KFA Town Hall Meeting on Layoffs

Hello colleagues,

For those of you who were not able to attend the Monday afternoon KFA town hall meeting on layoffs, here is a brief update on what has happened so far, and where we currently are.

Quick summary of actions / events to date:

• Union was notified of planned layoffs
• Union met with the Employer for consultation as per the legal requirements of the Collective Agreement between the parties
• Union provided a response to the Employer including proposed alternatives to layoffs
• Employer provided a reply declining our proposals
• Employer proceeded to layoff notices
• Union and faculty members currently are proceeding to actions in support of rescinding the layoffs
   

Synopsis of Financial Situation as presented in the Consultation with the Union

The general rationale for layoffs as provided in legal consultations with the Union was as follows:

Based on projected revenue declines due to projected reduced enrollments, faculty layoffs are necessary.

A more detailed rationale was provided as follows.

From the budget presentation made to the KFA:

This indicates a reduction in faculty salary of $3.801M.

How did they break it out?

So, the total decrease in faculty is estimated at $6.6M, composed of ERIPs, layoffs, and reductions in non-regular work. We were informed during consultation that normal attrition was also accounted for in the total for reduction. When we examine the actual numbers around these.

However, the total decrease of $6.6M is not consistent with the number of layoffs.

Why not?

Number of ERIPs accepted:

40 (all are at top of scale)

Estimated salary savings: $4.6M

FTE in Layoffs: 52.5 FTE

Estimated salary savings: About $5.5M.

(Note: At top of scale this would be $6.04M but not everyone is at top of scale, so $5.5M is a modest estimate.)

Total faculty salary reduction for these two categories alone: About $10.1M

At a moderate estimate, then, the total reduction in faculty just from these two categories exceeds the target for reduction by at least $3.5M.

This does not take reductions in non-regular work assignments into account. Non-regular faculty FTE in the whole institution comprised 145.743 FTE in 2024, and most of that would have been in the two affected areas because Arts and School of Business are the two largest areas of the University. Thus, reduction in non-regular work has to have been significant. After all, no regular faculty layoffs can occur until there are no more non-regular work assignments in the affected departments. We would suggest that the reduction in non-regular work assignments must surely exceed the remaining total for layoff.

This also does not take normal attrition into account.

Thus, we think it is reasonable to suggest that zero faculty layoffs are necessary under the draft budget because we believe the total reduction should have been met FULLY by retirements, reduction of NR work assignments, and attrition.

Administration salary

We are also concerned with the fact that no reductions except faculty reductions have been proposed.

Administration salary is actually increased in the first table by $2.6M.

However, that is not the real or total increase. How is that so?

All of the following were communicated to the KFA during consultation with the Employer:

• There is a current year budget surplus of about $10M
• Most of that is due to unfilled admin positions
• The draft budget proposes to trim $5M from that, but still proposes to fill $5M, plus an additional $2.6M in “one-time” positions.
• The “one-time” positions are likely to actually be ongoing

This increase is part of an ongoing burgeoning of administrative positions as presented in our previous communication. The data we drew upon for that analysis was, as stated, all data from the Human Resources Database which is compiled by PSEA, with student FTE data coming directly from KPU’s own published Accountability Plans & Reports.

Stonewalling by the Employer:

The Employer claimed a general decrease in enrollment as rationale for the planned layoffs, in addition to the financial rationale. They have provided general projections, but have so far explicitly refused to provide data necessary to verify any of the specific layoffs. They have not provided any historical enrolment data. They have not provided any historical departmental schedules. They have not provided any historic fill rates. They have not provided any data on int’l student % for departments. They have not provided the plans for the coming year so far as base section allocations or schedules.

Thus they have provided no appropriate data by which the Union can verify whether the layoffs are legitimate from the perspective of enrollment changes (as claimed) or not.

The Union went to faculty department chairs in SoB and Arts to help us gather this information. When the Employer learned of this, they ordered faculty not to share this with the Union, claiming it is “confidential” information.

When we queried this with them, they responded that the Union is not entitled to this information as it “belongs” to the administration. They also seemed to imply a threat to faculty for communicating with the Union, by saying that the Union was “placing faculty into a precarious position” by asking for this information.

They did not provide any explanation for their claim it is confidential when we asked. It is our position that this information is in fact not confidential in the least. It is publicly available information. Furthermore, it would appear that they are trying to interfere with or prohibit the members of the KFA from communicating with the union executive of the KFA. This is prohibited by legislation, under the Labour Code of BC. We are taking appropriate action on that.

What Comes Next

The KPU Board is meeting tomorrow evening to discuss and vote on the draft budget. We remain hopeful that they will not pass it and will direct administration not to lay off faculty at this time.

If that does not happen, and faculty layoffs are still in the plans, then we have a number of good options at hand, including broader communication of our views, lobbying of government at multiple levels, involvement of allies in the education sector and in the broader labour movement, and so on.

We also have the option to file 70 grievances, one policy grievance and 69 grievances, one on behalf of every individual. The basis for these grievances is our position that these layoffs are not necessary on the general level, and that the Employer has not provided any means to verify the claimed “necessity” of the individual layoffs. We have given the Employer notice of our intention should they continue to refuse to provide the information we have requested to verify the individual layoffs. The clock is ticking on that.

We also are gathering information from the affected individuals regarding their FTE and what they are qualified to teach, and proceeding to examine each situation with an eye to whether the individual is actually in line for layoff due to FTE order (we have already seen several errors) and by qualifications (we already have at least one example).

A few last words

Friends, this situation is beyond stressful and challenging for our colleagues who have received layoff notice, and it is stressful and challenging for all of us. Please know that your representatives, your KFA officers, are doing our best to address the situation with consciousness of the toll this is taking on all of us faculty.

Can we reverse every single layoff? I hope so, but I don’t know whether we can. But please be assured of this: we remain optimistic that we all, together, have ways to protest these actions and means to push back against all of this. And I remain optimistic that we can prevail. Sometimes we hear words like that or read words like that, and we might think they are lip service. But my dear colleagues, we are seeing so many people working hard to turn this around. We are seeing and hearing many words of support and solidarity. We are seeing our colleagues reaching out to each other and to the broader world. We are seeing faculty taking creative action to communicate the truth of the situation and to ask those with power to make it change. I believe sincerely and with all my heart that we can stand together and make this change.

In solidarity,

Diane Walsh, VP-Grievances