PSC/CUNY Research Grants
CUNY Alliance Engages
In Fear-Mongering
CA says in
their latest email that CUNY Faculty is “poised” to lose control of
the PSC-CUNY faculty research program. Then they go on to charge
the PSC leadership has been “silent” about this “pending loss.”
Both charges are not true.
On February 19,
2009, First Vice President Steve London posted the following
statement to the PSC Delegate Assembly list serve:
To PSC
Delegates:
Several delegates have raised concerns on this list about the
review of PSC-CUNY grants now being undertaken by CUNY. Please
be assured that the PSC-CUNY Grants are a negotiated benefit.
The University cannot change the grant process without
negotiating with the union. The PSC was invited to participate
in the University Task Force On The Restructuring of the PSC-CUNY
Research Award Program. In response, the PSC's stated position
has been that any proposed changes regarding eligibility, scope
of grant activity, and the practice and processes regarding
decision-making in the awarding of PSC-CUNY grants must be
negotiated with the union. Deborah Bell, PSC Executive Director,
has attended the two task force meetings that have been held to
report back to union officials about the progress of
discussions.
While an alternative approach to reviewing and making decisions
about PSC-CUNY grants emerged from the most recent meeting
(1/29/09), it is the union's position that the Task Force should
meet with the Executive Committee of the University Committee on
Research Awards for discussion of substantive issues before a
formal proposal is put forward by the Task Force. The PSC
leadership will also meet with faculty serving on the UCRA
Executive Committee to discuss substantive issues. And, if the
University puts forward a formal proposal that involves
contractual changes, it will have to be negotiated with PSC.
This statement
was also circulated on February 24, 2009, to the panel chairs of the
University Committee on Research Awards (UCRA).
The PSC
leadership has been in constant communication with members of the
Executive Committee of the UCRA since early February and has a
meeting with the Executive Committee scheduled for March 17th.
Secondly, the
contractual language protecting faculty governance and
decision-making in the awarding of grants is very strong. To assert
that CUNY management’s takeover of these functions is “pending”
because management asserts a position in a preliminary report of a
management-formed task force is to show a lack of understanding of
the contract and weakness as a negotiator.
The New Caucus
leadership has a strong record of defeating management demands when
they are put across the table because we have a strong record of
rousing membership to defend hard-won contractual rights (something
CA has criticized us for in the past). It was the current New
Caucus PSC leadership who defeated CUNY management’s contractual
demands that Department Chairs be removed from the bargaining unit,
that HEO 13.3 (b) job security protections be gutted, that salary
steps be removed, that HEOs be paid less than faculty, and the list
goes on.
And where was
CA when these contractual fights were taking place? Do you remember
any CA emails then? Of course not, because they were sitting on the
side lines when the real work of the contract campaign was to be
done.
Now that there is an
election, CA hopes to capture your attention with fear-mongering and
falsehoods.
New Caucus
leaders have a record of real accomplishment when it comes to
protecting contractual rights, established in turbulent times. How
can you trust people with your future if all they can offer is fear
mongering and falsehoods?
click
here for
printer-friendly copy
