HEALTH CARE REBUTTAL PRESENTATION: This presentation contains two sets of rebuttals. The first is based on the exhibits we traded Feb 1 and the second was based on the actual presentation we saw on the 20th. Both rebuttals are in one file. The adobe.pdf of the health care rebuttals [0] is 121 kb. The original powerpoint slides [0] are also available as a 204 kb download.  

RETROACTIVITY REBUTTAL PRESENTATIONS: This presentation contains two sets of rebuttals. The first is based on the exhibits we traded Feb 1 and the second was based on the actual presentation they gave us later. Both rebuttals are in one file. The adobe.pdf on the issue of retroactivity [0] is 32 kb. The original powerpoint slides [0] are also available as a 80 kb download. 

The main presentation reviews our current bargaining positions, which have changed slightly because of both our review of seven comparable contracts and the need to argue about retroactivity with salary and health care [see summary of changes below]. Although we are not arguing for a 4 year contract, we have detailed what we would consider to be an appropriate four year offer to give additional options in settling this contract.

One important aspect of the administration's position is that they have moved from a 3 year contract to a the 5 year contract they presented us with back in December. This was the secret one marked 'NOT FOR USE IN FACT-FINDING' - our analysis of it is posted on the website [1].

When the fact-finder returns his report, the two sides need to meet to negotiate the final contract. While we have repeatedly stated that we will abide by the fact-finder's recommendations if the administration will, they have not made any statement. We are disappointed that after all the effort both sides have put into this, the administration will not even state that they will take results seriously. We believe the recommendations of this neutral party should approximate the final contract, rather than a starting point that the administration tries to bargain down from.

For more information, see

• Our presentation for Fact-finding about the comparable institutions [2],

• The Fact-finder's decision on comparable institutions [3]

• The Chief Negotiator's Blog [4]

• Framework for a Fair Contract [5]

Summary of Changes in EMU-AAUP Bargaining Positions

Across the Board Raises

Previous offer had 3.75% across the board for three years

Fact Finding Retroactive Solution:

• In 2006-07, 3.50% retroactive to 9/1/2006.
• In 2007-08, 3.00% +$750 flat amount (4.07% total)
• In 2008-09, 3.60% +$100 (3.75% total)
• If there is a 4-year contract: In 2009-10, 3.75% + $100 (3.88% total)

Rationale for change:

We formally implement the concept of a flat raise plus a percentage amount as described in the Framework for a Fair Contract [6]. This is due to the fact that the new health care hit, which we propose would not take effect until January 1, 2008, will have a disproportionate effect on faculty with lower salaries. The flat dollar amount in 2007-08 is the top PPO premium proposed by the EMU-AAUP, and is designed to cover additional health care premiums in a way that is similar to how comparable institutions phased in substantial changes in health care. In the final 2 years, the $100 flat amounts are designed to support increases (marginal changes) in premiums in those years.

The level of the raises is well in line with those at comparable institutions.

In analyzing the different composition of raises

• A straight across the board percentage increase favors higher paid faculty
• A straight dollar increase (no percentage at all) favors lower paid faculty
• A combination of percentage and dollar increases is fairest to faculty at all pay levels.

The raises still average 3.75%, but this time over 4 years

The largest raise is proposed in 2007-08, the year health care premiums would begin. This is in line with what occurred at comparable institutions when they introduced significant increases in out of pocket faculty health care costs.

Retirement Contribution

Previous offer had 10.50% in 2006-07 and 11.00% in 2007-08

Fact Finding Retroactive Solution:

• In 2006-07, stays at 10.00%
• In 2007-08, 10.50%
• In 2008-09, 11.00%
• If there is a 4-year contract: In 2009:11.50%

Rationale for change:

It would be very difficult to go back and give additional TIAA-CREF contributions, as there would be the issue of lost market returns.

Many of the comparable institutions contribute 14% or more to faulty retirement, so increasing this aspect of compensation is supported by the comparables. Additionally, an increase in compensation paid through the retirement contribution is cheaper for the administration.

Promotion Increments

• To professor: Prior position was $5,800; retroactive solution is $6,000
• To associate: No change
• To assistant: Prior position was $3,200; retroactive solution is $3,000

Rationale:

In line with those at comparable institutions. Since few faculty are promoted to assistant (from instructor), we believed more faculty would benefit from the higher promotion to full.

Continuing Education Compensation (that is not in-load)

Prior position: $1,400 starting in 2006-07

Retroactive Solution:

• In 2006-07, $1,200 per credit hour (current contract)
  
• In 2007-08, $1,400 per credit hour
• In 2008-09, $1,600 per credit hour
• If there is a 4-year contract: In 2009-10:$1,800 per credit hour

Traditional and HMO Health Care Plans

The HMO will remain open after the end of the contract. This is in contrast to our earlier position. We believe that choice is important, and having an option beyond Blue Cross is in line with what is available at the comparable institutions.

For both the traditional and HMO plans, we propose that there be two levels of premium, for single and 2-person/family.

$450 for single and $1,200 for 2-person/family (it was $1,200 for everyone)

The ratio of the level of premiums between single and family premiums is based on actuarial experience.

Since faculty are now paying preiums, dependents should be included as part of the family premium until 25. No other comparable ends dependent care coverage at 19, and 25 is well supported by practices at comparable institutions.

Most readers will want to download the adobe.pdf version [6] of the 145 slide presentation (only 300kb). For those who would like to make use of the original powerpoint slides, there is a 2 MB powerpoint version available also [6].