Approximately 154 employees opted in to Carleton University’s voluntary retirement program and will receive incentives introduced by the university to address its financial deficit, sparking concerns from unions and faculty about the program’s impact on existing university staff.
Nearly 29 per cent of employees who were eligible for the Voluntary Retirement Incentive Program (VRIP) applied to participate, accounting for a “significantly higher” uptake rate than the university’s 15 per cent projections, according to university provost Pauline Rankin.
The program offers a financial incentive for retirement to faculty and professional staff who are at least 55 years old and have a combined age and years of service totaling 75 years or more.
In exchange for their voluntary retirement, participants receive a lump-sum payment equal to one month’s salary for each completed year of work. Employees can receive a maximum of 12 months salary through the program.
Of the total participants in the program, 27 per cent were faculty members and 73 per cent were professional staff, according to Rankin. The numbers were “spread across all five faculties,” she said at a Feb. 28 senate meeting.
Despite repeated requests from the Charlatan, the university refused to provide the number of VRIP retirements per faculty.
Rankin said it is too soon to analyze the financial impacts of this program, and more information will be available once the operational budget for the next fiscal year is presented to senate on April 25.
The university is projecting a $38-million deficit for this fiscal year if it does not address its financial challenges, according to presentation materials shared at a Dec. 4 Board of Governors meeting.
At the Dec. 4 meeting, Rankin said determining the university’s next steps to addressing its financial deficit depended on the program’s outcome.
“We’ll be in a better place to decide what measures are next when those numbers come in,” Rankin said on Dec. 4.
‘There is no plan’
The high number of employees participating in the retirement incentive has sparked concerns among faculty and unions about increased workloads, larger class sizes and a lack of transparency from the university regarding future hiring.
Dominique Marshall, president of the Carleton University Academic Staff Association (CUASA), said her union was not consulted before the program was implemented.
“We were told that this is not a matter that has to do with CUASA,” Marshall told the Charlatan. “We don’t agree with this. We said it, but this was done away from us … It should be bargained.”
Jerrett Clark, the president of CUPE 2424, which represents administrative, technical and library staff, also said his union was not consulted.
“The university might say they consulted with us. I would say that we were simply informed of something the university had already decided they were going to do and the terms under which they were going to do it,” he said.
The university declined to comment when asked by the Charlatan if CUPE2424 and CUASA were consulted about the program.
Marshall also raised concerns about the university’s lack of a plan to fill vacant positions and address the long-term impacts of the vacancies on course offerings and quality of education.
“The worry for those who leave and for those who stay is, ‘What’s going to happen to my program? What’s going to happen to my unit? What’s going to happen to my discipline?’ And that we don’t know,” she said. “They say, ‘Oh, we’ll see later,’ but there is no plan.”
At the Feb. 28 senate meeting, Rankin said any changes to course offerings or teaching assistant support is the responsibility of faculty deans. She also said it is too soon to provide information about plans to fill vacant positions, and that more details will be shared during the operational budget presentation.
According to the university’s website, it is “not committed to filling all vacated roles.”
In a March 13 email statement to the Charlatan, university media relations officer Steven Reid said the university is taking steps to minimize disruptions and assure students their studies will continue as planned.
“Leadership teams are working to prepare for the operational impacts in affected areas of the university,” Reid wrote.
Clark voiced similar concerns about increased workloads and the university’s lack of transparency on plans for open positions.
“As a union representing those individuals [who accepted the retirement package], we’re happy that there’s a benefit to them,” Clark said. “On the flip side, we are deeply concerned about the impact of the departures and what the university plans to do with those open positions.”
Clark said the union has repeatedly requested information about the total number of CUPE 2424 members who opted into the program, but has not received a clear answer.
At the Feb. 28 senate meeting, Alexis Shotwell, a senator and professor in the department of sociology and anthropology, said three out of five administrative staff members accepted the retirement offer, instilling fear in her department.
“People are freaking out,” Shotwell said. “We have been entirely reliant on our administrative staff. I just really can’t overstate also how terrified everyone is about the length of time it’s taking to start thinking about replacements.”
Faculty and staff members are also raising concerns about how the retirements will impact students and class sizes.
“Fewer teachers also mean bigger classes,” Marshall said. “It’s not good for [students]. It’s really not good. And it’s not good for us.”
Rankin said “protecting student programs” is a priority for the deans.
University president Wisdom Tettey added that protecting programs does not mean maintaining the status quo.
“The integrity of the program is not going to be compromised, but the faculties have the opportunity to rethink how programs are organized,” he said.
Marshall acknowledged the university’s financial deficit, but said CUASA’s concern remains that measures to address the deficit shouldn’t compromise students’ experiences.
“It doesn’t mean that we are not aware of the financial situation, it is that we think that resolving budgetary problems by diminishing the quality of education is not a good idea.”
Graphic by Sara Mizannojehdehi
