Negotiation Update
September 1, 2017
The Rider University Administration and the Rider University Chapter AAUP have reached a tentative agreement today on a three-year contract for faculty, librarians and athletic staff, subject to ratification by the Board of Trustees and the AAUP membership.
Negotiation Update
August 31, 2017
The parties negotiated until close to 1 am and will continue the conversation tomorrow at 11 am . We will update you as soon as we can.
Negotiation Update
August 30, 2017
The parties met today, and no real progress was made. We will meet with them again tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. Come to the chapter meeting tomorrow at 12 noon, BLC Theater. Wear your T-shirts.
Negotiation Update
August 29, 2017
Today, progress was made but we are still millions of dollars apart. The parties will meet again tomorrow.
September 1, 2017
The Rider University Administration and the Rider University Chapter AAUP have reached a tentative agreement today on a three-year contract for faculty, librarians and athletic staff, subject to ratification by the Board of Trustees and the AAUP membership.
Negotiation Update
August 31, 2017
The parties negotiated until close to 1 am and will continue the conversation tomorrow at 11 am . We will update you as soon as we can.
Negotiation Update
August 30, 2017
The parties met today, and no real progress was made. We will meet with them again tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. Come to the chapter meeting tomorrow at 12 noon, BLC Theater. Wear your T-shirts.
Negotiation Update
August 29, 2017
Today, progress was made but we are still millions of dollars apart. The parties will meet again tomorrow.
Negotiation Update
August 28, 2017
The parties are scheduled to meet Monday through Thursday this week.
Today, we made a number of further offers and cost savings to the administration but we are still extremely far apart. We will update everyone on the state of negotiations at the chapter meeting on August 31, 12 noon, BLC Theater. Wear your T-shirts, and if you haven’t already signed up for picket duty, please do so today.
August 28, 2017
The parties are scheduled to meet Monday through Thursday this week.
Today, we made a number of further offers and cost savings to the administration but we are still extremely far apart. We will update everyone on the state of negotiations at the chapter meeting on August 31, 12 noon, BLC Theater. Wear your T-shirts, and if you haven’t already signed up for picket duty, please do so today.
Negotiation Update
August 24, 2017
The parties met and discussed health insurance. Some progress was made but the parties are still very far apart on other major economic issues. We look forward to seeing everyone on Thursday, August 31 at 12 pm.
August 24, 2017
The parties met and discussed health insurance. Some progress was made but the parties are still very far apart on other major economic issues. We look forward to seeing everyone on Thursday, August 31 at 12 pm.
Negotiation Update
August 22, 2017
The parties met today, August 22nd and we will meet again Thursday, August 24th. We will have a complete update after Thursday's meeting.
August 22, 2017
The parties met today, August 22nd and we will meet again Thursday, August 24th. We will have a complete update after Thursday's meeting.
Negotiation Update
August 16, 2017
This week the parties met on Tuesday and Wednesday. The administration rejected our proposal on interest arbitration. They made no additional proposals that would further reduce their concessionary demands of $9.25 million. We put a new proposal on the table that would save the institution an additional $450,000.
The parties will meet again on Tuesday and Thursday next week.
August 16, 2017
This week the parties met on Tuesday and Wednesday. The administration rejected our proposal on interest arbitration. They made no additional proposals that would further reduce their concessionary demands of $9.25 million. We put a new proposal on the table that would save the institution an additional $450,000.
The parties will meet again on Tuesday and Thursday next week.
Negotiation Update
August 15, 2017
The parties met today and we will meet again tomorrow morning. We will have a complete update after tomorrow’s meeting.
August 15, 2017
The parties met today and we will meet again tomorrow morning. We will have a complete update after tomorrow’s meeting.
Negotiation Update
August 10, 2017
The parties met on Wednesday and Thursday. On Wednesday, we discussed with the administration the implications of their workload proposal. They agreed that it effectively meant that faculty would be doing more work for less compensation and we discussed ways that it could be mitigated. We also explored some of the elements of their proposal on health insurance. We ended Wednesday by putting an additional economic concession on the table.
