Archived Updates

Summary: Contracts for new faculty members state that the start date for the new CA will be July 1, 2023.

Summary: While the Employer has yet to confirm the tentative agreement and finalize three key articles, particularly regarding the RTPP process, the FA is pushing ahead with redeveloping the RTPP workshop to reflect these changes. Despite ongoing frustrations, the bargaining team remains committed to concluding negotiations and providing members with resources to prepare for their applications, and is asking for continued support from the collective.

Summary: Both sides agree on a path forward to review the outstanding CA articles. It is hoped that the draft will be finalized in the next week.

Summary: Despite reaching a tentative agreement to end the strike in March, the Employer has repeatedly delayed the finalization of the Collective Agreement (CA) by providing incomplete drafts and refusing to acknowledge necessary corrections. The Faculty Association’s team has reviewed, revised, and documented outstanding issues, while also dealing with unprofessional conduct from some administrators, as they work to conclude negotiations.

Summary: The FA seeks to finalize the CA and, if issues persist, they may involve conciliation officers to address the Employer’s delays in reviewing the corrections.

Summary: After two weeks of waiting, the Employer has sent a revised draft, and the FA is reviewing it to identify outstanding issues; continued delays persist due to the Employer’s refusal to meet, forcing negotiations to proceed via email.

Summary: The FA grievance officer emphasizes the need for an accurate collective agreement, noting persistent errors in drafts from the Employer that have delayed signing since March. Despite efforts to meet and resolve these issues, misleading communications from the VPAP appear intended to undermine solidarity.

Summary: The lead negotiator comments on the employer’s unwillingness to meet in person to finalise the CA; demonstrates that, despite accusations to the contrary, we are not attempting to re-negotiate any terms but only to ensure that the CA reflects the contents of the tentative agreement in March; and discusses the employer’s decision to file a complaint with the Labour Board, which will necessitate further delays to the whole process and financial cost not only to the Faculty Association but also to the university as an institution.  

Summary: The incoming president of the FA executive introduces herself; comments on the employer’s decision to file a complaint with the Labour Board; explains why the statement made by the VPAP about the employer’s hope to expedite backpay is disingenuous, since the articles governing salary scales in the employer’s draft are still inaccurate; reports that the number of substantive inconsistencies between the employer’s proposed draft of the CA and the tentative agreement reached in March has been reduced to 36; and reports her request for a meeting with the BoG chair.

Summary: The lead negotiator reminds FA members about the general and specific mandates for the Bargaining Team, especially as outlined in the Letters of Understanding; discusses aspects of the service route to full professorship; and provides an update on the current inconsistencies between the employer’s proposed draft of the CA and the tentative agreement reached in March.

Summary: The FA president provides a full account of the 36 outstanding consistencies between the employer’s proposed draft of the CA and the tentative agreement reached in March and, echoing the comments in the lead negotiator’s email on the same day, suggests that these issues could be resolved quickly if the employer were only willing to meet in person to work through them. The FA president also comments on the proposal to extend timelines for RTPP and on the urgency of processing backpay once the employer’s proposed salary scales are corrected to reflect those agreed upon in March.

Summary: The FA vice president corrects the record with respect to the Labour Board complaint, explaining that it cannot automatically lead to binding arbitration; it can only force both sides to come to an agreement.

Summary: The FA president reiterates the explanation from the FA vice president on the previous day, stating that the Labour Board complaint cannot automatically lead to binding arbitration; it can only force both sides to come to an agreement.

Summary: Unsuccessful conciliation meeting. Employer not providing a complete & accurate CA for signature. Next steps include responding to the Employer’s complaint to the Labour Board and proposing mediation and arbitration.

Summary: More details on the conciliation meeting: employer did not attend in person and refused to engage in discussion. Employer will not make changes to 36 outstanding items. Union lawyer to propose mediation/arbitration. FA Exec to request a meeting with BoG Chair.

Summary: Union lawyer requests parties to meet prior to Case Management Conference with a mediator/arbitrator. No response from Employer will mean FA to submit complaint to Labour Board. Request to meet with BoG Chair denied.

Summary: Special Q&A meeting featuring the FA lawyer was scheduled. Employer’s response to Labour Board and FA correspondence was that they were willing to speak with FA prior to CMC. A phone call was scheduled between FA lawyer and Employer’s lawyer for Sept 17. Tyrone Cotie’s response to FA president’s letter was that the BoG cannot do anything because the BoG is ‘not the direct employer of Faculty’.

