I quote here from the end of the selectors report -- in particular, from pages 12 and 13 of that report. I think it captures the salient features of the report (ed.). If you would like more information on the full report, contact the MUFA office. To appreciate what follows, it is perhaps worth pointing out that the Administration's final position was that there should be no CP/M and no ATB during the transition period (April, May, and June of 1996). The MUFA position was, essentially, that CP/M normally due on July 1, 1995 should be paid for the last 3 months of the 1995-96 academic year (see our brief for details).
".....in the present circumstances, we think that inertia is indeed a virtue. It will buy for the parties additional time to digest the news of further government funding restrictions, which were not available until after the briefs were exchanged in thi s procedure. Moreover, it will permit them to address the shared principle of recognizing merit and encouraging excellence in the context of negotiations with a much wider scope than the negotiations which preceded the current selection process.
The Faculty Association expressed the concern that the merit assessments for 1994 would be "lost" if its position was not selected. This is a real concern, but it is entirely possible for the parties to recognize merit over a longer period than one year , and we sense that the Administration shares this concern.
While there is an element of procrastination in the Administration's position, therefore, there is also the promise of enhanced opportunities to deal with faculty salaries in the context of future funding prospects in a comprehensive way, having regard t o issues of total compensation, and giving due recognitions to the 1994 merit assessments.
In the result, we have decided to select the Administration's final offer. We wish to extend our thanks to the representatives of the parties......"
Dated at Toronto, Jan. 5, 1996
Signed by the 3 selectors (Kennedy, McKechnie and Swan).