, maintenance/utility/trades, and medical/dental/pharmacy/health. NASA’s concern is that job families be as broad as possible, and NASA’s biggest concern is the implementation and appeal process to be put in place for job families. The University is coming back to NASA on the matter of the implementation and appeal process.

On Article 38, Grievance procedure, a dispute resolution procedure has been discussed. The University is not entirely uncomfortable with the concept of stewards being used in the grievance process. The University and NASA have agreed in principle to steps taken in the Grievance procedure prior to Arbitration - with NASA representative present at every level of the process file the grievance, meet with the department head, meet with Vice President of Human Resources or a designate, and if not resolved at either of these levels, proceed to Grievance Arbitration. On the matter of Grievance Arbitration, the University and NASA are now working to expand on the current roster of arbitrators to be used for Grievance Arbitration. Both the University and NASA agreed to the use of tripartite or single arbitrator. The current standard is the use of one arbitrator except in cases of policy grievance. The roster would be rotated in random order to select the arbitrator. The University and NASA are working toward a grievance process that would result in settling the grievance at the lowest possible level prior to proceeding to Arbitration.

Arbitration on employee types is scheduled for Wednesday, July 30, at which time David Jones as the arbitrator will need to make a decision on the matter of application of service to temporary and recurring term employees. NASA expects to hear this decision in approximately 30 days. This decision will have implications for any temporary employee over 12 months, any employee who has had a recurring pattern of employment, or any employee who has experienced a break in service. Specifically, the impact for these employee types would be eligibility for retroactivity on application of service based on these 5 or so grievances currently going to arbitration on July 30, 1997.

The next bargaining sessions are scheduled for August 13, 14, and 15, at which time discussion will continue on Article 20 - Layoff and Recall.

The next Focus Group meeting will be held on August 20, 1997.

This is my first and last update on bargaining, in Joy Correia’s absence until August 18. I am resigning from the Focus Group effective August 18.

If you have any concerns or queries on bargaining, please contact Tim Southernwood or Kevan Warner. Kevan is NASA’s official spokesperson on the Bargaining Team at this time.

Judy Lederer

July 18, 1997

As you may have heard, John Wevers is currently unavailable for bargaining. The response of the Bargaining Team was that we continue bargaining using our members and relying on the Focus Group to vet any progress made during negotiations. The Focus Group meeting of July 16th passed a motion to continue bargaining with Kevan Warner (Bylaws Chair) assuming the role of chief spokesperson for NASA's Bargaining Team.

At the negotiating sessions on July 10th and 11th, the Bargaining Team signed off the retroactive portion of Article 20 (Lay-off and Recall). They also responded to the University's compensation proposal with a position that we would NOT consider anything less than what the academics received.

The next scheduled bargaining sessions (July 23th, 24th and 25th) will deal with the balance of Article 20 - ie. the notions of Job Families and Seniority Units. We are anticipating further discussion of the as yet unresolved issues as previously scheduled. Also during these sessions, the Bargaining Teams will undertake an assessment of the productivity of these sessions and make a decision on whether or not to proceed in the same manner (ie. Interest-based bargaining) or to revert to the former method (ie. positional).

Unfortunately for us all, the negotiating process is very, very slow. The Bargaining Team is anticipating at least another three months, likely more, of negotiating. As a result, it is unlikely that any of us will see any return of our roll-back (should we negotiate one) until the fall at the earliest.

The Focus Group next meets July 28th to receive an update from the Bargaining Team. I will be away (vacation time has finally arrived), but should you require further information about bargaining, or would like to join us, please do not hesitate to contact either Judy Lederer or Tim Southernwood. We welcome any and all comments and suggestions the membership has to offer.

July 4, 1997

The University gave our bargaining team its initial position on monetary issues on June 27th. There will be a joint communique coming out in the very near future to all support staff which outlines the current status of negotiations. Also to appear in your mailbox (next week) is an issue of Hot Topics which will also contain update of bargaining.

The University has proposed a three-year agreement with an overall increase in total compensation(TC). They want the TC package to include any increased costs associated with our benefits (as agreed upon previously under Benefits Cost Containment). This means that the "first charge" to any agreed upon increase in the base salary scale would be any increased cost of our current benefits package. The University is also williing to consider reductions (possibly only partial) in the number of unpaid days as part of the package.

