South Dakota Council of Higher Education

September 2010
Dear COHE Member,

                We are gearing up for another tough round of negotiations with the BOR.  While I had hoped on gaining some ground with a new Executive Director and a new BOR President, but many of their recent actions suggest that they continue to ignore faculty rights by deprofessionalizing us.  They often treat us with disdain.  Of course, we are used to such behavior, because we regularly see it from our own campus administrators.

                In this letter, I am seeking your ideas and proposals for contract negotiation items.  I will highlight a few major ones below. However, as a dues-paying COHE member, you have a right to participate in this process from the beginning. We will give non-COHE faculty unit members an opportunity to submit items, but your proposals come first.  I will then assemble these into a survey where COHE members can rate or prioritize the items.  The COHE Executive Board will review these results and make recommendations to the Bargaining Team.

                I have already contacted the BOR about a bargaining schedule and anticipate we will begin meeting in November/December and continue through the Spring Semester.  Hopefully, these negotiations will be completed by April, when all COHE members will have an opportunity to vote on the proposed changes.  We approach these negotiations, as we always have, in good faith that the BOR will listen to our proposals and attempt to reach a compromise.  Of course, we will be tough and hold our ground.

                In the past, I had suggested a "full-court press" strategy, where we would take on all 18 imposed items and major items like the salary formula.  It is evident to me that there is no support for this strategy among the COHE Executive Board and COHE members on the campuses.  Instead, I will suggest to the Executive Board that we select a few major items and possibly a couple of minor ones to bring to the table.  The Board will make that determination based on your recommendations.

                When you propose an item, please indicate the specific contract section number to which you are referring.  We would really appreciate it, if you could draft some language and/or a rationale for the change.  Of course, this is not required, but it would share the burden over a larger number of members.

  Major Items For Negotiation

Lack of Pay Raise in Relation to Performance Formula

My attendance at recent BOR meetings indicates to me that the lack of a pay increase for two years concerns several Regents. One contract change they are likely to propose this year is related to how these zero percent raises affect their performance scheme.   They recognize that faculty who have been exceeding expectations (as measured by BOR-imposed standards) in those years have not gotten any financial return for their efforts. 

I think they will offer some kind of proposal that will cover those back years.  I do not think they have it figured out yet.

Here is my guess: They are likely to offer language that when there is a large percentage increase available (5 to 8%, perhaps), the money be spread out over the past years when there was no increase.   Somehow, they will want to average the performance of those "zero increase" years and "reward" those who performed highly on their measures.

My response would be "that is a good start, but you are missing the larger point."  As you are well aware, even when there is an increase in salaries, it is not a COLA or inflationary adjustment.  Moreover, we have tremendous salary compression and even inversion in some departments.  This is a more pressing issue!

One proposal is that we ask to "reset" the system by guaranteeing every faculty member a fixed percent of the Oklahoma Faculty Survey (say, 85 or 90% of market).   This rewards those loyal, productive full professors who have seen salary erosion and seen freshly-minted Ph.D.s with little or no teaching experience arrive in SD with close to the full professor's salary.

If they ask, "where do we get the money?"  My first response is "that is not my job, but yours."  My second response is "well, let's talk about the increasing expenses of administration.   Both the number and salaries of campus administrators and the BOR staff have ballooned over the last ten years."

Academic Freedom

As you are aware, academic freedom is under assault everywhere.   I have collected a few news stories on the recent attempt to terminate an SDSU professor.   Also, I strongly urge you to review the NEA Policy on Academic and Intellectual Freedom and Tenure in Higher Education.

I am particularly concerned because a recent federal court ruling declares that a public university "is entitled to unfettered discretion when it restricts statements an employee makes on the job and according to his professional responsibilities."  (Hong v. Grant, 2007).  The court relied on the logic offered in a U.S. Supreme Court decision about public employees (Garcetti v. Ceballos, 2005).  It galls me that the Hong caseapplies that logic to a university professor!

One proposal is to review the AAUP documents on this issue and see if we can excerpt some of that language as a contract change.

Adherence To Contractual Procedures

I should really call this lack of adherence to contractual procedures.  In both the termination case above and intellectual property disclosures, the BOR and campus administrators have thumbed their nose at their own rules.  In several IP cases, administrators have ignored--or even declared new--timelines arbitrarily without consulting the faculty involved.  One proposal is to explore whether some kind of arbitration board, jointly composed of COHE and BOR appointees, could adjudicate these cases.

Other Possible Proposals 

Qualifications for P&T Committees and Term-limits
A couple of campuses have brought forth the concern that faculty with ranks below Full Professor can serve on these committees.  Also, some would like to see term limits.

Part-Time Adjuncts and At-Will Instructors
As the NEA policy cited above indicates, a large threat to academic freedom is the increasing percent of faculty hires that are part-time and/or instructors with rolling contracts.  These appointments have no possibility for rank promotions or tenure (and limited opportunities for professional development).  We could propose a system for full-time teaching appointments (several already exist), so that these individuals have these protections as well.  We could also propose they become part of our bargaining unit, even if they are employed less than one-half time.

Extend Contract Period
It is a burden to your Executive Board to negotiate this contract every three years.  Should we propose extending the contract period from three to four (or five) years?  It would prevent onerous changes from taking place quickly and would secure any victory we might achieve this round.

Well, the point of this letter is to solicit your opinions, not for you to hear mine. However, I wanted to provide some insights into what I am hearing from my attendance at the BOR meetings and from members on the various campuses.  Please send a message with any of your ideas to my non-university email address, "garyaguiar1@gmail.com," before October 7.

Finally, I would also like to express my sincere gratitude for your membership in COHE!  Your dues is much appreciated.   Also, many of you spend substantial time working for COHE and on behalf of all faculty in an official or unofficial capacity.  All of this in addition to the terrific work in your "day jobs" improving higher education in South Dakota.  THANK YOU!!!

Your brother in defense of faculty rights,
Gary
 
p.s. Please forward this letter to new COHE members and ask them to subscribe on our Website (sdcohe.org).