Standing room only: Union members expose contract shortfalls, demand real bargaining

By Jessica Silver-Sharp

SMCCCD employees packed the board room to share their concerns with trustees (8/27/25).

In a strong showing of democratic participation, leaders and rank and file members representing all three of SMCCCD’s employee unions recently crowded the District’s boardroom to decry the many ways that protracted negotiations are failing to produce fair pay, benefits and other essential protections for union members districtwide.

On August 27, CSEA and AFT marched together after gathering in Building 1, and were met by AFSCME members in green. Once the meeting began, union leaders addressed their comments to the Trustees, who were joined by the college presidents, student trustee Michael Llanell-Vararaj and Chancellor Melissa Moreno. (Note: find all speakers quoted in this article in Board meeting recordings linked below).^{1, 4}

Fauzi Hamedeh, CSEA, August 27, 2025. Photo by Justin Stevick. 

CSEA 2nd Vice President Fauzi Hamadeh presented a succinct and powerful analysis of the District’s actual financials that clearly proved the District’s ability to pay a fair wage.² This followed a more in-depth memo CSEA Chapter 33 had earlier presented to Trustees. 

AFT President Rika Yonemura Fabian reminded the Chancellor about her own recent comments at the District Opening Day assuring her employees that our District above all else, values its people. Her reproach: “A contract that provides fair pay and provisions for employee well-being would demonstrate such a commitment to valuing employees as people,” emphasizing, “so far, we don’t see that.” 

Again citing facts proving the District’s ability to pay while also noting his union contract’s two month expiration date, AFSCME 829 leader Ryan Shannon castigated the administration: “Every day that drags on sends a message to everyone in this room that the district doesn’t see its own workers as a priority.”

Source: Fauzi Hamedeh & CSEA presentation to the Board 8/27/25

Next, Board Chairman Mike Guingona announced to the crowd that they’d be denied their right to speak publicly that evening because they had missed the 5:00pm agenda slot to comment on closed session items (namely bargaining). Union members and leaders swiftly rejected that decision, citing years of precedence, and Chairman Guingona capitulated — but reduced allotted speaking times from three minutes to one. 

Thirty-two speakers followed, passionately raising a wide range of concerns related to contract provisions so far denied to all three unions in ongoing negotiations. Henry Fan of CSM explained: 

“Fair compensation is about dignity. We can’t promote equity while reinforcing wealth supremacy and wealth extraction…Like our firefighters and nurses, our community suffers when those who care for it can’t afford to stay in a region shaped by inequality.”

Mother-daughter classified professional team Alicia and Aria Frangos reminded the Board of their deep commitment to SMCCCD students while Skyline student alumnae Becca Wilson echoed the words of others, that “Inflation and the rising cost of living is exactly the reason the board should be supporting these new contracts.” AFSCME 33 President Joseph Puckett, San Mateo County Labor Council rep. Julie Lind, and many members of the Peninsula Democratic Socialists Club also spoke out. Covering the action from a student perspective, journalists from the Skyline College student newspaper, The Skyline View, attended as well.³

Round Two: September 10, 2025

CSEA 33 Secretary Rosie Morrison, Sept. 10, 2025

Union members returned to the Board en masse on September 10 to continue delivering their demands to the Trustees. With the Boardroom overflowing its capacity, many members looked on from the 2nd floor lobby. The majority of the almost 30 speakers demanded wages that keep up with inflation and the cost of living in one of the richest counties “in the history of the world” (Prof. Ben Feldman, Skyline). Many CSEA and AFT speakers specifically called out their solidarity with AFSCME workers, who held protest signs and flanked them in support.⁴

Among other topics, AFT faculty members challenged the District’s decision to deny essential family leave (Prof. Maher, Cañada) and salaries able to combat rapidly rising health insurance costs (Profs. James & Travis, CSM) or even account for inflation. Other faculty reminded the Board that academic freedom is a core value necessary for faculty to express and challenge ideas and beliefs without threat or fear of retaliation. (Profs. Zarur, Skyline; Eck & Lanska, Cañada) and that the District must take real action to protect undocumented immigrants and transgender faculty, provisions to protect the latter having been rejected by the District in bargaining (Profs. Kaslan, Cañada & Fabian Yonemura, Skyline). Faculty also demanded fair pay for lab classes and adjunct faculty.

Reminding the Board of the financial presentation shared earlier, CSEA 33 Secretary Rosie Morrison, shared:  “The district team has not formally presented a counter based in fact. The only response we have received from the board’s attorney is just because the district has more, doesn’t mean you’re going to get more.” Many other speakers that evening called out the rude and disrespectful tone of the District’s hired negotiators, anti-union lawyers Randy Erickson and Ellen Wu during bargaining sessions with the unions.

As the speakers continued, the anger in the room became increasingly palpable. In a fiery concluding speech, CSEA steward and Skyline College Public Safety Officer Brandon Becerra shamed the Board for failing to prioritize campus safety for students and employees by instead deferring to minimal staffing of officers required by law. 

