AB	Assembly Bill (as in: AB 591)
AB 1725	Assembly Bill 1725 (passed in 1989, now Sec. 87482.6 of the Education Code; requires 75% of hours-of-credit instruction be taught by full-timers, but its loopholes weaken the law’s enforcement)
ABC	Association for Better Citizenship (CTA 's Political Action Committee)
ACCJC	Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges; division of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (accredits AA degree-granting institutions in California and elsewhere)
ASCCC	Academic Senate of the California Community Colleges
Agency Fee	Also known as Agency Shop or Fair Share; the fee a faculty member is required to pay their union local as a condition of employment (see below)
BOG	Board of Governors (the governing body for California's community colleges)
CAS	Classified Associate Staff (the union which represents all associate staff employed by CCA-CTA)
CCC	California Community Colleges
CCC/CFT	Community College Council of the California Federation of Teachers
CCCI	California Community College Independents, those colleges without a statewide bargaining agent such as CCA
CEW	Campus Equity Week (to promote the interests of part-time faculty)
CFA	California Faculty Association, the exclusive bargaining agent for faculty at the California State University
CFT	California Federation of Teachers (California affiliate of the AFT, American Federation of Teachers)
Chapter	The basic local unit of self-governance chartered through CTA and affiliated with NEA
CPEC	[see-peck] California Postsecondary Education Commission
CPFA	California Part-time Faculty Association (represents interests of CCC part-time faculty)
COCAL	Coalition of Contingent Academic Labor (COCAL-CA is the California chapter)
CoFO	Council of Faculty Organizations, which includes CCA, CCC, CCCI, FACCC, and CPFA
CSO	California Staff Organization (the union that represents all professional staff employed by CCA-CTA)
EDD	Employment Development Department (oversees unemployment compensation, for which part-time CCC faculty are eligible)
ESP	Educational Support Personnel, such as instructional aides
FACCC	Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges (not a union, but a lobbying organization)
GLS	Group Legal Services, the method used to provide legal assistance to chapters and individual members (Note: All GLS service requests must be initiated through your designated Staff Consultant/Primary Contact Staff)
GPO & WEP	Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision (see below)
GR	Governmental Relations (CCA-CTA's lobbying office)
NAFFE	North American Alliance for Fair Employment
PAC	Political Action Committee
PERB	Public Employee Relations Board (state agency that coordinates union elections and deals with unfair labor practices in public employment, including state and community colleges)
PROP. 98	Proposition 98 (see below)
SB	Senate Bill (as in, SB 432)
WASC	Western Association of Schools and Colleges (accrediting organization for colleges in the western U.S.; parent organization of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges [ACCJC])
Weingarten Rights	Based on the 1975 U.S. Supreme Court ruling of NLRB v. J. Weingarten, Inc., these rights give union employees the right to have union representation at meetings with supervisors that are investigatory or that could lead to disciplinary action. See "Your Weingarten Rights" for details.

Definitions of Things You May Have Always Wondered About, Like . . . . . . . .

Agency Fee (AKA: Agency Shop Fee, Fair Share)

When a faculty member is required to either join a union or pay the organization a fee as a condition of employment, these fees are known as agency fees. Under California law, Sections 3583-3585 of the Government Code relating to higher education labor relations, states that eligible employees who do not pay union dues may be required to pay for the costs of "…lobbying activities designed to foster collective bargaining negotiations and contract administration or to secure for the represented employees advantages in wages, hours, and other conditions of employment in addition to those secured through meeting and conferring with the higher education employer."  The decision of whether an Agency Fee will be levied rests solely with each individual union.

The rationale for agency fee is that by law, the  union must represent every employee within the bargaining unit, whether or not the employee is a member of the union. Agency fees are intended to compensate for this work.

Comparing Union Membership and Being an Agency Fee Payer

As a Union Member, your full dues are deducted from your monthly paychecks. Choosing this option means you can hold office in the union, give input and vote on the contract, vote in your local union elections, carry the union's liability insurance, be eligible for any benefits offered by the union, and have legal representation, should you have an employment related dispute.

