New Contract--time for discussion?

At the UPI meeting on Tuesday there was little time for discussion and questions about the contract so there will be another meeting in SCI 100 at 12.30 p.m. There was supposed to be blog or listserve open last week for people to post questions about the contract if they could not attend the meeting, but that does not seem to be working.

Since UPI wants votes in by Sept. 15th it is imperative that members understand the new contract which is coming at a point when the sands are shifting at CSU. Does the contract negotiated over the last year take into account all the changes that are being wrought for instance by the Admin in reorganizing the College of Arts and Sciences or in dismantling the College of Graduate Studies? These are some questions that I have had and I would encourage others of the faculty to voice their concerns --better yet vote in favor if you think the contract will protect us during this period of chaos and disorganization or vote no if you don't think so.

And feel free to post a thread here anonymously if you like though I know many people are afraid to voice their real points of view in the retaliatory climate we have on campus.

My questions and comments to the UPI Contract Team:

Thanks for negotiating the raise, assuming the Gov. doesn't make us take furlough days to offset it, it's nice to have some hope.

1. Has the university Admin breached the existing contract by drastically reorganizing the College of Arts and Sciences this summer without consultation and discussion in the Faculty Senate?

2. What is now meant by "department" in this new configuration of the CAS and who is in charge of overseeing it if chairs are reduced to division heads? Is this reflected in the new contract? Since the Admin does not know yet or has not yet revealed how division heads or coordinators will be organized, how can these be covered in the new contract? It seems like the contract UPI negotiated is for a different place than one that will exist in a few months time.

3. The Administration got their foot in the door of a post-tenure review process that could eliminate tenured faculty in the new contract (not that I necessarily disapprove of the language per se that is there), but what did faculty get in return for this?

4. With the closing of the Graduate College, how, in the name of heaven, will "departments" be able to handle all the paperwork of the admission and graduation process since the role of Grad Coordinator has been reduced to being that of Grad Advisor and the whole extra cue process is connected to how many students attend your program, not how many submit applications? How are "departments" with no chairs or with mere Graduate "Advisors" supposed to pick up this work which will involve a lot of tedious correspondence and parry questions on financial aid, Veteran's benefits, calculate gpa's from God knows how many programs that a student attended, and a myriad of other details ALL of this WITHOUT proper secretarial aid or even functional computer printers in our offices? We have been told in no uncertain terms by Ms Ce Cole Dillon that there will be no new printers bought for faculty just as there is no upgrading of the smart classrooms planned. I have to beg for any office supplies I get. We currently have one "department" secretary who works for 6 disciplines.

5. Why is the word "consultation" with faculty used so infrequently in the new contract?

Please advise.
To all: does the new contract really secure us?