Remember that random gathering of people with flags and signs outside HP last month? Well, the collective bargaining that prompted NAIT’s academic staff association (NASA) to gather in public is still ongoing, and yes, students should be paying attention. Each side has multiple proposals, but don’t worry. We’ve gone through both sides, read all the updates, and broken down two proposals that could directly affect students.
Issue 1: Classroom sizes are up for debate
NAIT wants to make it easier and less expensive to increase class sizes. NASA wants the opposite.
The details
As stated in the current collective agreement, “a full-time instructor’s salary is based on 1885 hours per academic year.” Those hours are broken down into six categories of responsibilities, including Scheduled Instruction Hours (SIH)—a period of 60 minutes where an instructor delivers “either curriculum or hands-on skills instruction” online, or in-person. In other words, the hours that an instructor spends teaching are their Scheduled Instruction Hours. These hours are capped based on the type of program.
However, an instructor can get additional SIHs based on the size of their class, because “both parties recognize that class size impacts and instructor’s workload.” To calculate when an instructor would earn additional SIHs, NAIT uses a formula that considers the number of students in a course:
In simple terms, if an instructor is teaching multiple courses with many students, they are more likely to earn additional SIHs, which means more compensation for that instructor. And, if an instructor’s SIHs are higher than what they should be at the end of the year, those additional hours will be paid at three times their hourly rate. So having more students in a class can be costly for NAIT, not to mention the extra work for instructors.
However, NAIT and NASA do not agree on what changes should be made to the CSF. NAIT has proposed to increase the threshold for additional hours from 17,000 to 20,000. In NAIT’s summary of their bargaining proposals from Aug. 1, it says the change “better reflect[s] the supports that now are available to instructors, inside and outside of the classroom when they have larger class sizes.”
But according to NASA, increasing the CSF could mean “larger classes resulting in instructors having more students and less time per student.” And in their proposal, they decreased the CSF to 12,500 from 17,000. In one of their bargaining updates, NASA argued that by lowering the CSF, it’s more expensive for NAIT to run large classes, “so it would likely keep class sizes smaller.”
Why it matters
Well, depending on what happens, class sizes could either get bigger or smaller. And class size can have a direct impact on instructor morale, ability to teach, etc. It’s not a guarantee that if the CSF goes up that class sizes will also increase, but it would pave the way to make it easier and less expensive for NAIT to do so.
Issue 2: Establishing a ratio of counsellors to students
NASA wants to create a ratio for how many counsellors NAIT has compared to how many students are enrolled. They also proposed guidelines for counsellor’s workload, including how many students they should reasonably see each week and when they’ll get paid more if their workload exceeds the target.
The details
Currently, there is nothing in the collective agreement about the ratio of counsellors to students at NAIT.
NASA has proposed a ratio of “1 full-time equivalent counsellor to every 1,250 full-time learner students at NAIT.” Their reasoning has to do with the growing student population and mental health crises; currently, there is “no guarantee for more counsellors to be hired and provide the increased support a growing student population requires.”
They’ve also proposed the following weekly workload:
If an instructor were to go over the proposed threshold, they’d be entitled to overload pay, “calculated as the percentage of student patients over the maximum number of student patients.”
Currently, NAIT counsellors see five patients a day, according to Lead Student Counsellor Tanya Spencer. “We are very mindful of the intensity of our work, and we definitely keep tabs on it,” she explained. As of writing, there are six counsellors under Spencer’s leadership along with one Spiritual Care Provider and one volunteer Chaplain. Spencer is also happy with the average wait times at NAIT’s clinic, which have never risen above two weeks for a conventional appointment.
Why it matters
If the proposal is accepted, it could mean that there are more counsellors available for students as enrollment increases. But it also could mean that there are less counsellors when enrolment drops, and the proposal doesn’t state what would happen when the number needs to be reduced—would they get laid off, fired or moved elsewhere? It’s not clear.
Ultimately, a ratio could be good for students because NAIT would have to hire more counsellors as the full-time student population gets bigger, but it could potentially be expensive with having to hire or fire new counsellors each year. The proposal also doesn’t address the growth of other demographics of students; if part-time study exponentially grows, that wouldn’t change the ratio of counsellors according to the current version of the formula, despite still having more students on campus that may require care.
And while Spencer would “always welcome” more staff, she also hopes any formula dictating the workload of counsellors to “be free of unintended consequences.”
“It’s not ethical to leave students in the lurch because a formula is calculated [and] all of a sudden, we are beholden to a lower staffing level,” Spencer explained. “Any proposal that either NAIT or NASA puts forward, I would strongly encourage them to leave the provisions so that we can provide responsible care to the students.”
However, Spencer emphasized that regardless of the specific workload directed by a formula, if someone needs help, the counsellors are obligated to make sure students get help.
“My license says that if I am aware of an emergency situation, I must attend … so if there’s anything in the collective agreement, regardless of which party proposes it, that we can’t abide by professionally, then we will have to ignore it.”
What now?
Bargaining is still ongoing. A Nov. 5 statement from Jodi Edmunds, Director of Employee and Labour Relations for NAIT, said that “NAIT and NASA will be at the bargaining table for a total of 30 hours between now [Nov. 5] and December 15,” so there’s still a lot of negotiation to be had. Edmunds’ statement to the Nugget also highlighted that NAIT is “committed to timely and respectful bargaining that doesn’t impact student learning.”
And while two proposals have been highlighted here, these aren’t the only ones that could have an impact on students. Interested students can find both parties’ proposals publicly available on NASA’s website. NAIT has not posted their proposals publicly.