Our bargaining team has proposed a two-year agreement with a return of the 2.67% salary reduction we took a few years ago, a cost of living adjustment (likely very welcome by our many members who have been sitting at their last LSI for a number of years now), the conversion of the unpaid days to paid days off, and an increase in compensation to reflect the loss of benefits parity. This last item stems from the fact that support staff "bought" benefits parity a several years ago, giving up a substantial part of a salary increase. This translates into an approximately 10% increase in TC.

While our proposal may seem like we are "shooting for the moon" please note that the Academic Staff Association (AASUA) has ratified their Collective Agreement (in effect July 1 1997) which provides them with a 10-11% overall increase (depending on whether you take into account compounding) in a three-year agreement, with the ability to re-open the discussion on salaries after two years. This was an offer made to AASUA from the University.

Further dates for bargaining have been scheduled for the month of July (9th - 11th and 23rd - 25th). These sessions will continue in the interest-based approach used so far, including the presence of the facilitator, Jay Sparks. The teams have agreed (as of June 25th) to the following timetable:

July 9 AM - NASA response to Unversity's compensation proposal

July 9 PM - Article 20 language finalization

July 10 - Grievance Procedure

July 23 - Steward System

July 24 - Time-off for NASA Business

July 25 - E.I. Rebate

As you can see, the negotiating process has reached an intense stage, and now, more than ever, it is important to have as many members as possible partake in the process on a timely basis. Once again - if any of you are interested in joining the Focus Group or being a contact person for your area or department, please do not hesitate to contact me, Joy Correia, by phone (8942) or e-mail (joy.correia@ualberta.ca)

June 17, 1997

My deepest apologies to all the membership on not having an update for this page prior to this.

Negotiations continue with meetings at the end of this month - June 19, 20, 25, 26, 27. It is hoped that at these sessions the discussion of compensation will finally be addressed. There is not much to report about Bargaining. It continues this month with the "compensation" issues (hopefully).

Other Alberta Settlements, Focus Group Survey Results

As most of you are probably aware, the AAS:UA (Academic Staff Association at the U of A) are voting on a tentative agreement which gives them a 10% increase over 3 years. In the first year, they recover completely their unpaid days, and are left with a net .65% increase (after the rollback of 3 or 4 years ago is returned). In the next year, they get another 3% and in the third year another 3% (roughly compounded increase of 11% over 3 years). Their bargaining team are recommending they accept it. We won't know until near the end of June, as their new contract begins July 1 1997. That means they would get the week off at Christmas -- all with pay.

Athabasca University support staff (members of AUPE) have just settled a 2 year contract - they received a 6% salary increase and 100% coverage of all their benefits. If this settlement suggests a precedent, it should look good for us in bargaining on wages.

Unfortunately, discussion with the U of A on the other eight key items (E.I. Rebate, Grievance Procedure, Lay-off and Recall, Discipline, Inclusions & Exclusions, etc) chosen for initial discussion has not led to any resolution.

A review of the initial responses to the questions sent out from the Focus Group with regard to the issue of unpaid days shows a clear direction from the membership. The overwhelming response is our goal in these negotiations should be for both the grade-level rollback and the loss of money the unpaid days represent be returned to pre-reduction levels. If you have not sent in your survey - please do so. It makes a difference.

Stewards

The Focus Group will be proposing the following resolution to the Annual General Meeting on June 24 (you should have received your notice for that reconvened meeting by now).

• The last few years have been tough for us. We need to do things differently.
• We need to develop a strong union presence in the workplace.
• We need to improve membership communication.
• We need to improve membership education.
• We need to increase the membership’s access to the union.
• We need to increase membership participation.
• We need to have an avenue to build the leadership within NASA.

Stewards are the cornerstone of a strong union. If you don’t have a Steward System, you can’t have adequate protection and you don’t have the means to build a strong union to represent your interests. NASA needs a steward system.

Move that the Bargaining Team incorporate, as a high priority, the following principle in the Collective Agreement currently being negotiated:

That NASA Stewards be recognized as the official representatives of the union in the workplace and have time-off with pay to investigate and provide representation for any and all work-related concerns.

