Dear President Mulvey, Vice President Davis, and Secretary-Treasurer Sinclair,
We, the undersigned, call on the AAUP leadership to quickly settle a contract with the United Staff of the AAUP (US-AAUP). The contract should be just, equitable, and in line with the racial justice principles promoted by the AAUP. We support the US-AAUP’s approach to rectify long standing inequities in compensation, study leave, family and medical leave, and telework.
On compensation, the staff union proposal is well within the 2023 budget set by the AAUP for salaries. A salary step system is an excellent move toward more consistent and equitable compensation, and the US-AAUP proposal prioritizes recognition of staff service to the Association, keeps up with the rising cost of living across the country (and especially in DC), addresses structural and historical inequities, and promotes retention given that the AAUP has lost twenty-two staff members since 2019.
In terms of proposal cost, according to the official AAUP budget approved by council last November, salaries were budgeted at $5,096,275. The total cost of the staff union's compensation proposal for bargaining unit salaries in 2023 is $2,736,194. Staff union-proposed bargaining unit salaries plus those for management and confidential staff ($1,454,520) make total staff salaries for the year $4,190,714. The staff union compensation proposal is $905,561 under budget and does not require an increase in national member dues.
On study leave, we support the staff proposal of expansion, not elimination, of this benefit. The Association’s value of racial equity calls us to extend this benefit to all, not reduce or eliminate it for all. We believe study leave can be a crucial tool for staff retention, which our chapters need. We worry that continued staff attrition will affect the level of expertise and services staff can provide members in the long term, and we urge the AAUP to use the tools it has to recruit and retain talented staff. We are also concerned that the push to eliminate study leave stands in contrast with the AFT, which offers all of its staff—including administrative staff—sabbaticals of six months to a year every six years. Why, on the heels of an affiliation with the AFT that was intended to make the AAUP stronger, would we focus on reducing staff benefits below the level of the staff at the AFT?
On telework, we support the proposal of two days a week in-office put forth by the staff union. It is reasonable and fair, and, importantly, addresses the racial inequity inherent in the status quo for DC-based staff by giving everyone the right to work a hybrid schedule with two days in the headquarters office and three days at their home office.
On paid family leave, we support the staff union proposal for one standard paid family and medical leave benefit for all staff. Our understanding is that different state laws governing paid family and medical leave create the opportunity for the Association to provide vastly inequitable paid leaves for remote staff (which is nearly half of the entire staff) based on their place of residence. We don’t believe the AAUP should uphold those inequities. The US-AAUP proposal extends to all staff the same paid family and medical leave benefits that DC-based staff currently receive through the District of Columbia’s Paid Family Leave program when they are out on leave from work to bond with a new child, take care of a family member, or take care of their own serious health condition. This is equitable and just and cost neutral for the Association.
Regarding the cost of expanded study leave, paid family leave, and a more just telework policy, these policies are cost-neutral. No financial cost is added to the operating budget because the AAUP does not hire additional labor during staff leaves. Instead, the rest of the department pitches in.
We thank you for your service and we urge you to settle quickly, fairly, and in alignment with the values of our Association. We look forward to seeing an agreement to be proud of very soon.
In Solidarity,
