On May 15th, we had our fifth bargaining session with the University. We reached a Tentative Agreement on Union-Management Committee, and we also received two counterproposals and two new article proposals from the University. You can review the bargaining tracker for a history of our bargaining process with links to all proposals and follow our progress.
Our priority is to achieve the demands that we collectively set for these negotiations, which is a contract that meets and, in some areas of particular importance to Unit Members, exceeds the best contract standards set by unionized postdocs elsewhere, including what our colleagues have won at Mount Sinai. To do this, we will continue reviewing the University’s counterproposals very carefully and ask them questions so that we can consider moving toward their position and be responsive to their concerns while maintaining our demands. Our expectation is that the University will start to match our serious consideration of their proposals by engaging with the articles we’ve proposed. Despite us proposing fifteen new articles since April 16th, the University has so far only responded to two.
Tentative Agreement
As mentioned in our previous update, the Union-Management Committee (UMC) is responsible for holding monthly* meetings (*with exceptions for July, August, and December) for the first year of the Agreement and meetings every three months thereafter to discuss the administration of the new contract and other related issues. This is important because this will ensure prompt and proper implementation of our hard-fought contract. A committed and regular UMC means fewer formal grievances and a happier Union and University because problems can be solved as soon as they arise.
New articles from UPROR-UAW
Next up, we proposed an article on Job Postings. This Article ensures that all open hire job postings 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.
Counterproposals from UPROR-UAW
We also presented a counter on Workspace and Materials. As the name implies, it ensures that Unit Members have all the necessary workspace and materials for them to perform their job duties. There is still some disagreement from the University; we made sure they knew what this was about: The University must provide us with the workspace, facilities, equipment, resources, and materials we need to perform the duties assigned to us, starting no later than our first day of work.
Counterproposals from the University
The University gave us a counterproposal on Employment Records. We’re moving closer together, but there are still some terms to iron out. For example, we’ve proposed that you should have the right to a copy of all the University records related to your employment in digital form! If there is ever a dispute, the University should be able to produce your previous appointment letters, work authorizations, correspondences, and more! These records should be private and secure but still accessible to Unit Members so that we can easily produce any documentation of our employment necessary, even after we’ve left the University. Employment records need to be accurate, but the University’s current proposal does not grant us the ability to correct mistakes, errors, and misrepresentations. Instead, they propose that we can simply submit a written statement to be added to the records. There is also disagreement on whether warning letters that don’t lead to subsequent disciplinary action within a year should be maintained — we think that, so long as the warning is effective and a Unit Member meets the job expectations after receiving it, the warning should eventually be removed from their file. The current University proposal maintains these warnings in perpetuity. We will continue to fight for the right to maintain accurate and accessible records rather than fill them with an internet forum’s worth of debate.
The University’s counterproposal on Grievance and Arbitration still fails to provide a fair and enforceable process for resolving disputes. We are still pushing for timelines and procedures that match the standard set by postdocs at Mount Sinai, meeting the needs of our unit without the delays and limitations sought by the University. It’s important that we have a process that ensures timely resolutions. For those cases that require more time, we have agreed to allow the Parties to mutually agree to extend timelines if necessary.
Finally, we received two new proposals from the University.
Proposals from the University
The first is called Housekeeping. The Article proposes that either Party can seek to fix “minor non-substantive issues” even after we ratify our Collective Bargaining Agreement. We expect that both Parties will put sufficient careful consideration into the drafting of their articles that this proposal becomes extraneous.
Lastly, the University offered up Notice to Parties. It stipulates that notices sent to the University go to Human Resources and the General Counsel, and those for the Union go to a designated Union Representative. We’ll continue to carefully evaluate its implications internally as we bargain over articles that require notices or decisions to be served on the Parties.
And with that, we hope you attend our next bargaining session on Wednesday, June 4th, from 10 AM to 2 PM. Please click here to RSVP so that we can follow up with more logistical information. Feel free to reach out at info@rockefellerpostdocunion.org with any thoughts or questions.
In solidarity,
UnJin Lee
On behalf of the UPROR-UAW Bargaining Committee