Negotiations Report #15

    See All Negotiations Updates   

 

July 1, 2025

Some brief takeaways from our fourteenth negotiation session on June 26th:

To put it bluntly: the District’s economic offers are insulting.  They “increased” their compensation offer by a measly 0.5% in Year 1, 0.25% in Year 2, and 0% in Year 3, so in total they are offering the following raises (FT=full-time, PT=part-time):

  • Year 1: 2% for FT, 2.5% for PT
  • Year 2: 1.75% for FT, 2.25% for PT
  • Year 3: 1.5% for FT, 2.0% for PT
    • These proposed raises don’t keep up with inflation, don’t reflect the increase in property tax revenue the District receives, and are less than half the 5% annual raise the SMCCCD Board of Trustees just voted to give themselves in February.
      0
    • On top of that, the District is offering NO IMPROVEMENTS for any other economic aspect of our lives: not on retirement, not on parental leave, not for professional development, not on increasing FLCs for labs to come closer to “lab/lecture parity,” etc.
      0
    • Finally, when our Chief Negotiator, Monica Malamud, presented our proposal that full-time faculty be paid for summer office hours (pointing out that they currently do this work for free) and asked rhetorically whether she should hold office hours after teaching her summer course that night since they are not currently paid to do so, the District’s Joe Morello said “maybe you shouldn’t.”  After Monica pointed out students taking summer courses deserve the same level of attention as students taking those courses in fall and spring, Joe Morello said “I expect you to fulfill your professional responsibilities.”
      0

So, what now?

If we want to win a fair and equitable contract, we need you!  The District has made it clear they won’t even give you basic cost-of-living raises unless they are forced to.  Our power at the negotiation table lies in our ability to act collectively together outside of the negotiation room, and that means organizing to flex our muscles together this fall!  Please contact me at lexvold@aft1493.org so we can discuss how you can get involved.

⇒ You can also sign up to join us at a future negotiation session.  Our next negotiation sessions are Tuesday, July 8th, 12:00 pm-4:00pm, and Thursday, July 17th from 12:00pm-4:00pm.  We are working on scheduling negotiation dates for August and for the Fall semester, as well.

Current Bargaining Report

AFT Negotiation Team: Monica Malamud (Chief Negotiator), Chet Lexvold, Gil Perez, Luis Zuñiga, and Althea Kippes.  Also in attendance from AFT were President Rika Yonemura-Fabian and Observer Teeka James.

From the District: Ellen Wu (Co-Chief Negotiator), David Feune, Joe Morello, Julie Johnson, Gerardo Ramirez, and Aaron McVean.

 

Workload (Article 6 and Appendix D)

We presented our first counter to the District’s counter proposal on this article.

  • On 6.1, we re-worded when changes in FLCs in the Lab Assignment schedule would become effective to be the “first yet-to-be-scheduled semester.”
    0
  • We proposed requiring the District to report time spent on ancillary duties to CalSTRS, which would allow CalSTRS to determine if that time counts.  Further, we proposed that if ancillary work can be loaded, it shall count for benefits eligibility.
    0
  • We accepted the District’s counter of current contract language regarding the number of preparations per semester.
    0
  • On 6.6, we rejected the District’s addition of “minimum hours per week” for Professional Responsibilities.  This was extensively negotiated in previous contract cycles and we’re not going backwards.

Appendix D: We brought back Appendix “D2-A2” we had proposed specifically for personal counselors, who have different duties than academic counselors.  Gil Perez, CSM Chapter Chair, member of our Negotiations Team, and Personal Counselor at CSM, presented all the reasons it’s important there is a separate Appendix specifically addressing duties that personal counselors perform.  Gil did a masterful job, showing a slide with the “Mental Health Continuum of Care duties” and job postings from Cañada and CSM to support our case that personal counselors need their own section in Appendix D for their duties.

  • In D2-A3, we again proposed that counselors could perform their professional duties “at a time and place appropriate for the activity,” mirroring the language in the current contract applicable to instructional faculty.
    0
  • In D3 for librarians, we are largely in agreement.
    0
  • For the new “ Appendix D4 – Ancillary Work,” we re-proposed that the list of ancillary work be non-exhaustive (“includes, but is not limited to”), and proposed that any duties not listed in the Appendix D sections spelling out duties for all faculty would be Ancillary.

