Our most recent negotiating session took place last Saturday 6/14 for eight hours. It did not result in an agreement. While a detailed summary of the CIA's perspective on the meeting is available on the portal, that account does not include the statement the CTA delivered toward the close of the meeting during the only time the parties met across the table.
CTA President Richard Horvath delivered the following message on behalf of the membership:
The CTA regards the current management proposals to be an incomplete and disappointing response to the CTA’s package proposal, which the CIA had requested prior the May 31, 2014 negotiating session.
We acknowledge that health care is a major obstacle in the negotiations for both sides. In that regard, we need to emphasize that management’s continued reference to “market rates” as a justification for financial proposals that would result in significant pay cuts for faculty is not productive. Management’s interpretation of the “market” simply does not correspond to the CTA’s view of the reality in which we are operating. As opposed to a putative national norm, we understand “market” as a relative term referring to specific, local conditions. Our market realities include the following:
· In economic terms, the value the employer (CIA) assigns to its faculty employees, as reflected in salary and benefits (i.e. how much the CIA is able and willing to pay for the faculty work it values and that sustains the Institute)
· The CTA’s affiliation with NY State unionized educators who have relatively better health care coverage at lower rates than many other employee groups
· A 50% longer work year than other educational institutions
· Work requirements involving specific risk factors, the cost of which employers traditionally bear
· An-already significant increase in faculty health care contribution (from 0% four years ago) against modest wage increases, resulting in an essentially flat salary level for the past three years.
In addition, we note that the health-care contribution rates now proposed by management are roughly double those the CIA proposed for the year 2015 in the last round of negotiations (2011).
The CTA negotiating team knows that our faculty will not ratify any contract including the combination of wage figures and health-care contribution rates currently proposed by management. They simply cannot afford to accept these terms. Furthermore, they regret that this punitive contract proposal – reflecting a lack of value and appreciation for the talented, highly-experienced faculty the CIA employs, so contrary to enlightened valuations of employee well-being in so many other sectors of the hospitality industry – is eroding morale across the Institute and detracting from the CIA’s well-earned reputation. In these respects especially, our members are beyond disappointed.
Negotiations are continuing, with the next session scheduled for July 2.
Please let us know if you have questions or input.
In solidarity,
Richard