User Tools

Site Tools


Table of Contents

Job Actions 2022

A one stop guide to job action. You can always find the latest from the Bargaining Team on the current work to rule campaign here.

Work-to-rule: Principles and Protocols

The bargaining team has created an overview document of the principles guiding faculty's work-to-rule labour action (see attached). You can also check out detailed lists of struck work activities for Phase One and Phase Two here. You have union support and legal protections if you refuse to do work that you understand to be “struck work” according to those principles and lists. If you perceive any potential threat or retaliation from your supervisor, please let you Union Local know immediately, and fill out the work-to-rule incident form.

2022/02/15 21:16 · 2vp

W2R Update #17: Today's CEC Email Feb 10: A Victim-Perpetrator Role Reversal

The College Employer Council continues their daily mail outs. No doubt the writer they hired is making a good buck. It is crafty the way the writer of their letters tries to spin their agenda as our truth, but it isn’t fooling anyone. Their daily onslaught is actually looking like last-minute wild gestures of desperation.

Amongst their ‘confabulations’ below I have noted in bold and underlined some points that include our wider context of consideration. The writer’s trope is a victim-perpetrator role reversal.

Certainty of Outcome

Management Bargaining Update February 10, 2022

Today, we are sharing with you a direct but important message Does that mean that their daily direct messages of the past two weeks were not important? about the uncertainty that a rejection of our final offer would create for you, your students, and the college system. The only certainty they are looking for would be a total rejection of the bargaining process in favour of regular Forced Vote plebiscites like the one coming up next week.

We know that OPSEU is encouraging you to reject our offer. They claim that a rejection will force CEC to give more. (This is the same message they gave about a vote in favour of strike.) This was a vote for a strike mandate. To the CEC’s chagrin (and surprise), we chose a Work-to-Rule strike action instead, where our pay cheques keep coming and our classes keep running.

Unfortunately, this is not the case. The Final offer is the best offer we can put forward. There will not be a further offer. Check out a short comparison of both final offers, note (nothing substantive has changed since December):

And if you have the time – here is a timeline and links to all exchanges between our bargaining team and the College Employer’s team:

We have told OPSEU many times since August that we cannot agree to their outstanding demands: How many telling times do they think it take to make their agenda our truth?

  • Arbitration is the wrong way to address workload and to advance EDI and Truth and Reconciliation we need to move forward together through consensus. So why did ‘you’ leave the bargaining table, request a No-Board and unilaterally impose changes to our Collective Agreement? And which politician has not used this clichéd phrase? Surely their writer can do better than spitting up this generic political pablum – ‘move forward together’ means ‘vote for me’.
  • We will not agree to provisions that would strip work away from other employee groups. This from managers who are assigning our work, such as placement coordination to non-teaching staff, and studio and lab teaching to technicians. Who is stripping away whose work? They are claiming to be the victim and calling us the perpetrator.
  • We will not create greater uncertainty for partial-load faculty by allowing longer serving faculty to bump other partial-load faculty out of assignments. In other words, they will gladly do away with seniority rights. Then they can hire new partial-load professors every year and not have those experienced professors climbing up the pay-scale; minimum wage forever!
  • Bill 124 prohibits us from accepting the workload demands put forward by OPSEU. The Union demands breach Bill 124 and we cannot violate the legislation. The proposed workload committee will review all of these issues before the next round of bargaining when Bill 124 will no longer constrain us. They can no longer claim 124 constrains them; see my email W2R Update #16 from yesterday where we have a legal opinion that Bill 124 only applies to union salaries, not hiring needs, not educational condition improvements (like workload assignment adjustments from 1985 to 2022 contexts).

A rejection of our offer will only create more uncertainty. For 'you', because the provincial election this June will send us both to the compromising jurisdiction of binding arbitration – just as it did in 2017.

OPSEU may continue its work-to-rule, or escalate to a full walk-out strike without consulting with faculty again. Our elected bargaining team will consult with us because it is the right thing to do; they have been consulting through regular meetings with the 24 Local Presidents and Bargaining Advisory Committee, and Town Halls which many of you have attended. Though, it’s true we already gave our elected team a strike mandate. The final offer vote is your last opportunity to ensure there will be no escalation to the strike action. True, if we vote to REJECT the CEC’s final offer. If we accept their Forced Vote Offer, that will be the end of good faith bargaining because they will always wait out consensus bargaining until they can put their final Take-It-All-Or-Leave-It Forced Offer Plebiscite to us.

If OPSEU chooses to escalate to a full walk-out strike, the upcoming provincial election could affect the length of that strike. It will certainly shorten it or have 220,000 full time students and their more numerous voting family members questioning the government’s ineffectiveness in solving labour-relation problems where labour is not asking for a raise. And there are even more part-time student numbers. And, if faculty are legislated back to work, we don’t know what form of arbitration the government may choose, and neither side knows the terms that an Arbitrator may impose. But it will be another failure of the CEC’s maneuvering towards a plebiscite rather than coming in good faith to the bargaining table.

By voting YES on management’s final offer you can bring the certainty you, your students, and your colleges deserve in these uncertain times. These uncertain times are the result of the pandemic and lock downs, no labour vote will bring certainty to the uncertainties plaguing the world today. The CEC hired writer is trivializing the sublime. The next round of collective bargaining begins in less than 2.5 years. Let’s settle this collective agreement now so that we can focus on working together on important issues that affect us all. We could have settled it before our last contract expired last September if the CEC did not stall, delay and equivocate the issues – as they continue to do.

Vote YES Feb 15-17.


The Management Bargaining Team

Dr. Laurie Rancourt (she/her) Bargaining Chair, Humber College Stephanie Ball (she/her) Executive Dean, Durham College Leslie Casson (she/her) Associate Dean, St. Lawrence College Goranka Vukelich, PhD (she/her) Executive Dean, Conestoga College Ian Wigglesworth (he/him), Associate Vice President, George Brown College Jeannine Verdenik (she/her) Executive Director, Confederation College

Don’t give these ambitious college executives, working for their political masters your vote. Let’s stand together as before, as always, in unity and vote NO to their Forced Offer.

In solidarity,


2022/02/15 21:32 · 2vp

W2R Update #16: Bill 124, The Verdict Is In, The CEC’s Biggest Confabulation

The CEC has continually claimed that they have only a 1% increase in college budgets to work with. Not just on our wages and benefits, but also on educational concerns. Running through all their propaganda, they claim their hands are tied on matters of workload and precarious work. It’s all been a crock of misinformation; please see my email with the subject line: “W2R Update #16: Bill 124, The Verdict Is In, The CEC’s Biggest Confabulation” for the details.

In solidarity,


W2R Update #15: Deans’ Future Faculty Initiatives? Not During W2R, Respectfully!

Greetings Colleagues,

Whether in spite of, or oblivious to our current contract negotiations, two of Sheridan’s Faculties have announced ambitious restructuring plans and invited your volunteer, non-SWFed participation.

During our strike action of working-to-rule (W2R), please do not attend or contribute to these future plans of your Dean and Faculty. Some meetings are called for this Friday. We are in a strike action. None of this ‘planning’ work would be proceeding if we were out on the picket lines; it should not be initiated now, we should not participate now.

Please consider the long term effects of not participating in our W2R labour action. Just like in the contract negotiations of 2017, the College Employer Council (CEC) has ignored our CAAT-A Bargaining Team (BT). It is our BT which takes our democratically selected bargaining demands forward; so that, by ignoring our elected representatives the CEC is ignoring our demands.

The CEC has abandoned bargaining and is now relying on FORCED OFFER VOTES to deal with our demands for a more constructive workload, for a better education of Ontario’s workforce. They did in 2017 after three weeks of a strike; they are doing it again in this round after seven weeks of W2R. Ninety-five percent of Ontario’s College professors voted on the Forced Offer Vote of 2017, and eighty-six percent of us (89% at Sheridan) rejected the CEC’s heavy handedness. We must do so again.

If we say ‘yes’ to the CEC’s Forced Offer Vote this time, don’t expect any more time to evaluate your students’ assignments, to answer your students’ emails’, to teach the same course online and in-person simultaneously, to rewrite and re-mark exams for accommodations. Expect longer hours, weekend work, more students per virtual class, and less time to plan and execute new curricula. Expect no reprieve from 44 hours of SWFed work to fit into a 40 hour week.

