Documents relevant to this update include:
Last week’s bargaining update highlighted NAIT’s ingoing proposal package, which unfortunately did not include their wage proposal.
This update focuses on highlights from NASA’s proposal package.
Explanations and analysis are presented without prejudice to the ongoing negotiations between NAIT and NASA.
Many of the proposals put forward by NASA should be familiar, as over 95% of the proposals sent to NASA members on February 25th ahead of the bargaining town halls ended up in the package proposed to NAIT. The discussions through the town halls were supportive of what was being considered for proposals, and we were also provided some important critical feedback that was helpful in developing the final package.
This is likely the most ambitious proposal package NASA has put forward in its history, and that’s a good thing. These are many significant ways in which your working conditions can improve, and then so can student learning conditions. If NAIT wants to say they’re here to listen to faculty, you’ve given them many important things to hear about.
Highlights
These are highlights from some of the proposals that were already sent out ahead of the February/March town halls.
Wage increases
NASA members were overwhelmingly supportive of wages catching up with past inflation, while meeting ongoing inflation, plus very strongly supportive of an increase on top of that in recognition of the work that has been done and will be done for an institute “Essential to Alberta”.
An electronic survey was sent out after the bargaining town halls to weigh some options for the ingoing wage proposal, and the one with the most support has now been tabled.In addition to that, NASA members have also prioritized reducing steps on the salary schedule, and wage parity for all NASA classifications.
In line with those priorities, NASA’s wage proposal tabled to NAIT on August 1 included:
A retroactive increase of 25% to July 1, 2024
An increase of 10% plus Cost of Living Adjustment on July 1, 2025
The salary schedule in the current collective agreement has only 8 steps for Divisional Librarians, and they also have the highest top rate, and so the proposal uses the Divisional Librarian scale as the starting point for the July 1, 2024 increases for all NASA staff to avoid anyone under NASA losing out in the transition to the new salary schedule.
Reducing the class size formula
Another top priority for NASA members is workload. While NAIT has proposed increasing the threshold for SIHs to be awarded, meaning class sizes can go up without compensation or workload adjustments, NASA has proposed the opposite, reducing the threshold from a 17083 CSF to 12583.
In addition, the proposal states the formula should be proportional in every intake or semester to avoid “hot and cold” loading where NAIT could load instructors up with students one semester and completely unbalance the workload, but then give them classes with fewer students the next semester to avoid SIH payout.
We’ve used example workloads below to calculate how NASA’s proposal could effect class sizes. Averages will vary within those categories below for different schedules.
Diploma: moving from an average of 29 students per course, with a total load of 348 students for the academic year, to an average of over 21 students, and a 256 student load over the year and 131 in a semester. That’s more than a 24% decrease in average class size, and a more than 26% decrease in overall student load.
Degree: moving from an average of over 37 students, with 339 students total in the year to over 27 students per class and 249 total This results in about a 27% average class size decrease, and an over 26% decrease in total student load.
Apprenticeship: average class sizes of 25 could be decreased to 19, with an annual student load of 200 decreasing to 147. A 24% decrease in class sizes, and an over 26% decrease in total student load.
Note that these calculations are based on current SIH thresholds.
16.06 Decreased SIH thresholds across all categories of instruction
NASA has reviewed the collective agreements for other institutes in Alberta and has found lower thresholds in all categories of instruction, and so has proposed reductions in SIH that would bring NAIT in line with those institutes with the lowest thresholds.
The proposal also adds Post Diploma Certificates as a category of instruction equivalent to Degree programs, as their current threshold is equal to degree programs at 449.
Apprenticeship would move from a 685 annual SIH threshold to 552.
Diploma/certificate from 585 to 427.5.
Applied Degree (BAIST) from 515 to 450.
Degree & Post Diploma Certificate would move from 449 to 370.
53.01 Academic Freedom, Instructional Assistants, and Support staff displacement
This proposals adds academic freedom into the collective agreement, a common provision and important principle in post-secondary.
It also limits the use of Instructional Assistants, a proposal which is overwhelmingly supported by NASA members.
This proposal makes it clear that the I.A.s role shall not include teaching, and that IA’s should not be able to cause displacement of NASA staff not only through redundancy, but replacement through attrition (when you replace a NASA member after they leave with an I.A.) including of temporary and casual staff, and that they should also not cause a reduction in academic staff SIH, or a loss of hours for temporary staff.
