THE NASA OPERATING CONTRACT

Commentary:
What about This Deal?

TRUST TOPICS

WHAT'S NEW?

REP'S COUNCIL

STEWARD'S CORNER

ABOUT NASA

TRUST TOPICS

UNION COMMITTEES AND REPORTS

SOLIDARITY!

SITE INDEX

CONTACT US

Last updated: 03/15/99

Trust Bargaining Update – February 22, 1999
Joy Correia, Trust Bargaining Focus Group Chair

Attention: Trust Employees
Debbie O'Neill, Michelle Rooker, Rod Gramlich and Robert Rolf

A Few Quick Notes Regarding the Trust Agreement
Patricia Burgess C.E.T.

Trust Agreement Reached!

TO: All Trust Support Staff Members
FROM: Barbara Surdykowski, Chief Negotiator, and The NASA Negotiating Team
DATE: February 24, 1999

RE: Proposed Trust Collective Agreement

On February 19, 1999, NASA and the University of Alberta concluded a contract on behalf of Trust Support Staff at the U of A. This proposed settlement is now before the Trust members of NASA for ratification.

The NASA bargaining team is endorsing this collective agreement and urges you to vote in favour of this contract.

• Salary provisions match the operating collective agreement retroactive from April 1, 1998 through to the year 2000. The proposed October 1999 increase, which is based on the operating benefit costs, will be added to the Trust salaries despite a difference in the plans.

• For the first time, the full health benefit package is available to part-time trust employees. You can choose to opt-in to benefits you need. Long-term disability and life insurance are mandatory benefits. Although the cost-sharing is 30% paid by the employee, we think having these benefits available to you is a significant gain.

• Illness entitlement and accrual has been increased.

• The hours of work clause has been written to provide for flexibility in your scheduling, a condition that you told us you enjoy. However, there are protections have been built in to promote reasonable expectations in the kind of schedules you are expected to work.

• Vacation entitlement has been improved. If you have five years worked as of April 1, 1998, you will be entitled to four weeks of vacation effective March 31, 1999. If you have 16 years worked as of April 1, 1999, you will earn five weeks of vacation to be taken in the year 2000.

Breaks of employment of less than three months or layoff of under 24 months will not sever your service. You will not be considered as a new-hire for vacation and other benefit purposes.

• You will receive double time for work on a paid holiday.

• Job evaluations are available for you to initiate. Further, over the passage of time, all positions will be reviewed by the job evaluation unit.

• We have been able to address your job security concerns. Employees with more than five years of continuous employment will now have notice provisions (of up to six months) in the event the job ends. There will be an onus on the employer to assist in job finding on campus. Trust employees will have the right to recall for a period of 24 months to job opportunities in trust positions on campus.

• Trustholders who suffer severe budget cuts will have a mechanism to provide alternative terms of employment to the trust employees who work for them. However, the acceptance and negotiation of alternate terms will be controlled by the employee and NASA together.

• Retroactive provisions negotiated include compensation and adjustment of entitlements to compensate those employees who were not paid for the winter closure of 1997, and HRDF funding for those who have taken eligible courses since April 1, 1998.

• Trust employees will now have a contract to rely on for equitable treatment amongst all trust employees. You will have a grievance procedure and representation when and if you need it.

No, the proposed agreement does not provide for all the entitlements of the operating agreement. In some cases, those provisions would not be appropriate considering the nature of Trust employment. In other cases, NASA was not able to negotiate certain terms (e.g. standby and call-back). However, when you review the attached synopsis of the proposed agreement, we believe that you will be pleased with the package as a whole.

We encourage you to vote in favour of this proposed agreement. If this agreement is not ratified, NASA will proceed to mediation and arbitration to resolve the contract. Arbitrated settlements are imposed by a third party and not subject to a ratification vote.

In the fall, ALL NASA members will be in negotiations together, working for common terms for all employees, while addressing the special interests of various groups on employees.

(Prepared and written on a "without prejudice" basis; ie. this is our perspective, and is not binding on the bargaining teams.)