We must maintain the strict discipline of W2R, vote NO to the Forced Offer next week and show the CEC that we care more about, and know more about our students’ education than any bureaucratic office can ever imagine or even understand. Let the CEC turn their zeal back on the government and ask them why Ontario provides the lowest per college student funding of any province in Canada! Now is not the time to take the easy way out!

And now back to the CEC’s daily propaganda offerings. Yesterday’s CEC letter offered us the status quo, nothing new just the promise of future improvements. To paraphrase Homer, “Beware the CEC bearing gifts”.

As far as today’s CEC letter to coordinators, as a coordinator wrote to me, “Nowhere in the offer does it say that coordinators decide what is reasonable for them. Nowhere does it say that coordinators can seek to revise or revisit duties – it only says that they are subject to change.” And I would add, once one accepts the role of coordinator their duties are not voluntary. Anyone who has been a coordinator knows that once in, the only option is to follow orders or quit the position.

The legal opinion on Bill 124 is in. That’s the bill that limits our salary increase to 1%, lowering our wages by 3.8% against inflation. The CEC claims that the 1% applies to expenditures on workload and other educational expenditures. Look for the legal opinion summary to be mailed later today.

In solidarity,


2022/02/15 21:18 · 2vp

W2R Update #14: Zoom GMM Tonight 6:30, Guest, Bargaining Team Chair JP Hornick

First, a quick note on today’s College Employer Council’s (CEC) Update. They have run out of things to say and so have repeated last week’s canard that in matters of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) they want consensus and we want arbitration. In the Fall they left the good faith of the bargaining table, then on December 13 they imposed a new CA, now, over the heads of our bargaining team, they have imposed a forced offer.

Their series of withdrawals from consensus seeking, left us no alternative but to ask for binding arbitration. They refused the compromising resolutions of binding arbitration. For the CEC to claim last week and today that we want an arbitrator where they want consensus for EDI is disingenuous. We would like all matters decided by consensus. It is the CEC bargaining committee members who want winner-take-all arbitration.

Shame on them for using such an important matter as EDI as a pawn in their political maneuvering.

Vote NO to their FORCED Offer on February 15-17.

In solidarity,


2022/02/15 21:19 · 2vp

W2R Update #13: The Arsonist & the Firefighter, Town Hall Review

And now from the chair of the College Employer Council (CEC), “the focus of our bargaining team has been on tabling an agreement that provides you with certainty in uncertain times.”

So the CEC heaps professional uncertainty upon us by refusing to bargain and refusing the compromise (and eventual government legislation) of binding arbitration. The arsonist is now the firefighter?

From their highlights of the offer they put before us collectively:

Faculty Workload
Create a joint committee on workload; who are they kidding? In my Update #10 I listed four of those committees – the findings of which were ignored or in the case of the 2017 task force, cancelled by the government before the report could be submitted. Note: the government is the CEC’s boss.

Partial-Load Enhancements
“Already includes bridging of benefits.” I guess our union bargaining team missed that benefit! Our part-time colleagues bridging benefits require a written guarantee that they will have a partial-load contract six months in advance. Which Associate Dean can promise that? Some benefit!

Advancing Truth and Reconciliation
If the CEC objects to predetermined mechanisms whereby our indigenous colleagues have access to Elder advocates in legal dealings at the college and provincial tables, it is hard to imagine how they are really interested in meaningful engagement with Indigenous communities.

And finally, their campaign note to end the week states that their first approach to OPSEU to extend our contract until after COVID in February 2021. Note, they went straight to head office over the heads of our elected bargaining team, and bargaining, by their imposed rule in 2008, did not begin until June 2021. Once bargaining began they refused any short term time limited Collective Agreement; they wanted three years or nothing.

Let’s take back our bargaining platform, let’s go back to the bargaining table or send both our final offers to the compromise option of final binding arbitration – vote NO on February 15 to 17.

From the Bargaining Team

Info from the Faculty Webinar

Greetings all:

Many thanks to the 700+ faculty who turned out to the Provincewide Bargaining Update webinar on February 2nd, and to the additional hundreds of faculty who've been attending local bargaining Q&As. There has been incredible engagement at these events, along with fantastic questions and feedback from those who have been able to attend. The message has been clear: faculty are voting to reject management's forced offer. The online vote is scheduled to take place February 15 @ 9:00 am - February 17 @ 3:00 pm. For more information, click here.

Info from the Faculty Webinar

If you weren't able to attend the webinar on February 2nd, we have made available to faculty a recording of the presentation and Q&A can be viewed here.

Work-to-rule: Principles and Protocols

The bargaining team has created an overview document of the principles guiding faculty's work-to-rule labour action (see attached). You can also check out detailed lists of struck work activities for Phase One and Phase Two here. You have union support and legal protections if you refuse to do work that you understand to be “struck work” according to those principles and lists. If you perceive any potential threat or retaliation from your supervisor, please let you Union Local know immediately, and fill out the work-to-rule incident form.

Instructing Students: Student Q&A Webinar

The College Student Alliance is hosting a LIVE Q&A with the faculty bargaining team on February 8 from 7-9pm. All students are welcome. Please circulate this information to your students. It is appropriate to use College e-mail or Learning Management Systems to do so.

CAAT-A Radio Campaign

Please keep your ears open next week for a new series of five radio spots produced and promoted by OPSEU Campaigns in support of our efforts leading up to the forced offer vote. The spots emphasize the importance of College faculty for the success of our students and our communities.

As you can see above, we are collectively reaching out to members and students and the broader public. Please join in this effort by sharing your own stories and messages on social media, and by reaching out to your colleagues to ensure that they vote to REJECT the CEC's forced offer. Only by rejecting the effort can we continue our unified effort to improve our working conditions and our students' learning conditions.

Yours in Solidarity,

JP, Jonathan, Kathleen, Ravi, Rebecca, Michelle, and Shawn

2022/02/15 21:07 · 2vp

W2R Update #12: CEC’s Truth Wiggling, Sheridan Union GMM Monday, February 7, 6:30 PM

Did you see the latest from Wigglesworth of the College Employer’s Council (CEC)? Lotta wiggling of the truth going on there. But the worst half-truth (conniving lie) is that our side wants Truth and Reconciliation with the Indigenous peoples of Canada done through arbitration.

Our side wants all Collective Agreement (CA) matters done through bargaining. Because, when the CEC walked away from the bargaining table and imposed their new version of our CA, we were left demanding binding arbitration as the only remedy to their unilateral power grab.

Wigglesworth’s deceitful wiggle is that we centered out Truth and Reconciliation as the only matter to be put to arbitration. And he goes further suggesting that arbitration is a colonial style of dispute resolution, thereby diluting the real evils of colonialism.

Shame on Wigglesworth, shame on the CEC. Vote NO on their condescending offer!

Reminder: If you didn’t get to hear JP Hornick’s eloquence at the provincial Town Hall last night, she will be our guest next Monday, see below.

Save The Date: February 7, 6:30 PM For General Membership Meeting

The agenda for the evening will include:

  1. 2022 Local 244 Budget
  2. W2R - JP Hornick Speaker – Chair of our Bargaining Team
  3. Provincial Delegate Confirmation
  4. SWF Calculations - 'How To Workshop'

In solidarity,


2022/02/15 21:01 · 2vp

W2R Update #11: More CEC Newspeak, Robocalls, Town Hall Tonight

The Latest CEC Newspeak

Gotta love those College Employer Council’s (CEC) daily propaganda mail outs. In today’s bullet points they mention enhancements (from our demand list) for what they call “priority status”. The list ends with the claim that our side’s (same) demands would allow, “longer serving partial-load faculty to bump other partial-load faculty out of teaching assignments”. Well, what will their “priority status” gains do, other than allow, “longer serving partial-load faculty to bump other partial-load faculty out of teaching assignments”?

Does the CEC think we are so dumb that we don’t see that ‘priority status’ is a euphemism for ‘seniority’, and seniority works on a bumping process? Please! Vote NO to their deceptive offer.


You will probably be receiving a robocall from our Bargaining Team this afternoon. To many this is overkill, to some the shorter message platform will be welcome. If you don’t want to receive more than the first call, stay on until the end, where you will be able to opt out. If you didn’t receive one (because OPSEU doesn’t have your phone number) but would like to, you can email your phone number to requesting to be added to the list.

Provincewide Faculty Town Hall: Register now!

