The last Labor Management meeting of the academic year was well attended by PSC members, including several new participants. Coworkers across titles came out to support the PSC team, thanks to the efforts of our phonebanking crew. We started by noting the lateness in management’s response to issues raised in the last meeting. It was a long (2 full hours!) and intense meeting. Read on for the summary.

Follow up items: 

What Everyone Needs To Know: We noted that this letter, which we had asked for, has not gone out in months. Management said it would go out shortly.

Hiring Laborers at 2026 Commencement: Members raised concerns about being asked to carry heavy boxes at commencement (to the location and inside of the space). Management requested 3 laborers from Central. However, Central denied SLU’s request for laborers. Management is looking into getting laborers from other CUNY schools, paying them overtime. If they can’t hire laborers, they will hire a company. PSC noted that a moving company is better than a courier. Management will update PSC as soon as arrangements are finalized. Management confirmed that couriers’ tasks include: carrying boxes inside the space, not just to and from. In addition, currently, custodians are asked to carry chairs, open walls, and are using their bodies and backs to perform tasks that should be done by laborers. Members recommended to management that they hire one or two laborers as full time staff to avoid accidents in the future. Management said that the school is too small to warrant hiring a laborer and that they need to assess how much need there is.

Mandatory Title VI Training: At the last LM meeting, members raised concerns about the mandatory Title VI training and issues raised by PSC Academic Freedom Committee including infringement on academic freedom protections. No action had been taken by management, so we brought it to the table again. Our ask continues to be that management communicates concerns to CUNY Central  and advocates pausing the training until it is redesigned to reflect the spirit of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and not infringe on academic freedom. Members reiterated that our concern is with the content of the training and that Title VI should reflect the spirit of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We should be concerned  about the misuse of Title VI, especially  as a social justice school where social justice issues deemed controversial may be construed as a violation of  Title VI. Management said that the discomfort with the content is felt across CUNY leadership, and that there is already a discussion within CUNY Central.

Reorganization Plan and Scheduling: At the last meeting, members raised concerns about SLU’s reorganization plan, and asked for a town hall. We asked about the status of the townhall, and management said that the reorganization plan was on pause because they have run out of time and there is no time to resolve problems in a systematic way. i PSC noted that the process surfaced many meaningful SLU-wide issues and asked how we will address them. Management stated that problems have come up one at a time and are not something to be discussed in labor management or resolved by committee, but by the administration on a case-by-case basis. They said that the plan was promising but is not going to happen. This issue is ongoing and members will continue monitoring the reorganization plan and process.

Technology, Surveillance, and Privacy Issues: Members continue to  raise concerns about the new policy that institutes the use of body worn cameras by Peace Officers on campus. Members were also concerned about the impact cameras have on privacy, protesters, and the wider SLU community. Again, members highlighted the uniqueness of SLU’s population which includes minors. Management acknowledged that this is a university-wide problem and SLU’s location in  leased space where building security does not wear body cameras. Management stated that CUNY public safety officers are here to ensure limited access to the campus, and cited limiting access for federal ICE officers as the reasons they were needed, suggesting that it is something the governing bodies had asked for. They also spoke about body cameras protecting potential victims of police and making police accountable, which was off topic because the questions PSC raised were about privacy impacts. A member with expertise on the subject pointed out that police footage serves the police and the explosion in body cameras has not resulted in the reduction of police brutality. Management will have a discussion with Central and will ensure that the school complies with the law and has protection in place that  will only release what is necessary for the law.

Because body camera footage can be FOILed, members asked about the person responsible for FOIL at SLU, because it is not clearly identified on the CUNY website. How much purview does SLU have in deciding FOIL processes and  protocol? Management pointed out the FOIL has served the social justice movements well, lecturing us about its history, although no one on the PSC side was speaking against the FOIL as a concept. Management said that the labor designee, Richard Wright, handles FOIL requests for SLU, and reports to the General Counsel. Richard Wright and his team do the redacting and Central IT will do the gathering of information. Management noted that they get FOIL requests “all the time” with procurement issues. Members raised that SLU has local autonomy regarding FOIL and management will look into this issue.

In the last meeting, we raised concerns about Zoom AI settings and management promised to send dates for a meeting. However, when the meeting dates were shared the day before this labor management meeting, one date had already passed and the other was too soon. Management shared new dates, and this meeting will happen on May 13 at 1pm.

