OPENING STATEMENT OF THE 
UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATION’S
REPRESENTATIVES ON THE
JOINT COMMITTEE 

December 11, 2001

The University Administration’s representatives on the Joint Committee look forward to our Committee’s deliberations to determine the remuneration provisions for the next few years.  This opening submission outlines our view of the context and considerations that will pertain to our discussions.  In preparing for this meeting, we have identified the key interests that we hope the Joint Committee’s discussions can address.  These interests inform and underlie all that we hope to contribute to, and achieve through, this process.
 

  1. Our primary interest is to maintain and, wherever possible, enhance provisions that allow the University and the Faculty Association to ensure the highest standards of excellence of McMaster’s faculty.  This is the single most important ingredient necessary to ensure the University’s achievement of its goals and mission.  In so doing, all of us on the Joint Committee will have paid due attention to the “Principles for Negotiation of Faculty Remuneration”, which the University Administration’s representatives accept as an important and relevant guide to our discussions.  [Attached as Tab 1]*

    (*The documents contained at the Tabs are available in the MUFA Office for viewing)


  2. It is our strongly held preference that the Committee achieves agreement in direct discussion.  Agreements made directly among the members of the Joint Committee are always superior to ones imposed by someone external to the relationship.

  3. In view of the demands and challenges that lie in the immediate future for the university and its faculty, it is our belief that we will all be best served by the stability and predictability provided by a three-year agreement on matters of remuneration.

  4. As in all matters, the agreement needs to be mindful of the fiscal health of the University.  It is the Committee’s challenge to balance this stewardship responsibility with the achievement of outcomes consistent with the interests stated above.


There are four major areas of consideration that form the backdrop to our discussions during this round of negotiations.  In each case, the members of the Joint Committee have access to recent documentation and information providing the specific data pertaining to each.  With this submission, we are including the documents that are especially pertinent.  We remain committed to providing any other information that the Association’s representatives might request.  Attached, please find:
 

The Financial Statements of McMaster University (Tab 2)
Current Budget Framework (Tab3)
Faculty Renewal Information Paper  (Tab 4)
Whither McMaster? Managing our Growth for 2003  (Tab 5)
Campus Plan - Executive Summary (Tab 6)
Enrolment Targets (Tab 7)


As an overview of the four major areas of considerations we offer the following.
 

The Financial Environment
Consideration of McMaster’s financial position cannot be separated from discussion of increased faculty remuneration.  The components of our revenue and expense picture will help the Joint Committee to appreciate the fiscal constraints that place boundaries on the outcomes of our discussions.  The University Administration’s members of the Committee look forward to a full and open discussion of these numbers, trends and plans as our deliberations ensue.
 

Remaining Competitive
If we are to retain current faculty members and attract new and equally highly qualified ones, it is of paramount importance that McMaster offer salaries, benefits and working conditions that are competitive with those offered by other excellent universities.  Factors particular to those other institutions will often influence the nature of agreements within their academic communities, but it is instructive to consider what they have to offer.  The University Administration’s members on the Joint Committee are open to comparing notes with the Association with a view to ensuring that our remuneration outcomes address this issue.

Furthermore, within our own McMaster community, it is also important to consider commitments the University has made to other groups’ compensation packages.  Information about these settlements and policies will be shared.
 

The Campus Environment
There is more to life as a faculty member at McMaster than salaries and benefits.  A safe, functional, up-to-date and clean working environment is also fundamental.  An environment that is conducive to learning is also critical in attracting and retaining the best faculty, and thereby the best students.  This goal does, though, involve a major draw on our resources.  Our committee’s consideration of future faculty compensation also has to take the needs pertaining to the working environment into account.
 

Faculty Renewal
This issue, the importance of which flows from demographic trends associated with both faculty members and students, is by no means particular to McMaster.  A critical component to our discussion will be an analysis of the size and nature of the challenge facing McMaster in this regard.  Faculty renewal at a rate appropriate to address both the retirement of many highly qualified faculty and the growth in student numbers is fundamental to the University continuing to achieve its mission.  This will be the source of pressure on our resources but it will also be the opportunity for McMaster to confirm its continued reputation for excellence.  Decisions made by the Joint Committee in these discussions will be key to our success.

PROPOSAL

We propose that the Committee give due consideration to the issues described above, so that we might collectively establish an appreciation of the environment within which we are negotiating.

We further propose that we agree without delay to maintenance of the Career Progress/Merit (CP/M) scheme at the “normal” level of 120 par units per 100 faculty members.

Subject to agreement on this point, and working within the parameters of the attached Budgetary Framework, we propose that we then jointly establish an appropriate amount of increase to Salary and Benefits compensation exclusive of the cost of maintenance of the CP/M scheme.  With this in mind, we offer the following:

A) Career Progression / Merit (CP/M):  Our proposal is to make this the foundation of our new agreement.  We shall provide the models that indicate what it will cost to maintain it in each year of an agreement.  (In the first year, the cost of 120 par units per 100 faculty members is between 2.25 and 2.5% of salary plus benefits.)
B) Salary and Benefits:  With the cost of CP/M established, we propose to determine through Joint Committee discussion the most effective way of distributing the balance of the available total compensation for each year of the agreement among the components of the salary and benefits remuneration package.  Full costing information will be shared on each potential item such that the committee can maximize the allocation of this amount to meet our shared interests and objectives.  Possible components include (with reference, as appropriate to the “Principles for Negotiation of Faculty Remuneration”):
 
i) Principles #1 and #2 (re. Compensation):
  • An across-the-board (ATB) increase for all faculty, to maintain a competitive salary structure and to reduce erosion by inflation.
  • Floor and breakpoint adjustments to the CP/M to allow larger CP/M increases, for more years, for many, and especially the more junior, faculty members.  Our models, to which we referred above in the context of our commitment to the 120 par units per 100 faculty members, also indicate what modifications to floors and breakpoints would cost.
ii) Principle #4 (re. Compensation):
  • Medical Benefits: Our belief is that our medical benefits package is, on balance, a competitive one. That said, we are willing to respond to suggestions as to how it may be improved, bearing in mind that any increased costs must be accommodated within an agreed upon total for compensation exclusive of CP/M.
iii) Principle #6 (re. Compensation):
  • Supplementary Earnings Retirement Plan (SERP): Approximately one-third of McMaster’s faculty members are at or above the Revenue Canada maximum, and that fraction will increase appreciably during the term of our agreement.  The introduction of a SERP is therefore an essential component of an overall compensation package that will allow us to recruit and retain the best faculty.  A SERP is furthermore crucial if a McMaster pension is to fairly reflect the service and salary on which it should be based.  A SERP will impose costs on the University, and its introduction will have an impact on what else is possible within the agreed upon total for compensation exclusive of CP/M.  We are close to completion of a review of different ways in which a SERP could be implemented, which will include cost estimates, and we will share this information with our colleagues in the Faculty Association early in 2002.
iv) Principle #5 (re. Compensation) and Principle #11 (re. Working Conditions):
  • Professional Development Allowance:  We recognize that for faculty in some academic domains the PDA is crucial to the pursuit of their scholarly objectives.  As such, it is an effective way for the University to support scholarship while not contributing to the tax burden of the individual.  We therefore see considerable merit in discussing an adjustment to the monetary value of the PDA.
  • Modem Pool Fund: As with the PDA, we recognize that this fund is important to some, but not all, faculty. We are prepared to review it as part of overall compensation.