Adjunct faculty

Action alert: urge Newsom to increase the part-time workload cap

Part-timers have long spoken of the difficulty of having to commute between multiple community college districts just to make ends meet, since current California law limits the amount a part-timer can work in one district to 67% of a full-time load. AB 1856 (Medina) would increase the cap on part-time workload from 67% to 85%–allowing part-timers to devote more time and attention to students in a single district, rather than working in 2, 3, or more. We know that raising the cap isn’t the only measure required to solve the issues raised by adjunctification, and we continue to advocate for more full-time hires and a concrete plan to end the two-tier system. Nonetheless, raising the cap to 85% will improve part-timers’ quality of life as well as allowing part-timers to better support our students and engage in our community.

With the support of our statewide union, the CFT, AB 1856 has passed both houses of the California legislature. Now it needs Governor Newsom’s signature. Please use this link to send a pre-written letter to the Governor urging him to sign the bill to raise the cap: https://actionnetwork.org/letters/increase-the-workload-cap

It takes just 30 seconds to send a letter and could make the difference in whether AB 1856 gets the Governor’s signature. Our goal statewide is to get as many letters as possible sent today, so please take a moment right now and urge Governor Newsom to sign AB 1856.

District salary comparisons

How does SMCCCD instructional adjunct pay compare to neighboring districts?

[Jump directly to Comparison Table]

Despite significant increases in pay rates for SMCCCD instructional adjunct faculty over the last three-year contract, the actual pay-per-class compensation still lags significantly behind the Marin and Mission/West Valley districts and is also behind the San Jose/Evergreen district when comparing all but the highest steps.  SMCCCD part-time instructional faculty, therefore, continue to be the lowest paid of those in the four Bay Area “Basic Aid”/”Community-supported” community college districts.  Our district is also the only one of the six districts between San Jose and Marin that still continues to pay part-time instructors on an hourly rather than on a unit-load based rate. All of the other districts pay instructional adjunct faculty a set percentage of full-time instructional faculty (often referred to as a “parity’ percentage)—from 95% at Marin to 73% at San Jose/Evergreen—and adjunct instructional faculty in all of those other districts are paid on a “mirrored schedule” which has the same columns (reflecting educational levels) as full-time faculty. (For example, click here to view the Mission/West Valley district’s instructional adjunct faculty salary schedule.)

Adjunct faculty in our district are not paid at a set percentage of full-time faculty; the parity percentage depends on which step on the salary schedule and what educational level is compared. For example, an adjunct instructor at Step 1 with an MA makes 71% of a full-time instructor with the same experience and educational level, while a part-timer at Step 10 and has an MA plus 30 additional units makes 77.5% of a full-time instructor with the same experience and educational level. Paying by load rather than by hour provides a clear and equitable way to set adjunct instructional faculty pay rates at a uniform parity percentage of full-time faculty. In the last round of contract negotiations AFT and the District agreed to form a group to study the logistics of moving to load-based pay for adjunct instructors in the next contract.

The San Mateo District has agreed to an ongoing commitment that, until SMCCCD achieves the parity goal of 85% for instructional adjuncts, the District will commit funds to closing the parity gap over and above the money it makes available for compensation and benefits improvements for all faculty. (Because the parity percentages of adjunct non-instructional faculty pay rates are currently significantly higher than those of instructional faculty, those rates will not reflect increases made specifically for instructional faculty; adjunct non-instructional faculty will continue to receive the same percentage pay increases as negotiated for all faculty.)

Comparison of 2022-23 Adjunct Instructional Faculty Compensation
for SMCCCD and Neighboring Districts
Based on teaching one 3-unit class

Click on the linked name of each district in the chart above to view the salary schedules for that district.
SMCCCD: Calculation to translate hourly rate to 3-unit load: Hourly Rate x Hours/Week (3) x Weeks/Semester (17.5) + Office Hour Rate x Weeks/Semester (17.5)
* 2022-23 rates (Marin, Mission/WV, SJ/Evergreen, Foothill); * 2021-22 rates (SMCCCD, CCSF);
BA – “Basic Aid”/”Community-supported” districts

New “Mirrored Schedule” begins in Fall 2022

One of the final items the District agreed to in the last round of contract negotiations was to give adjunct instructors all 25 experience-based salary steps currently available to full-timers, rather than the 11 that adjuncts had previously. Beginning in the Fall ’22 semester, instructional adjuncts now have a full “mirrored schedule” with all the steps (to recognize experience) and columns (to recognize education) that full-timers have. The new schedule was created by making Steps 1-11 on the 2021-2022 adjunct instructional schedule Steps 1-11 of the Master’s column on the new schedule, then building out the other columns and steps using the percentage differences between columns and steps on the full-time salary schedule. The following special conditions will apply:

• Adjunct instructors with a Master’s, MA+45 units, MA+60 units, or PhD/EdD/JD will be placed into the column corresponding to that degree.
• Adjunct instructors who do not have a Master’s, and who are on a 2021-2022 SMCCCD seniority list, will be placed into the Master’s column.
• Adjunct instructors who have been at Step 11 for at least three years will be placed at Step 14. All other adjunct instructors will be placed one step above their 2021-2022 step.

