Queen's University
Faculty Association
Newsletter |
QUFACTS |
| PEOPLE |
QUFACTS is a service to the
Faculty Association of Queen’s University to promote exchange of ideas, foster debate
on issues, and inform members about current issues related to the purpose of the
association.
Members are invited to submit letters (approximately 150 words) and news items for
publication. Letters will be published unedited. Any modification of articles will be done
in consultation with the authors. Items may be sent to the QUFA office, Room 120, Old
Medical Building. |
May 2000
Volume 26, Number 1 |
| This issue was published
by Editor: Mark Jones, Layout Editor: Rhonda Clark-George, Advisors: Marvin Baer and
Elaine Berman |
In This Issue:
President's Report
My term as President of QUFA came to an end on
April 30. The new President, Barbara Kisilevsky, took over on May 1, and I wish her well.
This was my second term as
QUFA President. My previous term was about ten years ago. At that time QUFA was a fragile
organization, operating on the verge of insolvency, scrambling to find volunteers for
executive positions, and engaging the university Administration through "non binding
supplication." QUFA is now more robust--as the following reports in this edition of
QUFACTS indicate. However, the issues confronting QUFA remain the same, both outside and
inside the university.
In the late 1960s,
Principal Alex Corry expressed "anxious concern" and "vague unease" as
Canadian universities changed from "cloistered institutions struggling along in
poverty" to institutions deeply dependent on the public purse--a movement he
described as "from private domain to public utility." He warned that the
temptation for governments to intervene would be strong. He viewed this temptation as a
natural consequence of the sudden and long overdue recognition of the importance of
universities and of the corresponding rapid improvement in their public support. Thanks in
large part to his efforts in devising arms-length advisory organizations and funding
formulas, this public interest has remained, until recently, more or less benign. In fact,
where public intervention has been most aggressive, in promoting educational and
employment equity, I believe it has been helpful in overcoming resistance from those who
believe that the university's higher mission should make it immune to social policy.
However, things have changed. Public support and funding have waned while the calls for
public accountability have become more sinister. I have in mind the recent initiatives for
commercial exploitation of research, the opening of Ontario to private universities, and,
for comic relief, the imposition of performance indicators based on degree completion and
graduate employment rates.
Principal Corry also
warned that as universities moved into the public domain, academic staff would have to be
vigilant in promoting the university's autonomy in essential matters. (He spoke at a time
when he thought that changes in the rules of university governance had shifted the balance
of power to faculty.) At Queen's, we have relied heavily on provincial and national
organizations (OCUFA and CAUT) to speak publicly about government policy towards
universities. These organizations have sometimes been weak and preoccupied with their own
internal workings, but in recent years they have devoted more time and energy to trying to
influence government policy. My predecessors Frank Burke and Annette Burfoot helped in
turning OCUFA around and encouraging it to become more focused.
Turning to internal
matters, the QUFA Executive has lately sensed that the association's relationship with the
university Administration is on hold. A prolonged transition period amongst the senior
Administration has affected both the recent round of salary negotiations and the ongoing
work of the Grievance Committee and the JCAA. More detailed reports from these committees
are published in this edition. You will see that many matters have taken months to
resolve, I think because the responsible university officials have been preoccupied with
other matters.
This preoccupation may
explain both the slow pace and the results of salary negotiations this year. As the
detailed report on these negotiations shows, at the end of the process the final offers
submitted to the arbitrator were not far apart. You may wonder why a negotiated settlement
could not be reached. I do not think the cause was intransigence on the part of QUFA's
bargaining team or Executive. I believe that the Administration's participation could
fairly be described as polite disengagement. However, this may just be a matter of style
and have nothing to do with the Administration's ultimate position.
Apart from the pace of the
negotiations, the QUFA Executive was also concerned with the Administration's attempt to
bargain out of context. The Administration's bargaining team ignored the fact that under
the current three-year agreement many normative and compensation items had already been
settled by compromise, leaving only scale and benefits to be negotiated. QUFA's bargaining
team resisted the Administration's disingenuous attempts to offer previously agreed-upon
items (such as career development provisions and dental benefits) and extraneous matters
(such as the one-time cost of early retirements and the professional expense allowances)
as trade-offs for scale increases.
