Member suggestions: Actions and updates

While gathering your ideas for MoA changes last summer and fall, we also received many thoughtful suggestions and questions about processes and practices outside the MoA. We’ve kept track of everything you shared. Below is an update on where these items stand now and what we’re doing next.

You’ll see several references to discussing items at the Staff Relations Committee (SRC). This committee is our main forum for addressing staff working conditions with the University, though some operational and communication-related issues are addressed through more informal channels.

Items relating to policy development were rated as very important in our member survey about MoA and related priorities. Suggestions related to the processes for developing and approving policies included:

• Having a formal role for the UWSA in creating guidelines affecting staff working conditions (remember: policies go through SRC, but not guidelines).
  • The new MoA (in subsection 3.1.3.4) now guarantees that the University will engage with us as any relevant guidelines are developed or revised, and we will be discussing the role of guidelines vs policies—and our role in each—at Staff Relations Committee (SRC) this year.
• Implementing enforceable policy timelines and staff consultation processes.
  • These will require changes to Policy 1 – Initiation and Review of University Policies. Opening Policy 1 requires agreement from both the Faculty Association and the University, and we are discussing these concerns with FAUW leadership and at SRC. It is very unlikely that Policy 1 would be opened for review until the currently open (and long-overdue) updates to policies 12, 57, and 33 are complete. However, we are committed to advocating for clear consultation requirements in future terms of reference for policy drafting committees and to discussing policy consultation and transparency around policy development at SRC.
     

Many of the suggestions and concerns we received about improving grievance processes and better protecting staff are addressed in the updated Grievances section of the MoA, including the introduction of a neutral third-party arbitration process for association grievances, should it come to that.

We truly hear and appreciate concerns about the difficulty and failures of the current processes for addressing harassment, discrimination, and toxic work environments. We recognize staff frustration with the significant delays to updating the policy on ethical behaviour (Policy 33) and remain committed to keeping this at the forefront of discussions. There is new movement on that policy, and we expect that changes will make real improvements for staff in this area.

Other next steps on this topic:

• We are committing to an in-depth review of individual and group staff grievance processes, including consultation with members, to prepare for proposing changes to the ethical behaviour and staff dispute resolution policies.
• An association-level grievance process will provide an avenue for better holding leaders to account for decisions that undermine staff rights.

Some of the suggestions we received were about our health plan and other benefits, which are not covered in the MoA. Health benefits are decided by the Pension & Benefits Committee, which has representatives from multiple employee groups and the University.

• Our representatives on the Pension & Benefits Committee know that increased vision coverage—especially eyeglasses—is a priority for many staff. At this time, adding eyeglass coverage would require either reducing other benefits or significantly increasing the cost of the plan, and the committee has decided not to move forward with those changes. Your continued input is important and helps guide ongoing benefits discussions.
  • In the meantime, we have secured an eyewear discount for UWSA members at two local stores! Visit our members-only discounts directory for details.

• We will bring forward to the University the suggestion of time off for staff to engage in volunteering!

A few of the suggestions we received were for things that are covered in policies, not the MoA—remember, the MoA sets out how the UWSA and UW determine staff working conditions, but the details of our working conditions are in policies.

Here's how we're acting on suggestions relating to employment policy and HR practices:

• We are actively discussing pay frequency with the University. More on this to come soon!
• Eligible staff already receive minimum severance that exceeds Employment Standards Act (ESA) requirements, but we’ve flagged the lack of prorating for staff with less than five years of service, which we’ll be bringing forward for discussion at SRC.
• An enshrined right to redeployment before termination would be difficult to implement. In many workplaces, this typically looks more like a right to apply and be considered as an internal candidate for a new role, which we already have for staff who’ve completed their probationary period. That said, redeployments are happening when possible and appropriate, and such mitigations to avoid job loss are brought to SRC. 
• Irrevocable role protection for staff returning from secondment or leave was raised. While home units cannot guarantee that a specific role will continue to exist while a staff member is on a secondment, any role elimination must follow standard organizational change processes and Policy 18 obligations apply.
• Policy 18 and other employment rights continue to apply when regular ongoing staff take on contract roles (e.g., when a secondment is denied), but this is not always clearly understood and we will work to clarify this in future communications. 
• We have worked with Human Resources to secure new language in future severance agreements to clarify that members who have been terminated can continue to speak with and receive support from the UWSA.
• We received questions about why job protection language appears in the FAUW agreement but not in the MoA. FAUW’s agreement is structured differently, and for staff, job protection provisions such as seniority provisions, retention of internal status, reinstatement, notice, and severance are set out in Policy 18.
• We heard a desire for 360-degree performance reviews for managers. While there are no plans for formal 360-degree performance reviews, we understand that the new performance development module in Workday will allow senior leaders to solicit feedback from staff reporting to managers in their area.
   

We received a few suggestions about increasing staff representation in University decision making and requiring updates from staff on the Board of Governors:

• Staff involvement is defined inconsistently across the various policies governing senior administrative nominating committees. The University has agreed to review the any concerns we bring forward to ensure clarity and consistency in the UWSA’s role.
• We will monitor new committees, task forces, and working groups and advocate for meaningful staff representation if needed. 
• Staff serving on the Board of Governors are covered in provincial legislation and are not appointed through or accountable to the UWSA, so we can’t require anything in particular from them. That said, we will work with the staff governors to keep members informed about what’s happening at the Board!
• The Secretariat is currently researching the possibility of adding staff representation on Senate.
• Release time for UWSA-related work is reviewed at SRC each May, and we will raise the suggestion of release time for staff serving on University‑level committees (where it is not already provided, such as UWSA presidents and directors) as part of that process.
• We will continue to advocate for formal recognition of staff service, such as University‑level committee work and other UWSA service, particularly as the new performance development system rolls out under the Strategic Talent and Performance Framework (STPF).

We also received a suggestion to strengthen accountability for UWSA representatives on University committees. Elected representatives are held accountable through our governance processes and can be removed by the Board of Directors if they are not acting in good faith, and we have procedures to address conflicts of interest. Appointed committee representatives are selected through our Appointments Committee and share updates with members each year before the annual meeting, where members can ask questions of any representatives. We’re also looking at whether there are additional ways to support professional, productive conduct across all representative roles. If you have specific concerns or ideas, please reach out—we want to hear from you.
 

Finally, we received suggestions to support the equitable and transparent recruitment and appointment of representatives, including anti-oppression training for UWSA volunteers. These recommendations have been referred to the UWSA Board of Directors for consideration in this year’s strategic planning work, and to the Appointments Committee to inform updating their practices.