The UWOFA Board of Directors has unanimously voted in favor of filing for conciliation and holding a strike vote.

We have reached a point in bargaining where the remaining issues are some of the most important to Members, and the Employer is not moving far enough.

Western’s current salary proposal does not restore the purchasing power we have lost. Its response to our benefits proposals was a rejection of the package in its entirety. It has reduced the number of Limited Duties conversions and rejected proposals to improve job security for long-serving contract faculty. On workload the Employer continues to pursue a proposal that would allow Deans to impose an Alternative Workload on Members they consider to be less active in research or scholarship activities than the norm. 

We need to increase the pressure at the bargaining table.

Why are we filing for Conciliation?

Conciliation is the next step in the bargaining process when significant differences remain between the parties. A Conciliation Officer is a third party appointed by the Ontario Ministry of Labour who works with both sides to help resolve outstanding issues and reach an agreement. They do not impose a settlement or decide what our collective agreement will be.

A Conciliation Officer can help move negotiations forward and bring the parties closer to an agreement.

What does a strike vote mean?

A strike vote asks Members to decide whether to give UWOFA a mandate to take strike action if it becomes necessary. 

A strike vote is not a vote to go on strike immediately.  It does not end bargaining, and it does not mean Members will immediately stop working. Instead, it gives UWOFA a mandate to take that step later, if necessary, while strengthening our position at the bargaining table now. 

A strong mandate demonstrates to the Employer that Members are prepared to stand behind our bargaining priorities. It gives us greater leverage to negotiate the agreement we need. 

Get informed. Get connected. Vote.

The next week matters.  When you return to campus, connect with your Stewards and get answers to your questions about bargaining and the strike vote. Talk with your colleagues about what is at stake and make sure you are ready to participate.

Information about the strike vote, including voting dates and locations will be shared later this week. 

Every Member has a voice in this vote. We need you to use it. 

We returned to the bargaining table with the Employer on August 24th and 25th following the summer pause in negotiations. 

When we last updated Members, we reported that the parties had exchanged proposals addressing the major elements of a new collective agreement. We were hopeful that bargaining could make meaningful progress when we returned to the table. 

There is still work to do. The Employer has made clear where it is prepared to move, and where it is not. At the heart of these negotiations is a simple question:

What does it mean for Western to be truly All In?

Being a world class university isn’t just about rankings, buildings, or ambitious strategic plans. It is about the people who teach students, conduct research, create new knowledge, provide academic leadership and contribute to communities here and around the world. 

Benefits: Is “good enough” good enough?

We put forward a broad package of improvements to the benefits plan, looking at the plan as a whole rather than focusing on one benefit at a time.  

The Employer’s response was to reject all of the proposals, pointing to improvements made in the last round including mental health and vision care.

The fact that improvements were made in the last round does not mean there are no gaps today. Members’ needs change. Costs change. And benefits need to change with them. 

We identified areas where Members could be better supported,  such as increased coverage for physiotherapy, more funds to allocate to PER and HCSA, and access to the benefits plan for Members who hold a standing appointment. 

These are just some examples of the improvements we proposed, and  the Employer rejected the package as a whole.

The Employer says there is limited room to make further improvements from an affordability and sustainability perspective. But benefits are something Members rely on when they need care, to support their families, and manage professional expenses and other costs.

We believe there is room to move, and we expect the Employer to show movement on benefits. 

Salary: 2.5%, 2.5%, 2%, 2% – Is that enough?

The Employer’s current salary proposal is: 

Year One: 2.5%

Year Two: 2.5%

Year Three: 2%

Year Four: 2% plus $700 to base salary

The Employer says this proposal is sustainable and has pointed to faculty compensation, including across the board increases and merit pay, to argue that faculty have kept pace with, and in some cases outpaced inflation.

We do not agree with that assessment.

London is not the low cost city it once was. Housing, food, childcare, and other costs have risen significantly and Members are dealing with those costs every day.

At the same time, Western benefits from a scale that individual Members simply do not have. Western operates a large institution with  thousands of employees and tens of thousands of students. It has the ability to spread costs across the university and generate revenue at a scale that individual households cannot.

Members contribute to the economy in return. We live here. We buy homes and goods here. We pay taxes here. We support local business and contribute to the economic and cultural life of London and the region.

Western benefits from the work we do, and Western’s reputation depends on that work. If Western wants to compete as a world-class university, it needs to offer compensation that helps attract and retain the people who make that possible.

We believe there is room to do better. And we expect the Employer to make a more meaningful offer. 

Workload: How many times do we have to say no?