Moved by Lynn Chandler / Seconded by Mary Daly

We are asking the Bargaining Team to ensure the provision for stewards in our Collective Agreement. This should greatly enhance the Grievance procedure, and also result in fewer legal costs over the long run. These recommendations are a result of an all-day Joint Forum on Stewards that NASA held on Saturday June 8. The members who attended heard presentations from labor educators and representatives of other unions on stewards. It was clear to the participants that NASA could benefit from a steward system. Small group discussions at the Joint Forum identified what needed to be done to establish a steward system.(see also "Report on June 8 Joint Forum on Stewards"). The Focus Group has been assigned the task of coming up with sample contract language that could establish stewards at the U of A.

At the Forum, the representatives from three other unions -- CUPE (Canadian Union of Public Employees), AUPE (Alberta Union of Provincial Employees), and CAW (Canadian Auto Workers) -- explained to us how stewards work in their unions and what types of provision, protection, and time-off would be required in our Collective Agreement. Stewards in other unions are given time off in their Collective Agreements to file grievances on behalf of the union as well as handle any or all worker concerns in the workplace (contract interpretation or violation, workers compensation questions, health and safety concerns, etc.). Stewards in those unions are well trained to do that kind of membership support, and the unions present at the Forum on June 8 even said they could help us out with training our stewards if we needed the assistance.

The Focus Group will let you know of any updates on Bargaining after next week's meeting. If any of you would like to join the Focus Group, please let me know. We hope to broaden out as much as possible to represent as many departments as possible. The next Focus Group meeting is immediately after the Reps Council meeting on June 17 in Room 269 in CAB. If you wish to join, please attend.

And don't forget to come out the reconvened AGM on June 24 in CAB Room 243 at 4:15 p.m. where we will be providing further updates on Bargaining.

Joy Correia, FG Chair

April 29, 1997

We haven't had a weekly report for a while. Apologies for not sticking to our schedule. Bargaining sessions continue with a great deal of discussion but not much translation of these discussions into agreement or contract language. The topics of current conversations continue to be the Grievance Procedure, Exclusions/Inclusions, the Discipline Policy and the E.I. Rebate. As you may have heard, the AASUA has also been negotiating their contract, but have not yet come to an agreement.

Brief, lunch hour meetings are planned for May in order to get YOUR views on the issue of unpaid days. This will also include a quick update on bargaining but, most importantly, the Focus Group would like to find out what YOU think about how the unpaid days should be dealt with. You should all be aware that the University has already planned that its buildings will be closed between Christmas and New Year's both in 1997 and 1998.

Look for posters announcing these meetings in your building the week before. Please feel free to bring your lunch. We hope to see you there and to have a chance to hear your questions and viewpoints. If you would like to voice your thoughts on this and other matters, please feel free to contact me on e-mail or by phone at 8942.

The Focus Group currently has membership for the following buildings/departments:

Building Department
Administration Registrar's Office
Arts Modern Lang & Comp Studies
Assiniboia Hall Linguistics
BARD Archives
Biological Sciences Biological Sciences
CAB Physical Plant (Building Services)
Cameron Library Cameron Library
Chem/Min Engineering Technical Services (Electronics)
General Services Physical Plant (Control Centre)/Computing Science
Lister Hall Housing & Food Services
Materials Management Materials Management
Physics Physics
SUB Bookstore
WM Health Sciences Health Sciences Library

If your building/department is not now represented, please notify the Focus Group(see below) with the name of a representative so that your department, too, will get current bargaining reports and give us membership feedback on bargaining issues in between mailings of Hot Topics.

Joy

April 11, 1997

Negotiations are proceeding at a slow and arduous pace and as a result I can give you no real news.

Despite the amount of discussion taking place, there has been NO progress to the point of resolution on any of the articles currently the focus of bargaining (see previous update for list). In hopes of generating some agreement, a couple of these issues have been relegated to subcommittees of the Negotiating Teams (ie. a member from each side). The issues of Discipline and the Grievance Procedure have gone to such committees.

The Focus Group is still looking for input into this process as well as people to be contacts for their areas. If you have any ideas to share, please do not hesitate to call me at 8942 or e-mail me at joy.correia@ualberta.ca.

