Union bargaining XXVI

6/25/2013, 9-4. Sorry, no live-blog on this one but I’ll post a synopsis later. Meanwhile try Luebke’s blog.

Your Guarantee of TruthinessAll UO Matters bargaining posts fact-checked by Randy Geller, HLGR and their lobbyist and public relations consultant, (and former Frohnmayer aide) Marla Rae.

Disclaimer: My opinion of what people said or were thinking but were too polite to say. Nothing is a quote unless in quotes.


In March the administration made the union a take it or leave it ultimatum on raises. Their “fact check” website says:

Briefly summarized, the FY13 and FY14 Salary Increase program grants eligible faculty a 1.5% increase in base salary for FY13 retroactive to January 1, 2013 and an additional 1.5% increase in base salary for FY14 effective July 1, 2013. The program also calls for merit increases, based on a 2% pool of all eligible faculty salaries for each unit, to be distributed based on performance as evaluated and allocated at the local level. For more information about the FY13 and FY14 Salary Increase program, visit http://around.uoregon.edu/salary-adjustments.

As of the last meeting, the admins had increased their offer to 10.5% over two years, and the union’s counter was

2013: 1.5% ATB, retro to 9/16/2012.
2014: 2% ATB, 2% Merit, 2.5% Equity.
2015: 2% ATB, 3.5% Merit, 1% Equity.
2014: 3% of current NTTF salary in a pool for floors.
10% raises for promotions.

So, basically 14.5%. We’ll see what happens next.

Tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Union bargaining XXVI

  1. Anonymous says:

    Wow, considering how few raises the faculty has had over the last 10 years (Larivierre’s ill conceived raises not withstanding), 14% over 3 years sounds pretty darn good to me considering what the economy is still like. I wonder what the commensurate rise in tuition will be to cover that?

  2. Anonymous says:

    Are these annual raises compounded? Or is 2013 used as the base year for 2014 and 2015 raises? If the salary after the 2013 adjustments becomes the new base for 2014, etc, then the total for three years looks like 15.1% with a geometric mean of 4.8%/year. If not, then the geometric mean looks like 4.6%/year. Of course, not everyone will get the full amount of Merit and Equity… For just the ATB and Merit raises (no Equity) the compounded raise over three years looks like 11.4% with a geometric mean of 3.7%/year. Not too bad if inflation stays low and people don’t get further screwed on the retirement benefits, especially people enrolled in the ORP. If not compounded, then its 11% over three years with a geometric mean of 3.5%/year.

    But over 40% of the raises will be going to payroll taxes for many people. And thus what’s left over may cover inflation and union dues for those people not excluded from collective bargaining.

  3. UO Matters says:

    Thanks for this comment. The proposals from both the admin and the union are in year over year percentages, thus to get the full impact you should indeed compound, as you’ve done.

    Also note that 2015 typically means “starting July 1 2014”.

    And last some people are a bit confused on what it takes to cover union dues, which the union has committed to attempting to keep at 1.25% of salary or less. The retroactive and permanent 1.5% raise that the admin has already put on the table, effective Jan 1 2013, will give faculty a small cash bonus (about 1%) when the contract is signed, and will then more than cover dues in perpetuity.

    I’ll add a table to this post with an example.

    • Anonymous says:

      Permanent increases will cover dues in perpetuity IF but for the union we would not have had a 1.5% raise.

    • UO Matters says:

      True enough, we will never know the counterfactual. For me, having seen our president’s handpicked bargaining team in action, heard their myriads of excuses, and keeping in mind their March ultimatum ploy and their continued sniping about the AAU comparator benchmark, I don’t think we were going to get much out of Gottfredson without a fight. We never have, except fort that brief period when Lariviere was in charge. And of course we still may not get much.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Any summary of what happened? What’s on docket for next session?