Just a reminder that tonight, February 2 at 6:00 PM, the CAAT-A Divisional Executive will host a third provincewide Town Hall with the Bargaining Team. These town halls have proven extraordinarily popular so far; thousands of members have attended and hundreds of member questions have been answered.

Please register using a non-college (private) email address.

In solidarity,


2022/02/15 21:00 · 2vp

Update #10: Meet the Bargaining Team Chair, The CEC's Empty Promise

We received a College Employer Council’s political message today about setting up a ‘workload task force’, if you’ll only vote yes on their offer. Well here’s a little history of previous task forces:

2003-2005: Jointly-led study to gather data and propose changes. It didn't result in any, and went to arbitrator Kaplan
2006: Kaplan orders a new task force
2008: Rayner task force. Management cherry picks findings that reflect its priorities for the imposition and forced final offer vote that ended the strike – no change to our workload
2017: Ontario Colleges: The Next Fifty Years – this task force was cancelled by the Ford government just as they were about to publish their results, which included acknowledgement of twenty-first century virtual technology.

It's important to note that NONE of these resulted in implemented changes, despite reams of data and years of study. If a task force or subcommittee does not have a clear and binding process for implementation, history has shown again and again that nothing will be done. The SWF was established in 1985. There have been no changes to preparation and evaluation factors since. This new promised task force is of the same useless pedigree.

Meet JP Hornick, Chair of our Bargaining Team, coming to our GMM

Save The Date: February 7, 6:30 PM For General Membership Meeting

The agenda for the evening will include:

  1. 2022 Local 244 Budget
  2. W2R - JP Hornick Speaker
  3. Provincial Delegate Confirmation
  4. SWF Calculations - 'How To Workshop'

In solidarity,


2022/02/15 20:57 · 2vp

Notice - Sheridan General Membership Meeting - Student W2R Provincial Meeting

Good Morning Colleagues,

Next Monday evening, February 7 at 6:30 p.m., JP Hornick, the chair of our Bargaining Team, will be joining us for our General Membership Budget Meeting. The Agenda will be:

  1. 2022 Local 244 Budget
  2. W2R - JP Hornick
  3. Provincial Delegate Confirmation
  4. SWF Calculations - 'How To'

Then Tuesday night, please let your students know that our Bargaining Team (BT) will be addressing them personally in a provincial Town Hall. See the registration information from the BT below.

In solidarity, Jack

From the Bargaining Team:

Greetings all:

Please distribute the following to all faculty to share with our students. As a reminder, it is absolutely legitimate for faculty to communicate with students about bargaining issues. Our working conditions are their learning conditions.

On February 8 at 7pm, the faculty bargaining team, in conjunction with students, will be holding a LIVE Q&A Webinar to talk with students about what's happening in bargaining, what faculty are asking for in order to better support students, and to answer questions that students may have.

Faculty are fighting for:

  • More time to support students
  • Job protections for contract faculty, counsellors, and librarians
  • Binding action on equity, Indigenization, and decolonization
  • Faculty consent on the sale or reuse of their work

Here’s the registration link for the live student webinar on Feb 8th (starts at 7pm)

 When: Feb 8, 2022 07:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) 
 Topic: Student Town Hall on Bargaining

NOTE: French translation and ASL interpretation will be provided.

Register in advance for this webinar:

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

In solidarity,

JP, Jonathan, Katie, Michelle, Ravi, Rebecca, and Shawn

2022/01/31 20:11 · 2vp

W2R Phase 2 Reminder

Greetings Colleagues,

A number of questions have come in about work that is considered struck work. Please note we are now in Phase 2 of Work-to-Rule (see link below).

During this phase of W2R, we are not to exceed an eight-hour day from start time of SWF duties for eight hours. Also, do not attend any meetings not presented directly on your SWF, like PAC or professional organization meetings.

For more details please see,

In particular see item 6 under the heading All faculty:

Do not spend any additional time on committee work other than what is assigned on your SWF each week.

In solidarity,


2022/01/31 20:05 · 2vp

W2R Update #9: 5 Reasons to Vote No -- 22 Days to Forced Offer Vote

Good Morning Colleagues,

Here are five good reasons to vote “NO” on the College Employer Council’s (CEC) Forced Offer Vote coming up On February 15 to 17.

1) Our workload formula, covering full-time faculty only, has gone largely unchanged since 1985.

  • The types of teaching, technologies and students have all tremendously changed since 1985
  • At this point, we are asking for up to 1.8 minutes per student per week more for evaluation of essays and projects
  • An increase from 5.4 to 7.2 minutes
  • Weekly marking allowances are 1.8 minutes per student for essay or project evaluations, 54 seconds per student for multiple choice evaluations, and 33 seconds per student for in-class evaluation

2) By the College Employer Council’s (CEC) own numbers (we believe them to be even higher), over two-thirds of faculty in our system are precariously employed contract faculty

  • only partial-load - who comprise over 40% of our union - are represented by us
  • When non-unionized (sessional, part-time) teachers are included in the count, non-FT Contract Faculty do the majority of the teaching in our system
  • The CEC claims to want stability for students but have built a system on the backs of faculty who have inadequate job security and are not properly compensated.

3) We are attempting to protect our work which is being contracted out and privatized, including:

  • work of counsellors (during a mental health crisis)
  • librarians (only 10 of 24 colleges have an academic librarian now)
  • vast increase of private colleges, especially in Brampton and Mississauga

4) Labour disruption can be avoided by the CEC by

  • accepting our standing, reasonable offer of binding interest arbitration of all outstanding issues, where arbitrator takes both sides’ final demands and hammers out a compromise
  • CEC wants final arbitration where the arbitrator must pick one side’s demands or the other’s; no compromise, a winner or loser scenario
  • the CEC returns to the table and engage in real negotiations

5) The entire college system has had $1.65 billion in surplus over the past five years

  • administrative positions have multiplied
  • administrative salaries have seen considerable growth
  • those are the pockets where supposedly scarce money is being directed

In solidarity,


2022/01/24 16:08 · 2vp

W2R Update #8: The Forced Offer Vote February 15-17

Greetings Colleagues,

In the next couple weeks, before the forced offer vote, please take some time to look into the background of this upcoming vote. You will find details in

  • my emails
  • BT's letters I will forward, like the one below
  • and our social media platforms
  • (new) through SMS text messaging, invitation below
    • shorter concise messaging

If you haven't received the following short email from OPSEU central on behalf of our Bargaining Team (BT), you can opt in from the information below.

In solidarity,


From the Bargaining Team

Greetings from OPSEU,

As you know from our previous communication, the employer has requested a forced offer vote. We need to make sure we connect with you regularly to let you know what is going on. To do so, OPSEU is working with Stratcom to keep you and all our members informed through SMS text messaging. We see this as the fastest and most effective way to communicate and mobilize. As you know, clear and timely communication is critical at this stage.

The goal is to obtain CAAT-A members’ non-college contact information, including cell phone numbers. Over the next few weeks, we’ll be rolling out emails, voice messages and live calling to members to update this information. Please take a moment to update your contact information and in particular your cell phone number. It will only take 30 seconds.

Click here to enter your personal contact information.

Alternatively, you can text CAAT-A to 90993 to register your contact information. Please feel free to forward this email to other members who may not have received it.

From the Bargaining Team

Dear Faculty,

As you may be aware of by now, a forced offer vote will be held online from 9 am on February 15th to 3 pm on February 17th. You are being asked to vote on the last offer presented by the College Employer Council (CEC), which is virtually unchanged from its November 23rd offer. Faculty have already rejected this with the strike mandate we handed down in December.

The upcoming vote is a critical one that will have both short- and long-term consequences on collective bargaining in the college sector.

In the short-term, voting to REJECT means that we will end up with a new collective agreement that is better than what the CEC is presently offering. The CEC offer does not meaningfully address faculty demands around key issues:

  • more time for students,
  • partial-load job security,
  • preventing contracting out, to protect the work of counsellors, librarians and all other faculty,
  • faculty consent for how the colleges use our course materials,
  • equity and decolonization.

Once we reject this offer, the CEC will have no tactics left to avoid bargaining faculty issues.

For the second consecutive round of bargaining, the CEC has demonstrated little willingness to negotiate our demands, and instead continues to stoke fear of a full strike and threats of reprisal to try and divide faculty. After a five-week long strike in 2017 that resulted in significant gains for college faculty (e.g., academic freedom, increased seniority rights for partial-load members, and the creation of new full-time positions by removing a moratorium on Article 2 grievances), the CEC gambled this round that faculty would not stand together again, even after experiencing significant changes to our working conditions over the past four years.

