REPORT ON THE 9^TH CAUT FORUM FOR CHIEF NEGOTIATORS OTTAWA, MARCH 27-29, 2009

Forum Overview – Neil Tudiver

The big question that framed the Forum this year was:

What are the opportunities during times of fiscal restraint?

Neil Tudiver opened the Forum by advising us that the employer will be tough on money. Economic crises put pressure on negotiations, so we should expect Administrations to make arguments that they have less money due to a drop in endowment funds, decreased government funding, and budget shortfalls. They will also try to leverage the fact that the government is threatening to freeze salaries. Finally, we can also expect employers to exploit perceived divisions in the membership, for example Part Time vs. Full Time, reduced teaching vs. teaching-only.

The current conditions for bargaining highlight once again the need for consensus and unity in the membership. To maintain that consensus and unity, the executive and negotiating team must focus first on listening to the membership in determining their priorities, and then on maintaining consistent and clear communications between the negotiating team, executive, and membership.

Members are more likely to support clear bargaining positions of defensible priorities that they themselves have identified as needs through a consultative process. Clearly, if a position is not defensible in terms of what members need, then the negotiating team and the executive shouldn't hold onto it. As negotiators, we need a package our membership is comfortable supporting.

What are the non-monetary priorities the bargaining unit can advance in this climate?

• Procedures that are outdated and could be improved – review Collective Agreement for articles that have not been updated in the last couple of round
• Governance issues
• Policies and the power to introduce policies
• Justice and dignity e.g. dismissal or suspension without pay – can be improved to with pay until the arbitration is decided
• Equity – a key issue for this round of negotiations at Acadia
• Cost-neutral gains – moving discretionary money from employer-control to control by the Collective Agreement. You can negotiate all matters of compensation that are related to conditions of employment e.g. converting market differentials to a fairer or more competitive grid.
• Control over starting salary prevents salary anomalies and inequities – negotiating a fair starting salary formula based on a point system removes the discretionary powers of the employer to create inequities.
• Refining the salary system – refining salary system to make it a fair and equitable system.

Keeping the Membership at the Table – Peter Simpson

Peter Simpson got the first session underway with the provocative declaration that we should not concede to the media message of crisis, arguing that from the perspective of the negotiating table, there is no global crisis. Warning that the fears engendered by the media message serve interests that we need to interrogate, he advised that we do “more local assessment” of our economic situation, which will be more pertinent than what the media claims is impacting us globally.

Our strongest bargaining tool against the fear-mongering strategy of crisis bargaining is our faith in the membership and its capacity to mobilize against it.

Simpson then outlined a number of points for negotiating teams and their executives to keep in mind as they enter into bargaining, some of which we feel are important to share with the membership as we begin to plan for negotiations:

• 100% transparency to your membership. Keep the membership informed of significant moves. There is nothing secret about preparations for bargaining – explain what’s going forward. Don’t give the employer a wedge between the membership and the executive/negotiating team.
• 100% transparency requires taking fewest items to the table. Craft 5 or 6 items that are rallying points on which you must get something.
• Craft proposals for settlement rather than positionality. Go to the table with what you can live with in mind – you need to know what your priorities are.
• Represent a true collective that is threatening to the employer who relies on division in the membership. This will force the employer to be sensible and reasonable. A committed membership and a narrow set of objectives are the hardest for the employer to defeat.

Global Crisis & the Need For a Sustainable Economy

A highlight of the Forum was an alternative socio-economic analysis of the global economic meltdown that utilised the well-known dilemma of Wile E. Coyote to illustrate the need to develop policies that will put a sustainable economy in place.

Panel – Dealing with the Employer

This panel had some experienced hands offer valuable aces to keep up our sleeves at the bargaining table, but these were dealt out under advisement that we not regard bargaining as a bag of tricks and tactics. Rather, there is every reason to come to the table prepared to avoid posturing and gamesmanship and, instead, to come prepared to explain and justify our proposals, and also to work hard to get the employer to do the same.

Of great interest in this panel was the advice offered from one who has sat on “the other side of the table.” She emphasised that we pay attention to negotiation Style: HOW one negotiates is as important (well, almost) as what one negotiates. Again, the emphasis was on maintaining a bargaining style based on professionalism, equanimity, authenticity and active listening, rather than bluster and threats. We were urged especially to try to understand the other side’s priorities, while keeping our own objectives in mind.

Persistence and tenacity win the day.

This panel ended with another presenter offering Tips for Continuing Negotiations between Contracts, which confirmed the fruitful labour of our Executive and Joint Committee over the last two years in dealing with the Administration.

Panel - 3^rd Parties’ View of the Process: Conciliators/Mediators

This was a useful panel discussion led by head mediators in Ontario and Quebec on what to expect when a conciliator or mediator is called in, based on understanding their role in the process. We were reminded in the first instance that our task is not to convince a mediator that we’re right, but to clarify our position, through the conciliator/mediator, to the other side. The conciliator/mediator is there to help the two sides to get a deal, not to advocate for one side or the other. What they can do for us is enforce the rules of engagement – that bargaining is taking place, and in good faith. (It was chiefly for this latter reason that we called for a mediator in the last round of negotiations, which proved instrumental to concluding negotiations.)

Panel – Preparing to Bargain

This panel began by asking two questions: Does the University have no give? Does the Union have no give? The issue was the need to find flexibility in times of apparent “no give.” The panel offered several non-salary areas in which unions can seek improvements: pensions, working conditions, taxable benefits, research funds, accountability and transparency, complement, and managerial rights.

Again and again during the Forum, equity and governance were foregrounded as the two non-salary issues for which unions should seek to negotiate improvements.

Respectfully submitted,

John Eustace & Vernon Provencal

Table of Contents