Union files formal grievance, sees LCC ‘slowly dying’

Presenter: A union files a formal grievance against the Lane Community College administration. The union says that while multiple programs have been closed—without due diligence—that later must be restored, in this case LCC violated the collective bargaining agreement. 

The president of the Lane Community College Employee Federation addressed the LCC Board of Education at its past two meetings. On June 3, Tami Hill:

Tami Hill (Lane Community College Employee Federation): …Another issue that raises concerns about transparency and employee involvement is the college’s recent agreement with Linn-Benton Community College to provide institutional research services, including mandatory reporting analytics, and data visualization support. 

Under the memorandum of understanding, Lane Community College will pay $60,000 annually for these services, and the agreement automatically renews with no end date. So until somebody terminates it, it’s going to keep going.

The college may view this arrangement as a necessary response to staffing or operational challenges. However, questions remain about whether alternatives were fully explored and whether the bargaining unit was adequately informed and consulted regarding the work that has historically been performed by college employees.

Article 9.2.6 of the LCCEF Collective Bargaining Agreement reserves management’s right to contract or subcontract work. At the same time, it requires the college to consult with the union regarding the impact on bargaining unit employees when subcontracting work presently being performed, and to provide an opportunity to discuss alternatives and the need for such.

To date, I was not aware of any consultation regarding the agreement. If consultation did occur, it was not communicated to me or anybody on my executive team. Given the contract language and the potential impact on classified work, it’s reasonable to ask what discussions took place, what alternatives were considered, and how the college determined that outsourcing was the preferred solution.

Presenter: At the July 1 Board of Education meeting, Tami Hill:

Tami Hill (Lane Community College Employee Federation): At the June 3 board meeting, I raised concerns about transparency and the employee involvement in the college’s recent agreement with Linn-Benton Community College, who would provide institutional research services, including: mandatory reporting analytics, data visualization support for the institutional research department. 

Under the memorandum of understanding, the contract reads that it will commence on the date of signature for the academic year of ‘26-’27 and continue on a fiscal year cycle unless terminated within 90 days notice by either party.

Section E is the close of contract. It reads that if either party chooses to non-renew, Linn-Benton will, during that 90-day closeout period, provide consultation and transitional support to assist LCC in developing and maintaining its own data systems and institutional research capacity, including:

Guidance related to student and education reporting and analysis; mandatory report analytics and data visualization; evaluation and accreditation-related projects and mentorship; and knowledge transfer to LCCs institutional research team. 

There’s a reason I’ve listed all those. This reads to me as meaning that Linn-Benton will provide all the services previously listed, unless and when either party terminates the MOU. That’s when Linn-Benton will hand over the data duties to LCC employees. Interesting. 

When I asked about it, it was explained to me and several others that the whole purpose was because there was a deadline to make some reports. 

Presenter: That question also came up at another point during the July 1 meeting, and was addressed by LCC President Stephanie Bulger:

President Stephanie Bulger: We had a bit of a crisis on our hands. We were not going to be able to make our commitments with respect to compliance reporting. We have compliance reporting with the Higher Education Coordinating Commission, with the federal government.

We were in a position of not being able to do that. This was a measure in order to make sure that that occurred. We also have a lot of transition going on in our institutional research area.  

Presenter: The president of the classified employees union shared her opinion about why LCC found itself in that position. Tami Hill: 

Tami Hill (Lane Community College Employee Federation): Now I am going to talk about Cathy Thomas.

The reason that LCC is in a difficult position and can’t get these reports done on time is because when Cathy notified them last fall that she would be leaving, they had plenty of time to hire and train a new employee had they treated it as a more urgent position to fill.

Instead, they waited until March 9 (which was the replacement’s first day). Then they act surprised that in three months that person doesn’t know everything that Cathy knows that she’s done for 10 years.

And I think you might agree that LCC employees benefit from more training by the person with the in-depth knowledge of the college’s data processes.

We also heard what the college is doing to her at last month’s board meeting when Kate Sullivan, a faculty member at Lane for 26 years, discussed the treatment of Cathy, who is blindsided by President Bulger, refusing to sign a contract to extend her employment after retirement.

Cathy relied heavily on the promised part-time position and was informed on May 20 that she’d have to vacate her office and return her laptop by July 2. And I believe her last day is July 7.

Cathy’s worked at LCC as LCCs primary data analyst for several years. Last fall, she announced her intention to retire at the end of the academic year, so I met with her so I could get firsthand what’s happening and such.

So Keith Comer, Cathy’s supervisor, was directly involved with President Bulger in securing a part-time contract to extend her work mentoring our new data analyst. 

