Cal State LA Sociology Department’s Statement on the Tentative Agreement
As Sociology faculty, we are interested in the sustainability of the human condition - not just in theory but in practice. As such, we are deeply invested in health, wellness, economic equity, and other forms of support for our students, staff, and faculty. We stand in solidarity with the CFA members across the 23-campus California State University (CSU) system, who are voting “NO” on the Tentative Agreement (TA), and we are urging members to consider the consequences of a “Yes” vote.
Although the gains in the TA are not meaningless, they are modest. The reality is that we demanded a 12% general salary increase (GSI) because many of us are struggling over adequate housing, food, and other bare necessities to live in California. However, the CFA Board of Directors made significant concessions to the CSU management too quickly after only one day of our initially planned five-day strike.
We are now being offered a 5% retroactive GSI - which is a pay cut that most of us cannot afford as inflation rates and the cost of living have left many of us without secure housing. We also cannot afford to gamble on the 5% GSI for 2024 that’s contingent on state allocations to the CSU! Furthermore, more than 2/3 of faculty are ineligible for the 2.65% service salary increase (SSI). When we compare the GSI offer with inflation, we see that the proposed salary “raises” are actually pay cuts. Moreover, claiming that lecturers will get a raise in the salary floor is a smoke-and-mirrors approach. In order to be eligible, lecturers must be at the lowest step of Range A or Range B to receive the full $3K, eligible lecturers must also be currently employed full-time, or have taught 30 units in AY 2023-24 - otherwise, lecturers will only receive a portion of the $3K! There are also NO salary floor raises for Range C and D lecturers, which means there are no increases for our longest-serving lecturers. Regarding student mental health, the TA only says that campuses “should endeavor to reach” the goal of one counselor for every 1,000 to 1,500 students; vague language that does not ensure adequate access to much-needed mental health counseling. This coincides with a tuition hike of 34% over the next six years, meaning students will be paying more and not receiving the services that would benefit them.
The inadequacy of the TA is not the only issue. The bargaining process and the way the ratification vote is conducted are undemocratic and patronizing, and show the CFA central leadership’s lack of faith in the rank and file. Under the existing system, bargaining team members are not elected but appointed by the CFA President. While CFA members voted to authorize the strike, no process in place allowed members to deliberate on whether the strike should be canceled after just one day. Moreover, the electronic ballot for the TA ratification vote is worded with distorted language that not only misrepresents the bargaining process but also uses fear tactics to suppress a “No” vote from the rank and file.
Remember, the CSU administration returned to the bargaining table even before we went home from the picket line on the first day. This means that we—lecturers, coaches, counselors, librarians, tenure-track faculty, and student and community supporters—have the collective power to build on the gains already achieved and secure the rest of what we rightfully deserve. The first step is to vote “No” on the TA. A “No” vote does not mean accepting the terms the CSU imposed on us; it means empowering the CFA bargaining team with a mandate from the rank and file to resume negotiation with the CSU administration for the contract we deserve.
We have the collective power to win a better contract, and we must democratize our union! It all begins with a “No” vote on the TA.