On Thursday the administration indicated a willingness to utilize interest arbitration, but we felt the limitations they placed on its usage made it unlikely to actually occur. We made a counter proposal which they are now considering. They also reduced the annual concessions they are demanding from us by an additional $250,000. They are presently demanding 9.25 million in concessions by the bargaining unit.
August 10, 2017
The parties met on Wednesday and Thursday. On Wednesday, we discussed with the administration the implications of their workload proposal. They agreed that it effectively meant that faculty would be doing more work for less compensation and we discussed ways that it could be mitigated. We also explored some of the elements of their proposal on health insurance. We ended Wednesday by putting an additional economic concession on the table.
On Thursday the administration indicated a willingness to utilize interest arbitration, but we felt the limitations they placed on its usage made it unlikely to actually occur. We made a counter proposal which they are now considering. They also reduced the annual concessions they are demanding from us by an additional $250,000. They are presently demanding 9.25 million in concessions by the bargaining unit.
Negotiation Update
August 9, 2017
The parties met today and we will meet again tomorrow morning. We will have a complete update after tomorrow’s meeting.
August 9, 2017
The parties met today and we will meet again tomorrow morning. We will have a complete update after tomorrow’s meeting.
Negotiation Update
August 3, 2017
The parties met only in the afternoon, as the administration representatives caucused all morning and reconvened at 2 pm.
The negotiations began with their attorney berating us for our communication with our members. After some back and forth about the goals of each side, they admitted that they wanted a fundamental change in the institution.
We made clear that our goal is to provide some financial relief in order to help get over some present financial problems. But we maintained that we were not interested in changing the fundamental nature of the institution. The administration made clear that they had some ability to move off the $10 million, but they continued to insist on long term structural changes in our compensation.
Their proposal dropped the total size of the concession to $9.5 million, and they continued to insist on their proposal to increase the teaching load.
At that point, negotiations broke off for the day. The parties will meet again on Wednesday, August 9th.
August 3, 2017
The parties met only in the afternoon, as the administration representatives caucused all morning and reconvened at 2 pm.
The negotiations began with their attorney berating us for our communication with our members. After some back and forth about the goals of each side, they admitted that they wanted a fundamental change in the institution.
We made clear that our goal is to provide some financial relief in order to help get over some present financial problems. But we maintained that we were not interested in changing the fundamental nature of the institution. The administration made clear that they had some ability to move off the $10 million, but they continued to insist on long term structural changes in our compensation.
Their proposal dropped the total size of the concession to $9.5 million, and they continued to insist on their proposal to increase the teaching load.
At that point, negotiations broke off for the day. The parties will meet again on Wednesday, August 9th.
Negotiation Update
August 1, 2017
The parties met and we began by reviewing the financial savings realized by Rider through a reduction in the number of full time AAUP faculty members and the lack of faculty raises over the last three years. Average faculty salaries nationwide rose in those three years by over 10%, and as you know our salary increases were 0%. In addition, AAUP faculty numbers fell from 247 to 230. Combined this saved the institution over $5 million in 2016-17. We then reviewed the annual savings (salary and benefits) from the early retirement incentive program. By 2022 the annual gross saving will be $7 million and the net savings (gross savings minus new hires) will be over $4 million a year.
We then gave them our initial economic proposal for the new Agreement. This was a five-year proposal with annual concessions valued at over $2.5 million a year. To put this in perspective the administration put a proposal to us in the fall that demanded approximately $6 million in annual concessions. The proposal they presented to us in May increased their demand to $10 million in annual faculty concessions.
Their response today was that our proposal was insufficient and that they did not see how we were going to get close to what they are demanding, which remains at $10 million in annual concessions. We made clear that while we still had negotiating room that they were going to have to make dramatic changes in their proposal if we were going to reach an agreement. They said that that was not going to occur. We again offered arbitration and they rejected that possibility. It is unclear where we go from here but the ball is in their court.
We meet again on Thursday when we hope they will place a more reasonable proposal on the table.
