Welcome to the All Faculty Association
Summer 2018 Negotiations Update
Dear Faculty colleagues,
As you recall, in April 2018, the District proposed a pause in impasse proceedings, and Dr. Chong authorized the District negotiations team to return to the table and recommence negotiations with the AFA team. Those meetings began in May, and they have continued into the summer. I can report that the two teams are engaged in good faith negotiations, are working hard, and are making progress. The AFA team remains hopeful that we and the District will come to a mutually satisfactory agreement by the beginning of the Fall 2018 semester. We are also prepared to continue negotiating if it takes longer than that to reach an agreement.
In the meantime, here are a few things you should know as the August 20 start date for Fall 2018 classes approaches.
Our negotiations are ongoing, and should we reach an agreement with the District before the start of Fall 2018 classes we will inform the faculty about details right away.
In case current negotiations are still ongoing at the start of Fall classes, faculty paychecks August 31 and September 10 will reflect the application of the Rank 10 formula for 2018-19. The complete salary schedule, showing the Rank 10 calculation for 2018-19, is at the AFA site here . (This draft is still pending review by the District.)
In what we hope is the unlikely event that our current negotiations should stall, the District and AFA retain the right to restart impasse proceedings, moving on to the fact-finding stage. In case that happens, faculty paychecks during the Fall of 2018 will reflect the application of the Rank 10 formula for 2018-19, until such time as the fact-finding process is completed, and the PERB negotiator issues a settlement proposal.
Chief Negotiations Officer, AFA
Information about the recent Supreme Court Ruling regarding Fair Share Service Fees
Dear SRJC faculty colleagues,
As you probably know the Supreme Court, in its Janus v. AFSCME decision on Wednesday June 27, changed the law on the collection of fair-share fees from public sector employees who are represented by, but not members of a union. The legal precedent that was overturned by Wednesday's SCOTUS decision, set in 1977 by Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, held that fair share fees were legal but could be used only to cover costs of negotiating compensation and working conditions. The Janus decision holds that such fees are unconstitutional on free speech grounds, and orders that collection of fees be immediately stopped.
If you are a member of AFA, we thank you for your support. This decision changes nothing for you personally, at least for the time being. More broadly speaking, however, the Janus decision is a significant blow to public sector unions such as AFA, threatening to make it more difficult for unions successfully to represent their membership in matters of pay and working conditions.
If you are not a member of AFA, the decision means that a fair share fee will no longer be collected from your paycheck, starting with the first paycheck you receive after July 10. We can't predict how California and federal law will evolve in response to the Janus decision, but as of today, AFA continues to represent you in negotiations and other contractual matters, exactly as before. That includes negotiations with the District over the Rank 10 salary formula, which are ongoing through the summer. But the union will no longer have the support of your fees.
AFA is proud of its history of success in representing the faculty at SRJC. The loss of fair share fees, if left unremedied, threatens that record of success. And the remedy is simple: AFA urges all faculty members who have not yet joined the union to do so, as a means of defending and promoting your own personal interests and the collective interests of your faculty colleagues. Look for information coming soon about how to determine whether you are a member, and if not, how to join AFA.
Many of you are surely also aware of the larger national political stakes of the Janus decision. Look for further communications about this larger context at the beginning of Fall semester. This link will take you to a Dialogue piece from 2016, addressing those stakes, in reference to a precursor case to Janus, Friedrichs vs. CTA. The link below that is a to a useful summary discussion of Janus and its implications by the Economic Policy Institute, a labor-sympathetic independent think tank.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Chief Negotiating Officer, AFA