However, I think the
fundamental difference that remains between QUFA and the university Administration
concerns the appropriate response to shifting demands for faculty. The Administration
would like to respond to market demand on a selective basis, giving a scale increase lower
than inflation to most Members in order to fund market-driven increases for already high
salaries in some disciplines. Moreover, they have suggested that we look for ways to do
this on a temporary basis, removing market-driven supplements when demand subsides. QUFA,
on the other hand, sees the problem as inadequate salaries across the board, and
particularly at the junior level in some areas such as the humanities. While we recognize
the need for market differentials, market demand alone cannot set salary policy. We are
engaged in a collegial enterprise and must make some attempt to prevent differences in
salaries from becoming too inequitable.
I want to thank all those
who have made my term manageable, even fun. Thanks to all the members of the Executive and
Council, and particularly to the members of the Negotiating Team, Grant Amyot, Constance
Adamson, Magda Lewis, and Maury Breslow; to the members of the JCAA, Elizabeth Hanson and
Richard Greenfield; to the members of the Grievance Committee and particularly to the
Chair, Annette Burfoot, and Grievance Officer, Phil Goldman; and to the Co-chairs of the
PACC, Frank Burke and Susan Lord.
Marvin Baer
Report of QUFA Negotiating Team, 1999-2000
The current Collective
Agreement is in place for three years but leaves scale increase and benefits to be
negotiated between QUFA and the Administration for 2000 and 2001. In the case that no
agreement can be reached, the CA provides for only the scale increase to be settled by
arbitration; other matters are left as they were before negotiations. This year, for the
first time since QUFA's certification, the parties failed to agree and sent their final
offers for scale increase to a mutually agreed-upon arbitrator on April 18. On May 11, the
Arbitrator ruled for the Administration's final offer. The Arbitrator's ruling and its
implications for future bargaining are discussed in the latest Negotiations Update (# 4); the present report reviews the negotiations
process and the issues QUFA brought to the table.
QUFA's Negotiating Team
for 1999-2000 consisted of Constance Adamson (Libraries), Maury Breslow (Drama), Magda
Lewis (Education), and Grant Amyot (Political Studies) (Chief Negotiator). The
Administration's negotiators included Tom Harris (Dean, Applied Science), David Turpin
(outgoing VP-Academic), Suzanne Fortier (incoming VP-Academic), Sheila Devine (Associate
VP-Faculty Relations), Bill McLatchie (Special Advisor to the Principal and
Vice-Chancellor), and Robert Silverman (Dean, Arts and Science). The parties met at the
bargaining table for four months, beginning in December.
QUFA's Bargaining Team took to the table a
list of priorities it had identified in fall term through consultation with QUFA Council,
with the Executive, and with Members by way of the November benefits survey. These
priorities were:
 | A fair and meaningful scale increase; |
| Corrections to some systemic problems with
salaries, including;
 | a low starting-salary floor, |
| salary inversion and salary compression
within disciplines, due to recent market-driven increases in starting salaries for new
faculty, |
| historic widening of salary discrepancies
between disciplines, |
| pressure on senior abatements levels, and |
| salary losses from the Social Contract
years and the imposed 0% scale in 1992; |
|
| New benefits and improvements to existing
benefits, including:
| vision care, |
| tuition assistance for dependents, and |
| improvements to retiree benefits. |
|
This year QUFA's Bargaining Team also
engaged benefits consultants, whose analysis showed that the benefits package at Queen's
is inferior to those at other Ontario universities in several areas, and that the amount
spent by the university on insured benefits is extremely low in comparison to the norm.
We regret that all of this was left on the
table when the final offer selection process was triggered at the end of March. The
Administration's last offer at the table was, at most, an increase of 1.55% in new money.