The use of I.A.s would also be at the request of instructors, and not imposed on academic staff.
Given that NAIT’s introduction of IA II’s teaching and displacing NASA members was unanticipated and undisclosed, there is justification for the proposal also adding that the same principles against displacement through use of I.A.s will not occur through the hiring and use of any other support staff.
New proposals since February 25th, 2024
Further discussion among members and with the bargaining committee led to the development of 4 new proposals.
8.02 No policies that are non grievable
This adds a new cause in Article 8 to state that NAIT can not create or maintain policies that can not be grieved, unless otherwise specified in the agreement. The identified policy at issue here is NAIT’s Distributed Work Agreement policy which states that a review of a denied distributed work request can be made by a higher level of management, but that the “decisions will not be subject to grievance procedures”.
17.02 Reading Week days
As discussed in the last update, NAIT’s proposal is to give more power to management to deny staff who have asked to work during Reading Week days.
NASA’s proposal then is to give staff the power to choose to work, instead of being forced to take vacation.
46.02 clarifying redundancy process
46.02 as it reads gives NAIT the option of releasing Temporary staff members when redundancies occur, or keeping them on. The past practice has been that Temporary staff have been let go before the involuntary redundancies occurred. From NASA’s perspective this makes sense. With a goal of having more permanent staff than precarious, it would be detrimental to allow a situation where NAIT can keep on Temporary staff but make the Continuing staff involuntarily redundant.
The proposal updates the language in 46.02 to reflect the past practice of having Temporary staff released before any involuntary redundancies could take place. This still allows for a situation where the Continuing staff may volunteer to be made redundant, and that may stop the need for release of some or all of the Temporary staff.
New Letter of Understanding: Distributed work agreement
Proposes a new letter of understanding. Letters of understanding are seen to be something in effect for the length of the agreement and subject to renewal in the next round of negotiations, as opposed to something more permanent. This can be a preferred approach in areas that may change quickly, such as distributed work agreements (DWAs).
The proposal borrows from NAIT’s own distributed work agreement policy, as well as provisions in other collective agreements. It says that DWAs will be voluntary, requested by employees, and mutually agreed to with leadership.
They would then be subject to regular review, at least yearly, and either party can terminate the agreement with 30 days notice, and also modified with mutual agreement.
The agreements should be considered on a case-by-case basis instead of a blanket “no distributed work at all”, but still taking into account operational requirements and other relevant factors. Staff will get the reasons in writing why a request has been denied.
If denied, the employee can escalate to the next level of management, and if that is not satisfactory they can pursue the issue through the grievance process, moving to Step 3.
The proposal enshrines the right to union representation through these discussions.
It also maintains the one-time allowance of $800 for home office set-up, and NAIT’s obligation to provide all required technology for the primary workplace, and for it to be mobile to be used in multiple locations, while still allowing the possibility of personal equipment use.
Proposals that were not adopted by the committee
The bargaining committee decided not to bring forward these three proposals that were under consideration during the town halls, and so they were not part of the package presented to NAIT.
Extra pay for educational credentials
There was some strong advocacy among NASA members on both sides for this proposal. The committee considered the complexity of recognizing the many valuable credentials that NASA members hold and the chance that some staff would be left out, the fact that the job duties are the same in a program regardless of an instructor’s credentials, as well as the ability to improve pay for all staff by focusing on general wage increases. Staff should still have their credentials taken into account when they are placed on the salary grid when being hired. Another consideration was that this proposal received both the lowest level of support, as well as the highest level of those in strong disagreement in the December 2023 electronic survey.
Stronger definition of chair duties
Discussion among the committee acknowledged that focusing on the proposal under 16.03 (7) to quantify chair download set at a minimum of 50% while also taking into account various criteria for a further download could see more substantive results for Chairs in this round of negotiations.
Continuing contracts for precarious staff
There was discussion about proposing something that would stipulate recurring periods of employment for Temporary staff. In the collective agreement examples the committee looked at, it was implemented as a second class of temporary staff, where they would either be on a 3 year term, or for a shorter fixed term. It was voiced that focusing on improving the conversion from temporary to continuing, and other improvements for all temporary staff could do better than creating a separate class of temporary workers.