August 1, 2017
The parties met and we began by reviewing the financial savings realized by Rider through a reduction in the number of full time AAUP faculty members and the lack of faculty raises over the last three years. Average faculty salaries nationwide rose in those three years by over 10%, and as you know our salary increases were 0%. In addition, AAUP faculty numbers fell from 247 to 230. Combined this saved the institution over $5 million in 2016-17. We then reviewed the annual savings (salary and benefits) from the early retirement incentive program. By 2022 the annual gross saving will be $7 million and the net savings (gross savings minus new hires) will be over $4 million a year.
We then gave them our initial economic proposal for the new Agreement. This was a five-year proposal with annual concessions valued at over $2.5 million a year. To put this in perspective the administration put a proposal to us in the fall that demanded approximately $6 million in annual concessions. The proposal they presented to us in May increased their demand to $10 million in annual faculty concessions.
Their response today was that our proposal was insufficient and that they did not see how we were going to get close to what they are demanding, which remains at $10 million in annual concessions. We made clear that while we still had negotiating room that they were going to have to make dramatic changes in their proposal if we were going to reach an agreement. They said that that was not going to occur. We again offered arbitration and they rejected that possibility. It is unclear where we go from here but the ball is in their court.
We meet again on Thursday when we hope they will place a more reasonable proposal on the table.
Negotiation Update
July 27, 2017
The parties met and we provided responses to their set of non-economic proposals. We also offered changes to our initial proposals. These actions involved both dropping proposals that we felt strongly about and agreeing to some of their proposals which are far from ideal. We did so in the hope of reaching an agreement. We are still far apart in a number of key non-economic issues, and have yet to make any progress on economic issues. We will meet next week onTuesday, August 1st and Thursday, August 3rd.
July 27, 2017
The parties met and we provided responses to their set of non-economic proposals. We also offered changes to our initial proposals. These actions involved both dropping proposals that we felt strongly about and agreeing to some of their proposals which are far from ideal. We did so in the hope of reaching an agreement. We are still far apart in a number of key non-economic issues, and have yet to make any progress on economic issues. We will meet next week onTuesday, August 1st and Thursday, August 3rd.
Negotiation Update
July 20, 2017
The parties met today and the substance of the mornings discussion focused on their proposed reduction in health benefits. Their proposal includes over a million dollar cut in our health insurance, such as introducing premium charges for the employee, deductibles (presently there are no deductibles), increasing co-pays and introducing a drug management element to our health insurance.
“With respect to the Pharmacy Benefits, a Value Plus formulary will be implemented. It will include such features as Precertification on traditional drugs, step therapy and formulary exclusions.”
They also proposed the following:
“Additional terms and conditions of the benefits and coverage described below are set forth in the respective plan documents. Any changes in such plan documents affecting the AAUP bargaining unit shall be made by the University after consultation with the AAUP .The University may modify benefits inthe future for bargaining unit employees on notice to the Union but without negotiation, provided it discussed such changes with the AAUP and makes the same changes for all other employees”
Needless to say, we rejected the notion that terms and conditions of employment can change without negotiation.
In the afternoon, the administration, in response to our urging that the parties focus exclusively on economic matters, put a new proposal on the table removing many of their initial non-monetary proposals. In addition they proposed delaying the zeroing out of funding for leaves and professional travel by one year. This means if you have been awarded a leave during the 2016-17 year you can plan on it being funded. You may also put in for support for professional travel during the 2017-18 year. This was a major step forward but the administration is still insisting that we make concessions of 10 million dollars a year and that all of this work be done byAugust 31st. Clearly there is much work to be done. Beginning in August the parties will meet twice a week.
We will meet with the administration again next Thursday.
July 20, 2017
The parties met today and the substance of the mornings discussion focused on their proposed reduction in health benefits. Their proposal includes over a million dollar cut in our health insurance, such as introducing premium charges for the employee, deductibles (presently there are no deductibles), increasing co-pays and introducing a drug management element to our health insurance.
“With respect to the Pharmacy Benefits, a Value Plus formulary will be implemented. It will include such features as Precertification on traditional drugs, step therapy and formulary exclusions.”
