This past week, we held our sixth, seventh, and eighth bargaining sessions with the University. We currently have 22 articles on the table that you can follow on the bargaining tracker here. While the University has yet to counter many of the articles we proposed, they did respond to our proposals on Job Postings and Workspace and Materials. We also responded to the University’s proposals on Grievance and Arbitration, and Employment Records.
As many of you know, the University changed policies in 2023 so that annual pay increases for Postdoctoral Associates and Postdoctoral Fellows all take effect on July 1st. Yesterday, we reached an agreement on a Side Letter that ensures the University’s compensation increases this year are consistent with its historical practices and do not prevent us from negotiating further improvements to compensation. These Side Letter negotiations are separate from the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and the Side Letter will take effect upon reaching an agreement rather than waiting for the full contract to be ratified. Details on the Side Letter and each of the articles discussed at last week’s session are below:
Side Letter: An Increase to Unit Members’ Annual Compensation Rates for Fiscal Year 2026
Purpose: The Side Letter outlines the Parties’ agreement regarding increases to Unit Members’ annual compensation rates for Fiscal Year 2026, which runs from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026. Note that Side Letters are negotiated and agreed to by the Parties separately from the Collective Bargaining Agreement, although they are included in the final contract. Negotiations over this Side Letter have given us more insight into how Unit Members’ compensation at the University has been determined, and we are ensuring that the University implements pay increases for Fiscal Year 2026 equitably for all Unit Members insofar as it is consistent with their historical practice. This does not determine the eventual contents of our Compensation article – we can and will still demand further improvements in our contract! as well as demonstrate how the Union can fight for a say in how our working conditions are established.
Discussion: Both UPROR-UAW and the University agree that everyone should receive a 3% increase in compensation in Fiscal Year 2026 (although we will negotiate over additional raises). It is the University’s position that, historically, they chose from year to year whether to increase the minimum compensation rates or simply encourage an annual cost-of-living adjustment for those employed at the University — and they provided examples of years in which this was the case. As in previous years, Heads of Laboratory and the University may also agree to increase a Unit Member’s compensation by an amount greater than 3%. They may also agree to any additional increase at any other time.
They have also asserted that some Unit Members will not receive standard raises due to “performance issues.” Unfortunately, this is also consistent with historical practice by the University, and a number of Unit Members have received less than the recommended increase each year. We have made clear that such decisions must be documented to ensure that alleged performance issues are based on facts. If you learn that your compensation increase is less than 3% and you are unaware of job performance issues, please reach out to us at info@rockefellerpostdocunion.org or through any UPROR-UAW organizer or local lab contact.
While this is not a formal article in our Collective Bargaining Agreement and instead relates to a regular cost-of-living increase during the period of bargaining, we are standing firm to ensure that the standard practice of the University does not change while we negotiate a strong Compensation article for the contract. You can read our final agreement here.
Purpose: This article establishes consistent terms and rights for the maintenance and access of employment records by Unit Members. It ensures that those records remain confidential and that records of warnings or discipline are only maintained for as long as they remain relevant to current employment.
Discussion: We maintain that records should be transferred to an electronic format, and that they be readily available to Unit Members. The primary points of discussion are around the timeliness of requested corrections to the records, when the electronic versions will be generated by the University, and the exact contents of the records.
Grievance and Arbitration & Appendix: Grievance Form:
Purpose: This Article describes the procedure by which grievances — formal complaints regarding violations of the contract — may be filed and through which resolutions may be reached. This is a core article of virtually every union contract that ensures binding resolutions to contract violations are reached quickly and fairly.
Discussion: The Union’s focus is to give Unit Members and the University ample time to come to an informal resolution before filing a grievance. However, once a grievance is filed, the process should move quickly to resolve issues. We moved towards the University’s positions on some timelines, and also on which administrator to contact initially about a grievance. One major point of contention is the University’s right to use the Grievance Procedure. Our stance is that the University has other means to handle complaints as the employer that controls the workplace. Our goal is to keep the grievance procedure centered on resolving contract violations that affect workers. If there are specific concerns the University feels need to be addressed, we’re open to discussing other ways to ensure those issues can be handled constructively, without altering the core purpose of the grievance process.
Purpose: This Article ensures that all job postings, which are open hire advertisements for positions in the bargaining unit, clearly state that the position is a union job, providing clear descriptions for what potential Unit Members or current Unit Members seeking other opportunities can expect, and ensures that hiring decisions follow a fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory process.
Discussion: We asked the University to clarify the period of time that postings would be active, why they could not commit to diversity and inclusion terminology, and the lack of appointment information on a job posting.
Purpose: This article aims to ensure that all Unit Members have the necessary workspace, materials, facilities, equipment, and resources to carry out our work without unnecessary distractions that detract from our research. The University responded with a counterproposal that offers “reasonable access” and less explicit time commitments for providing access and reimbursement.
Discussion: The University repeatedly states that working from home is a privilege. However, the purpose of this article is to give Unit Members the means to do their work, regardless of their location, including remotely, with agreement from their HOL. In the cases where a Unit Member must use personal funds to make a purchase, we ask for timely reimbursement.
We believe that this process could move faster if the University responded to our proposals in a more timely manner so that we can discuss multiple articles in our sessions. We have proposed fifteen new articles since April 16th, but the University has only responded to three. Our committee wants to keep hearing your priorities to ensure that we have the highest standards of enforceable timelines and strong contract language providing protections to Unit Members. If you have thoughts or would like to get more involved in the fight, you can join a working group or reply to this email. You can also be an observer at our next bargaining session on Wednesday, June 25, from 10:00 AM to 1:30 PM by RSVPing here.
In solidarity,
Joanna Krzyśpiak
On behalf of the UPROR-UAW Bargaining Committee