Return to CPFA Opening PageNOTE: The following report was posted to the elchorro-list listserv
by CPFA Executive Council Chair Chris Storer on 06/18/00.
| Hi CPFA Colleagues,
As most of you have probably heard by now, the Legislative Conference Committee has finished its work and the Budget package going to the Governor includes the largest CCC budget augmentation in history. For a system that has been severely under-funded for decades, it looks like manna, but for part-time faculty, it looks like much of the same. At the last minute our hard fought for Human Resources Program (HRI) was cut, leaving part-time faculty as the only group in the system who were, again, completely left out-side the tent. A closer look at the budget, even from the point of view of others, shows it not to be quite so wonderful. It is a lot of money and we need it, but the Prop 98 split between K-12 and CCCs comes out to about 10%, down from 10.3% in the May revise (and about the same last year), and down from the "constitutional guarantee" of 11%. The big questions at Consultation on the 15th were, what happened to the HRI? and why?, and what can the system do to move forward on our established system priority of addressing part-time faculty equity? Chancellor Nussbaum, after recognizing the budget success the system has had this year over-all, and its dependence on the system unity achieved, immediately put the focus on the loss of the HRI, and the fact that this meant PT Equity was the only element of the system package that was fundamentally cut out of the package. He emphasized the need to reconvene the task force to develop a the best way for the system to address this priority. I believe all members of Consultation, at the general level of principle, remain committed to the priorities established by the HRI, but finding a specific response to try to direct districts to do what is right here will not be easy. Patrick Lentz, Vice Chancellor, developed a picture of what happened, as best could be judged by those close to the action. It appears that, for whatever reason, many on the Conference Committee became convinced that the Governor would simply veto the HRI if it were included. This may be related to the complexity of the program and a perception that much of it could reasonably be funded from other areas of the budget, and it is probably also related to the Governor's desire to have a formal study in hand before taking action. With this interpretation in mind, Patrick suggested that there may develop an opening to introduce a separate PT Equity Bill from the release of the Legislative Audit Report on PT Faculty Compensation. Such a last minute bill might be fit into the changing ebb and flow of Sacramento politics, and at worst, it would get the Audit report before the legislature, increase the visibility of this system priority, and help develop the understanding needed for legislative recognition of a five year dedicated effort to undo the damage caused by decades of under-funding. When I spoke to the Council, I emphasized the necessity of strong leadership from the Chancellor's Office, and from all the organization leaders in Consultation, directed toward encouraging real action at the local level, taking some of the general wealth the Budget is providing to the system and directing it through local negotiations to pressing inequities facing PT faculty. I also focussed on the necessity of taking full advantage of any door opened by the Audit report to continue to raise the profile of the system's united prioritization of achieving PT faculty equity. I emphasized the need to develop a coherent and comprehensive 5 year plan for next year's budget, and that a bill now would not only pump more dollars into the system, it would reduce the magnitude of the problem for following years. I reiterated that, if part of the problem this year was a lack of understanding by legislators, what better way to educate them than through the presentation of a bill focussed on the single problem of PT faculty inequity. Faculty leaders were strong and united in their concern that PT faculty were the sole losers in this years process so far, and in their commitment to not allowing things to rest here and simply wait for next year. While administrative leaders were quieter, I sense that they fully appreciate the huge success for the system achieved this year, and the fact that it depended largely on the unity leadership achieved back in Feb. They are also aware of the huge gap in funding when comparing CCCs to all other areas of education and the necessity of maintaining the unity if we are to truly address underfunding. I feel certain they will support any reasonable attempt to bring more money into the system, even if categorical, if that it the price of continued unity. In the big picture, Part-Time Faculty Equity is clearly the Right Thing To Do, and in terms of fully funding the system, it is a small part of the budget necessities. If part-time faculty achieve equity, our Institutions will be the winners, and thus also, our Students will win and the administrative job will be easier. I believe this is starting to be understood by all. It is a long and slow process, and admittedly frustrating at times, but overall, I think we continue to move forward - just not as quickly as we had hoped. I have included Tom Tyner's up-date below to give you a slightly different perspective, and to fill in some of the details I have left out. I join him in urging you to take time for yet another brief not to the Governor. The more money the system gets, the more there will be for negotiations, and while applauding the attention the CCCs are starting to receive, can we can still call attention to areas that remain in need. For those coming to the Plenary next week-end, I will see you there. I hope we will have some further news at that time. For those unable to come to the Plenary, I will be passing on to you anything I can as the strategy takes shape. Ciao, Chris Storer