As inflation in 1999 was 1.75%, accepting this would have meant accepting a cut in real
salaries. The Administration's position did not move in the final days of bargaining.
Indeed, despite QUFA's best efforts, the
pace of negotiations was painfully slow throughout; the tone was strictly formal. There
were substantial delays while QUFA's Team waited for the Administration to provide data.
Especially distracting was the Administration's insistence upon figuring in to all of
their offers the cost of previously agreed-upon and/or non-compensation articles, such as
the dental plan and the Professional Expenses Reimbursement. We can only speculate as to
the reasons for these difficulties. The recent and ongoing personnel changes in Richardson
Hall may have been responsible for some of the inertia at the table. It may be that the
Administration's team felt its hands were tied by the province's long delay in announcing
the funding level for universities. It may be that the Administration took seriously the
Ontario Government's warning last fall that public-sector settlements should not exceed
1.4%--quite a blatant case of interference in the collective bargaining process. Finally,
the Administration's team may have felt that resorting to final offer selection was the
easiest way to avoid addressing improvements in benefits and adjustments to the salary
model.
Both QUFA's brief to the
Arbitrator and the Arbitrator's ruling may be found on the QUFA website, at </qufa/>. In summary form, QUFA's brief presents
information and arguments on the following points:
| the context of the current Collective
Agreement and the 1999 negotiations; |
| the choice of criteria in interest
arbitrations; |
| the state of the economy and current wage
and salary trends; |
| comparison with similar occupations; |
| Queen's salaries since 1975; |
| Faculty productivity and workload; |
| Salaries and benefits at other Ontario
Universities; |
| Previously agreed items. |
QUFA's final offer was a
scale increase of 2.6% to compensate for inflation in 1999 and provide a modest element of
catch-up. Phased in over the salary year (May 1 and Nov. 1), this would have cost Queen's
only 1.95%.
The Administration's final
offer was 1.7%, phased in as 1.2% in May and .5% in November. The Administration's brief
presented arguments based on comparisons with other universities and the education sector,
on ability to pay, and on a total compensation package including pensions and benefits.
While it remains below the inflation rate for 1999, it is worth noting that this
settlement is an improvement on the Administration's last offer at the table.
On behalf of the
negotiating team I would like to thank QUFA Council, the Executive, and Allan Manson for
their help and support over the past months. Elaine Berman and Rhonda Clark-George were
heroic in the editing and production of the arbitration brief. And we must certainly
acknowledge Grant Amyot's expertise and outstanding work in representing QUFA so well.
Constance Adamson
Report
of the QUFA Council of Representatives
Under QUFA's Constitution,
QUFA Council is responsible for approving, among other things, appointments to QUFA
committees, appointments of QUFA Members to University committees, Terms of Reference for
standing committees, and the QUFA budget. It is responsible also for receiving reports by
QUFA committees and other QUFA bodies. Since May 1999, among or in addition to these
routine activities, Council has:
| confirmed a decision by the Executive and
the Staff Relations Committee to make QUFA's two staff positions (administrative
officer and senior secretary) permanent and full-time (March 1999). |
| endorsed a Staff Employment Policy
document drafted by the Staff Relations Committee. This document brings QUFA's staff
policy in line with the University policy, with a few differences tailored to meet QUFA's
circumstances. |
| endorsed a motion to create a part-time
position of Grievance Officer to ease the workload of volunteers on the Grievance
Committee (March 1999). |
| endorsed revised Terms of Reference for
the Political Action and Communications Committee (PACC) (Jan. 2000). The revision
provides for the PACC to cooperate internally with other University bodies for the
improvement of Members' terms and/or conditions of employment. |
| endorsed the Executive's recommendation to
send an expression of support and a $1,000 solidarity donation to striking city workers
(CUPE 109). |
| adopted the Policy on Solidarity
Donations drafted by the PACC (Feb. 2000). This policy sets aside $15,000 each year
for solidarity donations and provides guidelines for its administration by the Executive. |
