MSP Negotiations
Submitted by Lori Reardon on Mon, 05/19/2008 - 2:18pm.
Email date: 05/20/2008 Description: Call-In to the Governor; Updates on 250 Plan; Tuition & Fees spouse, children; Retirement; Sabbatical Just as I did last Wednesday (and will again next Monday), I would like to urge you to call or email the Governor to urge him to provide fair and timely economic parameters. Nothing in our contracts will get resolved without getting those parameters. So, right now, please call - 888-870-7770 toll free - or email and let him know that "public higher education employees deserve fair and equitable contracts. We will not stand for more pay cuts." On Friday, your bargaining team met in Auburn to present several more issues to the administration bargaining team, and hear their responses to our proposals from the week before. We presented the following proposals. You can read more details in the contract section of the MSP website. --the 250 Plan: the MSP has made the fulfillment of the 250 Plan (which sprung from our faculty decline report and public hearings) a top priority since 2004. While the administration is committed to the plan, we have seen only a very modest increase to the faculty - a grand total of 20 more people were on campus this past fall than 2 years before. We have proposed that the administration authorize 125 searches a year for three years to get us back on track. --Tuition and fees: along with all the other MTA higher education locals, we have proposed that spouses and children of MSP members be given both tuition and fee waivers to attend state colleges and universities. Our longstanding benefit of a tuition waiver for spouses and dependents has been steadily eroded as fees have become a greater and greater share of the cost of attending UMass. Indeed, tuition is about one sixth of the total cost of attending UMass, where once it was eighty-five percent or more. The Administration indicated it had interest in improving our post-retirement policy (i.e. giving faculty who retire part-time contracts for a few years) but little interest in developing a phased retirement system. They also indicated some interest in discussing a more flexible sabbatical policy, but they stated their opposition to changing the benefit (i.e. moving to 80% pay for a full year sabbatical). Discussions continue. I'll report back again after this week's bargaining session. Max Page, MSP President |

