Students at Shasta College are offered fewer sections and are sitting in larger classes due to class cuts. This has given the district a golden opportunity to cut part-time faculty with the most teaching experience and the highest student learning outcomes under the guise of hardship.
Administrators bemoan the economy, the lack of stimulus monies, and state budget woes as the source of these problems. Yet, perhaps the first question that must be asked is, "what is the business of Shasta College?" Is it the mission of the district to run packed classrooms on a shoestring in order to maintain the administration's benefits and salaries? If not, please ask the administration what has been cut on the administration side to prevent the loss of classes. Ask if the district has considered taking monthly unpaid furloughs in order to keep classes available and uncrowded.
The campus community and citizens at large are so numbed by economic downturns they forget to ask specific questions whose answers would provide fuel for change. Each year ACCCA (Association of California Community College Administrators) names a repeal of the 50% law as one of its major goals. The 50% law requires that a full half of a district's funding must be spent on education, not administration. Yet, in a "business" whose mission it is to educate, administrators continue to seek to pull more funding away from the classroom.
At a time when unemployment is higher than it has been in decades, more and more people are turning back to school and retraining. Decisions made at our community college affect members of our community and whether our children will succeed. Ask your board of trustee members what they will do to make sure that Shasta College makes cuts to the education side last, retains its most experienced teachers, and provides the best education it can on the funding it has available. And ask the Shasta College Faculty Association why if job security and academic freedom are a right and a necessity for full time faculty, it refuses to support those rights for the hundreds of part-time faculty it purportedly represents.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
I hardly know where to being addressing the comments posted in this blog. First, regarding the comment from “freeway flyer” about the SCFA “refusing to support the rights of part-time faculty”. Every member of the exec board supports ALL faculty. What “evidence” do you have that we refuse to support their rights? This is simply an untrue statement.
A few weeks ago I sent an email to all of our part-time faculty regarding several days/times in which I held open meetings. The meetings were even telecast to our Tehama campus. The meetings were set at a variety of days and times to accommodate varied schedules. The total attendance over the 3 days was 8 faculty. Although a bit discouraged by the level of participation, we did have some great discussions. I will continue to hold these meetings periodically to engage our faculty and to have face-to-face time to discuss issues.
It is stated that I continue to “hobble” any effort to support job security. In fact, my efforts resulted in our HR department finally creating a seniority list. The list is to be used in the event full-time faculty are assigned courses previously taught by part-time faculty. While not a complete solution to the issue outlined by the anonymous writer, it is a step in the right direction. Issues such as these cannot be resolved overnight. There were several other issues which affect our part-time faculty that were addressed in our recent contract. Most importantly, our part-time rep was able to get our VPI to commit to meeting with PT reps to discuss issues of concern. I’m confident this committee (which is still being formed) will make progress. Our intent is that the outcome of these meetings will drive negotiations. Keep in mind that we are committed to pushing forward that which the majority contends to be the most important issues.
There are other comments such as Shasta College not paying part-timers for their office hours. That is not correct. There is a pot of money designated for that purpose which by the way was not completely used last year. Our last round of negotiations resulted in an increase in the hourly rate for office hours by 10$/hour. There is still a long way to go but we are starting to move in the right direction.
We have implemented a major change in our membership accounting. All full-time and part-time faculty are required to elect to join the union or to remain a fee-payer. As with all organizations, we can only be as strong as our membership is willing to be. I invite each of you who wrote in this blog to email be personally or stop by my office to discuss your concerns. I listen to the issues addressed by our current part-time rep. Just because I don’t agree with a persons tactics, doesn’t mean I’m not listening to a message. If there are more than a few part-time faculty who believe the issues discussed here are not being addressed by the SCFA, then come and speak with me. Despite the fact I receive a meager 20% release time, I always try to make myself available.
Posting personal opinions which may lead some to believe are factual information is not going to solve any real or perceived problems. Did any of the faculty who posted these blogs attend the meetings I planned? NO. The current part-time rep on the executive board didn’t even attend. The exec board only has one part-time representative despite the fact there are 3 slots available. We need more participation!
Finally, we will be surveying our part-time faculty in the near future. The survey which was adopted from a model used by CCA is designed to get a better sense of who our faculty are and what issues they want us to fight for. I’m committed to working to help all faculty on this campus but I need to be met half way. I also need to know who the players are. It is far too easy to post anonymous comments on the web rather than meeting face-to-face to discuss these issues.
Ken Nolte
SCFA President
My comment is in response to the following statement by Ken Nolte: “In fact, my efforts resulted in our HR department finally creating a seniority list. The list is to be used in the event full-time faculty are assigned courses previously taught by part-time faculty.”
The compiled seniority list is not observed in the event of one part-time instructor losing a class to another part-time instructor, and I have evidence to prove that. This is precisely how the part-time instructors are kept divided. Those who have classes do not want to criticize the administration because they do not want to lose their classes. They find a different way of defending their interest (through personal negotiations with those in decision-making positions, through lobbying, etc.) and that is not through their association.
This fall and next spring semester, several part-time instructors actually lost classes despite the fact that they have worked for Shasta College for many years. If part-timers do not have rehire/seniority rights spelled out in their contracts, they do not have job security and are basically disposable.
This time of economic hardship is the time when part-time instructors need the association the most and I do not think that the association is doing enough.
It is for the association to provide leadership and not to expect that part-timers, who do not really have a freedom of expression and are afraid to talk openly, would voluntarily voice their concerns.
Post a Comment