The last few sessions have seen precious little progress in negotiations between your union and the university. In the absence of any word on a financial package, we have been hesitant to proceed to any agreement on substantive issues at stake, such as healthcare, childcare, parental leave, workload or appointment policies.

Thus far, the university has rejected every single substantial proposal that we have put on the table, with little in the way of suggested alternatives. These summary rejections have given us very little room to work with and have made it very difficult and frustrating to achieve any compromise. The administration’s team has rejected our proposals on fees, appointment and reappointment, healthcare and childcare, while refusing to even negotiate MOU 6, that deals with ensuring diversity among the graduate student body.

In addition, the university administration wants to remove any upper limit on our healthcare co-payments (which negates the whole point of having insurance in the first place), it refuses to have any kind of written guidelines for hiring graduate students as assistants and refuses to even talk about crucial issues such as housing, childcare and fees.

While the administration has complained that the reason for the slow progress is the large number of proposals GEO has on the table, we have pointed out that that is furthest from the truth: we have been much more willing than the university in removing or amending proposals that we saw as not essential in order to achieve agreement on what was crucial. However, the university only came to us with five small language corrections and no real proposals whatsoever on anything. Unless we want to sit and bargain with ourselves, we cannot in good faith compromise any more than we already have; while the university sits across from us week after week with absolutely nothing to offer. Perhaps the university ‘s team needs basic lessons in how contract negotiations work: through a process of mutual give-and-take, where both parties have something to give. The last few weeks have made it painfully clear   to us that the university has nothing to offer, even apart from their lack of movement on financial issues.

On April 27, the university presented us with its latest package with language on articles dealing with processing of our dues forms, GEO staffing, workload issues and unpaid leave. Except the first, which is a minor procedural issue, the administration has nothing to offer on any of the other proposals. They also want to cut GEO staff positions because they believe that the union is ‘misusing’ the positions by trying to organize its own members!

On the issue of MOU 6, the university has taken the position that ensuring diversity among graduate students is a matter for individual department heads, and that any other larger issues of funding and coordination should be left to the personal discretion of the current dean of the Graduate School. Despite the fact that our contract guarantees $800,000 for programs and fellowships to attract and retain a diverse grad student body, the university feels it cannot discuss with us how this money is spent, for what purposes and by whom.

As we approach the end of the academic year, we have had to take on the university’s responsibility of figuring out why the state has delayed offering us a financial package for next year. We have also had to deal with having nothing to work with from the university’s side. And as we go in to next year, with already increased fees and health-care payments and the rise in general cost of living, our wages will stay the same: in effect this means we will be taking a PAY CUT in the Fall of 2007. Unless, we see real movement from the university’s side, unless we see any willingness for creative solutions instead of their current non-proposals, the responsibility to carry on these negotiations through the summer is mainly on your union.
The next bargaining session is scheduled for  Friday may 11 at 1.30 PM.

Comments Off on Bargaining Update from April 27 2007