Ana Mata from The San Mateo Daily Journal ⁵ turned out to cover the three-union action and the student journalists also returned.⁶

These recent actions demonstrate the unwavering solidarity of our unions in pursuing fair working conditions that benefit both employees and students. We will continue this effort until meaningful progress is achieved. Trustees and administrators must engage, bargain in good faith, and deliver a fair contract.

Endnotes

1. Board of Trustees August 27 meeting, video recording, https://smccd.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=df4f7990-d294-4d31-a4fe-b348012c41ea&start=5197.28872
2. Fauzi Hamedeh’s PDF presentation for CSEA
3. “Teachers union AFT1493 continues to protest for higher annual raise at district board meeting,” The Skyline View, August 28, 2025.
4. Board of Trustees September 10 meeting, video recording, https://smccd.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=a1ed1f6c-4fb0-4244-a6fc-b35501112e20&start=554.939194
5. “San Mateo County Community College District teachers’ union demands higher raise: District negotiators offering teachers a maximum 2% raise for next 3 years,” The San Mateo Daily Journal, Sept. 13, 2025.
6. “AFT1493 protests at second district board meeting this semester,” The Skyline View, Sept 12., 2025 (online edition)

Solidarity in motion: our colleges’ antiwar movement in May 1970

By Jessica Silver-Sharp

This is the third and final article in our Advocate series looking at student and faculty collaboration in our district during the 1970 Student Antiwar Strikes¹, which involved over a million students on nearly 900 college and high school campuses across the country. If you’re not familiar, these were in reaction to both the Kent State Massacre ² of students by the Ohio National Guard on May 4, 1970, opposition to America’s invasion of Cambodia, and the ongoing violence in Vietnam. 

Looking back, we know that while in 1970, Skyline (f. 1969) and Cañada (f. 1968) were very new colleges, CSM (f. 1922) had already experienced significant student protests, notably the 1968 College of San Mateo Student Uprisings ³ organized by the student members and advisors within the College Readiness Program (CRP) and members of the Third World Liberation Front.⁴

What we do know is that following the CSM student uprisings, students in the district increasingly voiced opposition to the Vietnam War, including to the Army draft. The first draft lottery was held December 1, 1969, such that male students entering college that Fall knew that once they graduated, they could face mandatory military service. 

Student organizing at SMCCD following Kent State

In the aftermath of Kent State (May 4, 1970), with student protests also escalating around the country, Cañada College students voted to go on strike,⁵ boycott classes for the rest of the semester, and join with faculty to hold teach-in style symposiums about Vietnam. Skyline students and faculty did not formally agree to strike but attended a mass meeting on campus, followed by multiday teach-in style symposiums⁶ organized by the Skyline College Strike Committee.⁷ They also joined protest activities at CSM.⁸

While many specific details remain to be uncovered about how students and faculty organized together, images in the CSM Historical Photograph Collection and our student newspapers from Cañada, CSM and Skyline form reliable sources for examining the events of May 1970. All of the newspapers have now been digitized by their respective colleges.

From these sources we know that CSM students did not vote to strike but a “collection of antiwar organizing committees” from the student council held several days of well attended rallies that included faculty speakers. Some CSM students and faculty also chose not to attend classes or pivoted their curriculum to anti-war topics. As CSM student journalist Tom Gildea reported in The San Matean:⁹

“The impressive movement, with its mass meetings day after day, had its origins in an open mike forum outside of the cafeteria Tuesday, May 5. A few of the speakers advocated violence, many urged non-violence, but almost all appeared discouraged over the Cambodian invasion…”

In response, on May 6 the Board held a mass meeting at CSM Men’s gym attended by about 500 people. There, “representatives from the faculty and students from Cañada, Skyline and CSM implored the Trustees to pass a resolution expressing its opposition to the war.” Remarkably, the Board complied the very next day.¹⁰

“…Be it resolved that, the Board of Trustees of San Mateo Junior College District does hereby urge the President of the United States and The Congress to take timely steps leading to the withdrawal of America’s military presence in South East Asia.”

Student peace march down 28th Avenue. The San Matean, Vol. 95, Number 12, May 15, 1970.

On May 7, with classes canceled by the District Superintendent (we now use the term “Chancellor”), but with all three campuses remaining open, Skyline’s faculty senate passed a resolution of support: “We therefore support, in principle, the Skyline student strike to [the] end that dedicated action may take place, both on the campus and extending into the community.”  The next day on May 8, a contingent of Skyline and Cañada students joined a CSM student-organized peace march numbering approximately 500 that began from CSM campus and ended down at San Mateo City Hall. While we know little about their planning efforts, a series of photographs captures the energy of students and faculty marching en masse through the streets of San Mateo. ¹¹

As promised by the Board, the next week a CSM student rep (name unknown) and Skyline student rep Mark Lee traveled as a delegation with three faculty representatives – John McBain (Skyline) & Rudy Lapp & Ray Lorenzato (CSM) – to Washington D.C., where they spoke with President Nixon’s assistant Christopher DeMuth about ending the war. 

Student peace march down 28th Avenue. May 8, 1970. Record 1501, CSM Historical Photograph Collection, College of San Mateo, California. Published by permission.

What lessons can we draw from May of 1970? 