March 27, 1997

OVERVIEW OF THE BARGAINING SESSIONS
MARCH 19 - 21/97

• Joint communique is the ideal way for information on bargaining to go out to interested parties. "If either party feels it is necessary to communicate in writing unilaterally, the parties agree to review it jointly before it is released."
• The Focus Group will continue in its role of membership communication.
• The procedures for interest based bargaining have been completed. These include guidelines for: organization of bargaining sessions; the bargaining process; achieving and confirming agreements; and arbitrability of bargaining issues.
• The bargaining process is looking initially at areas that have been targeted for immediate attention due to their time sensitivity.
  1. E.I. rebate
  2. Unpaid days
  3. Grievance procedure
  4. Exclusions/Inclusions
  5. Layoff and recall
  6. Trust employees
  7. Market supplements -- computing series
  8. Benefits cost containment
  9. Compensation
• E.I. Rebate: Further discussion awaits information from the Federal Government.
• Unpaid days: The parties have not agreed on the best ways to address this issue and have therefore issued the following statement:

The University of Alberta B. of G. and NASA have recently commenced collective bargaining as a result of the expiration of the current agreement effective March 31, 1997. The issue of unpaid days, a high priority of the parties, is currently under negotiation. Since no agreement has been reached to date on this issue, the current agreement will continue to apply. The University and NASA have recently agreed to retroactivity on monetary provisions. This may result in employees owing time or money to the University for any unpaid time they have taken between March 31, 1997 and the final resolution of this issue in bargaining. This may include the use of vacation, compensatory time off, working extra time, or other solutions the parties may reach through bargaining.

Grievance Procedure is the topic of today’s bargaining session.

If you would like to review the minutes or any of the joint communiques, they will available at the NASA office (8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.)

The next Focus Group meeting is April 1, 1997 at 4:45 p.m. at the NASA office.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind you of the upcoming Special General Meeting April 3 at 4:45 in CAB 243. This is an opportunity for all of us to discuss the pending dues motion again, bargaining, and other issues affecting NASA. Please come out and share your perspectives and exercise your vote.

Joy Correia, Focus Group Chair

March 24, 1997

The Focus Group is meeting on Tuesday after work so I don't have anything substantial to report till Wednesday. But I would remind you all to check the proposals we made that are available on the website. And don't forget! As part of our last contract settlement, full-time regular staff are required to take a maximum of three unpaid days off from your regular work. Your "Klein Days" run out on March 31 and you CAN'T carry them over after the end of this week. One of our priorities will be to eliminate this provision for the next contract so use them while you can....

Joy Correia, Focus Group Chair

March 19, 1997

Bargaining is now underway! Today, March 19, 1997, both NASA and the University bargaining teams met to exchange proposals. A copy of our presentation is available on the website. Initial bargaining -- basically clarifying what the other side put forward and taking a stab at some mutually agreed to positions -- will continue all day on March 20 and March 21. These sessions are being held in BARD (the home of the University Archives).

Our next Focus Group meeting is Tuesday, March 25 at 4:45pm in the NASA Office at which time we'll be getting our first progress report from the Bargaining Team.The Focus Group will also be receiving a copy of the University's proposals, as well as the 2nd revised draft of our proposals. If you have any concerns or issues to raise about bargaining, please let me know before then, and I will bring them to the Focus Group meeting.

Do you think you might have some time to help us with negotiations? The Focus Group is attempting to find contact persons campus-wide to ensure that we have all the University buildings covered so we will be able to get some of the necessary information out to our membership quicker than through regular mail.

If any of you wish to join our Focus Group, you are more than welcome. It is interesting work, and we will hear about the state of negotiations in a very timely fashion. Our meetings are normally Thursdays at 4:45 p.m. in the NASA office.

Joy Correia, Focus Group Chair

March 10, 1997

The Focus Group has completed its training in Interest-based bargaining as of Saturday, March 8th. Our tasks continue to be two-fold:

1) to review the draft "Issues" which are going to negotiations, and

2) to develop plans for communication with the membership.

The Focus Group is also continually looking for feedback and input from the bargaining unit. We need staff from all areas, all occupational groupings and all departmental sectors at the University of Alberta to provide insight and expertise to the negotiations team. We are also looking for NASA members to put their names forward as contact people for their areas should we need to solicit opinions or to spread the word about an information meeting on short notice. We invite any interested persons, both support staff and trust-funded employees to become involved in the negotiations process at any level of involvement.