Keith wasn’t aware of any issues and had planned with Cathy all the items that she was to consult on. These items included continued training for new staff, program review, transition survey design and evaluation, and in-depth analysis of placement and full-year registration.

However on May 28, the day before the president was to sign off, she refused to sign it (without explanation), and instead on May 28, signed an MOA with Linn-Benton to handle Lane’s state and IPEDS (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System) reporting. 

Imagine her surprise.

The costs are approximate and close to equal. Consulting with Cathy was about $67,000, about half-time plus the experience and institutional knowledge. Outsourcing to Linn-Benton is about $60,000 plus a lot of it staff time to get data transfers working. The tasks are totally different and have very different skill levels.

Cathy’s given 10 years of her career to Lane. She’s been the sole person providing institutional information for several years and has worked long hours to deliver it to those around the college who requested it.

You might be asking yourself, you know, ‘Why doesn’t Cathy just stay a little longer instead of retiring?’ Well, she’d like to, but she was told her retirement date is irrevocable.

Cathy’s institutional knowledge is irreplaceable, and I remain dumbfounded as to why the college doesn’t recognize her value. So LCCEF has filed a formal grievance against the college for this.

I learned about the outsourcing to Linn-Benton on May 20. I learned from a faculty member and a classified member. At the June 3 board meeting, we brought it to the board’s attention. However, I learned after that that the president had signed the contract on May 28.

This timeline is a great example of why Lane classified employees lack trust in our institution and feel there’s no transparency in decision-making, which as noted, was the same in the Gallup survey.

The documentation I received from my information request on this matter shows that the only people involved in formalizing this MOU are Linn-Benton’s president and President Bulger. The emails between them started on May 15 and President Bulger signed on May 28. A bit rushed, I’d say. 

Was anyone else involved in this decision? Not that I could tell from the documents. Are we empowering one person to ethically, financially collapse the entire institution? It appears so.

As a result, on June 25, LCCEF filed a grievance…  The union alleges that the college implemented and/or began implementing this agreement without fulfilling its contractual obligations to consult the union regarding the impact of the subcontracting and alternatives to subcontracting.

Of the seven requests that LCC is requiring of the college to remedy are: one, the college shall cease subcontracting bargaining unit work in violation of the collective bargaining agreement.

And the college shall immediately suspend further implementation of the Linn-Benton institutional research agreement pending completion of the consultation required by Article 9.2.6. 

Presenter: She concluded by checking in on employee morale, to see if there had been any improvement after the recent Gallup Poll. Tami Hill:

Tami Hill (Lane Community College Employee Federation): I’ve been actively asking employees, classified employees, how they feel. I like to take a little bit of a temperature to see if it’s just me or are we all feeling it.

Back to the survey results. This is in alignment with the feelings of classified employees that are on the ground. I’m just going to list what they’ve said: 

‘LCC is circling the drain. It’s hopeless. I feel deflated, scared, and angry. I hate this place. They’re manipulative. They’re liars. Their words don’t mean anything. No longer see what’s best for the students. They’re untrustworthy. Nothing but lies come out of their mouths.’

Almost the second thing is, ‘I’m brushing up my resume. It’s not looking good.’ ‘This isn’t a great place to be anymore.’

It breaks my heart that people feel just like a number. They’re not appreciated. Nobody cares. We’re just going to slash and slash and cut and, ‘Oh, well, good luck. That’s just how it is.’

I don’t see where we’re improving that whole Gallup survey or the promise to complete or the dedication to turn it around. It’s not happening…

You all are saying, ‘We always want to hear from the students.’ Do you? I’m not real sure, because they have a lot to say.

They have feelings.  They feel like this place is crashing. So much so that I’ve had a student come to me… to share with me an incident with the manager because they were too afraid of retaliation from anybody else in the college. That’s how bad it is.

So how do we change that? Communication. Transparency. Take care of the people that stand up. Remove the people that do things against the rules of Lane.

Why do we write stuff up—the vision, mission, core themes? None of it matters as long as things keep going the way they’re going.

So I don’t really know how to end this. It’s depressing to come here. It’s depressing to—last week, every day, I had four or more people tapping on my door in my office because they are scared. They don’t know what to do. The college is, well, as I said before, slowly dying. They feel like there’s one person making all the decisions and nobody else matters.

And then we have board members that don’t care and they’re just, ‘Whatever she says, agree.’ I don’t know what to tell them anymore. I don’t know what to tell them. 

Presenter: The classified employees union files a formal grievance against  Lane Community College, as its president describes the mood of students and staff.