A Timeline of Inaction by IEA/NEA
In recent communications to P-FAC members — more in a week’s time than our membership has ever received from them — IEA and its agents have made many false claims in their effort to keep your dues money. Here are just some examples of how IEA failed to adequately and justly represent P-FAC.
Recent Events, Fall 2014
September 19, 2014. After a meeting with IEA, P-fac states its position in writing: our work must go to our members, and that allowing full time staff to be assigned our work would dilute our bargaining unit and take precious course assignments from our members. P-fac continues to work on a Memo of Understanding (MOU) with the College and report progress to IEA.
Nov. 26, 2014. IEA issues a written determination that staff will be admitted to our unit and lays out many conditions that would be antithetical to P-fac’s contract, and harmful to our members as it would take work away from P-fac adjuncts, and goes direclty in contrast with our grievance filed to protect our members’ courses.
(Note: another IEA local, RAFO, has a stricter recognition clause than P-fac’s, which is already generously inclusive, yet IEA does not pressure RAFO to admit staff to teaching assignments because IEA only represents CCC staff. It’s a serious conflict of interest.)
Dec. 17 2014. IEA Reponds to P-fac’s rejection of proposal and P-fac’s request to continue discussions. IEA states that the talks are over, and because staff accepted the offer, IEA will provide them legal assistance to fight P-fac. P-fac continues to work on finalizing the FTST MOU with college. P-fac can only bargain with the college over part time faculty work. IEA wanted P-fac to bargain with IEA and the Staff union for our work. It violates legal obligation to do this. P-fac already has already negotiated a contract for its members.
December 17, 2014 USCC learns of the MOU negotiations and issues a cease and desist. When P-fac brings it to IEA’s attention, IEA claims no knowledge of a cease, though IEA had promised legal assistance to USCC but was providing P-fac none.
IEA issues letter of audit to P-fac.
* * *
IEA claims that P-fac was acting covertly on this disaffiliation. This is not so. In reps assemblies, general membership meetings and email messages to the general membership (which the college can access) P-fac discussed that we would:
give IEA every opportunity to address our concerns (Spring 2014; Staff who Teach Message, March 2014.
consider disaffiliation if problems persist (November 2014 — message to membership and urgent November 7 meeting regarding possible restructuring of the union);
discuss all possible options, including disaffiliation (member meeting followed by Reps Assembly on restructuring 11/21. Notification sent November 13, 2014)
move to disaffiliate as a result of IEA’s conflict of interest and other stated concerns (December 5 member meeting followed by reps assembly/vote. Notification sent Dec. 2, 2014);
hold a members’ meeting on restructuring on Dec 11 (notice sent December 5, 7, 8, 10, & 11, 2014), immediately followed by reps assembly to discuss. Confirm vote to disaffiliate;
caucus with membership;
assemble reps on December 22 (notifications sent Dec. 17, 18, and 20) for final vote and confirmation to disaffiliate;
notify the membership and consult as needed by phone, starting December 22;
send email announcements and updates as needed to the membership starting December 24.
What IEA hasn’t told you:
2010. P-fac vetted the possibility for full time staff “who teach” to join the union, P-fac was advised by IEA that there was no community of interest between full time staff and part time faculty, and that the recognition clause could not be changed. The NLRB supported this determination. P-fac and IEA then negotiated a contract accordingly for nearly three years.
The recognition clause has been in place since the first P-fac contract which excludes full time staff from being a part of P-fac. This is not new to this recent P-fac contract.
IEA Region 67 election interference, 2013. The DOL found IEA to be in violation of election protocols. Candidates for Region Chair and Vice Chair complained of numerous IEA-sponsored election law violations to IEA, without success. When candidates complained to the U.S. Department of Labor and produced evidence of IEA election irregularities, the Labor Department ordered a new election, which it supervised. No charges were filed against IEA because it reached a settlement with the Department of Labor that avoided such federal charges, namely a new election.
February 2014. Meeting with Staff who Teach. As they perform managerial duties, including the assigning of classes, we believe that managers were allowed to enter the staff union, which is a violation of labor law. P-fac knows that some members of “staff who teach” are administrators, who, with the full support of IEA, are fighting to infiltrate our union with their “non-bargained” teaching hours intact. We have seen administrators who represent management at the bargaining table attend union meetings between P-fac and USCC, demanding, with hostility, to be admitted to P-fac. This is an affront to basic union principles and the interests of adjunct faculty. We would be admitting people into our unit who would effectively overtake our work.
Fall 2013 – Present: The most senior P-fac members were denied a single course assignment while at the same time IEA was fighting for the right of management to let full time staff create courses for themselves. Many of our lower tier members received no courses while full time staff were assigned courses. P-fac filed a grievance to protect those members.
November 2014 – December 2014: IEA wanted to create new grounds for CCC to fire P-fac members as part of the “settlement” with full time staff!
Fall 2014. P-fac leadership and representatives have twice firmly asked IEA for monetary refunds to replace P-fac costs spent obtaining services that should have been provided by IEA. No such refunds are forthcoming from IEA, which is simply not equipped to meet
September 2013-Present. The Collective Bargaining Agreement between P-fac and the college was ratified by the membership and signed by all parties, and has been in effect. However, contrary to the agreement, the college continues to allow chairs and designees to assign classes to staff while our members lack assignments.
August 2013 – Present. IEA is trying to force P-fac to admit full time staff who want to teach classes, which would undermine the interests of P-fac members because it is antithetical to our Collective Bargaining Agreement, which IEA signed off on, and would dilute our unit by denying assignments to our members while permitting staff union members to teach our classes in addition to their full-time (with benefits) jobs.
Did IEA Really Say That?
IEA and RAFO alleged that “P-fac is holding a covert election.” Actually, the election is being supervised and certified by a retired DOL judge.
IEA’s Region 67 publicly alleged that P-fac’s dues “will be used to provide full time employment for current P-fac leadership” (a libelous accusation). P-fac bylaws (sans “IEA/NEA”) and contract will remain intact. Such a personal attack reveals that IEA has nothing factual to stand on.
In one department many members were informed that P-fac was not only trying to decertify, but was doing it illegally. Disaffiliation and decertification are completely different actions.
Disaffiliation is to remain a union independent of the certifying body (in this case, IEA) with all contract provisions, by-laws, protections, and benefits intact. Decertification is to dissolve the union itself, which P-fac would never do! We should hope that IEA and its agents know the difference, but it’s more likely that they lied to scare the P-fac membership into voting no.