The Board and ULFA negotiating teams held their thirty-second bargaining session toward a new Academic Staff Collective Agreement (ASCA) on the afternoon of October 24, 2025. Eight ULFA members attended as observers.
Part 4 is the last in a series on the full proposal package and supplementary documents tabled by the Board team on October 24. Part 1 outlined the contents of the package. Part 2 focused on the proposals for Schedules A and B. Part 3 recapped the evaluation and merit proposals. This post addresses five areas of the ASCA in which the Board team proposes to make significant changes. The ULFA team’s opening proposals contained no major changes in these areas.
Article 3 (ASCA Amendments)
Sections 3.05.4 to 3.05.8 of Article 3 provide that ULFA members have the right not to cross the picket line of another ULethbridge bargaining unit and address administrative and procedural matters relating to the exercise of this right. The Board team proposes to remove this right and to prohibit ULFA members from changing the modality of how instruction is delivered in response to job action by another ULethbridge bargaining unit.
Article 9 (Grievance)
After three rounds of proposal exchanges, the ULFA and Board teams continue to see Article 9 as describing a three-step grievance process. A grievance is a claim that the terms of the ASCA have been violated, improperly applied, or not applied. Aspects that remain unsettled include:
- the timeframe for filing a grievance – currently 60 working days, but the Board team proposes to reduce it to 30 working days, and
- what happens in step two – currently the party receiving the grievance conducts an investigation and produces a report and recommendations for resolution; the Board team proposes instead to require another meeting, after which the receiving party renders a written decision (not a report).
Article 11 (Rights & Responsibilities)
Section 11.03.3 of Article 11 discusses members’ responsibilities as scholars/creators and scholarly/creative misconduct. To address the Board team’s desire to align the ASCA with Tri-Agency policy, the ULFA team has proposed an adjustment to existing language such that research misconduct is stated to include failure to comply with applicable federal or provincial funding agency requirements. The Board team instead proposes to define research misconduct in the ASCA as failure to comply with the Tri-Agency’s research integrity framework, which would apply to all members, regardless of whether they receive Tri-Agency grant funding or not.
Article 19 (Supervision & Discipline)
Article 19 in the current ASCA spans 10 pages. The Board team’s opening proposal to overhaul Article 19 comprised only 2 pages, whereas the ULFA team’s most recent proposal continues to retain the current structure. Some of the initially discarded language is reintroduced in the Board team’s latest Article 19 proposal, but significant concerns remain, including the following:
- the current timeframes for initiating disciplinary action in Article 19 and grievances in Article 9 are both 60 working days; the Board team proposes to reduce both to 30 working days,
- no distinction between levels of potential disciplinary action; current ASCA distinguishes between minor and major disciplinary actions,
- the Board team’s proposal requires members to attend disciplinary meetings; current ASCA provides that members may decline such meetings,
- deans would consult with the Association regarding the investigator into a disciplinary matter or the membership of an investigation committee; in the current ASCA, the Association must agree in writing to individual(s) appointed to a disciplinary investigation committee,
- in the case of an investigation committee into alleged research misconduct, the Association has no right to be consulted or to agree to the committee membership; in the current ASCA, the Association must agree in writing to individual(s) appointed to a disciplinary investigation committee,
- no requirement for the report of an investigation committee to be copied to the member; under the current ASCA, the member receives a copy of all letters and reports about disciplinary matters and investigations,
- no process for rebuttal to an investigation committee report; current ASCA allows a member to submit a written response to such reports,
- no provision allowing the Association to refer to arbitration a written decision on a disciplinary matter, although the Board’s proposal includes a provision that all disciplinary measures are subject to the grievance process in Article 9; current ASCA includes a provision allowing the Association to refer disciplinary decisions or the disciplinary action or both to arbitration.
Article 25 (Personnel Committees)
The current ASCA requires all salary, tenure, and promotion (STP) recommendations to be made by duly constituted STP Committees. The Board team proposes to empower search committees for senior academic administrators to make tenure and rank recommendations.
The remaining scheduled Fall 2025 negotiation dates are November 12 and 14, and December 11 and 12. A summary of the progress of items opened in this round of bargaining is available here.