But we are, and we are telling them that their strategy isn’t working for faculty. Let’s continue to prove them wrong – not just for our own good but for that of our students.

If the CEC is successful in having faculty accept their offer, there will be no incentive for them going forward to change their negotiation strategy of delay, defer, deny, and do nothing.

Why would they change their approach if it works for them this time? Taking a forced offer vote–rather than negotiating or agreeing to faculty’s offer to refer unresolved issues to voluntary binding interest arbitration–demonstrates little respect for faculty. If the CEC can routinely avoid negotiating in good faith, our needs and the needs of our students will not be met and our system will suffer as a result.

Voting to REJECT the CEC offer in mid-February does not mean a picket line–it means a better resolution for all.

We will send an undeniable message to the CEC, and the college presidents who direct them, that faculty issues must be taken seriously.

In solidarity,

JP, Jonathan, Katie, Michelle, Ravi, Rebecca, and Shawn

2022/01/24 15:50 · 2vp

W2R Update #7: Response to Forced Offer

Greetings Colleagues,

The forced offer materialized within a few hours of my Monday morning prediction. I was wrong in one part of my prediction, they did not offer a signing bonus. It’s a take it or leave it deal. We already rejected their final offer with our 69.9% strike mandate vote, which made our current work-to-rule strategy legal.

Going back on that strike mandate vote by swallowing this forced offer vote will end any future constructive collective bargaining. Confrontational bargaining will result, because nothing will be accomplished at the bargaining table. The College Employer Council (CEC) will not put out their full demands until close to the end of our contract, they will argue that they cannot even come back to the table until we give up some of our major demands. Next they will impose their new version of our Collective Agreement (CA) and then go over the heads of our elected Bargaining Team (BT) and put the forced offer vote to the membership at large. Just as has happened in this round.

Binding arbitration, which our side has asked for, is what happened in 2017. In binding arbitration the arbitrator looks at both sides’ final offers and arrives at a compromise. The CEC wants the arbitrator to pick one sides’ final offer and accept it in full. There would be a winner and a loser in their choice of arbitration. They expect to win because the arbitrator cannot overrule the government’s 1% maximum salary increase. And so all their demands would follow into our CA.

It leaves us with no choice but to work-to-rule (W2R) or strike until they come back to the bargaining table or the government orders us to cease all job actions and forces binding arbitration upon us both as happened in 2017. With this being an election year our political position enhances the closer we get to Ontario elections.

If we do not reject their offer by a good margin we will have to accept the forced offer. It is only by a labour action like W2R or a strike that we can change the status quo of where we are right now and protect the collective bargaining process in future rounds.

It seems that the OLRB has set February 15-17 as the days for our vote. With no substantive change from their last final offer, we must vote against this forced offer. See our BT’s explication below.

In solidarity,


From the Bargaining Team

Dear Faculty:

For months, CAAT-A faculty have been bargaining for modest, realistic, but much-needed improvements to the College system. The CEC and the Colleges have refused to address these issues, resulting in our successful strike vote in December.

As we predicted, the CEC has called for a forced offer vote (likely to be scheduled sometime in February). The CEC's offer is virtually identical to the one faculty already rejected in December.

The CEC has bypassed the bargaining team and our negotiator and called for a forced offer vote—on an offer that again refuses to address faculty issues.

Nothing has changed from their last offer on November 23.

As a reminder, here’s what’s wrong with their offer:

  • it allows for contracting out of all faculty work and contains no protections for partial-load faculty, counsellors, librarians, or coordinators
  • it contains no changes to workload factors, which have remained unchanged since the ’80s
  • it does not acknowledge the need for faculty consent prior to the reuse or sale of their course materials
  • their proposed workload taskforce looks to expand two-tiering of faculty workload (including apprenticeship, aviation, academic upgrading, placements, and “other specialized programs”)
  • their proposed equity taskforce and roundtable on Truth and Reconciliation are all for show and do not guarantee any changes at all in the next three years and beyond
  • it contains no commitment to improved ability to bridge benefits for PL members, a group already without the same benefits as FT.

Faculty have already told the CEC that this offer isn’t good enough for us and our students. Apparently, we need to reinforce this message loudly and clearly. They can take a forced offer vote only once, and this is a further attempt by the CEC to force their position on faculty.

If, following the rejection of their forced offer, the CEC continues to refuse to bargain faculty demands, the faculty team will leave open the door to voluntary binding interest arbitration. The CEC could have chosen this path at any point to avoid further pressure on faculty and students.

Rejecting their offer takes away their last tool, and ensures that any final agreement will be better than this.

Vote to REJECT the employer’s offer. We are bargaining for better: time for our students, quality education for all.

In solidarity,

JP, Jonathan, Katie, Michelle, Ravi, Rebecca, Shawn

2022/01/24 15:39 · 2vp

W2R Update #6: Forced Offer Vote, 44 or 40 Hour Week? ULP Filed, Student Awareness

Greetings Colleagues,

In this Update:

CEC Forced Offer? Will the CEC By-Pass Our Bargaining Team Again

Can One Fit 44 Hours In A 40 Hour Week?

OPSEU Files Unfair Labour Practice (ULP) Complaint to the OLRB (attached)

Ten Things Ontario College Students Should Know: Student Information and FAQ

CEC Forced Offer?

Can Faculty be bought for trifling bonuses? We’ll soon find out. Did you notice that we just received our retroactive pay from the College Employer Council’s (CEC) imposed contract. That is less than $200 after taxes for fifteen weeks, to those at the highest pay step.

Look for the CEC to add a signing bonus to the one forced offer they are permitted to make over the heads of our union bargaining team (BT) directly to our membership; that’s you, that’s us. And look for that one-time offer to come as soon as today or this week, while they think we’re softened up by the retroactive pay.

They should know better, considering Ontario’s College Faculty chose to reject their forced offer after three weeks on the picket line in 2017. Rather than accept their menu of concessions, we were forced to stay on strike for two more weeks until the government legislated us back to work with binding arbitration. Work-to-Rule (W2R) is our new labour action strategy.

Seems like the CEC never anticipated we would counteract their bad faith bargaining by choosing a different strike strategy. Our new labour interruption action has us doing less harm to our students and to our bank accounts. And, there is the collateral value, never imagined by the CEC when they abandoned the bargaining table. They gave everyone a poignant purpose to see how our Standard Workload Form's (SWF) maximums measure up against our real weekly hours worked.

44 Hours In A 40 Hour Week?

The time limits on SWFs are set in stone during W2R. Some of you have written to ask if they should average times until they reach 44 hours; do a little more marking one week, less another. No, we never should, though most who are involved in the work they love, and know their managers have their back, work overtime without knowing it. There is a fine line between working to live and living to work when everyone respects your hard-earned contribution. Right now the CEC is stabbing us, and our collegial local managers, in the back.

So, no extra work during W2R. The CEC is hoping that more than 50% of us are not paying attention to how their unilateral action will erode our worklife, our calling, deliver less to our students’, our charges’ education. It’s time for some Faculty action; that’s where W2R is providing collateral value. Here’s some background knowledge worth keeping with you after W2R.

Fasten your barrister belts, we’re going forensic. Our legally assigned workload contracts, our SWFs, are based on maximums not averages. Case and point, our Collective Agreement (CA) says we work a maximum five eight-hour days in Articles,

11.01 K 2 Weekly contact hours assigned to a teacher by the College may be scheduled into fewer than five contact days and such compressed schedule shall be deemed to be five contact days.

11.01 L 1 The contact day shall not exceed eight hours from the beginning of the first assigned hour to the end of the last assigned hour

That’s a 40 hour week. Yet, our SWF does not go into overtime until we go over 44 hours a week. So how many can our managers assign, forty hours or forty-four hours? The extra four hours was a concession made in 1985 for those weeks when there is more to do, so that overtime pay does not often come into play. Forty-four hours was a maximum:

11.01 J 1 Such teaching contact hour agreed to in excess of the respective weekly teaching contact hour maximum shall be compensated at the rate of 0.1% of annual regular salary. Such workload hours agreed to in excess of the 44 hour weekly workload maximum shall be compensated at the rate of 0.1% of annual regular salary. Such overtime payments shall be for the greater amount but shall not be pyramided.