As an Agency Fee Payer, an amount equal to the full dues is deducted from your monthly paycheck, but you are NOT a union member.  You cannot hold office in the union, you cannot vote in union elections, and while you have the right to give input into contract issues, you cannot vote on the contract. You cannot carry the union's insurance, and receive none of the other benefits of union membership--but the union is required to provide legal representation if you have a dispute regarding your contract. The latter is true because the union has a “duty of fair representation” to all members of the bargaining unit.

Religious/Conscientious Objector  State law holds that if an employee "…is a member of a bona fide religion, body or sect that has historically held conscientious objections to joining or financially supporting public employee organizations, [such employee] would not be required to join, but would instead be required to pay a…service fee to a non-religious, non-labor charitable fund…"   If you claim exemption from paying union dues on this basis,  the full dues equivalent is deducted from your paychecks, but is made payable to a charitable fund (from a list usually chosen by the union) exempt from taxation under Section 501(c)(3) of Title 26 of the Internal Revenue Code.  Such contributions might not be an allowed charitable tax deduction for you, however, so you should consult with your tax advisor. (The decision of whether the employee is a bona fide religious objector will be determined on an individual basis by the union.)  Choosing this option has the same effect on you as if you were an Agency Fee Payer: you are not a union member, cannot hold union office or vote in union elections or on the contract, and you have no access to the union's liability insurance or other benefits. Choosing this option means the union gets none of your money.

Faculty with questions about Agency Fee or claiming Religious/Conscientious Objector status should contact a member of the Executive Board of their union.

 

WEP and GPO

The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) reduces the earned Social Security benefits of an individual who also receives a public pension from a job not covered by Social Security. It affects people who worked both as public employees in jobs not covered by Social Security and in jobs in which they earned Social Security benefits. The WEP affects educators who do not earn Social Security from their jobs in the public schools, but who work part-time or during the summer in jobs covered by Social Security. Part-time faculty and those who came late to the teaching profession are especially hard-hit by this law, because they probably have worked in positions where they earned Social Security benefits--yet because they have also earned a  "public" pension, they are penalized at retirement by having their Social Security benefits reduced.

The Government Pension Offset (GPO) reduces public employees' Social Security spousal or survivor benefits by an amount equal to two-thirds of their public pension. Spousal and survivor benefits are normally available to any person whose retired or deceased spouse worked at a job in which he or she earned Social Security benefits, but the GPO reduces or eliminates these benefits. 

The Social Security Fairness Act was introduced in 2007, seeking to eliminate these two provisions. While the Act ultimately gained some 352 bipartisan cosponsors in the House and 37 cosponsors in the Senate, it languished in committee until the 110th Congress adjourned last fall. The good news is that the legislation was reintroduced in January 2009. Repeal of the offsets will remain a top NEA priority for this Congress, and they will be pushing President Obama and Congress to take immediate action. 

For more details on the GPO/WEP, go to our Part-time Faculty page.  The latest GPO/WEP news is posted on NEA's Legislative Action Center at http://www.nea.org/home/20361.htm.

 

Academic Bill of Rights

The following analysis is courtesy of the American Association of University Professors at http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/issues/ABOR

Government Oversight of Teaching and Learning   With all freedoms come responsibilities. While participants in academic life have a right to retain and express (in appropriate venues) their beliefs and opinions, the AAUP holds that teachers and researchers are responsible "by example and practice, to abide by the best scholarly and ethical standards of their disciplines" as the AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics says. Students, for their part, are responsible for "maintaining standards of academic performance established for each course in which they are enrolled" (Joint Statement on the Rights and Freedom of Students).

In the United States, neither teachers nor students are responsible to the government for the content of their teaching or learning. But since 2004, nearly two dozen state legislatures have considered legislative proposals challenging the fundamental concept that higher education in the United States is and should be free of government control or interference. 

No state has yet approved the so-called Academic Bill of Rights, which would involve the state and/or federal government in oversight of curricula and teaching, and faculty hiring and promotion in both public and private institutions of higher education.  