The Employer has once again tabled a proposal that would allow a Dean to impose an  alternative workload for Members the Dean considers to be significantly less active than their unit’s norms for Research or Scholarship Activities.

This is not a new proposal. We have rejected it in the previous two rounds of bargaining and our position remains unchanged. 

The collective agreement already provides a process for addressing situations where the Dean considers that a Member is not meeting  their academic responsibilities. We do not believe that process needs to be replaced with a new mechanism that would give Deans unilateral authority to impose an alternative workload. 

The collective agreement already provides an appropriate means of addressing these kinds of concerns, and we expect the Employer to withdraw this proposal. 

Now we need Members to be ready.

Bargaining continues this week, and we will keep you informed as negotiations progress. Meaningful movement will require more than what happens at the bargaining table.

Watch for opportunities to take actions, show your support for the bargaining team, and stand with your colleagues. 

UWOFA and the Employer met for bargaining on July 9, 10, 13 and 14. These were our last days before pausing negotiations for a few weeks over the summer. During these sessions, both parties tabled compensation proposals, completing the initial exchange of almost all proposals that will shape the remainder of this round of bargaining.

UWOFA’s compensation proposal reflects the priorities for which you, our Members, have mandated us to bargain. It is designed to address not only the pay gap between Western and comparator universities but also, more importantly, the erosion of Members’ purchasing power. Over the life of the recent collective agreement, salary increases have not kept pace with inflation, leaving Members worse off in real terms as the cost of living has risen sharply.

Our proposal recognizes that a renewed collective agreement must do more than simply close the gap with comparators and keep up with the rate of inflation forecast for the next few years. It must also contribute to restoring the purchasing power Members have lost in recent years, while recognizing the value of their teaching, research,  scholarship, and service. For Part-Time Members, UWOFA’s proposal includes not only a raise to the minimum rate of pay per course, but also a substantial increase in pay in lieu of benefits.  For Full-Time Members, in addition to base salary increases, UWOFA’s proposal includes improvements to the breakpoints and salary point values in the merit-pay component of the compensation structure, a larger allocation to the career trajectory fund to address salary anomalies,  and elimination of the sabbatical leave pay cut. For all Members who are in the Academic Pension Plan, it includes a significant increase in the percentage of pay the Employer contributes. 

The initial proposal presented by the Employer does not sufficiently address the problem of Members’ lost buying power. As we demonstrate in the Every Budget is a Choice report, Western’s solid financial situation allows it to do better in funding the academic mission,  and UWOFA’s proposals reflect the view that investing in faculty is an investment in the teaching, research, scholarship, and service that are at the core of that mission. 

Beyond compensation, considerable work remains to be done on other issues at the table when bargaining resumes. This includes clarifying the definition of the scholarship activities performed by Teaching Scholar Track Members, meaningful improvements to the workload article, job security for contract faculty, guardrails around the use of artificial intelligence, advancing equity, diversity, inclusion, decolonization, and accessibility, and ensuring that instructional labour performed at the Western International College, an entity established by the Employer through a partnership with the private firm Navitas, is properly governed by the collective agreement.

Several matters have been clarified in discussions at the table, and we have been able to sign off on some revisions to articles pertaining mostly to administrative aspects of the collective agreement. While bargaining is progressing more or less as expected and all but a few proposals have been exchanged, there remains considerable work ahead to reach an agreement that addresses the priorities that you, our Members, have mandated us to negotiate. Your negotiating team has communicated clearly to the Employer what we need for an agreement and we are hoping for movement in that direction on the major issues when the teams return to the table later in the summer. 

Negotiations will resume on August 24 And we will keep you informed as bargaining progresses.

UWOFA and the employer met for bargaining on July 6, 7, and 8.  There has been some progress, though this has been limited to issues pertaining primarily to administration of the Collective Agreement. The parties reached agreement and signed off on the following articles:

• Association Rights
• Joint Committee
• Grievance and Arbitration
• Academic Fraud and Misconduct
• Entry and Return of Academic Administrators to the Bargaining Unit

We anticipate a busy next few days as we move into the final days of bargaining before a summer pause. There was productive discussion on the Academic Responsibilities of Members, including how activities are defined across Tenure Track and Teaching Scholar Track appointments. Back and forth between the parties has been cooperative on this matter, and we are encouraged by the direction of these conversations. 