Students and faculty concerns were closely aligned enough to carry out joint political activism powerful enough to bring about immediate Board action. That the student newspapers’ lack of critique of faculty involvement is also telling; it appears that many faculty directly encouraged student resistance and leadership. (In a recent email, retired Cañada faculty Kent Crockett recalled being an “advisor to the resistance.”) The faculty also contributed to their students’ political education through teach-in style events.

But we should also ask why this period of intense collaboration has been largely absent in our colleges’ regular commemorations of their history? Would our college communities today behave differently if they knew that student-faculty solidarity is deep within our colleges’ roots? As AFT continues to fight for a fair contract to ensure better working conditions for faculty, like those who came before us, our students’ wellbeing and also their political education remain important. As a union working with our student body we can continue to be stronger together. 

End notes

1. https://depts.washington.edu/moves/antiwar_may1970.shtml
2. “Kent State Massacre,” https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/kent-state-massacre
3.  Peace March (May 8, 1970) and preliminary activities (part one – seven images): Issues prompting the march: Killing of students at Kent State riots on May 4, 1970; Viet Nam War, U.S. invasion of Cambodia; social discrimination. Image 1: Student speaker in class or meeting; Image 2: Student speaker near Bldg. 18 (?); Image 4 – at microphone, Greg Davis (Faculty: Political Science); Image 5: March begins; Image 7: Near Laurelwood Shopping Center. College of San Mateo Photo Archives, https://collegeofsanmateo.edu/100/cs_crp.php
4. SF State historian Jason Ferreira has chronicled this time in CSM history in his article, “From College Readiness to Ready for Revolution: Third World Student Activism at a Northern California Community College, 1965–1969.” 
5. https://aft1493.org/may-2020-advocate-recalling-canada-student-strike-50-years-ago/
6. https://aft1493.org/november-2020-advocate-50-years-ago-anti-war-movement-comes-to-skyline/
7. “Faculty-Students Cooperate In Viet Nam – Cambodia Info”, Skyline Press, Vol. 1, Number 24, 13 May 1970, https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SKYV19700513-01.2.
8. My first two articles in The Advocate written during Covid did not include College of San Mateo because The San Matean student newspaper was not accessible. This article updates information presented earlier.
9. “Campus Reacts to Nixon’s Cambodia Decision,” The San Matean, p. 1, 3. May 15, 1970.
10. Board of Trustees meeting minutes on microfiche were not available before 1974 as of this writing. 
11. https://www.smccd.edu/photoarchives/exhibit2/e21499a.htm

Part-time faculty health insurance: catch it while you can – it’s free!

By Jessica Silver-Sharp

The District will soon announce that open enrollment for eligible adjunct faculty to sign up for health insurance will take place between October 6 and 24 with benefits beginning November 1, or whenever faculty experience a qualifying event (such as having their current insurance coverage end). If you are already enjoying this benefit there is no need to re-enroll. 

(Note: This is different from the District’s reimbursement program for adjuncts’ out of pocket medical premiums. That information is available on their website and in AFT’s Part-time Healthcare MOU. While previously these reimbursements were not taxed, this changed in 2024 when the District began offering part-time faculty the option to sign up for District health plans).

Enrollment questions

Now is the time to pose any questions to HR’s representative George Sampior, Jr. (650)-358-6744 (ext. 6744) sampiorg@smccd.edu. He will either answer them or let you know to make an appointment with American Fidelity, the group that administers the District’s insurance plan. If you are experiencing any trouble with the process, alert your AFT chapter chair right away.

By AFT’s MOU, adjunct faculty choosing the Kaiser Single HMO plan can expect to pay nothing for their insurance premiums. While faculty can opt to add family members, the District-paid premium contributions in this case will be the same that are available to full-time faculty (currently at 88% of the premium cost). This benefit is currently available through 2026; in 2026 AFT expects to negotiate with the District to extend the benefit.  

To enroll in the District’s plan you cannot be receiving benefits from another health insurance plan, so you may need to do some research now about the rules around changing your current insurance. For example, if your current plan ends December 31, you could begin with the District’s insurance plan on January 1, 2026. You would let Mr. Sampior know two to three weeks ahead that you want to sign up outside of the October enrollment period because your insurance will be ending — that is a “qualifying event.”

Eligibility

Faculty eligibility is measured by the District twice a year and coverage is for two six month periods, November through April and May through October. Adjunct faculty who work 40% or more of full-time are eligible. You do not need a Summer assignment to maintain the insurance. While you may find language on the web that this benefit is for “teachers,” non-instructional faculty—nurses, counselors, librarians, etc.— are also eligible.

To be eligible, part-time instructional faculty need to be teaching 6 units or .4 FTEs as of this October 1. Counselors need a total assignment of 12 hours/wk or more. Other categories of non-instructional faculty named above need an assignment of 15 hours/wk or more. 

Note: if you do not work 40% of a full-time load in our District, but you work at least 40% across multiple community colleges, see the MOU for more details.

Part-time faculty health insurance was made possible by AB190, a California law which local AFT1493 members and teachers across the state fought to pass. So get it while you can!