Summary: Sept 17 call between Employer’s lawyer and FA lawyer was fruitless. Request for a mediator/arbitrator still unanswered by employer. Labour board proposed a date for the parties to meet to finalize the CA but employer not available. On the suggestion of CAUT, MSVUFA filed a complaint with the Labour Board against the employer. FA submitted an application to CAUT Defence Fund. JC working on a draft for RTPP timelines.

Summary: Summary of the workload by FA Exec and challenges they face. FA is a safe place to ask questions but some questions cannot fully be answered due to the confidential nature of ongoing bargaining.

Summary: A followup sharing CAUT’s memo on FOIPOP requests; Explanation for how the tentative agreement was constructed in order to end the strike swiftly

Summary: Update on how JC is proceeding with pressing issue in lieu of a signed CA; Overview of where discussion on the CA are at after a productive meeting facilitated by the Labour Board.

Summary: Update that the FA has been waiting for more than a week for a response on RTPP from the employer; the GO urges members to write the VPAP to ask that the process be hastened. 

Summary: Announcement that in-person “Case Management Conference” facilitated by the Labour Board was productive; more facilitated meetings to come; account of FA attempts to hasten responses on RTPP from the Employer

Summary: Explanation of the legally binding nature of JC decisions and the ramifications the unsigned CA has had on RTPP

Summary: Further elaboration of the binding nature of JC decisions and explanation of the timeline, i.e., the FA was unaware that the Employer had been moving along with RTPP processes, in violation of JC, until mid-September

Summary: Clarification that the FA was unaware that members were receiving RTPP notification letters from the Employer over the summer; update on ongoing efforts to resolve confusion and move forward with a clear process

Summary: Clarification on the complaints made to the Labour Board and the corresponding hearing scheduled in January, 2025; Clarification on outstanding issues concerning the CA; Update on the progress of finalizing RTPP timelines

Summary: Labour Board facilitated discussions; JC work on RTPP; President to give oral report at BoG meeting

Summary: What does our union do? What is the unique power of a union? Difference between Appendix B and Article 17.2

Summary: Update and clarification on Appendix B; Employer has agreed to FA’s proposed resolution for Appendix B

Summary: Announcement that all outstanding issues have been agreed to; RTTP update with JC; announcement that CAUT has approved $88,000 be issued to the MSVUFA to reimburse legal fees

Summary: Chronological summary of previous updates for the sake of transparency

Summary: Announcement that proofreading of the CA has been completed; Overview of next steps required to sign the CA

Summary: The last step is for the Employer to confirm all cross-referencing; RTPP processes are nearly finalized

Summary: The Employer has not acknowledged the FA BT for two weeks since the final copy of the Collective Agreement was sent to them for final review.

Summary: Details on the outcome of the CMC meeting; Labour Board has set new timelines for Employer and FA to respond to each other with another CMC scheduled Dec 4 if needed; Announcement regarding FA Communications initiative

Summary: Clarification and response to the Administration’s message circulated Nov 27; Summary of negotiations throughout November including timelines set by the Labour Board; FA has never requested changes to language agreed upon in March; One heading correction and two cross-references remain to be clarified or corrected before signing.

Summary: Announcement that the Collective Agreement has been signed by both parties.

Summary: Adjustments to timelines pertaining to: workload, RTPP, sabbatical, professional development, and travel.

Summary: A list of 36 errors identified in the Employer’s copy of the CA

Summary: FA President requests meeting with the Chair of the BoG to hasten the signing of the CA; the request is initially accepted, but later refused on legal grounds; MSVUFA president elaborates on the need to resolve matters swiftly and urges for a meeting; the request is again denied; the Chair of the BoG declares that the Board of Governors is “not the direct employer of faculty.”

Summary: Advisement that RTPP work and assessment be paused while a new timeline is formulated.

Summary: An overview of the state of labour relations at MSVU and the pressing need to sign the CA; a declaration of the FA’s motion to support academic freedom in the wake of political targeting of scholars engaged in scholarship on the war in Gaza

Summary: Narrative documenting the attempt to block the MSVUFA President from BoG meetings on matters of confidentiality; Silencing of the MSVUFA President during a BoG meeting; Disciplining the role of the MSVUFA President on the BoG

Summary: Details on the agreed upon new RTPP deadlines and process.