Negotiations Report #21

    See All Negotiations Updates   

 

October 17, 2025

[Note: This one is later than usual because of activities related to our Flex Day Boycott and Rally; this negotiation occurred Oct. 3, 2025, prior to our Flex action on Oct. 8, 2025.]

 

The main takeaway from our twentieth negotiation session on Oct. 3rd:

The District refused to move on Appendix F (Faculty Load Credit (FLC) Allocation), which is where we’ve been proposing increased FLCs for various labs and class maximums for Calculus and English Composition classes.  There are only two more negotiations scheduled this fall, and we have one final push to make before we likely go to mediation and/or impasse.

 

!! Please RSVP here to join our Informational Picket Line at the Board of Trustees on Wednesday, Oct. 29th, 4:15-5:15pm. This is our last big action before our final negotiation scheduled this fall on Oct. 30th.

⇒ Also, you can sign up to join us at a negotiation session, including the next one on Friday, Oct. 24, from 1:00-4:00pm.  And of course, continue Red Shirt Wednesdays- we are re-ordering shirts because so many faculty have been participating this semester!

⇒ Finally, fill out the Bargaining Priorities Survey if you haven’t yet to let us know your thoughts on the remaining issues we are negotiating.

Current Bargaining Report

AFT Negotiation Team: Monica Malamud (Chief Negotiator), Chet Lexvold, Gil Perez, and Luis Zuñiga.  Also in attendance from AFT were President Rika Yonemura-Fabian and Observers David Eck, Daniel Keller, Mandy Lucas, Kamran Eftekhari, and Lori Slicton.

From the District: Ellen Wu, Richard Storti, Julie Johnson, Aaron McVean, David Feune, and Max Hartman.

Professional Development Leave Program, Article 13.

We have reached a Tentative Agreement on this article. We accepted the last District counterproposal, leaving PD funding at 1% of the District budget for regular academic and third- and fourth-year tenure track employees. See Negotiations Report #12 for further details on what we gained in this article, including leaves that can encompass both spring and fall semesters, and an expansion of faculty who can participate in short-term project leaves.

 

Academic Freedom (New Article)

We brought in the big guns to present on Academic Freedom because the District has refused to bargain at all on this topic so far. CSM Academic Senate President Daniel Keller and former District Academic Senate President David Eck spoke about the need to include an Academic Freedom clause in our contract. Keller cited the statewide Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) position paper that recommends putting Academic Freedom in collective bargaining agreements (CBAs), accreditation, and pointed out how unusual it is for academic senates to work so closely with the union on a contract recommendation, illustrating how important this issue is to faculty. Eck stressed the urgency of protecting faculty with an Academic Freedom clause considering the political climate, citing a Texas A&M professor recently fired for discussing gender and how the White House has asked universities to sign an agreement about the definition of gender.  Eck also asked the District to consider what message it sends to faculty – both current and prospective – if the District continues to refuse to bargain on this topic simply because it’s not legally required to do so.

 

Compensation, Article 8

We countered on compensation as follows:

  • Year 1: 7.00% increase for  FT and non-instructional adjunct salary schedules, and 7.75% increase for all instructional adjunct salary schedules.
  • Year 2: 6.25% increase for all salary schedules with the implementation of pay by load/ pay by FLC
  • Year 3: 4.75% increase for all salary schedules

 

On 8.6 (services outside the normal 175-day academic year), we proposed going back to the status quo because we have not been making progress on this section.

 

On 8.8, we proposed moving to pay-by-load (pay-by-FLC) starting Fall semester 2026, with 83% parity in 2026-27 and 85% (which is the final goal to reach parity) starting Fall 2027.

  • Relatedly, in 8.16(E), we proposed forming a joint study group with the District to prepare for the transition to a load-based compensation model. We made this proposal because the District has been insisting that we form a joint study group before deciding to implement pay-by-load. In response, the District questioned / protested our proposal, claiming it’s “very different” than the joint study group they proposed.
    • Our proposal actually implements pay-by-load within the three-year period of the contract, while the District’s would not guarantee the implementation of pay-by-load at any point, and AFT Chief Negotiator Monica Malamud pointed out this is not a radical idea- many other districts have already implemented pay-by-load.

