Negotiations Update 10 August 2026

Once again, your PFF team came prepared. We had a six-hour meeting scheduled, so we presented four (4) new proposals and four (4) MOUs. The District presented one (1) proposal, one (1) counterproposal, one (1) MOU, and very delayed calendar proposals. Please see below a chart with an update on the articles pending negotiations.

Of note, PFF and the District established a set of ground rules to ensure negotiations are respectful and successful. The District continues to violate these ground rules by neglecting to share agenda items in advance or guests in advance. Today was particularly egregious. The District invited former members of both negotiations teams to the table to discuss one of the agenda items and did not disclose this invitation until negotiations had begun. We’ve asked the District repeatedly to abide by the ground rules.

✅ MOU_PT Office Hours Extension (PFF)

• PFF secured an extension to the PT office hours 🎉 This means that for the 26-27 academic year, part-time faculty can continue to be compensated for up to 16 hours per 20% load, maintaining parity with office hours provided by full-time faculty. 

• This extension is particularly significant as we continue negotiations over Article 15 (Compensation). The District initially rejected PFF’s proposal to codify office hour parity in the CBA. PFF nevertheless secured an additional year of parity while negotiations over Article 15 continue. PFF will continue to fight to ensure the part-time office hour parity is recognized and protected in our CBA.

✅ MOU_Large Class Cap Extension (PFF)

• Additionally, PFF secured an extension to our MOU providing stipends for those teaching classes with large class caps. Our initial proposal for Article 8 incorporated the same language from this MOU, but the District has proposed changes. This extension preserves these stipends while we continue to negotiate Article 8. We recognize the additional workload associated with large class caps and will continue to advocate for department collaboration in determining which courses are appropriate for large class caps.

📌 Article 13 Safety (PFF Initial Proposal) 

• PFF proposed minor adjustments to Article 13 to clarify safety measures provided by the District. The District seemed amenable to the changes and negotiations will continue to finalize the language. 

📌 Article 25 Intellectual Property (PFF Initial Proposal)

• Both proposals for Article 25 and 26 focused on changes necessitated by Artificial Intelligence (AI). In Article 25, PFF added language to protect faculty ownership rights when using District-provided AI tools, clarify that the optional use of District-licensed AI and other generally available technology does not constitute “substantial support” that would affect ownership, and ensure that faculty-created works cannot be used to train, improve, test, or develop AI systems without the faculty member’s prior written consent. The focus was on ensuring that the increasing use of AI won’t undermine faculty intellectual property rights. 

📌 Article 26 Broadcast and Recording Instruction (PFF Initial Proposal)

• Similarly, our proposal for Article 26 centered around the changes to broadcasting, recording, and general technology in instruction given the increased presence of Artificial Intelligence. PFF proposed strong and specific consent requirements, faculty autonomy and academic freedom protections, updated definitions of recording and broadcasting to ensure that new forms of automated capture will be covered, and a proposal for a student notification requirement to make it clear that inappropriate use of class material is prohibited. The proposal recognizes that AI technology will continue to evolve and calls for ongoing discussions and negotiations as new issues emerge. 

📌 Article 27 Resignation (PFF Initial Proposal)

• PFF advocated for a longer period of time to withdraw a resignation after submission. Current language allows for a 48-hour period to withdraw a resignation if needed. We proposed changing this to a five-day period of time to bring us into alignment with neighboring CBAs.

📌 MOU TERB Noninstructional Forms (PFF)

• PFF presented the new noninstructional forms to the District. These forms have already been approved by Faculty Senate and PFF. The District indicated support for these new forms but wanted to check with the VPI before signing. We expect to see these at our next negotiations meeting. 

📌 MOU Effects of Body Worn Cameras (PFF)

• Building off of CCE’s successful negotiations establishing parameters for the District’s use of body-worn cameras (BCWs) for campus peace officers, PFF proposed an MOU to establish protections against the use of BCWs for monitoring or disciplinary purposes. PFF also included language to provide advance notice of CPRA requests involving faculty, notice of other surveillance programs, and privacy protections for employee spaces. The District was amenable to this MOU as it mirrored that of CCE. They did want to review the CPRA language before countering. We should expect a counter at our next negotiations session.

📌 Article 8 Class Maximums Counterproposal (District)

• As a reminder, PFF proposed including the exact language from our Large Class Caps MOU as well as the language surrounding standard class cap size and the categories agreed upon by both parties for reduced class caps (both of which are listed on the website for class cap changes request form). In their first counterproposal, the District agreed to some of the existing language but notably removed the standard class cap size (42), the agreed-upon categories for reduced class caps, and any mention of department involvement in determining the courses appropriate for large class caps. Unsurprisingly, the District also proposed removing the language that prevents online courses from exceeding the in-person class cap. We will continue negotiating to protect faculty involvement in class cap decisions, maintain the protections currently in place for manageable class caps online, and codify our existing negotiations process in the CBA. 

📌 Article 4 Workload and Calendar Initial Proposal (District)

• The District proposed some significant changes to the workload article that would increase its own flexibility over the academic calendar and add new requirements for full-time faculty. The proposal would remove the designation of the ninth week as Spring Break, give the District greater flexibility in scheduling All College Day, and formally designate the two weeks prior to the Fall Semester as noninstructional days. Most significantly the District is proposing requiring full-time faculty to maintain a minimum of 10 hours per week on campus outside of their scheduled assignments. Based on our understanding of member interests, PFF does not support these proposed changes and will remain firm in protecting the working conditions that faculty have fought hard to establish and maintain. PFF will continue to gather feedback on these proposals before countering. 

