Next week the Deans and Chairs are once again being dragooned into another "in-service" day resuming their efforts to construct faculty DACS. This time they are inviting faculty from the various department personnel committees and DAC Committees. This again? This in spite of the fact that both the Faculty Senate and UPI membership had protested vociferously against the imposition of Administratively-driven DACs? This in spite of President Watson's memo allowing for the continued use of the old DACs into the next academic year?
Who is not getting the message? DACs are the purview of the faculty, not the administration, no matter what technicality the Admin tries to claim. The UPI has filed a grievance, don't validate the Administrative usurpation of a faculty process by attending this in-service. Stand up for faculty's right to set their own DACs, don't fall for the $200+ extra pay they claim they will give faculty who attend.
UPI Grievance Officer, Dr. Steven Rowe, who was approached to attend had this to say:
I would decline to participate in such a meeting and would suggest that all others do the same. UPI filed a grievance on the DAC process on behalf of all Unit A faculty membership. This meeting, like all other such meetings that have happened since the faculty DAC committees submitted their DACs back in May is in direct violation of the CSU-UPI Contract. In UPI's grievance on the DAC process, we have demanded the following remedy:
Because the DACs created by CSU administrators in the June 7-8 workshops are the result of numerous violations of the CSU-UPI Contract, they must be disposed of and not used in any way. Furthermore, the President must comply with the CSU-UPI Contract and produce a written statement in response to each and every DAC that was submitted by departments across the University in May 2012. That written statement must be sent to all department chairs and department faculty and must follow the provisions of the Contract as discussed in this grievance. The result of all of these written statements must not constitute an unreasonable withholding of approval of the any or all of the submitted DACs from May 2012. A blanket rejection of all Departmental Applications of Criteria is unacceptable and a violation of the Contract.
I would encourage all faculty and department chairs to refuse to participate in this illegitimate process that further violates the CSU-UPI contract. Instead, I would encourage all faculty and department chairs to await the outcome of the grievance, which should be resolved along the lines of the remedy we have proposed.
It would be nice to see the Deans refuse to participate too.