Got questions about membership? Click here for FAQs!

Promoting Quality Higher Education– An Investment in Oregon’s Future

BARGAINING

Session 13: Success in Negotiating Continuous Appointments for Instructors

October 07, 2015 / Phil Lesch

On October 6th, we completed our bargaining over non-tenure track instructional faculty (NTTF). We have now conceptually agreed upon all of the details of a new system of continuous employment for our instructional NTTF. We will still need to draft and approve contract language for this system, so please look for a joint statement about this tentative agreement, which will be issued sometime next week.

The primary issue we resolved today was the transition plan for current NTTF. We conceptually agreed that:

  • Current NTTF who have reached the 4 year seniority mark and promoted will automatically convert to a continuous appointment.
  • Current NTTF who have not promoted, but have completed 6 years and have four recent annual or multi-year reviews will automatically convert to a continuous appointment.
  • Current NTTF who have reached the 4 year seniority mark, but haven’t promoted and have less than 6 years experience, can apply to convert to a continuous appointment.
  • Current NTTF who have not yet reached the 4 year seniority mark will be granted a continuous appointment if they promote in their 4th year. If they do not plan to promote, they can apply for a continuous appointment.

Faculty Senate, and then each department/unit, will need to create guidelines about how continuous appointment peer review procedures. In the interim, we conceptually agreed that applicants can put together a portfolio that includes: a narrative self-evaluation, CV, letters from colleagues or community partners, syllabi or other teaching materials that support the narrative, quantitative summaries of student evaluations, previous annual reviews and additional departmental-specific materials.

This issue took a long time to process, in part, because we’ve created an entire new system of employment for instructional NTTF. The Interest-Based Bargaining process (and strong member mobilization) really facilities this type of institutional change. While we may have been able to make this gain through traditional bargaining (and strong member mobilization), the IBB process ensures more buy-in, from both sides, in the final result.

Next session, we will discuss how we want to move forward with crafting a similar system for our non-tenure track researchers. If you are a researcher, our bargaining team would love to get your input on how we can increase your job security given soft funding constraints. Please email leanne@psuaaup.net to share your story and ideas with our team.

We will also spend time next session sequencing our bargaining issues. We have a number of issues we need to address including: academic professional issues, Summer Session, Professional Development, and of course, wages and benefits.

More good news! We signed-off on…

  • Article 11: Changing how academic professionals are released from duties to participate in bargaining. Previous contract language was written with only faculty in mind
  • Transfer of Tenure Home procedures

Blog Categories