Wednesday, August 17, 2016


The members of the Professional Staff Congress easily voted to ratify their new contract which basically gives them the Mulgrew pattern of around 10% salary increases for 7 years. This piece from Labor Press outlines the terms of the deal and the voting results. The PSC represents teachers at the City University of New York

In terms of beating the pattern, PSC President Barbara Bowen pointed to gains in the workplace:

According to Labor Press:

CUNY will be required to consider all adjuncts who have taught at least two three-credit classes a semester for the last five years for three-year appointments—in which it must pay them or find them alternative work if no teaching spots are available.

Having to "consider" someone for a three year appointment after five years of teaching at least two classes a semester does not seem like a huge gain.

On other issues, Bowen stated:

“We won big structural changes in the workplace.” In addition to the three-year appointments for adjuncts, the contract also gives them fully paid individual health insurance. Professional staff in “non-promotional” positions, such as counselors and financial-aid advisers, will gain opportunities for both pay increases and having their job titles upgraded, the PSC says. And the deal also “includes a binding commitment by management” to reduce the teaching load for full-time faculty by the equivalent of one-three-credit course “by a specific time: the ratification of the next contract.”

The next contract has a reduced teaching load. This sounds good but I wonder if it is cost free as it does not have to be implemented until the next contract is ratified.

The terms don't look that great to this outsider but the PSC members jumped at this deal with 94% of the 13,000 professors voting to ratify and 86% of the adjuncts in the 25,000 member union voting yes.

Those numbers make our 25% no vote by teachers on the UFT contract not look so bad. Then again, I don't see anywhere that  PSC members will have to wait until 2020 to get their retroactive money.


Michael Fiorillo said...

Given the tremendous abuse suffered by adjuncts - I assume things might be somewhat better for them at CUNY, but that can't be saying much - any contract provision that provides the chance for appointment beyond the following semester would be an advance.

That said, it looks like something that Admin could easily work around.

James Eterno said...

It just shows how bad things are for unions these days. Rank and file take anything.

Anonymous said...

This is not really news. The fact is that the UFT set the "pattern" with the horrible contract that they negotiated. Every other NYC union after us got stuck with pretty much the same crappy contract. The PBA is wishing for something better but it ain't gonna happen. The hardcore part of all this is what is going to happen during our next contract negotiation? Will the city demand the same type of long term contract with minimal raises?

Anonymous said...

The city will demand it and we will acquiesce.

Anonymous said...

I have seen adjuncts fired mid-semester in NJ. Long term adjuncts have little chance of being hired. It is like diminishing returns. Tenure track positions are on the chopping block.

Abigail Shure