Please contact me, Joy Correia, Chairperson of the Focus Group at 492-8942

or at joy.correia@ualberta.ca about joining our team and becoming involved in the negotiation of our Collective Agreement.

---------------------------------------------------------

NEGOTIATIONS 1997 CALENDAR OF EVENTS

March 8 Finalization of Interest Based training

March 10-18 Finalization of bargaining proposals by the Negotiations Team and Focus Group

March 19 NASA and University exchange proposals

March 20, 21 Negotiations sessions

March 26, 27 Negotiations sessions

March 3, 1997

After a great deal of hard work on the part of Ken Halbach (one of the Focus Group members) and, with the assistance of the NASA office staff, the Focus Group has prepared the first draft of the "Issues" (see February 24th's report below). Some of the proposals came from the membership in clusters too complex and diverse for the format required by Interest-based Bargaining. Our task now is to split up the proposals and continue with further preparation of these "Issues". We are also looking for combining overlapping proposals, and dealing with any that may contradict each other. At some point (hopefully in the near future) these issue statements will be available at this location.

The "Issues" will be exchanged with the University at the introductory meeting of the bargaining teams, March 5th at the BARD.

Concurrently, the entire Focus Group and Bargaining Team -- along with John Wevers as well as many representatives from the University management group -- are going through training to help us understand the principles of this negotiating style. The training sessions were booked for all day, Saturdays, March 1 and 8. Interest-based bargaining is a very different style of bargaining compared to the traditional method of presenting initial competing positions which are then "negotiated" through a process of trade-offs. So far we have talked about the principles of interest-based bargaining, and are learning how to look at issues with regard to what in an issue is of mutual concern and, therefore, dealing with it becomes of mutual benefit (rather than each side taking a stand on an issue and then having to fight to some compromise).

As of the last update, I have not heard from anyone interested in serving on the Focus Group. Please do think about how you could contribute to the group or if there is someone in your area considering it, please encourage them to contact me by phone at 8942 or by e-mail. In bargaining (as with most things), the more people involved the better.

Joy

February 24, 1997

The Focus Group is currently undertaking the preparation of the 33 proposals collected at the bargaining and membership information meetings held in November, December and January. Each member of the Focus Group is going through different topics and they will be put into a format proposed by the facilitator Jay Sparks (hired jointly by NASA and the University). Basically, the proposals are being converted to statements of " Issues, Issue Statements and Primary Interests" following the example given by Mr. Sparks. We are going to try to get a copy of our efforts ready for collation by one of our members by today. The preparation of these "Issues" will be the focus of our efforts for the next few weeks as we get ready for the commencement of the Interest based bargaining process (March 19th, 1997).

Our next meeting is Thursday, February 27th at 4:45 at the NASA office to go over our combined efforts. Don't forget; we still need a few more volunteers to serve on the Focus Group. Bargaining is the biggest job your union does for you. If you would like to be involved, please do not hesitate to call or e-mail me.

Joy Correia

February 17, 1997

Welcome to the Focus Group Information Page!

As the Chairperson of the Focus Group, I want to take this first opportunity to introduce NASA members to a new source of information during the bargaining period. Using this Web Page will not substitute for information NASA will be sending out by campus mail, nor replace the information meetings that will be held over the next few months. However, this Page will give us a chance to broadcast information quickly, and create a resource on our bargaining.

The Focus Group has already started holding weekly meeting (Thursdays after work, 5-7pm) for about 2 hrs. a session in order to flesh out the issue statements for the new method of bargaining. I don't anticipate this schedule lasting for much more than the next 3-4 weeks. Our current task is preparation for bargaining. Once that begins (deadline is March 19th), we will be meeting with the bargaining team for updates.

Unfortunately, after losing a number of Group members who were elected to the FG at the January General Meeting, we are now looking for other interested members to join us (hopefully from areas we don't already have representation). It would be important to know about any volunteers soon as we (FG et al) have training sessions in interest-based bargaining coming up shortly (see below).

Schedule for bargaining is as follows:

To get in touch with the Focus Group, please write to us at NASA Office, or via email.

Joy Correia

Back to the Top