Everyone knew it was a forty-hour week; the full-time college classes were scheduled from nine to five! And the 1985 academic year had 32 weeks of teaching (two sixteen week semesters), there were four consecutive working non-teaching weeks for program planning and course development, eight professional development (DP) weeks minus public holidays, and eight vacation weeks.

11.01 B 1 Total workload assigned and attributed by the College to a teacher shall not exceed 44 hours in any week for up to 36 weeks

Now we teach 35 weeks a year, have seven disbursed non-teaching working weeks for program planning and course development, 2 PD weeks minus public holidays, and eight vacation weeks. Assigning maximums is the norm now; no doubt you have heard your AD say that they have been ordered to maximise SWFs. That’s how a small 1985 concession (first four hours on the rare heavy week, no overtime) manifests in 2022.

So, when our demands ask for an extra minute and a half a week to evaluate each student’s matriculation, there’s no time, we’re already maxed out. The college would have to reduce our course load, hire more teachers and raise Ontario’s post-secondary student expenditure so that we are no longer the lowest per student funding Canadian province in college training and retraining of its workforce!

The numbers in our CA are maximums not to be averaged. During W2R, any leeway would be like crossing a picket line, strike breaking.

From Our Bargaining Team:

Unfair Labour Practice (ULP)

In response to escalating rhetoric from the College Employer Council and a number of colleges, OPSEU/SEFPO has filed an unfair labour practice (ULP) complaint regarding union interference with the Ontario Labour Relations Board [see attached].

The filing of the ULP follows a week in which several colleges–including Niagara, St. Lawrence, Humber, and Fanshawe–have directed faculty to stop sharing bargaining information via their email signatures or LMS. Many colleges, however, continue to use college resources in order to circulate their own bargaining information from the CEC to all faculty, staff, and students.

Specifically, the complaint centres on the ways in which the CEC team and certain colleges “…have blatantly interfered with the rights of OPSEU’s members to choose to demonstrate support for their bargaining agent’s position during contract negotiations” and have attempted to silence support for the union to gain “an unfair advantage in bargaining.” The ULP also asserts that they “have also interfered with the Union’s right to seek support from its members, and to engage in strike activity that is free from undue influence and threats of reprisal.”

While Graham Lloyd’s, CEO of the CEC, last issued letter asserted that faculty bargaining messaging is “anti-college”, he also included a set of his untested opinions about whether work-to-rule is a form of strike, and whether faculty SWFs are a reflection of our workload. His letter is a deliberate, if clumsy, attempt to distract and confuse faculty about their legal right to participate in work-to-rule.

Lloyd also states that the CEC will only come back to the table on the condition that faculty drop any demands the CEC is unwilling to consider.

The two questions that both Lloyd and the colleges do not answer or address in their communications are quite telling:

  1. Why won't the colleges address faculty demands on workload, partial load issues, contracting out, intellectual property rights, equity and decolonization?
  2. Why won't the CEC/college team agree to go to voluntary binding interest arbitration on outstanding issues, which the faculty team first offered on November 18 and which remains on the table as an option?

Instead, the CEC – and the college administrators who direct their team – continue to engage in a fear-based campaign that doesn't even pretend to counter the merits of faculty concerns and proposals. We have not undertaken the filing of this ULP lightly; we strongly and simply believe that faculty have the right to communicate with our students and the public about our bargaining, and to be able to do so in an environment free from reprisal or threats of reprisal.

Fortunately, Sheridan Management has chosen not to toxify our workplace to the degree of the aforementioned colleges.

Student Information and FAQ

Here is a brief overview of bargaining and work-to-rule, which was targeted to students:

We continue to encourage all faculty to use the following text in the signature of their College emails:

In response to the College Employer Council's decision to impose employment conditions following the College Faculty voted to support strike actions (, Ontario college faculty are now following work-to-rule guidelines established by the Faculty Bargaining Team.

Faculty have chosen to focus on our students' needs and not interrupt College courses with a strike at this time, while demanding that our employer negotiate a fair resolution to this labour dispute. Work-to-rule means that we will be working only the time outlined by our current contract and workload assignments, or job descriptions. This means that we may not be available for additional, volunteer work that we may normally do, or work outside of regular work hours. Therefore, we may take more time than usual to respond to emails or other forms of communication and any additional work-related requests.

Currently we are in Phase 2 of the planned work-to-rule job actions. For more information on these actions including a work-to-rule FAQ, please visit: We appreciate your patience and your support in our efforts to improve working conditions for Ontario college faculty and the learning conditions of Ontario college students.

In solidarity,


2022/01/17 16:26 · 2vp

W2R Update #5: OPSEU President Speaks Up For Our Labour Action Rights

Good Morning Colleagues,

It’s January 10, all our SWFs and Workload Memos and Partial-Load Contracts are in play. If you haven’t started, it’s time to keep a log of the times and coinciding work you do, so as not to exceed the limits of the current working-to-rule (W2R) labour action.

Document the time you spend making notes, preparing slides, mail-outs, jotting down ideas, following up with modified or new charts, diagrams, lesson plans, emailing students, colleagues, managers, APAs, PAC members, corresponding with suppliers, employers, advertising programs, placing students … the list is endless and ever changing. The invisible work we do is often unrecognized; it can be as unlimited as each professor’s imagination and dedication.

During W2R it is this invisible work we need to reveal, record and – stop doing when the SWF/contract hours recorded have been expended. We have every right to limit our work to the allotted SWF or contract limits, see the letter from President Warren Thomas below. During W2R we have a duty to cut back the substantial extras we provide, so that we avoid the total disruption of classes a strike would entail. And this will make clear to our managers, how much we do beyond our workload agreements.

Documenting our work will illuminate how our SWFs and contracts work. They are the scaffolding of the next 15 weeks of work; best to understand what we are signing up for when we sign our documented workload. SWF factors and hourly calculations by professors will help prevent mathematical manipulation by managers, a requirement for informed workload consent. Any acquired workload knowledge will add collateral value to this labour action.

Let me presume the argument that you might get from your AD to do work that is not otherwise assigned as a line item on your SWF. If your AD points to:

Article 11.01 F 1 - An allowance of a minimum of six hours of the 44 hour maximum weekly total workload shall be attributed as follows:

four hours for routine out-of-class assistance to individual students

two hours for normal administrative tasks.

Point right back to them that the key words are 'routine' and 'normal', and therefore these duties cannot be specifically directed by oral or written direction if they are not on a SWF or in a contract. Sheridan has been more understanding than many other colleges by giving an extra complementary hour on most SWFs in recognition of the extra time needed since the advent of email and Learning Modular Systems. But similarly, this hour is for the “complementary function listed as an ancillary professor’s role”. 'Ancillary', like ‘routine’ or ‘normal’ tasks, are not specifically named duties.

To conclude, keep a log of times and work done. Perhaps email your ADs to let them know when 50% of the allotted time is up for any specific duty on your SWF or in your contract, perhaps again at 90%. But certainly, once you have completed allotted times each week for preparation and evaluation and all duties specifically named on your SWF or contract, let your AD know that any work still needing completion, will have to wait until next week’s log time begins.

Sheridan administration has not been as confrontational to our W2R initiatives as have some other colleges. But all 24 colleges are directed by the College Employer Council (CEC), which is taking a much more draconian approach than bargaining in good faith would allow. Which is why our leadership at OPSEU central has responded strongly, as you can read below in Union President Warren Smokey Thomas’ letter to Graham Lloyd, Chair of the CEC.

In solidarity,


OPSEU President: Letter re concerns about employer communications to college faculty

January 7, 2022

Graham Lloyd Chief Executive Officer College Employer Council

Dear Graham,

Faculty members represented by OPSEU/SEFPO working at Ontario’s 24 public colleges have now begun Phase 2 of the work-to-rule campaign, as part of a legal strike action, which began on December 18, 2021.

As you know, work-to-rule is a legally recognized form of strike action, as per the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act (CCBA). The CEC is aware of this, and has responded to OPSEU/SEFPO’s strike action on its website. Clearly, there is no confusion about whether our members are engaged in strike activity.

There should be no confusion about the scope of that strike activity either. OPSEU/SEFPO has been abundantly clear about the scope and has clearly communicated that our members will not be performing tasks outside of the strict letter of the Collective Agreement, and where applicable, the requirements of their SWFs, including participation in orientation events. Such tasks are considered struck work, and performing them would be equivalent to crossing a picket line.