They also proposed the following:
“Additional terms and conditions of the benefits and coverage described below are set forth in the respective plan documents. Any changes in such plan documents affecting the AAUP bargaining unit shall be made by the University after consultation with the AAUP .The University may modify benefits inthe future for bargaining unit employees on notice to the Union but without negotiation, provided it discussed such changes with the AAUP and makes the same changes for all other employees”
Needless to say, we rejected the notion that terms and conditions of employment can change without negotiation.
In the afternoon, the administration, in response to our urging that the parties focus exclusively on economic matters, put a new proposal on the table removing many of their initial non-monetary proposals. In addition they proposed delaying the zeroing out of funding for leaves and professional travel by one year. This means if you have been awarded a leave during the 2016-17 year you can plan on it being funded. You may also put in for support for professional travel during the 2017-18 year. This was a major step forward but the administration is still insisting that we make concessions of 10 million dollars a year and that all of this work be done byAugust 31st. Clearly there is much work to be done. Beginning in August the parties will meet twice a week.
We will meet with the administration again next Thursday.
Negotiation Update
July 13, 2017
We met with the administration this week on Tuesday and Thursday. We again offered to give up our right to strike in exchange for binding arbitration if no Agreement can be reached and they again rejected our proposal. The substance of the discussions both days primarily focused on their salary proposals. There were no surprises and no real progress made. They are still insisting that adjunct faculty take massive pay cuts and not be eligible for any benefits, that full-time teaching faculty have a 33% increase in teaching load, that library faculty work an additional 33 days a year, and that the minimums for each rank be reduced by 10% and this would apply to both new hires and promotions effectiveSeptember 1st.
Perhaps the most breathtaking of all of their proposals is that all benefits stop being a matter for real negotiation and be totally up to the administration to change at will.
The other thing that became clear is that the present administration’s vision of the future is one where they make all significant decisions. As their outside lawyer continually reminded us, “we get to manage the enterprise”.
We will meet with the administration again next Thursday to discuss benefits.
July 13, 2017
We met with the administration this week on Tuesday and Thursday. We again offered to give up our right to strike in exchange for binding arbitration if no Agreement can be reached and they again rejected our proposal. The substance of the discussions both days primarily focused on their salary proposals. There were no surprises and no real progress made. They are still insisting that adjunct faculty take massive pay cuts and not be eligible for any benefits, that full-time teaching faculty have a 33% increase in teaching load, that library faculty work an additional 33 days a year, and that the minimums for each rank be reduced by 10% and this would apply to both new hires and promotions effectiveSeptember 1st.
Perhaps the most breathtaking of all of their proposals is that all benefits stop being a matter for real negotiation and be totally up to the administration to change at will.
The other thing that became clear is that the present administration’s vision of the future is one where they make all significant decisions. As their outside lawyer continually reminded us, “we get to manage the enterprise”.
We will meet with the administration again next Thursday to discuss benefits.
Negotiation Update
June 29, 2017
We met and reviewed the administration’s proposal on faculty development. They proposed that there will be no faculty leaves between September 2017 and September 2019. In addition, their proposal would eliminate summer fellowships of any kind during the summer of 2018 and 2019.
When those leaves are reintroduced in the fall of 2019, there would be a significantly lower number of leaves and summer fellowships available than there has been in the past under previous contracts. In addition, the value of those summer fellowships, once reintroduced, would decline to $5,000 from the present $8,554. Their proposal also completely eliminated travel funds from September 2017 to September 2019. Once reinstated in the fall of 2019, the funds available for travel reimbursement would be dramatically reduced from what is currently available.
June 29, 2017
We met and reviewed the administration’s proposal on faculty development. They proposed that there will be no faculty leaves between September 2017 and September 2019. In addition, their proposal would eliminate summer fellowships of any kind during the summer of 2018 and 2019.
When those leaves are reintroduced in the fall of 2019, there would be a significantly lower number of leaves and summer fellowships available than there has been in the past under previous contracts. In addition, the value of those summer fellowships, once reintroduced, would decline to $5,000 from the present $8,554. Their proposal also completely eliminated travel funds from September 2017 to September 2019. Once reinstated in the fall of 2019, the funds available for travel reimbursement would be dramatically reduced from what is currently available.