Proposals where principles were modified
These are proposals that were presented as under consideration for the town halls, but some of the principles have changed after discussion with members and the bargaining committee.
16.07 SIH Overload by Semester or Intake
During town hall discussion, members from one program expressed that this situation would not work for the flexibility they needed in the program. The proposal was modified to allow for a program to request an exemption and instead have SIH thresholds apply over the whole year. This would require discussion with the program staff, and agreement from NAIT and NASA, and require mutual agreement to be renewed every year if desired.
3.03 Full-time Hours for Temporary staff
Previous discussion had been on having a certain SIH threshold guarantee temporary staff full time hours. There were concerns raised that NAIT could then assign just one SIH under that threshold to avoid full time hour assignments.
The proposal brought forward instead requires job postings and assignment letters to state whether the position is full time, and if part-time what the FTE is, and then requires that those hired for full time hours not be assigned or paid less than 36.25 hours a week, and that increasing a part-time staff’s hours shall require mutual agreement.
Expire, modify, and renew letters of intent and letters of understanding
Often there are letters of intent or understanding that are agreed to that are specific to one collective agreement period, and they do not get carried forward into the next agreement. These items were not discussed during the town halls, but were discussed and adopted by the bargaining committee later.
NASA has proposed the following:
Letter of Intent – Interpretation of Article 3 – Application (Employee Type)
NASA has proposed expiring the Letter of Intent, contingent on adoption of the proposal Eliminating Casual Status.
This letter was created in the last round of negotiations, and stated that casuals were being used instead of contractors, and that casuals would not be hired to displace instructional staff through redundancy. This letter becomes irrelevant if the agreement moves to a two job-status system with all permanent staff being Continuing, and all precarious staff being Temporary.
Letter of Understanding Re: Article 3 – Application
Principles for Vendor/Contract for Credit Programming Needs
NASA has proposed renewing this LoU, subject to discussion with NAIT about which schools may be appropriate to allow the vendor contractors to operate under.
NASA has heard from members that this practice has been helpful for their programs, where specific credentials or skillsets may be required (e.g. Dentists), and many people in that profession may handle their employment through a corporation or numbered company instead of becoming a direct employee of NAIT.
It is limited to only 25 contractors in the whole academic year, with reporting requirements to NASA. Currently it is limited to the School of Health and Life Sciences and SAST, with SAST of course no longer existing.
NASA’s proposal also makes an amendment to more regularly report on who the vendor contractors are, for better accountability.
Letter of Understanding – Tie-breaking Process for Seniority
NASA proposes expiring this letter of understanding, It was necessary for this agreement as it was the first time seniority was introduced, but having ongoing tie-breakers is spelled out in 45.05.
Letter of Understanding – EPDA Administrative Process
NASA proposes expiring this letter. This has been completed and EPDA administrative duties are now handled by NAIT.
Letter of Understanding re; Article 10 – Institute-Association Relations
NASA proposes expiring this letter. Discussions around a tenant agreement took place, although they proved unfruitful when NAIT proposed restrictions around NASA communications. They also were not willing to guarantee no lock-outs for the stability of the operations of NASA’s office. No agreement was reached.
Letter of Understanding Re: Workload Thresholds for Post Diploma Certificate Programs
You will not find this letter in the agreement itself, but on the NASA website here. It was negotiated in the fall of 2022 after NAIT realized they had not proposed a threshold for post diploma certificates during bargaining. It is not uncommon for employers and unions to establish LoU’s between agreements. The LoU stipulates post diploma certificates will have their SIH thresholds at 449 in an academic year, which is equal to degree programs. The LoU says that the agreement will continue until a new collective agreement is reached.
NASA proposes expiring the LoU, contingent on being able to negotiate post diploma certificate thresholds in the agreement.
Future updates
Look for more updates to discuss:
- NAIT’s proposals left to be tabled and what they might involve
- What estoppel is and what it means for vacation and the NASA office
- Training available in the fall
In solidarity,
Trevor Zimmerman
NASA Bargaining Committee Spokesperson
On behalf of the NASA Bargaining Committee
Previous Bargaining Updates: