Queen’s and its faculty association have ratified a new three-year collective agreement, bringing months of bargaining — and the possibility of the University’s first faculty strike — to an end.
The University announced on Sept. 15 the renewed collective agreement between Queen’s and the Queen’s University Faculty Association (QUFA) had been ratified by both members of the bargaining unit and the University. The agreement is effective from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2029.
The agreement includes across-the-board salary increases of 2.25 per cent in the first year, 2.5 per cent in the second, and 2.75 per cent in the third.
QUFA, which represents approximately 1,600 faculty members, librarians, and archivists, reached a tentative agreement with the University in August after more than 40 days of bargaining. The previous collective agreement expired June 30.
READ MORE: Queen’s, QUFA reach tentative collective agreement
QUFA held a strike vote from Aug. 11 to 14. At the time, the association identified job security, workload, and participation in University decision-making among its priorities. 83 per cent of participating members voted to authorize QUFA’s executive to call a strike if necessary.
READ MORE: Faculty union to hold strike vote as bargaining continues
The agreement received 78 per cent support in QUFA’s ratification vote, which was then also ratified by Queen’s.
In an interview with The Journal, QUFA President Karen Rudie said the result shows support for the agreement while acknowledging a portion of members remained dissatisfied.
Alongside the salary increases, the agreement also introduces a new merit system, replacing the existing points-based structure.
Under the new system, members who meet expectations in their assigned areas will receive a career development increment, while separate merit awards will recognize work meeting criteria developed by a committee with equal representation from QUFA and the University.
For members who meet expectations in their annual performance review, the new system provides a career development increment — an increase added to their base salary. The size of the increase depends on the member’s salary, with larger increases going to those earning under specific thresholds.
Faculty earning under $180,000 will initially receive a $3,800 increment, while those earning $180,000 or more will receive $2,000. Librarians and archivists will receive $4,350 if they earn under $90,000; $3,700 if they earn between $90,000 and $150,000, and $2,000 if they earn above $150,000.
Rudie said the new system is meant to address inequities created by the previous merit structure by separating regular career progression from additional rewards for merit. Under the new system, members who meet expectations receive the career development increment, while additional merit awards recognize performance beyond those expectations.
“It’s not uncommon for people of childbearing age, or in particular, women are often disproportionately affected in this way,” Rudie said. “They might hit their stride and have their bigger accomplishments later in their career.”
“The problem in the previous scheme is it favours people who […] are big shots early on,” she said.
Another change creates a pathway for some continuing adjuncts to move into tenured teaching-focused positions. Continuing adjuncts working at least 80 per cent of a full-time appointment, with an active research program, and promotion to associate professor will be eligible for conversion.
“It’s unfortunately a small group of continuing adjuncts that will meet the criteria,” Rudie said. “But this is a foot in the door.”
The agreement also creates a $50,000 annual fund for scholarly research, creative work, and professional development for librarians and archivists.
Among changes, the Standing Joint Committee on Technology will become a permanent part of the collective agreement.
Rudie said the committee emerged from an earlier grievance involving the introduction of new technology and provides a mechanism for addressing issues including privacy and training.
While the committees mandate can encompass AI, Rudie said QUFA didn’t secure all the AI protections during bargaining.
“We would have wanted something in the collective agreement saying that an actual human has to make the decision on whether I get promoted and not AI,” she said. “That’s not in our agreement.”
Rudie stressed the absence of that language doesn’t mean the University intends to use AI to make promotion decisions.
QUFA also sought stronger guarantees surrounding collegial governance. Rudie said the association wanted the agreement to require at least half the members of certain administrative search committees to be QUFA members. That provision wasn’t included.
“I think our strong strike vote impacted what was offered in the tentative agreement,” Rudie said. “Had we not had a strong strike vote, we might have had a much weaker tentative agreement to vote on or no tentative agreement to vote on.”
In its announcement, Queen’s said it “appreciates the professionalism, collaboration, and commitment demonstrated by both parties throughout the bargaining process and their efforts to reach a successful conclusion.”
With both parties having ratified the agreement, Rudie said QUFA will continue pursuing improvements to working conditions.
“I don’t think the administration can see this as everybody’s perfectly happy with everything in that tentative agreement,” she said.
Tags
Collective agreement, faculty union, QUFA bargaining, ratification
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to eic@queensjournal.ca.