Negotiation Update
June 22, 2017
In today's session the primary focus was the administration’s workload proposal. They made clear their goal was to get significant financial savings by increasing full-time faculty workload. To achieve this, they would increase the annual teaching workload to 8 courses and 6 preps. In addition, they would give the dean unilateral authority to increase class size and the discretion to cancel classes for any reason.
Their lawyer said the administration needs “the authority to modify workload to achieve productive efficiency and cost savings.” It was their position that larger classes and a workload of 8 courses and 6 preps would have no negative impact on pedagogy or student experience.
A small pool of releases for research only would be provided, but anyone who receives a release would not be allowed to teach an overload. We did not agree with any of these proposals.
The parties will meet again next week.
June 22, 2017
In today's session the primary focus was the administration’s workload proposal. They made clear their goal was to get significant financial savings by increasing full-time faculty workload. To achieve this, they would increase the annual teaching workload to 8 courses and 6 preps. In addition, they would give the dean unilateral authority to increase class size and the discretion to cancel classes for any reason.
Their lawyer said the administration needs “the authority to modify workload to achieve productive efficiency and cost savings.” It was their position that larger classes and a workload of 8 courses and 6 preps would have no negative impact on pedagogy or student experience.
A small pool of releases for research only would be provided, but anyone who receives a release would not be allowed to teach an overload. We did not agree with any of these proposals.
The parties will meet again next week.
Negotiation Update
June 15, 2017
The parties met on Thursday June 15, 2017 to begin formal negotiations for a successor Agreement. In addition to their team President Dell’Omo and the Board of Trustees Chair, Mike Kennedy offered some brief opening remarks and then left.
In the hope of making rapid progress towards an Agreement we made the following set of proposals:
1. That the parties commit to binding interest arbitration if they are unable to come to an agreement by August 31, 2017;
2. That both parties drop all proposals that do not have direct monetary impact and that both parties concentrate on those issues that directly impact the University’s bottom line;
3. That both parties return to their last position from the informal negotiations that took place over the summer and fall of 2016 and that both sides agreeing not to up the ante from those positions;
(As a reminder, the administration put a proposal on the table July, 2016, we countered in early fall 2016, and the administration countered November 2016 with a proposal that demanded more
concessions than their earlier proposal. We then made an offer January 2017 with deeper cuts than in our previous offer.
The administration responded by saying our proposed concessions were not sufficient and that we should make a new proposal that provided even greater concessions. We declined to do so prior to a new counter offer from administration. At that point negotiations broke off. The administration then made a proposal in May as required by the Agreement. That proposal demanded greater concessions than their previous November 2016 proposal. The administration's proposal from November 2016 demanded concessions valued by them at $6.6m in FY18. Their latest demand for concessions are valued by them at $10m in FY18. In essence, as we moved towards them, they moved further away.)
The administration rejected our proposal. They said that it was necessary to “fix our academic house” and were not prepared to go back to their earlier economic proposals. They further insisted that they had to achieve the full $10M dollar per year cut in faculty expenditures. This continues the pattern of increasing their demands at each stage of these negotiations.
The parties will meet again, June 22, when the administration will present their proposal on workload and we will present our proposals on Articles I-V.
It is evident that it will be a long summer.
June 15, 2017
The parties met on Thursday June 15, 2017 to begin formal negotiations for a successor Agreement. In addition to their team President Dell’Omo and the Board of Trustees Chair, Mike Kennedy offered some brief opening remarks and then left.
In the hope of making rapid progress towards an Agreement we made the following set of proposals:
1. That the parties commit to binding interest arbitration if they are unable to come to an agreement by August 31, 2017;
2. That both parties drop all proposals that do not have direct monetary impact and that both parties concentrate on those issues that directly impact the University’s bottom line;
3. That both parties return to their last position from the informal negotiations that took place over the summer and fall of 2016 and that both sides agreeing not to up the ante from those positions;
(As a reminder, the administration put a proposal on the table July, 2016, we countered in early fall 2016, and the administration countered November 2016 with a proposal that demanded more
concessions than their earlier proposal. We then made an offer January 2017 with deeper cuts than in our previous offer.