Any direction from the employer to faculty to not engage in strike activity - or any reprisal, or threat of reprisal for doing so - will be considered interference with the union and OPSEU/SEFPO will take any, and all, appropriate steps required. We will not allow our members to be intimidated, coerced or retaliated against.

You can imagine how disheartening it has been to hear that our members are receiving threatening communications through the employers’ communication system across the 24 colleges. This is classic union busting, Graham. I’ve been around long enough, and I’ve seen it all. We’ve had members being targeted by the employer, and threatened with discipline.

I write to you today demanding an end to these harmful intimidation tactics, and to remind you that such tactics are in potential violation of the CCBA. Our union will continue to support college faculty members, and we will proudly defend any, and all members who face disciplinary retaliation.

It’s time to lower the temperature and get back to the bargaining table.


Warren (Smokey) Thomas President, OPSEU/SEFPO CC. JP Hornick, Chair, CAAT-A Bargaining Team

2022/01/17 16:29 · 2vp

How To Respond To Management's Refusal To Honour W2R

Good Morning Colleagues,

One questions from two of our constituencies is being asked more than any other, based on a standard college reply to faculty members’ notice of exercising work-to-rule in not attending meetings this week. Here is an example of the college’s reply,

AD to faculty member:

I agree, none of us wish to be in this situation.

As this is a non-teaching period, it is covered by 11.08 “In keeping with the professional responsibility of the teacher, non-teaching periods are used for activities initiated by the teacher and by the College as part of the parties' mutual commitment to professionalism, the quality of education and professional development. Such activities will be undertaken by mutual consent and agreement will not be unreasonably withheld.”

In the spirit of this clause in the collective agreement, I am requesting that you, as a coordinator, attend your program specific session of orientation to welcome students, present your program with the PPT presentation your prepared and answer questions as is customary.

Hopefully, this unfortunate situation will be resolved soon.

Here are two answers that I prepared and will stand by. The first is for faculty not attending meetings, including orientations:

Thank you for bringing up Article 11.08, which stipulates that activities in non-teaching periods be undertaken by mutual consent. It is the union’s position that the concept and spirit of mutual consent was abandoned by the College Employer Council (CEC) in all Ontario colleges' union-management agreements, when the CEC refused to accept binding arbitration as a means to prevent or resolve this current impasse begun by management's No Board filing, followed by their unilateral imposition of a new Collective Agreement, and labour’s subsequent work-to-rule action.

It is the local union’s hope that local management will understand, if not sympathise, with Local 244’s principled and legal labour action. These meetings can be held next week when our SWFs are active, under Article 11.01 F 1 during the stipulation of “two hours for normal administrative tasks”.

And for coordinators who might be lately charged with other duties or leading student or faculty meetings, please answer with the following, feel free to personalize, particularly in the last paragraph if you are speaking of duties other than meetings:

Thank you for bringing up Article 11.08, which stipulates that activities in non-teaching periods be undertaken by mutual consent. It is the union’s position that the concept and spirit of mutual consent was abandoned by the College Employer Council (CEC) in all Ontario colleges' union-management agreements, when the CEC refused to accept binding arbitration as a means to prevent or resolve this current impasse begun by management's No Board filing,, followed by their imposition of a new Collective Agreement, and labour’s subsequent work-to-rule action.

And further, to prove the abandonment of the concept and spirit of mutual consent by the CEC, they unilaterally imposed changes to our last Collective Agreement (CA). One of the changes in Article 14.03 A 3, which deals with coordinators, was to change how specific duties are itemized. Where the last, and now obsolete, version of the CA stated the duties, “shall be determined”, the current, and operational CA, states that coordinator duties shall be, “reduced to writing”.

Since this duty was not “reduced to writing prior to the acceptance of the designation”, and we are currently under the legal labour action of working-to-rule, I regret that I will not be attending this meeting. It is the local union’s hope that local management will understand, if not sympathise, with Local 244’s principled and legal labour action. These meetings can be held next week when our SWFs are active, under Article 11.01 F 1 during the stipulation of “two hours for normal administrative tasks”.

Be assured that your local union and OPSEU Central will defend our rights to take this labour action just as they would a full-fledged strike, which we hope will not become necessary as it is more harmful to students than our current work-to-rule partial labour interruption.

In solidarity,


2022/01/17 16:38 · 2vp

The CEC's Latest Bargaining Update

Greetings Colleagues,

You may have read the College Employer Council's (CEC) last Bargaining Update sent through Information Sheridan this afternoon. It implies that the mandatory Standard Workload Forms are not the full measure of our workload. They implicitly argue that there is no measurement to apply,

“As a reminder, the collective agreement requires teachers to perform such work as is necessary to deliver their assigned courses to students in accordance with the course outline to the best of their ability and the standard required by the College.”

That is a bad faith insinuation, which is easily contradicted by our Collective Agreement rights to challenge our assigned workload through the Workload Monitoring Group (WMG) and, if necessary, to a third-party Workload Arbitrator (WA). The right to challenge our workloads is based on the ability of the WMG and the WA to assess the full measure of our workloads according to the numbers, the mathematics, in Article 11.

And the CEC is undermining the Colleges by redundancy, suggesting that course outlines do not already reflect the standards required by the College. Course outlines are the Colleges' contracts with students, surely they should reflect College required standards.

In solidarity,


Bargaining Team's response

Greetings faculty:

You may have received a message from your College, “Your Right to Choose Regarding Work-to-Rule.”

We appreciate the College Employer Council's latest update, in which they remind faculty members that every college employee “has the legally protected right” to engage in work-to-rule or other labour action without fear of reprisal.

As the CEC correctly identified, faculty are in a legal strike position, and the protections of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act (CCBA) and Collective Agreement apply. Faculty should, therefore, not experience reprisal from the colleges for participating in the work-to-rule action.

From a union perspective, solidarity is the foundation of our strength, and participation as a union member in job action is required to demonstrate that strength. While the CCBA allows individual faculty the ability to cross a picket line by performing struck work, doing so undermines the very solidarity required for successful job action.

Today’s message from the CEC was clearly intended to stoke fear and division among faculty, and is likely attributable to the incredible strength and solidarity faculty are currently demonstrating during our first ever work-to-rule job action.

In one key respect, we agree: no college should reprise against faculty for exercising their rights, or participating in their union.

In solidarity,

JP, Jonathan, Katie, Michelle, Ravi, Rebecca, Shawn

2022/01/17 16:46 · 2vp

W2R Update #4: Town Hall Meeting, Jan 5, 2022 06:30 PM

Welcome Back Colleagues,

Back to virtual student contact, mostly, back to the pandemic’s new variant and governmental reactions. Welcome back to no contract and to work-to rule (W2R). We have become resilient; we have shouldered as much or more last year and the year before. Our united strength and determination, as I read and hear it in your correspondence to the union, and saw it in our last Sheridan vote, is heartening. We surprised the College Employer Council with our determination in 2017; we can do it again in 2022.

The details of W2R in the College System are crystallizing. Strategies are emerging as you’ll find in the Bargaining Team’s updates; the first of 2022 is below. There is a Town Hall about W2R strategies this Wednesday night, again details below.

Your questions to the union executive at Sheridan, asking about what is a defined duty and when W2R can be applied, shows much that we have in common but also the multi-faceted needs of our diverse programing. We must often judge for ourselves, what is work and what is extra-work. Keeping a log of hours and duties will help considerably, as will understanding your Standard Workload Form (SWF). This week, when we have no designated duties by SWF or Non-Teaching-Memo (NTM), is particularly perplexing. Here is the governing Collective Agreement Article:

11.08 In keeping with the professional responsibility of the teacher, non-teaching periods are used for activities initiated by the teacher and by the College as part of the parties' mutual commitment to professionalism, the quality of education and professional development.

Such activities will be undertaken by mutual consent and agreement will not be unreasonably withheld.

No SWF will be issued but such activities may be documented. Where mutually agreed activities can be appropriately performed outside the College, scheduling shall be at the discretion of the teacher, subject to the requirement to meet appropriate deadlines.

So that, if you do not have a direct written order for work outside of the above, you should notify your AD, that because of W2R you are not taking on any other assignment or work. You’ll find model language below. Please convey any repercussions that come your way directly to your local steward and your Local Union Executive. We have OPSEU’s legal opinion that W2R activities are legally like strike duties and those on W2R are guaranteed the same legal protection as those on strike.