New Issues

Re-appointment Letter for Faculty: Six full time faculty did not receive their reappointment letters by the contractual deadline. This problem is being addressed through the Personnel & Budget committee, but we flagged it as a union issue as well.

Roles and expectation of Department Chairs. The role and expectation of the department chairs were also raised by members. According to the PSC contract, Department Chairs initiate recommendations, appointments and reappointments of faculty. Any changes in the role of the chairs must be renegotiated. Once the process moves beyond P&B, it is beyond the role of department chairs. Management stated that department chairs are “quasi-managerial”, and pushed back against our position. We concluded by stating that department chairs are bargaining unit members and we are keeping an eye on this.

Honorarium policies: Faculty have been asked to report honoraria payments, with the definition of honoraria extended to include travel, lodging, and meals when providing a service that is not a part of our “official duties”. For example, if a faculty member does a presentation or a training outside of CUNY, and the people there provided them lunch, they have to report the amount, and detailed information about the activity. Aside from the administrative burden for many of our faculty that are very active public scholars, we expressed concerns about (1) the definition of official duties, which included delivering a speech, writing or publishing an article, and participating in a conference. Faculty are evaluated for promotion based on doing these things, so how can they be outside of official duties? (2) Based on the new policy, service performed for an honorarium must fall  within the subject matter of their academic discipline. But it is not a committee of peers who decides this, but the chief diversity officer at the Graduate Center. There are concerted Rightwing campaigns targeting progressive scholars.  Honorarium reporting forms can be FOILed. We raised this concern and asked management to find out the details of how the forms will be stored and where. Management agreed to gather more information on this issue and acknowledged the potential danger to free speech

FOIL Requests: Members also raised concerns about the coordinated rightwing attacks through FOILs, which request, for example, all emails or class materials with the word “antifascist”This  issue is  a major concern across CUNY campuses. Members asked management to describe SLU’s plan to protect members from these targeted attacks against progressive faculty and staff. Management said that their ability to control this was limited but they saw their obligation to support free speech. They also said that our reaction was unfortunate because FOILs were originally a tool of progressive movements and they are legal. They said we should know that our emails are not private. We pushed back to point out that the reality is that higher education and progressive faculty are under attack, and individual faculty should not be blamed for being attacked.  Management agreed to share a summary resource list, organize a workshop, and provide more information on the FOIL process.

Delayed Travel Reimbursement: Members raised concerns on delayed reimbursement for conference travel. Members spend thousands of dollars to attend conferences on SLU’s behalf. There are faculty and staff who are paid in advance and others who must wait for as long as three months sometimes accruing credit card fees. When this happens, faculty and staff are basically giving management a loan. An unresolved discrepancy is that conferences are either paid upfront or reimbursed. Management tried to place blame on the workers by saying that they did not submit on time or did not fill out the forms, but we pushed back. We also pointed out that we were speaking of reimbursements for staff, not just faculty. In the end, management agreed to resolve this issue and agreed that staff who travel frequently should also have access to T-Cards. We pointed out that this is an issue for someone only traveling once, too. Why should they have to pay for it upfront?

Privacy issues with Accessible 18th  bathroom: Members raised concerns about privacy issues with the accessible 18th floor bathroom. The stall door is not flush with the wall. This is a bigger issue than health and safety because it’s an ADA issue.  Management noted that this issue will be addressed immediately.

Reporting requirements for HEO professional development: Members brought to management’s attention that there are now requirements for HEO professional development, and there are concerns  that some will be punished for not participating. Members ask:  Will SLU engage in this? How can we push back against it? Management noted that they are not aware of a penalty for not completing the training, but always submit the tracker to HR, which are then sent to central office.

Timely Response to Members Demands: Members raised concerns about the lateness of responses to members’ requests after Labor Management meetings.  Responses are received only days before LM meetings, and there is not even an acknowledgment to the union’s communication. Substantive responses are really important to discussing demands amongst colleagues.The next set of Labor Management meetings will take place in the fall and is open to all PSC members. All PSC members at SLU are encouraged to participate in the school-wide union meetings. Planning meetings for the Labor Management meeting are held the week before the Labor Management meeting; exact dates and times will be emailed to members in advance of the meetings. The labor management meeting is our opportunity to bring our issues to management.