| adopted the Confidentiality Policy for
Grievances, drafted by CAUT and endorsed by the Grievance Committee and Executive
(Feb. 2000). |
| examined the usefulness of QUFACTS
(Sept.-Oct. 1999). Given the newsletter's resource requirements and the difficulties of
publishing it at regular intervals in its present form, Council discussed options such as
short bulletins on paper and electronic versions of QUFACTS to be distributed by email
and/or posted on the web. Discussion concluded that QUFACTS should continue to circulate
on paper and be posted on the QUFA website. |
| reviewed the duties of QUFA councilors
as representatives to their units, especially when voting (Jan. 2000). This provided an
opportunity to review the Council Protocol and clarify ambiguities. It was decided that
councilors' duties should be reviewed at the beginning of each Council year, when many are
new. |
| endorsed a recommendation by the Executive
and the Grievance Committee for QUFA's input to a revision of the Senate Policy on
Endowed Chairs (Oct.-Dec. 1999). The proposed text specifies that "Endowed
positions shall be consistent with the academic priorities of the Unit or Department. The
Unit or Department must have a formative role in the process to determine the areas of
appointment." |
| endorsed two student initiatives
concerning tuition (Dec. 1999). Specifically, Council endorsed and urged its Members
to support and participate in ACCESS 2000, the nationwide day of action held February 2,
and endorsed the principles of the student document on tuition policies, Accessible
Education for Citizens and Leaders in a Global Society. ACCESS 2000 was subsequently
observed by hundreds of students and faculty on Queen's campus, and Accessible
Education was subsequently endorsed by Queen's Senate. |
| endorsed the Collective
Bargaining Protocol (Sept. 1999) and consulted with the Bargaining team throughout the
year.
|
Margaret Jamieson
Report
of the QUFA Grievance Committee
The Grievance Committee's
load has been onerous this year, both in the number and in the severity of its cases. We
started the year with a bang as a seven-year-long grievance (including a complex and
lengthy arbitration) finally wound down. The arbitrator's decision for the grievor in this
case is the largest ever for a Canadian university, but we still had to persuade the
Administration to fulfill the terms of the settlement. In all, the committee has handled
72 investigations, individual grievances, and association grievances since September (28
are fully resolved, and many are close to resolution). They are broken down by type as
follows.
Unit-Based Inquiries,
Complaints, and Grievances
There have been 11 cases
concerning academic units, ranging from lack of secretarial support to unit-wide
violations of procedures. The procedures at issue have been for personnel decisions,
hiring, Head searches, annual assessments, and workload. Most of these complaints have
arisen from the neglect of provisions already within the Collective Agreement. There are
still quite a few units in which the Collective Agreement is ignored or artfully applied.
Given current budgetary constraints, it is no surprise that we are seeing problems related
to insufficient support staff. (Faculty do not yet seem to have found ways of grieving
increased class size and greater general workload expectations.)
Recurrent patterns in
unit-based grievances suggest that some units--sometimes entire faculties and
administrative departments--are in general dysfunction. The Grievance Committee
communicates its concerns about such patterns to the Administration, but recently, due to
changes in senior personnel and job descriptions, the response to our efforts to get
action on many important issues has been unacceptably slow.
Individual Complaints
Our 55 individual
complaints account for most of this year's case-load. Broken down by type, followed by the
number of individual cases, they are as follows:
| Appointment (3): These involve Members with
changing status. |
| Advice to Split Promotion from Tenure (3):
In these cases, deans have pressured junior faculty to forego applying for promotion at
the same time as for tenure. Since all of the junior faculty involved are visible
minorities, the pattern is disturbing. We have asked the JCAA to investigate this matter
and are considering conducting a study of systemic discrimination similar to the one at
MIT. |
| Promotion Combined with Tenure (3): All of
these cases involved emerging negative decisions and were resolved before a decision was
made. |
| Renewal (2): These cases also involve
issues arising before a decision has been made. |
| Tenure of Non-Bargaining-Unit Members (3).
