Economic Progress

So far we have agreed with the University on a few economic issues. The two parties have no signed off on these issues, so technically they are open for discussion/modification although neither party has indicated that they want to disturb the issues on which we are in agreement.

Wages: We have agreed that there should be a 1% raise to the minimum wage next year and a 3% raise to the minimum wage in the 2011-12 academic year.

Not all GTFs will receive this raise, as about 50% of GTFs work in departments that pay more than the minimum wage. Although it is our understanding that departments receive the amount of the minimum wage from the University, which includes the annual raise amounts, the departments that pay above the minimum are under no obligation to pass along this raise and many choose not to.

Thus, when we calculate how much it will cost the UO to raise the minimum wage 1%, we calculate how much more the UO will be obligated to put in the pockets of GTFs. The cost of a 1% raise is roughly $80,000 a year.

Fees: The two parties have agreed to eliminate resource (aka departmental) fees in the coming year.

This was the GTFF's number one goal for this round of bargaining, so this is a big achievement. It was accomplished because the UO is moving to a model where colleges and/or departments will be able to set their own tuition rates. The resources fees will now be included in tuition and will be waived for GTFs.

Even though both parties have agreed that there will be no more resource fees, we have a major disagreement about what this agreement will cost the UO. We calculate that GTFs paid roughly $88,000 in resource fees last year, so eliminating resource fees for GTFs cost the UO $88,000.

The UO argues that all the new tuition levels above the base rate of tuition this year should properly be considered fees that might have been imposed on GTFs this year, but are not because of the new tuition model. Therefore, they calculate that GTFs are going to be receiving on the order of $750,000 worth of new benefits. We strongly reject this argument.