UWOFA also presented its Benefits proposals, addressing improvements Members have told us are overdue. Highlights include:

• Benefits for Part-Time Members: automatic enrolment for Members with Standing Appointment to the same benefits plan as Full-Time Members. Increase in pay in lieu of benefits for all Part-Time Members. 
• Members Working Past Age 71:  improved access to benefits. 
• PER/Flex Credits: increased minimum amount of flexible benefit credits available to Members.
• Paramedical Services: increased coverage for physiotherapy, massage therapy, chiropractic care, acupuncture, osteopathy, and speech pathology, and counting of these costs toward the out-of-pocket maximum.
• Vision Care: increased reimbursement amount for prescription glasses and contact lenses.
• Dental Care: more frequent recall exams and the inclusion of Major Services toward the out-of-pocket maximum.
• Mental Health Coverage: out-of-province coverage (for example, for dependents attending university in another province).
• Long Term Disability: increased monthly benefit maximums.
• Critical Illness: increased lump sum amount, and expanded list of covered critical illnesses. 
• Faculty Start-Up Grant: increased research start-up funding for new Members on Probationary and eligible Limited-Term Appointments.

UWOFA is awaiting responses from the employer on key proposals, including contract faculty job security, putting guardrails around AI, and placing teaching work at the proposed Western International College under the terms of the collective agreement. We are presenting our initial compensation in the next few days and we look forward to receiving the employer’s.

When UWOFA negotiated the 2018-2022 Collective Agreement, we succeeded in convincing the employer to agree to something new: the Teaching Scholar appointment. At that time, Western had a de facto faculty teaching stream in the form of limited-term appointments, but without the job security that went along with the teaching-focused appointments that existed at other universities. With this new appointment category, Western faculty whose primary academic responsibility is teaching now have access to a dedicated career path, one with real standing, eligibility for promotion, and the security of continuing status.The creation of the Teaching Scholar appointment not only enhanced job security of teaching-focussed faculty, but it has also led to the emergence of a community of scholars who make outstanding contributions to the university’s teaching mission.

Teaching scholars hold the rank of Assistant, Associate, or Professor, just like their colleagues in the Tenure Track stream. What sets them apart is the shape of their work: 60% teaching, 20% service, 20% scholarly activities. 

As any faculty member knows, teaching is rigorous, complex, and demanding academic work. It is the heart of the teaching scholar role. What might be less well known is the academic work Teaching Scholars do in addition to their teaching. Scholarship activities that usually constitute a fifth of a Teaching Scholar’s workload include educational leadership, mentorship of colleagues, as well as curriculum development and innovation. They can also include work in the scholarship of teaching and learning: investigating, innovating, and sharing knowledge about how students learn and how education is delivered. In addition to these latter research components of scholarship activities, some Teaching Scholars maintain a program of research in their discipline, and it is important that this work be recognized as part of their academic responsibilities. 

The contributions of Teaching Scholars show up in tangible ways, including new models of effective teaching, advances in how a discipline or profession delivers education, and active participation in the scholarly conversation around teaching through publications and professional engagement.

“The Teaching Scholar role has been incredibly liberating for my career because it embraces a broader view of scholarship. Rather than focusing solely on traditional research, it encourages us to ask meaningful questions about teaching and learning and pursue them through various avenues such as research, innovation, collaboration, and educational leadership. It has also reinforced that creating knowledge is only part of the work. For me, one of the most rewarding aspects of the role has been finding creative ways to ensure my work has a broader impact on the teaching and learning community.”

-Nicole Campbell, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry

What We’re Bargaining for in 2026

The Teaching Scholar appointment was new in 2018. Eight years later, we know more about how it actually works in practice, and it has become clear to us that the language hasn’t kept pace. The reality is that many Teaching Scholars don’t choose between teaching-focused scholarship and disciplinary research; they do both, and often aren’t recognized for that work. 

In our current negotiations, we are advocating to update collective agreement language to define scholarship activities in a clear and consistent way, while ensuring administrators recognize disciplinary research as part of the academic work of Teaching Scholars who choose to pursue it, in addition to their scholarship activities. This change would better reflect the reality of the role and ensure Teaching Scholars receive full recognition and support for the full breadth of their academic responsibilities.

UWOFA and the Employer met June 23 and 25 for two partial days of bargaining.  Over the course of these sessions, we finished presenting the vast majority of our initial proposals. What remains to be tabled are primarily monetary proposals, which we anticipate presenting in the upcoming full week of bargaining. 