In solidarity,


From the Bargaining Team

Greetings faculty:

As we enter into the Winter semester, as well as Phase 2 of our work-to-rule job action, we know that you have many questions. The Locals and Bargaining Team have received common questions in regard to start-up meetings, orientation, and coordinator work in particular.

We address some of these below, and will provide further details at our provincewide Zoom webinar on January 5th (see details below).

We have also created a series of videos about how to read and understand your SWF, so that full-time faculty can understand the limits of your assigned workload.

Specific information relevant to partial-load faculty can be found here, and your Local can also address questions and concerns, or forward them on to the bargaining team.

Many questions have arisen regarding pandemic health and safety in the return to face-to-face classes for labs/shops/co-op and field placements, particularly in the face of many colleges’ refusal to institute physical distancing measures, provide appropriate PPE, install HEPA filtration units, or provide paid sick time to contract faculty. We encourage you to ask questions of your college regarding their commitment to the health and safety of students and faculty as it relates to the current wave of the pandemic. Similarly, we remind all faculty that you have the right to refuse unsafe work. If you are unsure if your working conditions are safe, please contact your faculty representative on the Joint Occupational Health and Safety Committee (or your Local Union). You can also contact your local public health authority or the Ministry of Labour.

Work-to-Rule Provincewide Information Meeting

The CAAT-A Divisional Executive is organizing a Provincewide Town Hall, as we enter into Phase Two of Work-to-Rule at our Colleges. The Bargaining Team will be discussing work-to-rule and answering common questions we've received. In addition, attendees will also have the chance to submit questions.

When: Jan 5, 2022 06:30 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)

Topic: Faculty Town Hall

Register in advance for this webinar:

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

We are currently attempting to provide simultaneous translation at this meeting.

What does work to rule mean for January?

1. Should I attend meetings and orientation sessions during the week of January 3-7?

Do not participate in the following pre-semester activities: professional development, town halls, school/divisional/department meetings, recruitment, orientation, etc.

To be clear, between January 4-7 (a non-teaching/11.08 period), any work that is assigned by managers should not be undertaken. Article 11.08 does not give managers the right to assign work during non-teaching periods; these periods are instead reserved for mutually agreed-to activities. While the Collective Agreement says that agreement shall not be unreasonably withheld by either faculty or managers, we are currently in work-to-rule, and it is therefore reasonable for faculty to refuse the tasks that managers attempt to assign them during non-SWFed periods.

2. What activities should I avoid, starting on January 3?

  • No unassigned college meetings
  • No unassigned and agreed-to professional development
  • No unassigned extracurricular activities
  • No holiday gatherings
  • No town halls.

Do not engage in any tasks that are not explicitly recorded on your SWF or (if partial-load) your contract, including volunteer meetings or committee work, extracurriculars, informal assistance to managers, programs, special projects.

3. What if I’m a program or course coordinator?

The same applies to program and course coordinators. The colleges have chosen to impose terms and conditions, including that “Coordinator duties will be reduced in writing before an employee accepts a coordinator-ship. Such acceptance will remain voluntary.” Coordinator duties are included on your SWF, and take place during the period covered by your SWF. The colleges have not changed those terms and conditions, and have said that they will not be imposing further terms and conditions. For the time being, that means that coordinators are not to participate in the struck work listed above.

While you should have been provided a written list of assigned coordinator duties and a clear number of hours on your SWF for the performance of those duties, that would only apply during the SWF period. During the non-teaching period before or after the SWF, you are not obliged to perform those duties.

4. How can I respond to my supervisor this week?

You are invited to adapt either of the following messages, to suit your purposes:

“Unfortunately, I am not in the position to attend any meetings this week, as CAAT-A faculty are currently in Phase 2 of the work-to-rule campaign. Engaging in struck work at this point would be equivalent to crossing a picket line. I hope that this work-to-rule job action will demonstrate the value of faculty work, get the employer back to the table to negotiate the issues important to faculty, and make a full strike unnecessary.” or

“In accordance with the work to rule plan, I will not be attending college meetings or activities this week, nor any that are not specifically recorded on my SWF with appropriate time attributed. While It gives me no joy to refrain from campus activities, I believe in the collective bargaining process and the rights it has provided me and countless others. Until the bargaining team directs otherwise, this is my position.”

5. What should I tell my students about work-to-rule?

You are invited to adapt either of the following messages, to suit your purposes, depending:

“Thank you for your email.

At the moment, all college faculty (Librarians, Counsellors, Professors and Instructors) are engaging in labour action - 'Work to Rule'. Under our current contract, I am allocated 6 hours of administrative time during the week. This includes emails, meetings, and regular contact with students and external stakeholders. I am also attributed no more than 5.4 minutes to grade each student’s work and provide feedback, weekly. The workload formula which gives these numbers hasn't changed in almost forty years!

Any work/emails which take longer than the times that I have been attributed for those tasks each week will be deferred to the following calendar week. Please encourage the college president to direct the College Employer Council to return to the bargaining table to resolve these issues. If this is urgent, please contact [provide your chair’s name and e-mail].”


“In response to the College Employer Council's decision to unilaterally impose employment conditions after college faculty voted to support strike actions (, Ontario college faculty are now following work-to-rule guidelines established by the Faculty Bargaining Team.

Faculty have chosen to focus on our students' needs and not interrupt College courses with a strike at this time, while demanding that our employer negotiate a fair resolution to this labour dispute. Work-to-rule means that we will be working only the time outlined by our current contract and workload assignments, or our job descriptions. This means that we may not be available for additional, volunteer work that we may normally do, or work outside of regular work hours. Therefore, we may take more time than usual to respond to emails or other forms of communication and any additional work-related requests.

Currently we are in Phase 2 of the planned work-to-rule job actions. For more information on these actions including a work-to-rule FAQ, please visit:

We appreciate your patience and your support in our efforts to improve working conditions for Ontario college faculty and the learning conditions of Ontario college students.”

In solidarity,

Your CAATA Bargaining Team

2022/01/17 16:30 · 2vp

W2R Update #3

Bargaining 2021 Flyer 21 December 2021
Work to Rule Phase 2 Flyer December 2021

Greetings Colleagues,

Attached you will find an abbreviated poster and a more fulsome strategy plan for Phase II of our Bargaining Team’s advice on how to Work-to-Rule (W2R) in the college system.

The principles involved are not new to our previous mail outs. Some of you have written to ask for more details, and some of you have already ceased the extra-SWF hours normally volunteered. The teaching we do is delivered in so many different ways that the general principles must be applied to your individual circumstances. You know what extra time you put in; you know which work does not appear on your SWF. That is the work to withhold.

If you’re not sure about how to read your SWF, we will hold SWF workshops in the new year. Disseminating SWF awareness is the collateral value of this W2R exercise.

We need a fresh start; we need more time for our students, for comprehensive preparation and evaluation in this digital world. As well, we are seeking remuneration equity and job security for our part-time contract worker colleagues and equity and inclusion to racially marginalized members of our community.

Let me end the year by wishing you, on behalf of your Local Faculty Union Executive, a restful and refreshing holiday, and spiritually renewing holy days as is your practice.

We can all celebrate the closing of 2021 and a fresh start for 2022, Happy New Year.

In solidarity,


2022/01/17 16:33 · 2vp

Work-to-Rule Local Update #2

Greetings Colleagues,

The ideas on how to enact Work-to-Rule (W2R) are still evolving. I believe that it will be more difficult in colleges than in high schools where W2R is a regular work action. I expect the Bargaining Team (BT) will have more concrete strategies in Phase Two. To end the semester, perhaps it's enough to clock your overtime and perhaps change your signature as suggested in the BT's Phase One publication.

Full-Time Work-to-Rule Questions:

Is it possible to get some greater clarity around what we're supposed to be doing here?

We're all in new territory, and doing our best to interpret the BT's plans as they come out. It is new to them as well. As I wrote in my last email, given the enactment of W2R in the last week of the semester, the most valuable exercise is to log your hours per task. The Bargaining Team recommends using Toggl, an app for a phone or computer that can assist you in tracking your time. Finish off this semester as best you can and be ready to enforce W2R more rigorously next semester.

I have been asked to participate in departmental duties that are not directly related to teaching, are these duties beyond W2R limits?

