| |
The State of the Union and the College
As my
term as Guild president winds down, it's time to do some reflection
about the Guild and the college. Let me say first off, the last couple
of years have been difficult for both. The Guild has experienced a very
rocky relationship with the superintendent/president and the Board of
Trustees. A lack of trust, accusations of the Board's micro-managing the
college, a breakdown in negotiations, a disconnected
superintendent/president, to name just a few, have made life difficult
for all of us. But through it all, the Guild has been stronger than
ever, and we have accomplished a great deal.
We have witnessed the emergence of new Guild leadership—on the
Executive Committee, on the Negotiations Team, on PQE, and on the
Chaparral.
The process of incorporating new leadership has been smooth and
seamless. The meet-and-greets last year were successful, and out of them
came new Guild members ready to serve. The Guild's Executive Committee
has two new members and a couple of others changing positions. The
Negotiations Team has one new member and two that have served only a
year. Five out of the ten members of this year's PQE hadn't served in
leadership positions before, and the
Chaparral
editor is brand new. As long as there is a good mix between new
leadership and more "seasoned" leadership, the Guild's future is bright.
The Guild, I believe, has provided timely and quality service to
its membership. I and other members of the Executive Committee have been
quite accessible in assisting members with a myriad of challenges,
ranging from personnel and pay issues to leaves and evaluations. I have
been impressed with the quality of service provided by Chief Negotiator
Isabelle Saber, Grievance Officer Caryl St. Ama, Treasurer Peter Stathis,
1st Vice-President Richard Kamei, 2nd Vice-President Phyllis Eckler, PIO
Ramona-Barrio-Sotillo, Secretary Zo Kaye, Garfield Campus Steward Marcia
Sibony, and Guild Budget Representative Sarkis Ghazarian. Much of what
they do goes unnoticed, but all of what they do contributes to the
success of your union.
One of the commitments I made at the beginning of my tenure was to
better serve our members at the Garfield campus, and I think I've
(we've) begun to do this. There are now regular Guild informational
meetings at the Garfield campus once a semester. We have also created a
new position on the Guild Executive Committee called Garfield Campus
Steward, in order to give members down at Garfield a stronger voice in
Guild affairs. The GCS is an elected, paid position, and with that comes
a vote on the Guild's Executive Committee. More needs to be done, but we
are certainly heading in the right direction.
The Guild has also stood strong and united in these tough times. We
have been heard and we are respected. Most importantly, we have been
politically active. Each time the Guild's leadership has asked the
membership for its support, the membership has stepped up. Neither the
leadership nor the membership has been too far behind or ahead of what
it was necessary to do. We have had four public demonstrations at Board
meetings over the last two years, and each time the turnout was great
and message sent loud and clear. When we accused the
superintendent/president of circumventing the collecting bargaining
process, the membership effectively demonstrated. Last year, when we
accused the Board of not making the faculty and students a "priority,"
the membership successfully protested, and twice this year, the
membership showed up
en masse
to express our displeasure with Board actions. A union is only as strong
as its membership, and we have a very strong union.
The membership has clearly stood with the leadership of the union
in demanding respect for the collective bargaining process, adherence to
shared governance procedures, and a more collaborative style of
administrative management. We have not backed down when these things
have
not
been forthcoming. We have stood tall and we have fought back, while one
Board member decided not to run for re-election and the
superintendent/president resigned effective June 30. Unwittingly, former
Board member Victor King, in a Glendale
News Press
article dated
May 5, 2009, explained why he and the superintendent/president are, in
effect, no longer connected with the college. After slamming an
"open-door" policy toward shared governance, King stated, "apparently,
the faculty did not want to pull together and work
under
this president. I hope the faculty will do so
under
the next." (The emphasis is mine.) This hierarchical and elitist
approach to shared governance is at odds with our culture, the law, and
"best practices." No wonder this former Board member and resigned
president have had such difficulty with the faculty.
Let me digress for a moment and catch you up to speed on the latest
happenings with Dr. Audre Levy. On May 5, the Board accepted Dr. Levy's
resignation and on May 7 she was offered and accepted a job in the Lone
Star College District at the CyFair campus. On the afternoon of the 7th
during negotiations, the Guild was informed that Dr. Levy was bought out
of the fourth year (next year) of her employment at GCC. Without going
into detail, some of which you already know, the buy-out cost the
District over $300,000. There is evidently no contingency language in
the buy-out that changes its nature if she finds another job. No one in
the Guild knew anything about this until it was asked at the bargaining
table on May 7. Buy-out negotiations had been going since February and
finalized in March, before April's Board election. I think the Board was
trying to do the right thing here, but in the wrong way. I think the way
they did it potentially raises some very serious ethical, legal, and
fiscal mismanagement issues. By messing up the process, the Board
allowed a now-resigned superintendent/president to draw three incomes
next year (the buy-out from GCC, her salary from her Lone Star job, and
her retirement from STRS), as well as not obtaining the necessary buy-in
from the faculty. And all this is being done at a time of tremendous
fiscal uncertainty in the state.
The Guild has also been involved in political campaigns at the
statewide level. Few CFT locals contributed as much as we did last year
to the Prop. 92 campaign. This year we have pushed for members to
support the Employee Free Choice Act and encouraged members to write,
e-mail, or call Senator Dianne Feinstein to get her to support it as
well. In addition, we have encouraged members to vote NO on all the May
19 propositions, except 1B. The propositions are confusing, the product
of slimy political deals, and, most importantly, don't solve
California's
structural
budget
crisis. The way to do that is not by permanently under-funding public
services, or artificially capping state spending, or funding education
based on gambling, but by supporting a progressive tax policy.
Still, there are areas where the Guild could and should do better.
I think we need to do a better job of seeking out and encouraging former
faculty members and others to run for the Board of Trustees. I also
think we need to develop better relations with local politicians on the
City Council and elsewhere. We need to continue to nurture our
relationship with the Glendale Teachers Association. But, most
importantly, despite differences of opinion and some miscommunication,
we need to begin to repair our relationship with the Board. The
relationship has been damaged over the last several years, but with
changes on the Board and a new superintendent/president, I think we can
move in a much more productive and positive direction. This place can
get back on track if we start to replace distrust and suspicion with
mutual respect and good will. It may take several years to get there,
but we should begin the process now.
&
back to top |
|