We re-proposed a “new” 8.13, which is mostly a copy/paste from 7.13 except it recognizes our proposal to move to pay-by-load by Fall 2026. This is regarding compensation for FT counselors beyond the 175 days

We again made a proposal to increase FLC for multi-level courses by 25%.

 

Article 9, Health and Welfare Benefits

  • We countered the District’s 89% offer on premiums for two-party and family Kaiser plans with 92%.
  • We proposed $4,000 on dental.
  • We proposed $8,500/month of salary continuation insurance.  This proposal was based on the fact that the District claimed that salary continuation insurance is calculated at ⅔ of the average monthly salary for each employee group.

 

Hours of Employment (Article 7)

  • On 7.6.1, we’re continuing to advocate for counselors, proposing “Scheduled in-person professional duties will be carried out on campus,” but that any of their 8 hours of professional duties not scheduled to be in person may be carried out at a time and place appropriate for the activity.
  • On Flex Days, we rejected the District’s “on campus” requirement for required flex days.
  • 7.13 we struck out because we’re proposing moving it to 8.13 because that’s where a clause related to compensation belongs.

 

Article 10, Retirement

The only remaining issue is 10.1.3, concerning the District contribution for retiree health benefits until the employee becomes eligible for Medicate Part B (age 65).

  • Our proposal is that starting with anyone who retired after June 30, 2025, the contribution goes up to $1,000/month (from $450).

 

Workload (Article 6 and Appendix D)

The District brought counter #3 on this article.

  • On 6.1, they again struck our copied and pasted language from Appendix F that explains that although 30 FLCs is considered a full-time assignment, 28-31 FLCs are acceptable.  They are proposing changing that language in Appendix F to say 29-31 FLCs are acceptable, with a minimum of 89 FLCs over a three-year period.
  • They rejected our proposal that said that if ancillary work can be loaded, the District shall report “reportable” time spent on ancillary work to CalSTRS so that it counts toward eligibility for fringe benefits in Article 9 and PT Healthcare MOU.
  • In 6.3 they brought language they called “clarifying” about PT faculty receiving payment for ancillary work and whether it’s dean/district/ approved, although we continue to take issue with language that Deans/Districts need to approve pay for election or appointment to academic senate positions.
  • On 6.6, they brought back language that says professional responsibilities for counselors are in addition to their minimum of the thirty scheduled hours per week.  They again re-proposed changing status quo “equivalent to” 2.5 hours per week of professional responsibilities for instructional faculty to a “minimum of.”

Appendix D

  • In A2, they struck out “mental health student club advising,” “receiving” clinical supervision for licensure, and “peer consultation.”
    • Max Hartman (Dean of Counseling, Cañada) attempted to justify the District’s strike-out by saying that because there are no AFT unit members receiving clinical supervision currently, it shouldn’t be in the contract.
      • Gil Perez (AFT Chapter Chair at CSM, Negotiations Team Member, and FT personal counselor at CSM) responded by pointing out that there are four personal counselors currently on the CSM team who needed to receive clinical supervision in order to become licenses, and the District will continue to hire people who will need clinical supervision in order to become licensed because we hire associates who are not yet licensed counselors.
  • In A3, we continue to have a conflict with the District proposing when counselors need to perform professional duties on campus.
  • District not agreeing to add “work performed as a program coordinator” to the list of ancillary work.  Ellen Wu, the District’s chief negotiator, claimed that adding this to ancillary work would open the District to legal risk even though, as Monica pointed out, Ed Code allows the District and the union to negotiate what qualifies as ancillary duties, and other Districts define this work as ancillary in their CBAs.

 

Faculty Load Credit (FLC) Allocation (Appendix F )

The District continues to reject our proposal to increase FLCs for labs, and to make the workload more equitable for English Composition and Calculus classes.  Instead, they’re proposing changing language in Appendix F to say 29-31 FLCs are acceptable as a full-time assignment (currently 28-31), with a minimum of 89 FLCs over a three-year period (currently there is no minimum, just a maximum of 91).

 

Safety Conditions of Employment (Article 16)

The District again rejected our language about faculty having the right to stop class if there’s a disruption and a reasonable person would feel unsafe.  They agreed to some of our language about the District assisting faculty obtaining restraining orders, but again rejected our transgender safe workplace language.  Instead, they added language about complying with CA civil rights laws and putting up posters on campus.

 

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.

 

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