📌 Academic Calendars (District)

• The District brought a calendar proposal for the 28-29 academic year noting that they realized the significant delay in bringing these to PFF and asking for urgent consideration. We explained that we need time to gather feedback from faculty before agreeing or countering. Two important considerations: 1) the calendar moves the Fall semester up one week to begin earlier in August, allowing for one week in between the Fall semester and the holidays, and 2) the calendar includes a general session for the summer for courses that require special consideration in the summer. PFF will be emailing faculty once we are back on contract for feedback as well as presenting the calendars at Faculty Senate and PFF for feedback. Stay tuned!

• Of note: The District also presented a new calendar for the 27-28 academic year despite having proposed a different calendar for that year in February, one for which we gathered feedback and countered already. Instead of addressing the original proposal, the District is attempting to reset the conversation and disregard the work that has already been done. We are, again, asked to operate with urgency due to the District’s poor planning and delays in negotiations. 

📌 MOU_Nursing Certification (District)

• The District shared an MOU establishing a stipend incentive for nursing faculty who earn a certification. The stipends will be funded through a grant secured by the District to increase the percentage of nursing faculty holding the relevant certification. 

Discussion

• CTE Academy Programs - The District shared a concern arising around a class of employees that have been hired in our CTE programs as skills instructors. They have been hired as STH and/or retired annuitants in the past, but the District is looking to create a third tier of faculty in our contract to account for this category of employees. PFF will explore in consultation with impacted faculty. 

• Non-Instructional Priority Numbers - The District and PFF will improve PN reporting to clarify what constitutes non-instructional workload when calculating priority numbers. 

• Office Hour Verification on Office Hour Submission - For the spring semester, an error on HR’s office hour calculations spreadsheet resulted in some confusion over office hour reporting and delayed some payments. PFF asked, again, for the District to provide part-time faculty with a receipt of submission confirming the submission of their office hours. This would allow part-time faculty to have documentation and create a clear record for resolving any discrepancies that may arise. This is a simple ask, but the District has claimed that our forms system does not allow for receipt of submission. PFF insisted they explore this option again. 

• TERB Updates - Discussion around TERB updates confirmed that the new forms for both instructional and noninstructional forms replace the old forms, except for those faculty members who are currently in an evaluation cycle who have the option to opt-in to the new forms or continue using the old forms. 

• Pregnancy Disability Leave - PFF asked the District about the status of the discretionary COLA applied to our budget per AB 65 and the new requirements to provide up to 14 weeks of fully paid pregnancy disability leave. The new law states that these requirements must be in place by January 1, 2027. The District was not prepared to discuss the budget implications nor the legal requirements associated with the implementation of the new PDL provisions. Although PDL was on the negotiations agenda, the VP of Finance was not present to address these implementation concerns. PFF made it clear that we will move this issue forward by bringing our own MOU to the District to address the necessary contractual and implementation changes. 

• Emeritus Faculty Sick Days - PFF brought questions forward around sick day accrual for emeritus faculty. The District shared that emeritus faculty are technically retired annuitants and therefore don’t accrue sick days. There are many concerns around this topic. PFF will explore the issue further in order to provide better clarity and strengthen the CBA for retired annuitants. 

The District continues to violate our ground rules by failing to provide an agenda 24 hours ahead of time and failing to inform our team of guests attending the negotiations sessions. Meanwhile, key members of the District team have been absent at a time when many of our agenda items need their attention and participation at the table. PFF has made as much progress as possible over the summer, as outlined below, but meaningful progress requires the District to come prepared to negotiate. As we move into the Fall semester, PFF will continue to push for substantive movement on the issues that matter to faculty. We will come prepared, stay focused on protecting faculty working conditions, and continue holding the District accountable to the negotiations process and commitments in our ground rules. 

District	PFF	Completed
Articles & MOUs with the District: Article 11 Article 13 Article 16 Article 25 Article 26 Article 27 Article 28 MOU_ECELS Salary Increase MOU_Effects of Body Cam MOU_TERB Noninstructional Forms Appendix E (agreed but never signed) Articles yet to be presented:  Article 1 Article 6 Article 12 Article 24 Appendix B Appendix C Appendix L	Articles & MOUs with PFF: *Article 4 *Article 8 Article 15 *MOU_Nursing Grant *27-28 and 28-29 Acad. Calendars *article presented to us today Articles yet to be presented:  Article 5 Article 7 Article 10 Article 20 Article 23 Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H (many of these are intentionally being withheld until we reach the end of negotiations)	✅ Article 9 ✅ Article 21 MOUs signed: PT Office Hour Parity Extension Large Class Cap Extension Accessibility Remediation PT Senate Seats Long Term Benefits Temporary Adjustment EAC ECELS Timeline Dual Enrollment SLO Admin. Access T&I Chair Adjustment DRC Chair Extension Z Tech Grant Football Coach Restructure Calendar Holiday Name Change

Signing off—but still here for every comma, clause, and cause.

Your PFF Negotiations Team