OPSEU Local 560
To:	All Members of OPSEU Local 560
From:	OPSEU Local 560 President Ted Montgomery
Date:	February 4, 2000
Subject:	Updates

NON-TEACHING PERIODS

Several members have asked me about what they can and cannot be required to do during non-teaching periods.

First, non-teaching periods are weeks in which you have no scheduled classes, but are not on vacation. For post-secondary faculty, these include the study breaks and any PD periods.  During non-teaching periods, any activities are to be undertaken only by mutual consent.  They are not assigned.  You are not required to be at the College, post hours, or attend meetings.  You certainly may choose to do these things,.  You may choose to pursue professional development activities outside of the College, or review materials, or prepare your courses.   You may wish to simply rest and re-charge your batteries.  Your right to do this was negotiated and agreed to by the parties and is a part of a commitment to professionalism set out in Article 11.08.

Teaching periods are set out on your Standard Workload Form (SWF).  The back of the SWF is for complementary function assignments.  The functions are assigned by your supervisor, but you decide when to use the time which is allocated for these functions.  You must meet appropriate deadlines, but other than that, where the function can be performed outside the college, scheduling is at the teacher’s discretion.  You can do your preparation, evaluation, feedback, and complementary functions anytime during the academic year. This is set out in Article 11.01 G 1.

Non-teaching-period activities are to be neither recorded nor scheduled, except as in 11.01 G1 – i.e. at the teacher’s discretion.

You should not break up your vacation entitlement by allowing the College to schedule vacation during a non-teaching period.  Although these are not holiday periods, the location you choose to prepare for the next term or semester is entirely up to you.

SICK LEAVE BUYOUT

You recently received the annual communiqué from the Sick Leave Buyout Task Force.  Soon, you’ll get a statement from the College advising how many days you have in your sick-leave bank.  This apples only to employees hired before April 1, 1991.  Only that group is eligible for the sick-leave payment when they leave Seneca’s employ.  It is a lump sum, giving you half a day’s pay for each day of banked sick leave, up to one half of your annual salary.  In short, if you have 261 days in your bank when you leave, you will get a lump sum payment of half a year’s salary at whatever is your rate and step at that time.  Some or all of that payment can be tax protected by rolling it into a special RRSP, not counted against your normal annual RRSP contribution.  That is limited to $2000 per year of employment with the college up to 1996.

Employees hired after April 1, 1991 still have a cumulative sick-leave plan which provides for 20 days per year, but they do not have the right to cash unused credits.

The parties set aside five million dollars per year for eligible employees who might want to cash out early.  That is the Sick Leave Buyout.  I won’t review the whole system, but essentially, among those who want to take the buyout, the ones with the greatest number of sick leave credits are selected.   The pay-out to them is at 75 cents on the dollar.

Each year I am asked about the buyout.

What are the chances of the right to the pay-out upon retirement being lost?  Next to zero.  The contract stipulates that any changes to the rights of persons eligible for the "retirement" payment must be voted on by those persons alone.  While there are more and more members in the system under the post April 1, 91 rules, these newer hires cannot vote on the old plan.  And, if the right is ever threatened, there would be notice of that well in advance.  Further, I believe any settlement with existing holders would not be less than that given to those who bought out early.  Lastly, as the number of members eligible for the payment decreases, so does any value to management to discontinuing the right. So is the money safe?  Personally, although, as the Social Contract Act showed us, no contract is absolutely foolproof, I am very confident that this aspect is.  It will eventually disappear on its own as the faculty affected retire.  There is neither the will, the need, nor the incentive to attack it.

Is it better to take the cash now, even with the 25% reduction?  For the vast majority, it is not.  If you take the buyout and stay with the college, the payment is fully taxed, and it may increase your tax bracket applied to all your earnings.  It is extremely difficult to make up the difference in any investment.  The value of the retirement cash-out increases at the same rate as salary increases.  Not least, when you buy out, you must cash 261 of the days in your sick leave bank.   These are days at full salary.  If illness means that you must be off work and have no sick days left, coverage drops to 75% of salary.

Why would anyone take the buyout?  Three possible reasons, I  suspect.  First, a compelling need for cash.  (I was on the Task Force in its first year.  A member from another college who was not among the group getting the payment, pleaded to be included, relating rather disturbing tales of his troubles with loan sharks.) An opportunity to pay down certain mortgages might be a similar reason.  Second, there are some investment opportunities that some members feel they must have the money for.  Buying a franchise might be one example.  Lastly, someone not expecting to reach retirement might want to have the cash now.

Finally people ask: Should I take the buyout?  You can see my views on the subject, but I would advise anyone seriously considering it to consult a financial advisor whom you trust.

On January 20, the Seneca College website posted four questions regarding ACAATO ’s  (Association  of Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology of Ontario) position regarding a "new charter" for the Colleges, asking for feedback.  Please note that the ACAATO position has already been established since June of 1999, and the efforts being made at this time by this lobbying body are simply to buttress that position. I will be providing you with another update soon which outlines details of the changes which the Colleges are proposing and their strategies for achieving these objectives.

Ted Montgomery, President OPSEU Local 560
 

HOME