MUNFA Proposals Committee Report

 “WHAT WE HEARD” SUMMARY REPORT 

Report prepared by MUNFA Proposals Committee 

Submitted to MUNFA Executive 

February 2026 

Introduction 

In the Spring, Fall and Winter semesters of 2025-26, the MUNFA Proposals Committee met with ASMs across the St. John’s, Grenfell, Marine Institute and Labrador campuses to talk about workplace issues and priorities for the next round of collective bargaining. The current MUN-MUNFA Collective Agreement (CA) expires in August 2026 and remains in effect until a new CA is negotiated or until there is a strike or lockout. We expect to start bargaining in Fall 2026. In this report, we describe the work carried out by the Proposals Committee to date and provide a short summary of what we have heard from ASMs, including feedback about increasing workload, inadequate supports, and concerns about job security. 

Background 

The MUNFA Proposals Committee is tasked with drafting contract language for use by the Negotiating Committee in bargaining. In preparation for drafting contract language, the Proposals Committee collects feedback from ASMs and MUNFA Committees about changes members would like to see in their workplace and working conditions, and works with the MUNFA Executive to identify a focused set of priorities for bargaining. 

What we did 

The Proposals Committee held meetings with ASMs in Faculties, Schools and other constituencies as identified in the MUN-MUNFA CA. The purpose of those meetings was to gather feedback from ASMs about workplace issues important to them, priorities and values for the next round of bargaining, any problems ASMs have encountered with language in the current CA, and any suggestions for edits or additions to the language in the current CA. Members of the Proposals Committee also knocked on ASM office doors on the St. John’s and Grenfell campuses and left cards inviting feedback when no one was available. Over 140 members attended the meetings (in-person or online) and we spoke to many other members at their office door. The schedule of meetings is in Appendix 2. 

What we heard 

Below we provide a short summary of the main concerns raised in the meetings and doorway conversations with ASMs, as well as feedback received by email in response to our cards. 

•  Increasing Workloads: ASMs across disciplines and units talked about increasing workloads. Reductions in tenured and permanent ASM complement have resulted in increased pressures to do more administrative service, and such pressures are exacerbated when there are no replacements for ASMs on leave. Larger program cohorts and class sizes contribute to increasing workloads. ASMs who take on additional administrative and teaching work often do so with little or no additional remuneration or recognition.
• Inadequate Support Services: Inadequate administrative, teaching, research and IT support services are impacting ASMs’ ability to do their work. ASMs talked about long delays in accessing research funds, processing travel claims, preparing lab space and resolving IT/computer issues and reductions in teaching assistant hours. ASMs also voiced concerns about how the University’s adoption of generative AI tools may impact intellectual propertyand copyright, as well as ASM work.
• Job Security for Term Appointments: ASMs recognized that term appointees have played acrucial role in running academic programs and talked about the need to improve theirworking conditions (e.g., reducing the maximum number of assigned courses) and jobsecurity (e.g., longer contracts, permanent stream, pathways to conversion to the tenurestream).
• The Erosion of Collegial Governance: ASMs raised concerns about reduced opportunities toparticipate in informed decision-making and overseeing of academic matters in ameaningful way. Extended interim appointments, limited communication and in some casesunilateral decision-making by administrators undermine collegial processes.
• Undermining the Comprehensiveness of the University: ASMs raised concerns about howthe current budget model and decision-making about programs threaten to undermine theUniversity’s obligations to comprehensiveness of teaching and research, as set out in theMemorial University Act.
• Salary and Remuneration: ASMs talked about wanting fair salary structures that keep pacewith comparable universities and fair remuneration for administrative duties (e.g., programchairs, deputy heads, division heads).
• Infrastructure: ASMs raised concerns about working in poorly maintained and unsafebuildings. In some cases, ASMs are being tasked with responsibility for overseeing buildingmaintenance, while others reported limits on building and office access.
• Unmet Commitments: ASMs reported a sense of mistrust towards leadership due to unmetcommitments (e.g., the University’s failure to meet CA obligations to provide childcare forGrenfell ASMs, the University’s decision to deny the joint Collegial Governance Committee’srequest for an extension to complete its work).

Next Steps 

If you were not available to attend the meeting with the Proposals Committee in your unit, there is still time to provide feedback. In particular, we invite feedback about workplace issues important to you and your colleagues, priorities and values for the next round of bargaining, any problems you have encountered with language in the current CA, and any suggestions for edits or additions to the language in the current CA. 

Please email your feedback to Dale Humphries, Labour Relations Coordinator at labourmunfa@mun.ca 

Appendix 1: List of Proposal Committee members G. Todd Andrews (Physics) 

Dan Duda (QEII Library) 

John Hawboldt (Pharmacy) 

James LeBlanc (Physics) 

Jillene Marlowe (SASS, Grenfell Campus) 

Derek Messacar (Economics) 

Nicole Myers (Co-operative Education, Engineering) 

Camille Ouellet Dallaire (SSE, Grenfell Campus) 

Nicole Power (Sociology), Chair 

Janna Rosales (Engineering) 

Amy Wadden (MUNFA Labour Relations Officer, non-voting member) 

Carolyne Walsh (Psychology) 

Kim Welford (Earth Sciences) 

Yolanda Wiersma (Biology) 

Russell Williams (Political Science), Executive Representative