|
==========================================
Subj: Consultation Report
l. There is still over $125 million in the legislature's budget for community colleges that was not in the Governor's May revise, and we need every penny of that money, particularly the additional 1% growth, the additional 1% COLA, the $5 million for paid office hours for part-time faculty, and the $12.8 million for non-credit funding enhancement. The additional growth and COLA funding will have a very positive impact on salary negotiations, the office hour funding is badly needed since the current fund has been exhausted by participating districts, and our non-credit education folks are desperate for better funding. Attached is a sample letter to send to the Governor asking him to support the legislature's cc budget and the specific line items. Please send letters immediately. That $125 million is a lot of money to gain or lose. Thank you! 2. The changed reg language for the 75/25% ratio will receive final hearing at the July BOG meeting and will go into effect this fall, meaning districts should create their 5-year plans for moving to 75/25 this fall and the hirings for fall 2001 should reflect their hiring goals for the first year. Please try to involve your local in the five-year planning. With whatever plan, it's critical that significant progress be made during good funding years such as the upcoming one to offset the little progress made in poor funding years, and that all districts not take the entire 5 years to reach 75%, particularly if they are at 65% or better already. A number of districts should be able to reach 75% within one or two years. It's conceivable that given a combination of funding sources and retirements, the system could hire 2,000 new full-time faculty for fall 2001. That is a great number of full-time job opportunities for part-time faculty, and a great opportunity for districts to improve their staffing diversity. 3. The state auditor's office should provide a preliminary report on part-time faculty salaries to the Chancellor's office this week - I'll be in touch with them (auditor's office) today. If the report substantiates the salary disparity that we know exists, we can still run a post-budget funding bill for p.t. equity with the salary study the Governor asked for as ammunition. All organizations in Consultation are willing to support such a bill. I don't want to get anyone's hopes up, and we need to see what's in the state auditor's report before proceeding further. I also put out the idea in Consultation of a percentage set-aside of total unrestricted fundings to go to p.t. equity, which wasn't roundly supported, but I did drive home the fact that at this point, one large segment of our employees - part-time faculty - were absolute losers in the budget, with the $80 million HR quashed, and that with over $400 million new funding coming into the system, and given our system commitment to part-time equity, that there should be no losers, and that we must find ways to address p.t. equity within the funds we do receive. With over $400 million in new unrestricted funding, this must be a banner negotiating year for improving p.t. salaries significantly. 4. AB 2434 is still being opposed by the Chancellor's office, but interest was shown among BOG members at last meeting to reconsider that position in July, so it will be on the agenda. I am trying to schedule a meeting with new BOG member/AFL-CIO employee Amy Dean in the near future to get her on board for this and other issues - she could be a great help on BOG. Tom ----------------- SAMPLE LETTER 6/15/00 Dear Governor Davis, Please support the legislature's following budget augmentations to the May revise for community colleges. 1. 4% growth funding 2. 4.17% COLA 3. $12.8 million to improve non-credit education funding 4. $5 million for office hours for part-time faculty 5. $45 million for equalization The additional 1% growth is badly needed to fund our increasing student enrollment. The 4.17% COLA will help to provide adequate salary increases for community college employees whose earning power was devastated during the poor funding years of the '90's. The increased funding for non-credit education will help to close the large funding gap between credit and non-credit per pupil funding. The $5 million office hour funding is badly needed to replenish the existing office hour fund which has been completely used up by participating community college districts. Finally, the equalization funding will help to equalize the per pupil funding level among community college districts. The funding augmentation will also help to close the $2000 gap between the per pupil funding level for California's community colleges compared to the national average. Our community college system needs every penny in the legislature's budget. Thank you for your support of our community colleges. Regards, Tom |
| Return to CPFA Opening Page |
Last modified by rsutter@cuesta.edu
California Part-time Faculty Association
2118 Wilshire Blvd.
P M B 392
Santa Monica, CA 90403
teachers@cpfa.org
Copyright © 2004 California Part-Time Faculty Association. All Rights Reserved.
Please send your comments regarding this site to rsutter@cuesta.edu