Two QUFA Members on the medical faculty sought and received assistance in securing tenure;
we are also watching the application of tenure for medical faculty in general. |
| Promotion (5): Interestingly, all of these
cases were in the sciences (including Health and Applied Sciences). Some of these cases
involve cross-appointments and confusion between units as to the determination of merit
for promotion. |
| Postponement of Decisions (2): Both of
these cases are pending and involve assistance to a member seeking a delay in application.
|
| Personnel Committee Procedures (1) |
| Conditions of Employment (1) |
| Workload (2) |
| Annual Assessment (9): This continues to be
a difficult matter to grieve. There is no administrator willing to accept the role of
adjudicator in an appeal of academic merit ratings (we believe it should be the
VP-Academic). In some departmental units, there is a problem arising from obfuscation of
the merit decision. |
| Official File (1): There seems to be
improvement in this area; both faculty and administrators are more likely to know what the
file is, how it is created, and that Members have a right to see its contents. This is a
welcome sign of increasing transparency in process. |
| Compensation (2): This is a matter not
usually grieved individually (except as a matter of merit assessment). But it seems the
Administration has a tendency to overpay some of us, which creates problems only when it
wants the money back. The Grievance Committee works to negotiate reasonable payback
arrangements. |
| Anomaly Adjustments (1) |
| Sabbatical Leave (2) |
| Sick Leave and Long Term Disability (5):
The grievances here tend to reflect problems in securing information from the insurance
carrier through Human Resources. We have only just managed to get copies of the agreements
between Members and the carriers. Meanwhile we seek better lines of communication with
Human Resources generally, but especially in regard to leaves (including maternity and
parental leaves). |
| Retirement Dates (2): The Administration
wishes to regularize retirement dates, and there is considerable confusion for some
Members and recently retired Members whose retirement dates were set variably (often
verbally) in the distant past. |
| Disputes with Colleagues (4): This is where
some of our most creative work takes place. Such cases require a great deal of time and
careful effort. We are trying to involve the Administration where suitable in helping to
resolve disputes between Members. |
| Discipline (2) |
| Discrimination (1) |
| Harassment (1) |
Association Issues (6)
In six cases QUFA has taken action, thus far all
short of formal grievance.
| Coca Cola Contract: since some university
contracts with soft-drink companies have involved non-denigration clauses, a question
arose concerning Queen's contract with Coca Cola. QUFA found that the contract has no such
clause. |
| Endowed Chairs: QUFA became concerned this
year about how the area of appointment is determined in the case of an Endowed Chair, and
recommended to Senate that units be involved in a formative manner. Senate has yet to
decide on the wording of this policy. |
| Removal of course enrolment caps in Arts
and Science: pending. |
| Conflict of interest in a Headship search:
pending. |
| Annual Assessment and Member's right to
respond to Head's report (Arts and Science): pending. |
| Automated Timetabling: this is being dealt
with in JCAA negotiations. |
Annette Burfoot
JCAA
/ CMCA Report
This year the QUFA side of
the Joint Committee for Administering the Agreement (JCAA) has consisted of Elizabeth
Hanson and Richard Greenfield. Marvin Baer became a member this month, when his term as
QUFA President expired. Elaine Berman also attends all meetings, participates in
deliberations, and is generally the support without which QUFA could not effectively
participate. In preparation for meetings with the university, this group is also joined by
Barbara Kisilevsky and Rod Lindsay to make up the Committee to Manage the Collective
Agreement (CMCA). Equity issues this year continued to be handled by Roberta Lamb, but now
in conjunction with the office of the University Advisor on Equity. This office was
responsible for the Equity workshops this year.
Last fall we dealt with
many issues connected with the implementation of the Personnel Article (13). We also
secured from the university Administration agreement to repay maternity, paternity, and
adoption benefits which are clawed back by the Federal government with the result that
Members taking such leaves were receiving less than 100% of their salaries. The
Administration has agreed also to alter the way in which maternity leave benefits are
calculated so as not to disadvantage Members whose leaves commence in the longer months.