During these two sessions the Employer opened and proposed changes to articles and responded to some of UWOFA’s initial proposals including: 

• Academic Responsibilities of Members
• Appointments
• Alternative Workload
• Reduced Workload
• Workload

UWOFA opened and proposed changes to many articles and responded to some of the Employer’s initial proposals including: 

• Association Rights
• Promotion, Tenure and Continuing Status
• Retirement and Resignation
• Academic Responsibilities of Members
• Academic Fraud and Misconduct
• Sabbatical Leave
• Appointments
• LOU: Limited Duties Conversions
• LOU: Provisions for Internal Recruitment to Teaching Scholar and Tenure Track Appointments
• Workload
• Discrimination and Harassment
• Joint Committee
• Grievance and Arbitration

These sessions focused heavily on issues affecting contract faculty, including job security and pathways to more stable appointments.  There was broad acceptance of language recognizing scholarship activity for teaching scholar track Members, aligning with proposals advanced across several articles. 

A full week of bargaining is scheduled for July 6th. We anticipate  responding to a number of Employer proposals and tabling our compensation and benefits proposals during this period.

“We have all felt the workload creep; in all aspects of teaching, research, and service as well as inequities across campus. Whether it is less teaching support, more students in classes, more tasks that are not faculty related, more academic dishonesty cases due to inappropriate use of AI or other matters, teaching workload is increasing.  That leaves less time for research where administrative tasks have also increased. And with the decreasing number of full-time, tenure-track faculty, service loads have also increased as the number of committees that must be filled increases and the training required for these committees does as well.  We are looking to have this acknowledged and to find solutions for this workload creep.”

– Tania Granadillo, Department of Anthropology, UWOFA Collective Bargaining Committee

Tania is describing something Members across campus will recognize. Workload at Western is not a simple problem with a simple fix. It is shaped by decentralized processes, unclear definitions, institutional decisions made without faculty input, and years of non-faculty tasks quietly accumulating on Members’ plates.

Our approach to workload in this round builds on work begun in 2022: increasing accountability in the workload document review process carried out by unit workload committees, to enable meaningful member engagement in the equitable distribution of work and the allocation of resources needed to keep each faculty member’s workload manageable. We have identified five key problems and proposed concrete solutions to each. 

Problem 1: Inconsistency across campus

Bargaining faculty workload at Western presents an inherent challenge. The process is decentralized by nature, and that has led to considerable differences in how workload is defined and managed across campus. Some of those differences are necessary and reflect the genuine diversity of disciplines and units. Others perhaps are not, and without visibility into how workload is handled across units, it is difficult for Members to know which is which. 

What we’re proposing: Make all unit workload documents available to all Members, so that variation is visible. Prescribe how workload documents must account for student supervision and how they specify teaching release for unit-level service roles, bringing consistency to areas where differences are hardest to justify. 

Problem 2: Confusion around normal workload definitions

The language currently defining normal workload is unclear and appears to have contributed to inequities, particularly for teaching scholar track Members whose workload balance has apparently not always been consistently or fairly applied.

What we’re proposing: Define in clear quantitative terms the normal workload balance for tenure track appointments and for teaching scholar appointments, with any deviation from those norms formalized in an alternative workload arrangement.

Problem 3: Non faculty tasks downloaded onto Members

“Every day I keep thinking that if I just work all evening or all weekend I will be able to catch up and then things will be more manageable. Sometimes I manage to get the tasks under control for a short time, but then 5 new things rapidly come in and the process starts again. Some things are small, some large, but they add up to fill all the time, leaving insufficient time to take care of myself or my family. This continues almost 365 days per year and seems to get gradually worse each year. Between teaching, research, and service, it’s pretty much not possible to even take a vacation, because if we do that, things will be unmanageable when we return.”

– Beth Gillies, Department of Chemistry and Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, UWOFA Collective Bargaining Committee

This is a pattern many members will recognize. Work that was never faculty work finding its way into faculty workloads and staying there. Over time, this accumulation makes it genuinely impossible to keep workload within reasonable limits.

What we’re proposing: Specify what duties should not be assigned to faculty members, and what duties should only be assigned when they are associated with a service role that is appropriately recognized in the Members workload. Require workload documents to account for the support personnel necessary to faculty members’ work, so that gaps can be identified and units can advocate for the resources needed to keep workload manageable.

Problem 4: Policy changes adopted without workload consideration

Academic policy changes that affect faculty workload are sometimes adopted without adequate consideration of what they mean in practice for Members. The student reported absences policy adopted by Senate is one example of a change that added to faculty workload without a corresponding adjustment of how that work is recognized or resourced. 

What we’re proposing: Following the recommendation of the joint workload study group established through the 2018 and 2022 collective agreements, require a review process through joint committee that makes recommendations that the employer is responsible for implementing. 

Problem 5: Enrollment growth without workload accountability 

Institutional efforts to increase student numbers have direct implications for faculty workload. More students means more teaching, more supervision, more advising, and more administration. When those implications are not factored into workload planning, the gap is absorbed by Members. 