Yes, if the work is not on your SWF, it is not your work. Refer it to your AD. W2R would have you turn all work beyond your allotted SWF time back to your AD, as it is their problem, not yours.

Is there a calculator provided by the union to translate evaluation and prep factors into real minutes?

It is right on your SWF. Each course has total hours of preparation, teaching and evaluation. There is a working SWF excel sheet on our webpage,, where you can input the prep and eval factors that better reflect your work, and see how they add up.


Preparation Hours Per Subject: Prep factor x Teaching Contact Hours = Time Per Week

Evaluation Feedback Hours Per Subject: Eval Factor x Class Size x Teaching Contact Hours = Time Per Week

Is there a way for the union to help us obtain the evaluation factor breakdown for each of the courses we teach (how the total was arrived at)?

Yes, one can do the math; the numbers and formulae are in Article 11 and how it applies to the evaluation assignments or tests on your course outline.

There are 3 categories of Evaluation types:

Essay/Project: .030

Routine/Assisted: .015

In-Process: .0092

However, frequently, Evaluation factors given will be a mix of types. For instance, in a mixed evaluation factor, say 50% routine or machine assisted marking + 50% essay/project would be: .015 + .030 divided by 2 = .0225. We will hold workshops on this in the new year. It would be illuminating if in your SWF meeting with your AD, you ask your them to explain how they arrived at a mixed evaluation factor.

The “click-to-email” campaign does not allow me to customize my message. I did not feel comfortable sending the boilerplate email to Janet as-is, but I would have sent it had I been able to personalize it slightly.

You can write to Janet without the boilerplate.

Contract, Precarious Work Professors:

I have heard from contract workers who feel that they have been left out in the cold. That is true, but it is not the union that is ignoring your plight, it is management. There are three contract worker categories, sessional – 13 or more teaching contact hours (TCH), part-time – 6 or fewer TCH, both of which are non-unionized groups. Partial-load – 7 to 12 TCH are unionized. All our contract workers have always had the most to lose; Work-to Rule substantiates this.

The precarity of all part-time professors has been a major issue in the last and the current rounds of bargaining. Article 26.10 and the Partial-Load Registry is the result of this advocacy. It’s just too bad that management has misinterpreted the article to mean seniority by contract (courses bundled to create a contract) while the union interprets it as seniority by course. We have a constitutional challenge out on this and it is part of our demands for contract faculty seniority protection in this round of bargaining.

And we have been trying to get part-time and sessional profs unionized so that we can try to have more influence on their working conditions. It is the Colleges who have blocked this move towards parity. We have had two votes on this, both of which have been challenged and discounted by management. In this round of bargaining, one of our key demands is to have the non-unionized contract workers’ courses count towards their overall seniority as outlined in Article 26.10. Right now, only their partial-load courses are counted.

In my opinion, I don’t think that anyone should withhold marks yet in this Phase 1 of W2R work action. Certainly not contract workers whose future employment could be at stake, when full-timers are in no comparable danger. Precarious workers should not do anything to jeopardize their livelihood. Count and track the hours that you are working to help us make the case that you are being abused by the colleges. And try to get the job done, maybe not as thoroughly as you would like, but within the time limits of your contract.


Change the signature line on your college and personal email to read:

“The College Employer Council and college management have chosen to impose terms and conditions of work on college faculty, rather than agreeing to extend existing terms while the faculty and employer bargaining teams negotiate a Collective Agreement. College faculty have begun a work-to-rule campaign, in protest. For more information, click here”

As I wrote in my last email, given the enactment of W2R in the last week of the semester, the most valuable exercise is to log your hours per task. One aspect of W2R is to have us turn all work beyond our allotted SWF or NTM time back to our AD, as their problem, not yours. But of course a dedicated teacher finds that hard to do; we can only ask that you try your best to keep solidarity with the work action.

Please have patience we're learning as we progress towards more effective W2R strategies.

In solidarity,


2022/01/17 16:37 · 2vp

Imposed Terms - Union Response

Greetings Colleagues,

Sheridan, unlike other colleges, has not yet sent us the College Employer Council’s initial terms of imposition. Here they are:

Today, the CEC initiated the introduction of the following terms and conditions of its proposal to improve working conditions for individual employees.

  • Maximum annual wage increase, retroactive to October 1st 2021, as currently allowed under Bill 124. Retroactive payments will be processed as soon as possible.
  • Medical cannabis coverage prescribed by a licensed physician to a maximum of $4000/year, subject to prior authorization by the insurer.
  • Permit Indigenous teachers to bring an elder or traditional knowledge keeper to the WMG as an advisor.
  • Permit Indigenous employees to bring an elder or traditional knowledge keeper to grievance meetings as an advisor.
  • Coordinator duties will be documented before an employee accepts a coordinatorship. Such acceptance will remain voluntary.
  • Update the counsellor class definition.
  • Partial Load employees will accrue service for statutory Holidays on which they were scheduled to teach.
  • Partial Load registration date change from October 30th to April 30th.
  • Extend Partial Load registration preference to courses which a partial load employee taught while part-time or sessional.
  • Partial Load priority will continue for a course even if the course code changes, unless there has been a major revision of the course or curriculum.

The insult is in the imposition itself. However we frame it, the terms actually do include some of our proposals, although not to the extent that we want. And we are definitely lacking any kind of workload improvements. As an offer, it definitely does nothing to improve our working conditions.

Also, “Update the counsellor class definition”, is worrisome, as the update could make it easier to contract out our counsellor positions.

The imposition is an insult, the terms don't offer the improvements we are seeking to our 1985 envisioned, pre-internet, parameters of our workload. But most of all it is an insult to our democratic establishment of demands and election of Bargaining Team representatives.

In solidarity,


From our Bargaining Team:


Faculty Members:

The College Presidents (and their bargaining agent, the College Employer Council) have unilaterally imposed terms and conditions of employment on all of us. The changes that they have imposed so far are based on faculty proposals bargained at the table. The CEC team has, instead, simply refused to discuss or refer our remaining issues to binding interest arbitration, effectively forcing faculty to work under their preferred terms.

The Employer may present these conditions as benign, and indeed many of them are points on which both teams had reached agreement at the bargaining table. However, these are only the initial terms and conditions of employment that have been imposed by the College Presidents and CEC. They can change these conditions at any time, with no notice, and can also impose different conditions at different colleges. These changes could impact any aspect of our working conditions, including salary, workload, vacation, professional development, and employee rights.

Imposition thwarts faculty’s ability to actually negotiate our working conditions, which requires our consent.

The following imposed conditions are far from positions that faculty had proposed at the bargaining table, and may hurt individual faculty members:

Update the counsellor class definition

The CEC has imposed their own language, which allows for the outsourcing of counsellor work. Individual faculty members – in this case, counsellors – stand very much to be negatively impacted by this imposition despite the CEC’s claims to the contrary.

Coordinator duties will be reduced in writing before an employee accepts a coordinator-ship. Such acceptance will remain voluntary

While both the Union and CEC have agreed to the documentation of coordinator duties, the Union also proposed that such duties be “reasonable”. Without that word, the employer has the ability to make the duties of the coordinator position unreasonable, which could result in no faculty member taking the position and the college assigning those duties outside of the bargaining unit. Additionally, if a coordinator accepts unreasonable coordinator duties because they wish to keep the position, they could be disciplined if they are unable to complete those duties. Yet again, individual faculty members can be negatively impacted by these terms and conditions, contrary to the CEC’s claims.

Medical cannabis coverage prescribed by a licensed physician to a maximum of $4000/year, subject to prior authorization by the insurer

While the Union and CEC have agreed, in principle, to this, the Union was still attempting to gain additional information from the CEC as to whether dental implants or other benefit improvements were a possibility. We expect medical cannabis coverage will only be available to a small number of members, given the restrictions imposed on this benefit by Sun Life.

To enable faculty to respond effectively to management’s imposed terms and conditions, the faculty bargaining team has informed the Employer that work action will commence on December 18th. We envision a process of escalating work action, commencing with a phased-in series of work-to-rule actions.


This strategy has proven effective in other educational contexts in Ontario. It was ONLY made possible by the fact that faculty voted to authorize work action (up to and including a strike) last week.

In solidarity, JP, Jonathan, Katie, Michelle, Ravi, Rebecca and Shawn

2022/01/17 16:52 · 2vp
2022/jobaction.txt · Last modified: 2022/02/15 21:14 by 2vp