Twitter icon
Facebook icon
RSS icon
YouTube icon


Know Your Rights

Issues Concerning Unit 17 - Librarians

Issues Concerning Unit 18 - Lecturers

Unit 17 - Librarians

Know Your Rights‐  Librarian Workload and Statement of Responsibilities

In spring of 2008, UC‐AFT and UC agreed to new language in Article 6 of Unit 17 MOU that for the first time gives librarians a contractual mechanism for controlling their own workload. Article 6.A. states that a librarian’s workload cannot be unreasonable, or excessive. Article 6.B.3 requires that any newly assigned work, temporary or permanent, be reduced to writing, added to the statement of responsibilities, and reviewed with the librarian. Article 6.B.4. provides an appeal process for librarians who feel that their workload is unreasonable or excessive. If you have questions or concerns about workload, please contact your Local’s field representative. Follow the link below to view Article 6 of the Unit 17 MOU:


Unit 18 - Lecturers

Know Your Rights‐ Unemployment Insurance for Non‐Senate Faculty

Non‐Senate Faculty are eligible to collect unemployment during breaks between quarters or semesters, and summer break, unless they have “reasonable assurance” of a job when classes resume.  Any written promise of employment that is subject to cancellation due to low enrollment or for any other reasons is not “reasonable assurance.”  A long court battle resulted in the precedent setting Cervisi decision in 1989, which held that an assignment that is contingent on enrollment, funding, or other program changes is not a reasonable assurance of       employment, and therefore benefits cannot be denied for that reason. For detailed information on your rights to U.I., and the application process, including a sample appeal letter, check out the links below from two of our sister organizations for faculty in the CSU and community colleges.

Know Your Rights- Pre-Six Lecturer Request for Re-appointment, Article 7a.C.4.a.1.

This article applies only to lecturers teaching during their first six years in a given department. The article stipulates that an assessment of a lecturer’s performance is required prior to a reappointment decision for any NSF who has requested consideration for reappointment.  NSF interested in reappointment for next academic year should be sure to request reappointment in writing with the current department chair, or other appropriate department administrator in the coming weeks.  A review of your performance will help protect you against arbitrary       appointment decisions, and establish a record of your performance to be used in your review for continuing appointment during the sixth year.  Here’s a link to Article 7a of the Unit 18 MOU:


Know Your Rights‐ Priority and Process Concerning NSF and TA Appointments

Since 2003, the Unit 18 MOU has protected NSF appointments from replacement by graduate students by restricting the hiring of TAs from other departments and unrelated disciplines.  A recent grievance settlement from UCI clarifies the extent of the consultative process, and the timing required for an appointment that would displace a NSF.  According to Article 7a.C.2.c, any time a department proposes to replace a NSF with a TA, it must first go through a regular       consultative process that includes more than one administrator, and be able to provide documentation of the process.  According to Article 7b.B.2.b, in order to appoint a TA in the place of a NSF at the time of review for a continuing appointment, the TA must be from within the department, or related discipline, or be appointed according to an academic plan for pedagogical training.  Such an appointment has to be designated during the academic year prior to the year in which the work is to be performed.  See links to Articles 7a and 7b below:


Know Your Rights- Personnel Files, Article 10

It is important to understand that the personnel file is more than just a folder containing employment history and payroll documents. The file is a source of protection for NSF against the use of arbitrary warnings and corrective memos, and accusations of unprofessional conduct or incompetence. In more than a few grievances involving non‐renewals, abuse of the personnel file has been a key factor in winning our case. In these cases, more often than not, the department accuses the NSF of unprofessional conduct, or some other unseemly activity that would warrant their non‐renewal. Without proper documentation in the personnel file, the information, or accusation cannot be used in a review for reappointment. Here are a few things to know about personnel files:         

  • With reasonable notice to your department you can examine the contents of your file.  You are also entitled to one free copy of your entire file.
  • There may be confidential and non‐confidential documents in your file. Appendix F of the Unit MOU outlines the difference. 
  • A separate file is created for reappointment review cases.  This file cannot contain information that is not contained in your personnel file.
  • You must be given a copy of any disciplinary material that is placed in your file. You have a right to respond to any item placed in your file, and to have your response placed in your file.   
  • Disciplinary material in your file that is older than two years can be removed if there has been no further disciplinary action concerning the same or similar conduct. Please take a few minutes to read Article 10. If you have questions, contact your local’s field representative or grievance steward.


Know Your Rights- Layoff, Reduction in Time, and Reemployment

With the exception of length of notice, all rights granted under the MOU are the same for reduction in time and full layoff.  The University has an obligation to consider alternatives to layoff including attrition, retirement, and voluntary reductions in time.  Seniority rights must also be considered prior to a layoff decision.