What we’re proposing: Following the recommendation of the joint workload study group, require the employer to work with joint committee to address the faculty workload implications of efforts to increase student numbers, and to implement recommendations formulated by that committee. 

The Goal

Our overall goal is to continue the work begun in 2022: building a workload process that is accountable, transparent, and capable of delivering outcomes for members across a decentralized campus. That means ensuring Members can see how workload is defined across units, that normal workload is clearly defined for all appointment types, that work belonging to other employee groups does not continue to accumulate for faculty, and that institutional decisions about policy and enrollment goals cannot be made without genuine accountability for their impact on faculty workload.

Workload is a significant issue at the table this round and we want Members to be informed and engaged every step of the way. This reflects what members are living, and what a fair and functioning workload process should be able to address. 

For the latest bargaining dates, process updates, and key developments, visit our Faculty Negotiations 2026 page, where we will post regular updates to keep members and the broader public informed throughout the process.

UWOFA and the Employer had their first bargaining meetings on June 4th and June 5th, 2026. 

Chief Negotiator, Jeff Tennant, began negotiations with an opening statement reflecting the priorities Members have identified for this round:

• Advance job security for contract faculty
• Ensure equitable and reasonable workload
• Achieve fair compensation
• Improve benefits
• Install guardrails around use of generative artificial intelligence technologies
• Place teaching work at the proposed “Western International College” under the terms of the collective agreement 

Jeff’s opening statement situated these priorities in the real conditions Members are living. Contract faculty face job insecurity, colleagues on limited-term contracts have not had their appointments renewed, Members are dealing with growing workload, and salaries continue to trail those of comparator institutions. Also noted was Western’s long track record of budgetary surpluses, making clear that every budget is a choice. 

Articles Opened in proposals presented by UWOFA thus far:

• Accommodation of Members with Disabilities (New Article)
• Alternative Workload
• Appointments
• Association Rights
• Entry or Return of Academic Administrators to the Bargaining Unit
• Implications of Technology
• Information
• Privacy
• Reduced Workload
• Working Conditions
• Workload
• Letter of Understanding Western International College
• Letter of Understanding Joint Working Group to Study Member Equity Concerns
• Appendix C, Arbitrators

Articles Opened in proposals presented by the Employer thus far:

• Performance Evaluation
• Promotion, Tenure and Continuing Status
• Retirement and Resignation
• Sabbatical Leave
• Workload

These first sessions mark the beginning of what we hope to be a productive round. Our proposals reflect what Members have been telling UWOFA, and we will continue to bring that voice to the table. The next bargaining dates are June 22, 2026 and June 25, 2026. We will present the rest of our proposals on those two days.

This page provides an overview of our bargaining process. Whether you are a Member looking to stay informed, a student wondering how negotiations impact your studies, or an interested party seeking to understand how union negotiations work, this page will walk you through each stage from start to finish.

The Ontario Labour Relations Act prescribes a sequence of potential stages for collective bargaining. Each of these phases serves a specific purpose, and the chart below is designed to illustrate how they connect.

Preparations mark the beginning of the process, during which we consult with Members and develop proposals based on identified priorities. Our bargaining goals were brought forward to the Board and Membership for approval, and Members voted in favour of the bargaining goals this spring. This is followed by Notice to Bargain, which formally initiates the bargaining process and obligates both parties to meet and bargain in good faith. This step has now been completed and once bargaining dates are confirmed they will be shared with the membership.

The process then moves into Negotiations where proposals are presented by the Union and the Employer and discussed at the table. If agreement is reached, a Tentative Agreement is brought to each party for ratification. For UWOFA Members this means a Ratification Vote, For the Employer, the agreement is brought to the Board of Governors. Both parties must ratify the agreement for it to take effect. 

If agreement is not reached, several structured steps exist to support resolution. Conciliation involves a government-appointed third party who works with both sides to help reach a settlement. If conciliation is not successful, either party may request a No Board Report from the Ministry, which once issued begins a defined 17-day period where negotiations can continue. At the end of the 17 days if an agreement is not reached, a legal Strike or Lockout becomes possible. Mediation may also be used at various points throughout the process to help move discussions forward. 

At this stage, we are moving towards active negotiations. Our chief negotiator and deputy chief negotiator will meet with employer representatives in May to focus on housekeeping which addresses issues of an editorial nature in the collective agreement. For this round, the employer has agreed with our suggestion that we also discuss some substantive items related to the administration of the collective agreement in these discussions.

For the latest bargaining dates, process updates, and key developments, visit our Faculty Negotiations 2026 page, where we will post regular updates to keep members and the broader public informed throughout the process.