"CA" in the table below refers to the Collective Agreement signed earlier this year between the University of Alberta and NASA. This agreement can be viewed at [www.ualberta.ca/~rcouncil/C-START.htm.]

Note: Notwithstanding clause (Article 29).

This article provides an opportunity for a trustholder who cannot meet the contract requirements (funding reason) to negotiate with HR and NASA to amend the terms for an employee. The trustholder would have to prove his/her case to NASA’s satisfaction. NASA would work with the employee to identify the employee’s best interests in amending the conditions. For example, an employee may elect to reduce their work hours for a period of time or may agree to amend the rate of pay for a period of time. There are no options outlined in the contract in order to allow the employee and NASA to create the best solution for the member. A grievance could be filed where the employer was unreasonably requiring changes to a person’s conditions of employment.

The trust employees will be paid for all the unpaid days during this time. In addition, where there were amendments made to vacation, accrued overtime etc. these entitlements will be readjusted and reinstated.

The employer says it doesn’t happen. When an employee returns to work, overtime provisions would apply. The Union has proposed that where we can show this does occur, that the operating agreement applies. This remains outstanding. NASA is interested in hearing from employees who are affected.

Attention: Trust Employees

As trust funded employees at the University of Alberta, you are now being asked to vote on the ratification of the recently signed Trust Employee Collective Agreement. NASA and the UofA have agreed in principle to a modified collective agreement, which will, if accepted by a trust employee ratification vote, become the binding employment contract for trust employees at the University of Alberta. It is our concern that trust employees be made aware of the following DIFFERENCES between the existing operating staff collective agreement, and the proposed trust employee collective agreement.

1. The trust agreement DOES NOT and CANNOT guarantee (because of the volatile nature of trust funding) implementation of negotiated wage settlements (eg. salary increases, merit increments). The trust holders retain the 'right' to refuse your entitled salary increases based upon a legitimate 'lack of funding'. However, the new trust agreement does include a 'notwithstanding clause' which directly addresses this issue. In the event that the trust funds cannot provide trust salary increases, the trust holder WILL be required to submit documentation proving the 'inability' to meet salary entitlements. Subsequently, compensation (in lieu of monetary provisions) MUST be mutually agreed upon by the employee, the trust holder, NASA and Human Resource Services. The form of the compensation has NOT been defined, which allows for situation dependent mutual agreements to be engineered. Current compensation measures being proposed are equivalent time off, shortened hours or increased vacation time. The purpose of the notwithstanding clause is to allow implementation of whatever works BEST for YOUR situation, while at the same time preventing employment termination due to wage demands which CANNOT be met by limited trust accounts. The trust agreement also does NOT protect you against possible negotiated salary rollback, even though trust funds may have already been committed, budgeted for, and available for current trust employee salaries and benefits.

2. The trust agreement DOES NOT provide vacation entitlement equal to the vacation entitlement currently enjoyed by operating staff. The three week cap for trust employees with 5 years of service has been lifted (effective April 1, 1998, these employees will be entitled to 4 weeks vacation). Qualified trust employees with greater than 16 years service will now realize a maximum of five weeks vacation entitlement (this entitlement is NOT retroactive, and the higher accrual rates will not begin until April 1, 1999). The biggest difference between trust and operating staff may be observed in long-term employee vacation entitlement. Qualified operating employees (23 years+) are entitled to a maximum of six weeks vacation, while trust will be capped at five weeks.

3. The trust agreement DOES NOT provide 100% benefits costs coverage for part time trust employees (which is the coverage part time operating staff currently enjoy). However, the proposed trust agreement does provide for a 70%-30% (trust holder - trust employee) cost split. While this is not equal to the 100% paid benefits enjoyed by part time operating staff, it is considerably better than the existing scenario for part time trust, whereby NO benefits costs are covered. The P/T trust benefits DO NOT COMMENCE until JULY 1/99.