 

Compensation (Article 8)

The District presented their third counter proposal on this article, and, as outlined above, proposed no changes except:

  • They increased their compensation offer by 0.5% in Year 1, 0.25% in Year 2, and 0% in Year 3, so in total they are offering the following raises (FT=full-time, PT=part-time):
    0
    • Year 1: 2% for FT, 2.5% for PT
    • Year 2: 1.75% for FT, 2.25% for PT
    • Year 3: 1.5% for FT, 2.0% for PT

 

After a caucus, we presented our third counter on Article 8, bringing back our proposal to pay part-timers (PTers) by load to achieve true parity amongst FTers and PTers.  We proposed the following salary increases:

  • Year 1: 7.5%
  • Year 2: 6.75%
  • Year 3: 5.0%
  • On 8.8, we brought back our proposed language regarding Summer and Overload salary schedules, seeking pay equity for FTers teaching summer and overload (that is, same salary schedule as PTers, and paid office hours, which FTers teaching more than their full-time load are not paid for).
    0
  • On 8.13, we brought back our proposal on substitute pay.
    0
  • On 8.14, we accepted status quo on large class pay.
    0
  • On 8.15, we accepted the striking of multi-modal but again proposed increasing load for teaching multi-level sections.
    0
  • On 8.16, we proposed to gradually reach the 85% parity for PTers (and FTers teaching beyond their full load of 1 FTE), with 81% Year 1, 83% Year 2, and 85% Year 3.

 

Faculty Load Credit (FLC) Allocation (Appendix F )

The District made their first counter proposal on this Appendix in response to our proposal to increase credit for many labs.  The District rejected all of our proposals to increase the load for labs, and they proposed that a full-time assignment should be 29-31 FLCs over an academic year instead of current language stating its 28-31.

 

Professional Development “Leave” Program (Article 13)

The District re-proposed their exact same May 9, 2025 offer: status-quo 1% funding after we had proposed 1.25% (down from 2% in our initial proposal).

 

Retirement (Article 10)

The District re-proposed their exact same May 16, 2025 offer: status-quo $450 as the reimbursement amount in 10.1.3, which has been that same amount since at least 2006.  We proposed $1,000, which would be in line with inflation.

 

Leaves (Article 11)

The District re-proposed their exact same March 28th offer, and said they are “not interested in offering additional paid leave” in response to our proposal for paid parental leave.

 

Part-Time Healthcare MOU (Memorandum of Understanding)

The District did not present a counter on this topic and said they don’t want to negotiate this until closer to its expiration at the end of 2026.  When Monica asked if the District has a different counter on Benefits (Article 9) since that is related, the District said they are “not interested” in negotiating on faculty health and welfare.

 

Hours of Employment (Article 7)

The District presented their second counter to our first counter on this article.

  • The District brought back the word “minimum” in 7.6.1, such that FT counselors would work a minimum of 22 hours for counseling duties and a minimum of 8 hours for professional duties.
  • They again proposed the “default to on campus” language for counselors performing professional duties, which we had changed in our counter to “will be carried out at a time and place appropriate for the activity” to mirror the language for professional duties for instructional faculty in our current contract.
  • On 7.7 for FT librarians, the District accepted our proposed language that any credit bearing classes taught by FT librarians would be considered overload.
  • On 7.11 regarding Flex Days, the District again proposed increasing the “required” flex days from 2 to 4, and the District also proposed that these mandatory flex days require in person attendance.
    • We had some areas agreement on 7.11.2 regarding flex days for PTers, but they again proposed “student contact hours” instead of “work assignment.”

 

Academic Freedom (New Article)

The District did not present a counter to our proposal on this article.

 

Part-Time Employment (Article 19)

The District did not present a counter to our proposal on this article.

 

Summer Employment (Article 18)

We cannot present a counter on this article because it would reference sections that are currently being negotiated, so we’re setting it aside for now.

 

Safety Conditions of Employment (Article 16)

The District did not present a counter to our proposal on this article.

 

Dual Enrollment (New Article)

We did not present a counter on this article and told the District since there has been so little movement on it by either party, we are setting it aside for now.

 

Reasonable Accommodation (Article 25)

We’ve reached a tentative agreement on this article!

 

Grievance Procedure (Article 17)

We’ve reached a tentative agreement on this article!

 

Informal Complaints and Formal Misconduct Investigations (Article 23)

We’ve reached a tentative agreement on this article!

 

In solidarity,

Chet Lexvold
Executive Director, AFT 1493
lexvold@aft1493.org