The administration responded by saying our proposed concessions were not sufficient and that we should make a new proposal that provided even greater concessions. We declined to do so prior to a new counter offer from administration. At that point negotiations broke off. The administration then made a proposal in May as required by the Agreement. That proposal demanded greater concessions than their previous November 2016 proposal. The administration's proposal from November 2016 demanded concessions valued by them at $6.6m in FY18. Their latest demand for concessions are valued by them at $10m in FY18. In essence, as we moved towards them, they moved further away.)
The administration rejected our proposal. They said that it was necessary to “fix our academic house” and were not prepared to go back to their earlier economic proposals. They further insisted that they had to achieve the full $10M dollar per year cut in faculty expenditures. This continues the pattern of increasing their demands at each stage of these negotiations.
The parties will meet again, June 22, when the administration will present their proposal on workload and we will present our proposals on Articles I-V.
It is evident that it will be a long summer.
Message to Members Regarding the Upcoming Negotiations
June 8, 2017
Dear Members,
Though the AAUP has been in constant negotiations with President Dell'Omo’s Administration since the Black October layoffs, on Thursday, June 15 we begin weekly face-to-face negotiations determined to reach a new Agreement.
Your team has met weekly since January to prepare for these negotiations and continues to carefully analyze your feedback as well as the information provided to us by the Administration. As in the past we will email updates following each Thursday meeting, which will also appear on the RiderAAUP.net website. In addition to the post-session updates, we will provide other relevant information to give context to the discussions.
The make-up of the Administration negotiating team is different than in the past. It is smaller and excludes key financial and academic officers. Their team comprises their chief negotiator, Michael J. Lebowich, from the high-priced New York City firm Proskauer Rose LLP, which is known for their anti-labor litigation; Rob Stoto (Vice President of Human Resources), who had served as the administration's chief negotiator in the past two negotiations; Jim Castagnera (Associate Provost); and Jonathan Millen (Dean of SLAS).
We appreciate all the many expressions of your support and remain committed to obtaining a fair contract that preserves the integrity of the institution we have worked so diligently to create.
June 8, 2017
Dear Members,
Though the AAUP has been in constant negotiations with President Dell'Omo’s Administration since the Black October layoffs, on Thursday, June 15 we begin weekly face-to-face negotiations determined to reach a new Agreement.
Your team has met weekly since January to prepare for these negotiations and continues to carefully analyze your feedback as well as the information provided to us by the Administration. As in the past we will email updates following each Thursday meeting, which will also appear on the RiderAAUP.net website. In addition to the post-session updates, we will provide other relevant information to give context to the discussions.
The make-up of the Administration negotiating team is different than in the past. It is smaller and excludes key financial and academic officers. Their team comprises their chief negotiator, Michael J. Lebowich, from the high-priced New York City firm Proskauer Rose LLP, which is known for their anti-labor litigation; Rob Stoto (Vice President of Human Resources), who had served as the administration's chief negotiator in the past two negotiations; Jim Castagnera (Associate Provost); and Jonathan Millen (Dean of SLAS).
We appreciate all the many expressions of your support and remain committed to obtaining a fair contract that preserves the integrity of the institution we have worked so diligently to create.
The AAUP and Administration exchanged initial contract proposals.
May 5, 2016
The administration's proposal is the most draconian, severe, and ill-conceived proposal in the history of the AAUP. The AAUP, as it has in the past, seeks modest and incremental changes to the contract to make Rider University competitive in recruiting and retaining the best faculty for our students.
AAUP's 2017 Contract Proposal
Administration's 2017 Proposal
May 5, 2016
The administration's proposal is the most draconian, severe, and ill-conceived proposal in the history of the AAUP. The AAUP, as it has in the past, seeks modest and incremental changes to the contract to make Rider University competitive in recruiting and retaining the best faculty for our students.
AAUP's 2017 Contract Proposal
Administration's 2017 Proposal