With the establishment of the new mirrored schedule, all adjunct instructional faculty members received some pay increases, but those with higher levels of education have received greater pay bumps.

[Note: This article is an update of the instructional adjunct salary comparison article in the May 2022 Advocate. It reflects SMCCCD’s new 2022-23 mirrored instructional adjunct salary schedule as well as recent increases in neighboring districts’ salary schedules.]

Faculty Contract negotiations

Report on September 2nd contract bargaining session

by Marianne Kaletzky, AFT 1493 Executive Secretary and Negotiating Team Member

Below is a report on the most recent bargaining session between AFT and District negotiators on a new 3-year faculty contract (July 2022 – June 2025) that took place on Friday, September 2.  To read reports on all previous bargaining sessions, see the Negotiations Reports page.

AFT:  Negotiators: Joaquín Rivera (Chief Negotiator), Monica Malamud, Marianne Kaletzky; observers: Eric Brenner, Rika Yonemura-Fabian, and Lori Slicton

SMCCD District: Randy Erickson, Julie Johnson, Mitch Bailey, David Feune, Aaron McVean, Max Hartman, Joe Morello, Charlene Frontiera

Summary:

After refusing to even negotiate over an MOU at our last bargaining session, the District opened this session with a proposal to continue the provisions of the MOU from Summer 2022. AFT offered a counter, but the District would not agree to several of our proposals, and discussions on the Fall 2022 MOU will continue at our next session. The parties also discussed contract articles on union rights and part-time seniority.

—–

Full report:

At the last AFT/SMCCCD negotiations session on August 24^th, the District’s bargaining team refused to even negotiate over AFT’s proposal for an MOU covering Covid-specific conditions, including the District’s recent adoption of a framework that makes indoor masking optional in some circumstances. District chief negotiator Randy Erickson argued that faculty no longer need an MOU as we have returned to the status quo.

At this negotiation session, the District changed course and proposed an MOU for Fall that continues the provisions of the brief Summer 2022 MOU, namely:

1. The District will continue providing N95s as well as surgical masks to employees, students, and community members.
2. Faculty will have access to an interactive process to determine if a reasonable accommodation is available if a) the faculty member themselves has a health condition that necessitates accommodation so they can continue doing their job amidst the new masking framework or b) the faculty member lives with someone who is immunocompromised, under 1 year of age, or medically documented to be at higher risk of complications from Covid.

While the summer MOU was necessary to offer essential protections to faculty working in summer, summer is a very short term, and AFT believes that additional MOU provisions would do more to ensure that student learning continues as smoothly as possible during Fall 2022, even amidst the inevitable disruptions of Covid. AFT negotiators responded to the very brief MOU proposed by the District with an MOU that has far fewer articles than the Covid MOUs from Spring 2022 and prior, but that nonetheless provides key support for faculty. AFT’s MOU proposal included, in addition to the articles proposed by the District:

• The right for faculty to temporarily pivot to remote delivery if they have to isolate or quarantine, yet feel well enough to continue working remotely. This provision would also allow faculty to temporarily pivot to remote delivery if they have to care for a household member who must isolate or quarantine. In this case, rather than having to hope a substitute is available and risk disruption to their students’ experience, faculty will be able to continue working remotely for a short period.
• The guarantee that the District will provide the additional Covid sick time buckets currently guaranteed by California law—even if that law expires on September 30th, as originally specified by the state. While indications are that Supplemental Paid Sick Leave may be extended, AFT’s proposal would guarantee that faculty who contract Covid or must care for someone who has to stay home due to Covid-related reasons will have additional sick leave available, regardless of state law.
• The guarantee that the District will provide synchronous technical support to students between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. Without guaranteed tech support provided by the District, faculty may face a higher workload if they are forced to provide tech support for students who need it while continuing to carry out their primary duties.

The District rejected these proposals. In response, AFT submitted one more counterproposal on the MOU just before the close of negotiations at 5 p.m. The District did not respond to this counter on Thursday, and indicated they will respond at our next negotiations session on September 20, 2022. While we would rather have an MOU in place sooner, it unfortunately has not been possible given the dates we have on the calendar and the approach the District has taken.

AFT and the District additionally continued negotiations over Article 1 (Union Rights) and Article 19 (Part-Time Employment) of our multiyear contract. However, we were unable to reach agreement on either article.

Upcoming bargaining dates:

• Tuesday, September 20: 1-5 p.m.