“Students will suffer, one way or another,” said fourth-year English student Jennifer Fraser in response to a decision by a labour arbitrator to approve a 4.5 per cent raise in the next two years to professors and librarians at the University of Toronto. The decision comes after calls from Queen’s Park for a public sector wage freeze.
The arbitrator also ruled that professors and librarians would not have to pay more towards pension plans, denying a university request to increase faculty contributions by 2.25–3 per cent. The pension plan, as it stands, is currently in deficit.
“It will only further strain the university’s budget, and at the end of the day, students will be at the receiving end of the adverse consequences,” said Fraser.
At the moment, it is hard to determine how the award, effective from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2011, will affect students. Angela Hildyard, vice-president of Human Resources and Equity, said in a memo sent to faculty and staff, “[the decision] has a significant impact on the university’s finances.”
The UFTA Arbitration Award — the wage increase itself — was made by Martin Teplitsky, a prominent arbitrator and civil litigation lawyer. Hired to act first as mediator during discussions between the university and the Faculty Association in January 2009, Teplitsky became an arbitrator when the two parties were unable to reach a mutual agreement.
Discussions focused on salary and benefits, a professorial appointment stream, tenure, and changes to the workload policy.
Teplitsky made the award when it was clear discussions were at a standstill. His decision comes after the release of a provincial Compensation Act, which called for a pay freeze for non-unionized public sector employees, such as the U of T Faculty Association. The university also claimed that it could not afford to pay a raise.
In a 15-page ruling last Tuesday, he stated that he “would appear a minion of government” if the provincial factors had been considered.
Hildyard expressed disappointment that the arbitration process did result in a raise for one of the two years at issue. The university already supplies merit pay at a 1.9 per cent increase per year.
“The continuing merit pay and the new [across-the-board] increases will have immediate and very significant financial implications for departments and divisions,” she writes.
In discussions, the Faculty Association bargained for a wage increase of 3–4 per cent per year on top of the merit payment, as well as 15 extra benefits, costing about $10 million per year. Faculty have lauded the decision.
Students, on the other hand, are left speculating the ways in which the award will affect them.
“If the university says it doesn’t have money, and have already installed flat fees and an Academic Restructuring Plan to address this issue, they will probably have to cut down on more things that affect student life and the quality of education of its students,” said neuroscience student, Tetyana Pekar.
ASSU President Gavin Nowlan acknowledges the pay increase was “the last thing the university wanted.”
He stressed that the faculty makes lower wages than their colleagues in other GTA schools. “But the fact remains that financial trouble or no financial trouble, they still need to pay their faculty and staff a decent wage.”
“What this decision does though is potentially affect the current academic planning process in the Faculty of Arts and Science. Much of the dean’s plan revolves around trying to alleviate the deficit that the faculty finds itself in. The dean will undoubtedly use this settlement as further proof of the need to take drastic action to sort out the faculty’s financial woes,” he said.
Nowlan goes on to say that an accurate depiction of the budget information of the Faculty is missing. “The Arts and Science Students’ Union, as well as many faculty members and members of the Arts and Science Council, have demanded that this information be released. With this settlement the need is even greater for this information to be made public.”