In winter term we
conducted several workshops. There were two for Heads, one dealing with a range of issues
and the other with merit. Another workshop was held for Members facing renewal or tenure
decisions. These events were well attended and apparently well received. One important
issue we confronted this term was the impending computerization of the timetable. We
succeeded in getting the Administration to concede that this is a working conditions issue
as well as a pedagogical one and therefore that the objectives which the software will
implement must be determined by a committee consisting almost entirely of faculty. We are
currently struggling with the Administration over retirement dates for faculty hired after
January 1, 1967, who started later than July 1, as well as over the principles which will
govern the salaries of those returning from Long Term Disability leave. A working group is
considering how to extend the non-compensation provisions of the CA to clinicians. We have
begun to deal with questions arising from this year's distribution of merit
points--specifically, we are seeking to learn the reason for rollbacks in merit scores
originally assigned by Deans, and the number of merit points that have been added to the
total controlled by the VP-Academic (in keeping with the CA, Appendix R).
The JCAA also oversees the
work of various side-tables. The Anomalies side-table distributed most of the $110,000 in
its fund. Some complicated issues arose there and in other discussions with the
Administration regarding the calculation of years of experience. Those discussions are
ongoing.
With respect to adjuncts,
the side-table for Continuing Adjuncts met continuously throughout the fall establishing a
percentage of Full-Time Equivalency (FTE) and hence a base salary for each adjunct in that
group. The side-table dealing with Initial and Renewable Adjuncts is now meeting. A
sidetable also distributed the stipends to support adjuncts engaged in scholarly and
creative work. Richard Greenfield, who participated in all of the side-tables pertaining
to adjuncts, has drafted an Adjuncts' Handbook which brings together the regulations
pertaining to adjuncts distributed throughout the CA.
A general note: the JCAA
has encountered some difficulties this year in accomplishing business in a timely fashion
because of the flux in Richardson Hall. With the departures of John Cowan and David
Turpin, many of the Administration's obligations have fallen to Sheila Devine. While Ms.
Devine's intelligence and cooperative spirit have been enormously helpful, they could not
fill the administrative gaps which we have encountered throughout the year.
Elizabeth Hanson
Report
of the Political Action and Communications Committee
QUFA's Political Action
and Communications Committee (PACC) for 1999-2000 consists of Grant Amyot (Political
Studies), Frank Burke (Film; Co-Chair), Dan Chamberlain (Spanish and Italian), Ena Dua
(Sociology), Genevieve Dumas (Mechanical Engineering), Mark Jones (English), Barbara
Kisilevsky (Nursing), Susan Lord (Film; Co-Chair), and Leda Raptis (Microbiology and
Immunology). The PACC has been active this year in all areas of its mandate: drafting
policies for QUFA, engaging in political action and communication within the Queen's
community, maintaining communications with OCUFA, and building strategies for lobbying and
political education. Last fall, the PACC redrafted its Terms of Reference to enhance its
communications function. Under the revised Terms, approved by Executive and Council, the
Committee is formally mandated to maintain contacts with Queen's Administration and other
employee and student groups at Queen's, and to cooperate with other bodies within the
university to monitor and influence university decisions that have implications for
Members' terms and conditions of employment. We therefore encourage QUFA Members to inform
us of any matters of consequence that come to your attention on campus.
This year, the PACC has
been involved in several issues on campus. Following the reappearance of misogynist signs
during orientation last fall, the PACC drafted a letter to the Senate Orientation
Activities Review Board condemning this occurrence and suggesting remedial actions. The
PACC initiated the reconvening of the QUFA Heads' caucus last fall term for the purpose of
clarifying merit evaluation procedures and other matters of interest to Members. And the
PACC was QUFA's liaison to two student initiatives last winter (both endorsed by QUFA
Council) against the unprecedented tuition increases of recent years. The first was ACCESS
2000, a national Day of Action against tuition increases (February 2), which was organized
by the Canadian Federation of Students and garnered strong support on Queen's campus. The
second initiative was the student-drafted tuition policy document, Accessible Education,
which was ultimately endorsed by Queen's Senate on March 30. In March, noting Principal
Leggett's mild response in the Gazette to provincial education policies, Frank
Burke drafted a long letter to Principal Leggett requesting that the Principal "take
a stronger stand publicly and within the Queen's community in response to the Harris
government's policies towards universities."
