Grievance Advisory – July 4, 2018
July 4, 2018
The Association is issuing an advisory to its members on the following:
A. Lowest Teaching Scores (Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Reports)
B. New Complaint and Grievance Process
C. Appendix I
D. Unit Standards
A. Grievance Advisory: Lowest Teaching Scores (Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Reports)
In August of 2017, the University and the Association reached an agreement on the issue of lowest teaching scores. The public settlement is found here.
The Association is requesting all members to review their Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Reports in OIRP and to report any oddities to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The lowest teaching score(s) should not show on the report as per the settlement. If a course was not evaluated since it had five (5) or less students, then it is not considered the lowest “scored” course. The collective agreement is clear that there is no minimum required number of courses. Article 26.7(c) only stipulates that a maximum of 2.0 credits may be used for evaluation.
If your report shows any of the following circumstances, please report them immediately to the Association:
a) Specifically For Instructors: If the two lowest scores have not been dropped and/or if more than 2.0 credit scores are appearing on the reports.
b) For all Faculty:
(i) If the lowest score “dropped” was a course that was not eligible for evaluation under Article 26.7(a) and the lowest score of the actual eligible courses still appears.
(ii) Any summer courses that were considered “overload”, which qualify for summer stipends.
(iii) The lowest score was not removed with arguments that a minimum of 2.0 credits must be available for review.
(iv) If the summer term is included in the wrong academic year.
*Please note that under the new collective agreement, the teaching evaluation article has been renumbered as Article 25.
B. Grievance Advisory: New Complaint and Grievance Process
The new grievance process will soon be in effect for NEW matters. The effective date of the new process is as of the date of the official signing of the new agreement (See Letter of Understanding – Article 30.5). The official signing process will be scheduled soon. The Association will only have twenty-five (25) working days to initiate and start informal discussions for any complaints (except matters of harassment, discrimination and potential discipline). Any members who have been discussing matters of concern informally with their Chair need to be aware that they may be subject to the new grievance process and are at risk of exceeding the newly prescribed deadlines. If a member has not been able to resolve their concern via informal discussions with their Chair to date, they are requested to contact the Association via email@example.com.
Although the Association continues to promote informal resolutions for many issues, any outstanding contentions may need to be converted to the new Complaint Stage of the process and initiated by the Association in order to protect members rights for timely resolution. Any members discouraged from reporting their matter to the Association need to know that this is contrary to their rights and should seek immediate advice from the Association if experiencing this type of inappropriate persuasion.
*Please note that under the new collective agreement, this the complaints, grievance and arbitration article has been renumbered as Article 29.
C. Grievance Advisory: Appendix I
For Faculty who teach CUTV courses, please note that there has been a change on the Appendix I – Agreement with Respect to In Class CUTV Teaching form, section 6(c)(i). For those persons who are the Instructor of Record and, the Copyright Holder, compensation is no longer 0.25 course credit value. It has been increased to be consistent with in-class courses, which is 0.5 course credits. The total compensation now is the payment of 33% of the rate for Summer School Stipend (Article 43.1) plus the 0.5 course credit value.
Please note that for all Faculty teaching CUTV courses, the Appendix I form must be completed and a copy of the form provided to the Association. The default workload credit for CUTV courses remains 0.5 course credits. The Association encourages all members with Appendix I forms to first speak with their Chairs/Directors to highlight if additional compensation is required in their specific case. For additional advice, please email firstname.lastname@example.org.
*Please note that under the new collective agreement, this Appendix I has not been renumbered. However, Article 43.1 has been renumbered as Article 42.1.
D. Grievance Advisory: Unit Standards
For all units who did not have signed unit standards by April 30, 2017 (signed by all three parties – Unit, Dean and Provost), these units will have only one year from the date of official signing of the new collective agreement to complete the new process of Article 10.3. The new provisions of Article 10.3 have retroactive application. The Association recommends that any units who have commenced the review process of their standards review for compliance under the new process and prior to seeking approval.
For those units who did have signed unit standards by April 30, 2017, the minimum review period for unit standards has always been three (3) years and units are not required to wait the maximum period of time. Under the new collective agreement, the mandatory review must now occur every six (6) years. According to Association records, any standards that were approved in 2013 are due for mandatory review in the spring of 2019. The Association recommends that all units who have reached the minimum three (3) years, also begin the review process in light of the changes to Article 10.2 and for the additional reasons outlined below.
In all circumstances, it is important to note that there is a new item in Article 10.11(g), which states that Unit approved standards remain in effect until the unit replaces them. It is only the last approved unit standards that may be used or in effect at the time of hire that is used as the standard for the member undergoing the tenure and promotion process. Unit standards that are under revision are not to be used during the tenure and/or promotion reviews. For some members, the last approved unit standards and the standards in effect at the time of hire could be the same. For some members, their units may not have had any unit standards in place by the expiration of the collective agreement or at the time of their hire. For members hired prior to the initial introduction of unit standards in 2013, the last set of approved standards are applicable to them but only for the period of time that they existed. The unit standards may not be retroactively applied earlier in a review process as they did not exist. If a unit is revising the unit standards concurrent to a member applying for tenure and/or promotion, it is the last set of approved unit standards that is to be used (see example below).
To qualify as approved, the unit standards must have undergone the full process as prescribed by the collective agreement in effect at that time and signed by all three parties. All members have rights to a copy of the approved unit standards, including new hires at the time they commence working.
In addition, all unit standards must now appropriately address any cross-appointment situations. Unit Standards are also subject to the grievance process and must comply with the collective agreement as well as the Human Rights Code.
Example 1: A 2005 hire wishes to apply for promotion in the 2018/2019 academic year. This person’s unit implemented approved unit standards in 2013. For the purposes of promotion, the unit standards will not apply to them for the period of 2005-2012.
Example 2: A 2014 hire wishes to apply for tenure and promotion in the 2018/2019 academic year. This person’s unit implemented approved unit standards in 2013 but has announced that the unit standards will be reviewed during the 2018/2019 academic year. For the purposes of tenure and promotion, the unit standards at the time of hire (aka as the 2013 unit standards) will apply to them.
Example 3: A 2017 hire noticed that their unit did not have approved unit standards at the time of hire and therefore did not have approved standards by the expiration of the 2014-2017 collective agreement. The unit now has to complete the process by June 2019. Let’s assume they are approved without complication and implemented in July 2019 and set to expire in 2025. When the 2017 hire applies for tenure and promotion in 2022, the 2019 unit standards will apply but not for the period of time between the hire date of 2017 and June 2019. The standards should be pro-rated.
To book an information session for your unit, please contact email@example.com.