Bargaining Bulletin #5

Update: Decolonization, Collegial model, and Regularization

Dear members:

We had bargaining sessions this week on Monday, 6 March, and Thursday, 9 March. In the interest of efficiency, we confined our discussions to a few topics at each session. On Monday two key items were our proposal for “Decolonization, Reconciliation, and Indigenization,” and our response to their proposals around the Collegial Decision-Making model.

In their response to our decolonization proposal, crafted with the guidance of our Indigenous colleagues, the employer acknowledged the value of some of the language but hesitated to commit the institution to such a sweeping, inclusive review. They argued that any agreement reached at the table should be in reference to reviewing the Collective Agreement alone and not bind the employer to a larger institutional review. This is disappointing given the simultaneous tabling of proposals that would weaken the consultative process (most significantly, their desire to delete the model in article 2.8).

In their response, the employer emphasized the role of the Board, Senate, and Office of Indigenous Education and Affairs in addressing pan-university issues, without acknowledging the inadequate efforts of those bodies to address decolonization, reconciliation, or Indigenization thus far. If those bodies had been successful, it is unlikely that there would be a need to address the issues through bargaining.

On Monday we delivered a thorough response to their proposals regarding the current decision-making model, explaining the history and value of article 2.8 and other related articles. We also underscored its importance to our members.

On Thursday, we were expecting a response to our statements about the decision-making model, having asked for one on Monday. The employer did not have a response but said they would respond at the next negotiations meeting on 27 March.

We spent most of Thursday's meeting on Regularization. The employer emphasized that there may be some room to move on regularization, provided we ensure “rigorous” evaluation of new faculty since there is a danger of the evaluators being too easy on new colleagues.

Anyone who has ever served on an evaluation committee, or been evaluated at this institution, will recognize the weakness in this line of reasoning. We indicated to the employer that their characterization of the evaluation process is inaccurate.

We encourage you to attend the 21 March 2023 General Meeting (watch for the e-mail invitation), in which we will give a further update. We also encourage you to attend the training on the collegial model on Tuesday 14 March at 11:30 a.m.

Before closing, we want to correct an error in the previous bulletin. We wrote that the past First Nations Advisory Committee was also known as the "Indigenize the Academy" committee. This was incorrect. The two were separate committees. We apologize for that error. Our current proposal for a Joint Decolonization, Reconciliation, and Indigenization Committee is, however, intended to resume the work of both of those past committees.

If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to email a member of your Faculty Association bargaining committee.

In Solidarity, Michael Begg (Chief Bargainer), Douglas Alards-Tomalin, Tim Acton, Monica Staff (FPSE staff representative), Eduardo Azmitia: CFA President (ex officio)

Previous
Previous

Bargaining Bulletin #6

Next
Next

2023 International Women's Day