The PACC has also acted on
several political issues affecting academic life beyond campus. The request for QUFA's
support of the Teach-In on Globalization in January came through the PACC. And in winter
term the PACC drafted letters of protest on behalf of QUFA to Mexico's Ambassador to
Canada, condemning the use of force in response to student protests; to Robert Prichard
(President, University of Toronto), protesting U of T's refusal to participate with the
Human Rights review in the case of Dr. Chun; and to Education Minister Janet Ecker,
protesting Ontario's imposition of teacher testing.
The Committee has been
active in solidarity issues also. It followed the strike of Kingston city workers with
CUPE 109 last fall and proposed the solidarity actions approved by Council in November.
Since this was Council's second solidarity motion since QUFA's unionization (the first was
for support of the Mount Allison Faculty Association in February 1999), and since both
motions passed by strong majorities, Council encouraged the PACC and Executive to draft a
solidarity policy that would facilitate such actions on humanitarian and practical
grounds. Drafted by PACC co-chair Frank Burke, and passed by Council in January 2000,
QUFA's Solidarity Policy provides a statement of principle, practical guidelines, and a
budget line for Executive disbursements in accordance with the precedent solidarity
motions. Under the new policy, QUFA has sent letters of support with donations of $5,000
to the Faculty Association of the University College of Cape Breton; of $5,000 to the
Association des bibliothécaires, professeures, et professeurs de l'Université de
Moncton; and of $250 to the Hay Daycare Centre in Kingston.
Much of the PACC's work is
still in progress. First, the Committee is working with OCUFA on lobbying and public
relations efforts in response to the provincial government's antagonism toward public and
post-secondary education. Frank Burke recently joined the OCUFA Communications and Public
Relations Committee, which he was instrumental in establishing. In the interest of shaping
coordinated action, he recently met with Ian Clark, President of COU, and Principal
Leggett, and later with Henry Mandelbaum, Executive Director of OCUFA. Frank's article
"Political Action and Communications from a Local Perspective," in the current
(spring 2000) issue of OCUFA Forum, speaks both to the political work that
Ontario's universities need to do and to the strategies needed to accomplish this work.
Second, partly in connection with findings by the Grievance Committee (see the report in
this issue), the PACC will propose to the Executive that a study be undertaken to evaluate
racism, sexism, and homophobia at Queen's. The PACC will strike an ad hoc committee of
concerned Members in order to evaluate this matter and, if need be, to determine study
procedures and models. Third, the PACC has decided to contact other PACCs and faculty
association executives to get some sense of their satisfaction with OCUFA, and to initiate
horizontal collaboration among the associations in researching political issues, in
drafting letters, and in other activities.
As co-chairs of the
Committee, Frank Burke and I would like to thank the members of the PACC for their great
work this year. Personally, I would like to make especial acknowledgment of Frank's
extraordinary commitment and his very effective practical work in analysis and strategy.
Susan Lord
QUFA Staff Relations Committee Report
Staff Relations is a
standing committee with duties assigned by the Executive and approved by Council. Over the
past year it has had several tasks. It developed an employment policy, subsequently
adopted by the QUFA Executive, for the permanent staff positions of Administrative Officer
and Senior Secretary/Receptionist. It reviewed the job descriptions for these staff
positions and updated the Administrative Officer's description to reflect increased
responsibilities within a unionized QUFA. It conducted annual performance reviews for
staff members, who provided written reports on their activities for the year. And it
participated in the hiring of a part-time researcher to assist the Bargaining Team with
data collection.
Barbara Kisilevsky