PrintFaculty in Illinois have launched an all-out campaign to protect their pension plans, diving into battle with a barrage of letter-writing and lobbying in the state capital. Threats to the current system include an increase in the age at which employees can retire, lower annual payment increases and a cap on interest earned on retirement accounts. A two-tier system, for current employees and new hires, also has been proposed.
Such changes, say members of University Professionals of Illinois/AFT, could hinder the state’s ability to attract qualified faculty.
Gov. Rod Blagojevich wants to change the current 3 percent annual increase in retirement annuities to the U.S. Consumer Price Index or 3 percent, whichever is lowest. If the index is lower, as it has been for eight of the past 10 years, according to James Hacking, executive director of State Universities Retirement System, the annual increase would dip considerably—the index has been as low as 1.6 percent. This change would only affect new employees.
Additionally, Blagojevich wants to increase the age of retirement eligibility for new employees from 60 to 65. He would require at least eight years of service for retirees to receive benefits, and 30 to 35 years for those who want to retire before age 65. The current system allows for as few as five years of service at age 62, and a “30 and out” provision permits people to retire, with benefits, after 30 years, regardless of age.
UPI members are protesting the two-tier system as divisive and unfair to new employees. “How can we attract the best and the brightest to our institutions when they know their benefits will be far below those of the professor in the next classroom?” asks Sue Kaufman, UPI president.
UPI’s voice of opposition to these plans has been amplified by a Higher Education Legislative Coalition the union initiated last year. For a lobby day UPI organized on April 13, the coalition included not only unions and the community college trustees association, but even the Ilinois Board of Higher Education, some university administrators and students.
Even current members could be hit by this proposal, should it go through. The governor wants to cap interest on retirement accounts, and limit pay increases to 3 percent during the final four years of employment—unless universities and local government agree to kick in any “excess” pay. According to Hacking, quoted in the Champaign-Urbana News Gazette, this would bilk State Universities Retirement System members of $4.43 billion, and undoubtedly draw a court challenge as a violation of the state’s constitutional guarantee that benefits will not be diminished for current members of the system.
Even legislators are squirming about Blagojevich’s plan to spend some of this pension money before it is even earned. “Any savings created by cutting benefits for new hires will not be realized for 20 to 30 years,” explains Kaufman, “but the governor’s plan factors in using those savings today.” State Sen. Bill Brady already voted against the plan; as a member of the governor’s pension committee, he called it “fiscally repulsive.”
After six years of struggle, the faculty union at Palomar Community College voted 151-4 on March 4 to ratify its first union contract. Four days later, the college board of trustees approved the agreement.
The Palomar Faculty Federation/AFT represents 850 part-time and 285 full-time faculty at the college. The contract, which runs through June 30, 2006, maintains the health plan and workload of the full-timers and provides a raise of 3 percent. For the part-timers, the contract provides seniority rights and more professional control over their work lives, in addition to significant raises and access to office space. All in all, the contract is a watershed achievement after years of challenging circumstances.
The effort to form a union began in 1999 when part-time faculty members, frustrated by inequalities in the pay scale, began organizing. Full-time faculty joined the effort in 2001 when a president who was hostile to faculty members and to the union movement came into power. “The full-timers had never experienced anything negative,” says PFF co-president Julie Ivey. “They didn’t realize anything could be taken away from them until this president came into power.”
For three years, the faculty worked tirelessly—holding rallies at board meetings, generating press coverage, and doing political action—to elect board members who were sympathetic to faculty concerns. The faculty also received significant help from a coalition of forces including the California Federation of Teachers and the San Diego Labor Council. Their efforts bore fruit when the hostile president resigned and three new faculty-friendly individuals were elected to the board of trustees. This new administrative team broke the logjam on negotiations, which moved along quickly, and an agreement was reached late this past winter.
Mary Millet, former co-president of the federation, notes that part-timers are most pleased with their new reassignment rights. After receiving good evaluations two semesters in a row, part-time faculty are put on a preference list, which allows them to choose the number of classes they would like to teach before new part-time employee assignments are made. In addition, the number of credit hours needed for promotion for part-time faculty members is reduced from 920 hours to 450 hours. As to raises, part-time workers will get increases averaging $475 to $480 per credit hour on top of their current salaries. These raises include equity increases mandated by law.
“I’m just glad we are moving in the right direction,” Ivey says. “We’d like to increase our presence on campus, and solidify the union.”