The Academic Bill of Rights push has greatly lost steam; the number of states with introduced legislation has dropped dramatically. However, the issue is not dead.  A number of related bills using the phrase “intellectual diversity” pose similar challenges. Ten states introduced such legislation in 2007. 

The AAUP has sharply criticized the so-called academic bill of rights as unnecessary and almost certain to compromise academic freedom rather than defend it. At their core, its measures would place decisions about faculty appointments and the content of academic programs in the hands of political officials, thereby jeopardizing not only the independence of faculty members and their institutions but also their capacity to advance knowledge and educate our students. Read the 2003 statement Academic Bill of Rights issued by Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

 

Academic Freedom

According to the Columbia Encyclopedia, academic freedom is defined as: "the right of scholars to pursue research, to teach, and to publish without control or restraint from the institutions that employ them. It is a civil right that is enjoyed, at least in statute, by all citizens of democratic countries.. . . . Essential to the acceptance of the concept of academic freedom is the notion that truth is best discovered through the open investigation of all data. A less clearly developed corollary of academic freedom is the obligation of all those who enjoy it to pursue the line of open and thorough inquiry regardless of personal considerations."    

The modern concept of academic freedom is built around an idea born in the 19th century in German universities. Called Lehrfreiheit--freedom to teach--it was intended to protect the right of professors to pursue their ideas freely, without restriction, both in teaching and research.

In the U.S., the idea of academic freedom led to the founding of the American Association of University Professors, and the organization’s statement on principles of academic freedom, designed to protect professors from termination due to their political opinions or activities.

 

Proposition 98

Proposition 98 is known as the "Classroom Instructional Accountability and Improvement Act of 1988." Incorporated into the state constitution as Section 8 of Article XVI, it was meant to guarantee a minimum level of funding for K-12 schools and community colleges.

Unfortunately, Prop 98 is an extremely convoluted statute based on a myriad of factors such changes in enrollment, per capita personal income and projections of state tax revenues...and it also some serious loopholes. (More about that later.)

Proposition 98 consists of three "tests" that apply under varying economic and fiscal conditions.

•  In years of normal or stronger revenue growth, the Prop 98 guarantee is the LARGER of:

  • Test 1: the same share of the General Fund as in the base year of 1986–87 or

  • Test 2: the prior year's funding from state and property taxes, adjusted for growth in per capita personal income and enrollment growth

•  In years of low revenue growth, when General Fund revenues rise more slowly than personal income, the Proposition 98 guarantee is:
  
  • Test 3: the prior year's funding from state and property taxes, adjusted for growth plus 0.5 percent.  (In other words, this test applies only when the percent change in state general fund revenue growth plus 0.5 percent is less than the percent change in personal income.)  Any reduction--compared to the previous year--must be no worse than cuts in state spending per capita for other budgeted services.    

The legislature has the authority to allocate Proposition 98 dollars to individual programs through the budget process and legislation. Suspending the provisions of Proposition 98 requires a two-thirds vote of the legislature and agreement by the governor.

PROPOSITION 98 AND THE CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES   Unfortunately, as far as California's 108 community colleges are concerned, Proposition 98 has not worked out as intended. According to the Contra Costa Community College District Chancellor's Office, Proposition 98--the measure that was supposed to help California's financially-strapped community colleges--has in fact done just the opposite: it has under-funded them by as much as $201 to $440 million annually during the last 10 years.

How?

By a little bit of legislative sleight-of-hand. Each year, the Legislature suspends Education Code 43201.1, which was written to guarantee community colleges 10.93% of all Proposition 98 funds. Their rationale is that ever since the passage of Proposition 13, local tax funding for K-12 schools has dried up...so they simply shift some of the Prop 98 money intended for community colleges to K-12 schools.

While this has given K-12 education a fiscal shot in the arm, it has also done something else far less constructive: it has set the K-12 system and the community colleges at one another's throats in the budget planning process. And it has created a situation where California's community colleges are now ranked among the worst-funded 2-year educational institutions in the nation.

 

CCA Home |   Site Map   |   Contact Us
© 2010 Community College Association