The first Labor Management meeting of the new academic year covered many topics. About 25 SLU workers attended this meeting, and we covered four major areas.

Beginning with space issues, we brought to management’s attention the ongoing space-related concerns that Bursar, Registrar, Admission, the Learning Hub, and others have been facing, particularly when providing student-facing services. Co-workers emphasized that these issues have been raised in previous meetings with Management, and asked about long-term solutions and how our concerns have been shaping future space considerations. Management replied that there is not sufficient space to accommodate needs, and the solution is to acquire more space. Management has been working with the University to secure more space, and also turning towards other government offices to advocate for the budget for more space. The second floor of the building has been requested, and the Admission’s office is projected to make use of some of the storefront space by next year. Management expressed needing to better understand Bursar’s specific space issues, and implement a scheduling system to alleviate space issues for the 14th floor, along with multi-purposing space. Management helpfully clarified that the timeline for resolving collective space issues could be anywhere from the next budget cycle to the next decade. Co-workers suggested, in light of the clear needs and ambiguous timeline for solutions, if funding to build out the 14th floor space with private office space was a possibility. Management replied this was considered but rejected due to collective bargaining agreements and funding concerns.

In order to address these longstanding and ongoing space issues, Labor suggested creating a taskforce that includes labor management representation. Management responded that an advisory committee with “appropriate representation” would be created by next week instead, including one faculty member, one student member, two staff members, and IT dept. representation.

We also spoke about how SLU space is used for external partners, and how that information is communicated to the SLU community. Co-workers shared examples of SLU external partners using spaces on campus for events, without any notice given to SLU staff. Co-workers also noted the lost opportunities for recruitment and partnership when staff are not informed of when partners are visiting campus. The question of how space is offered to partner organizations was also raised. Management noted that space is provided to organizations that serve on the board for free, while charging a fee to other organizations. It is unclear where these fees go, or how they might be used. Co-workers suggested sharing a calendar of when/how space is being used and when partners are on campus. Management was reluctant, citing concerns about how people might use that information.

Next, we discussed HR issues, a thorn in the side of many of our colleagues. We reiterated that since our last meeting, co-workers continue to face issues with late, missing, or incorrect payments. Other co-workers have faced delays in hiring dates, impacting their payments, health benefits, or access to CUNYFirst and Brightspace. We also raised the issue of discrepancies in appointment letters received by workers. Co-workers were clear to emphasize that we are raising patterns, rather than focusing on individual cases. Management indicated HR will investigate, but they would need to work through CUNY Central timelines. In addition, co-workers raised the consistent issues with pensions, tax brackets, benefits etc., and asked for an individual review of our files. HR stated that they have begun an individual review of SLU workers, and coordinating with the GC HR to review benefits. Management also noted that faculty have raised concerns with the onboarding process, and we expressed the desire to have PSC invited to the onboarding process.

The third topic we discussed were the new federal guidelines for Mandatory Reporting. We raised the important changes to guidelines on mandatory reporting, and how now many SLU workers (such as faculty, and student-facing staff)now fall into this category but have not received sufficient guidance. We also noted that ESPARC training is not sufficient. Management responded that training can be offered on the new guidance, and that students should be directed to the Title IX coordinator and informed of the worker’s mandatory reporter status. Co-workers raised the question of disciplinary measures for anyone who fails to report, what roles are covered by “teaching” and “advising” categories or those who have multiple roles, all of which still need to be investigated.

The final issue covered was air quality and temperature. Management stated thermometers have been purchased, but are making their way through the procurement process. Co-workers inquired about SLU’s air purifiers and their filters. Management replied that air purifiers at SLU must be changed once a year, and they are maintained on campus twice a year. Issues with vents were also reported, and Management claimed those issues should be reported to Facilities. We also raised the important issue that the building is at risk of losing its LEED certification if temperatures remain unregulated.