4. The agreement DOES NOT provide for reimbursement of 'union dues' deducted to date. These accumulated monies will be paid to NASA in the form of 'dues', retroactive to January 1997 (as a result of the December 96 ALRB Howes decision). There is no acknowledgement or adjustment for the fact that trust were NOT COVERED by a collective agreement during this 27 MONTH period of 'dues deductions', and that trust negotiations did not actually begin until March '98. Also, be aware of the fact that the operating membership dues recently increased. The trust dues increase was 'postponed' until the trust agreement was in place. Trust 'union dues' WILL increase to the equivalent of operating dues 30 days after ratification of this agreement !

5. The trust agreement DOES NOT provide for a systematic review (job evaluation) of trust positions. The onus of initiating position evaluations, for the time being, falls upon the trust employee.

6. Note that the agreement DOES provide entitlement to HRDF funding ($500.00/annum) retroactive to April 1, 1998. You may be eligible for reimbursement of work related training costs you paid out of your own pocket since April 1/98, since funding for this fiscal year continues to be available. The agreement also provides for remission of fees, and time off (mutually agreed upon by the trust holder and the trust employee) for UofA credit courses.

This summarizes the major differences between the proposed trust CA and the existing operating CA, as well as highlighting some benefits which trust employees will now be afforded. It is our belief that trust employees should be fully aware of these differences prior to casting their vote. It is also NOT our intent to recommend the acceptance or rejection of the proposed agreement, but rather to ensure that you are made aware of pertinent differences as they will affect you. Also, you MUST be a member of NASA to vote on this contract ! There are currently FEWER THAN 200 (of a possible 700) trust members signed up with NASA, and THEY will be the people deciding the outcome of this vote if you do not sign a membership application and cast YOUR ballot.

One footnote here is the consequence of a 'NO' vote. Failure to ratify this contract will LIKELY take the parties back to mediation, and thereby result in another lengthy delay in settlement (while you CONTINUE to pay 'service fees').

Sincerely,
Debbie O'Neill, Michelle Rooker, Rod Gramlich and Robert Rolf
(Members of the NASA Trust Negotiations Focus Group)

First, let me state that we should not view ourselves, nor allow others to view us as trying to "get more for less"; rather, we should remember that we give the best that we can give in time, effort, energy, and talent; but most of all we perform according to a professional code of ethics and honesty. Some of us even enjoy our work! Nor should we be seen as less than others of equivalent experience, education and commitment.

Second, while I do not disagree with the remarks by Rod, Robert, Debbie and Michelle, I do feel that we should also look at what the newly agreed upon Trust Agreement DOES render to Trust Employees who have, to date, no code except that of the University Rules and Regulations which often has not been applied.

1.The Trust Agreement DOES ensure that trust employees receive INFORMATION regarding their employment standards upon appointment such as:

a) Job Fact Sheets

b) Job Evaluation

c) Performance Review and Increments

d) Hours of work, coffee/lunch breaks

e) Overtime pay

f) Vacations

g) HRDF/UofA Credit Courses

h) Replacement of Tools

i) Employee Benefits

j) Illness Leave

…etc.

This information would be supplied by NASA through the Trust CA. Previously, some Trustholders ignored the University’s own Rules and Regulations (latest issue 1993).

2. The Trust Agreement, by its mere existence, DOES provide avenues of redress when problems occur. (See Dispute Resolution).

3. The Trust Agreement DOES provide for benefits after one year’s service, no matter how many Trustholders/Appointments may be involved.

4. The Trust Agreement, again by its mere existence, DOES put Trustholders on notice that Trust Employees ARE informed and DO have redress.

5. Trust Agreement, though flawed, if/when ratified WILL exist – what DID Trust Employees have before this???

Some may say that they were content with what they were accorded or had negotiated without a CA. My concern is for all of those Trust employees who have NOT received the advantages which may have accrued to other Trust Employees.

I have no problem with dues paid to date or in the future; however, I don’t think we should have our dues increased until we have greater parity with Operating Employees – perhaps after the next round of negotiations.

That said, I have more reasons for ratifying the agreement than for not doing so.

Patricia Burgess C.E.T.
Member of the NASA Trust Negotiations Focus Group.