UAW Local 2865

	UAW Local 2865 Representing Over 12,000 Academic Student Employees at UC

Current Bargaining Information, Updates, and Press Releases

10/12/2007: New Contract Ratified! Members around the state voted by a 96% margin to ratify a new contract with the University. The new contract includes many new rights and benefits. The current contract expires September 30, 2009.

Read contract highlights.

Read the full new contract.

Read a press release about this precedent-setting new contract.

Below is additional information concerning the 4th contract campaign, including updates from the elected Bargaining Committee and press releases for media representatives.

Read articles about some of the most important unresolved economic issues, including wages, fee remissions, healthcare, and childcare and leaves.
Read and sign the Public Statement signed by 6,615 UAW Local 2865 members (as of 9/28/2007).
Check out the University's own analyses that support the need for increased compensation for Academic Student Employees working at UC.
The initial proposals made by the University and the Union.
Take Action now! Call UC and urge them to bargain fairly.

UPDATES from the UAW 2865 BARGAINING COMMITTEE:

2007 Bargainging Update (October 12, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (September 27, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (September 24, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (September 12, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (September 5, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (August 27, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (August 23, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (August 17, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (August 6, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (June 27, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (June 11, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (May 29, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (May 15, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (April 22, 2007)
2007 Bargaining Update (March 20, 2007)

PRESS RELEASES :

Media Representatives: please contact our statewide office with questions, 510.549.3863.

Press Release: Teaching Assistants, Readers, and Tutors Ratify Historic 4th Contract with University of California (PDF)
Joint UAW-UC Press Release: UAW Local 2865 and University of California Reach Tenative Agreement (PDF)
Press Release: Unfair Labor Practice Charges Filed Against University of California
UC Student's Association Press Release supporting UAW 2865 bargaining (PDF)
Press Release: 6,154 UAW 2865 Members Demand that UC Negotiate Fairly

New Contract Ratified!

October 12, 2007

Members around the state voted by a 96% margin to ratify the new contract with the University. The new contract includes many new rights and benefits.

To check out highlights from the new contract, click here:
http://www.uaw2865.org/rights/files/2865_contract_highlights.pdf

To check out the new contract, click here:
http://www.uaw2865.org/rights/files/UAW_UC_07_09.pdf

To see the press release announcing contract ratification, click here:
http://www.uaw2865.org/news/files/UAWContract_Press_071012.pdf

For more information or to get more involved, please respond to this email, or call your campus’ office.

Solidarity,

Susie Keller

UAW Elections Committee Chair

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: UAW 2865 Files Charges Against UC Admin, Will Strike If Necessary

September 27, 2007

With four days until the expiration of our contract, the University of California administration continues to stall negotiations. As a result, our bargaining committee is filing dozens of unfair labor practice (ULP) charges against the UC today.

If you have been following our regular bargaining updates, you know that these practices of stalling, withholding pertinent information, and sending people to the table who do not have the authority to make agreements constitute an ongoing obstructionist trend since negotiations began in March. The bargaining committee remains committed to doing everything in our power to reach an agreement with the university administration by September 30th. However, if the administration continues to bargain in bad-faith , we are prepared to call a strike.

You can see our press release on filing ULP charges here: http://www.uaw2865.org/news/current.php

We’ve also received strong support from the UC Student Association: http://www.uaw2865.org/news/files/UCSA_Press_Release_09252007.pdf

Meetings to prepare for the expiration of our contract are currently being held in departments and hiring units across campus. If you’re not already involved, the time is now! Your campus’ contact information is provided below.

In solidarity,

UAW 2865 Bargaining Committee

Tarone Bittner, Davis Unit Chair
Toi Carter, Riverside Recording Secretary
Meaghan Chadwick, Merced Unit Chair
Clinton Christensen, San Diego Recording Secretary
Cassandra Engeman, Santa Barbara Recording Secretary
Michelle Gallagher, Los Angeles Unit Chair
Tim Gutierrez, Davis Recording Secretary
Adam Hefty, Santa Cruz Recording Secretary
Samantha Iyer, Berkeley Recording Secretary
Jamie Keeton, Los Angeles Recording Secretary
Daraka Larimore-Hall, Santa Barbara Unit Chair
Christine Petit, Riverside Unit Chair
Dan Roth, Berkeley Unit Chair
David Selby, San Diego Unit Chair
Sara Smith, Santa Cruz Unit Chair
Coral Wheeler, Irvine Recording Secretary

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: Administration Stalling Continues; Parents Speak to Need for Family Friendly Contract Provisions; Futher Information on UAW Economic Proposals

September 24, 2007

For the last two weeks of bargaining (Sept. 10-12 and Sept. 18-20), the university administration did not respond with counter-proposals on any of our outstanding proposals, including wages, fees, healthcare, child care, and leaves. Nor did the administration give us any new information relevant to health care or any other issues.

During the most recent session, academic student employee parents from the Southern California area took time out of their busy schedules, in one case with child in tow, to speak their mind on the administration’s dubious claim that existing UC childcare facilities are cost effective and sufficient. Parents unable to attend from campuses farther away sent in testimonials illustrating how unfriendly university policies are to workers with families. They told moving stories about two-year wait lists for university-subsidized child care programs and testified to child care expenses that often exceed a Teaching Assistant’s monthly salary.

Our economic proposals are out there, on the table. It is well past time for the administration to provide counter-proposals. While we await their response, please take a moment to get more familiar with our economic proposals. If you follow the links below, you’ll find four articles constituting a more detailed and context specific depiction of our economic proposals:

Wages at UC Uncompetitive, Grossly Inadequate to Cover Cost of Living

Expanded UC Fee Remission Program Necessary for California

Wal Mart or UC? When it comes to health care, it's hard to tell the difference

ASE Parents Speak Out on UC’s Anti-Family Policies

This week the final stretch of negotiations begins. We are scheduled to be bargaining from Wednesday the 26th until Sunday the 30th. We will keep you updated as the situation develops. To find information about our current contract or how to get in touch with leaders on your campus, please visit www.uaw2865.org.

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: Administration Proposes Cuts Across the Board; UAW Stands Firm

September 12, 2007

SUMMARY: Our bargaining team met with the university administration again September 5-7. The administration presented responses to several of our economic proposals. Unfortunately, the administration’s proposals were unacceptable and did not set a positive tone for upcoming negotiations. The proposals were unresponsive to members’ concerns about childcare and represented effective cuts in wages, fee remissions, and health benefits.

---------------------------------------------------------------

WAGES: the administration’s wage proposal called for a cut in real wages. They are proposing no guaranteed wage increases; instead, they are proposing increases of less than 2%, if the state budget allows, which will not keep up with inflation in California.

Furthermore, the administration’s wage proposal would not begin to address the gap in ASE financial support between the University of California and competing institutions, which the UC administration itself has identified as a key problem (see the update sent on 8/27 for more details). When pressed on this gap, an administration spokesperson suggested that it might be filled through “personal and familial sources of support,” as if readers, tutors, and TAs were independently wealthy.

HEALTH BENEFITS AND FEE REMISSIONS: the administration proposed to abolish 100% fee remissions by capping remission of education and registration fees and health insurance premiums at the 2007-08 dollar amount. Future increases in fees or insurance premiums would not be covered. With fees rising 8-10% per year or more and health insurance costs rising 6-15% per year or more, this represents a substantial cut in real wages.

The administration’s plan to pass these costs on to employees does not begin to address our proposal for a comprehensive healthcare system that includes employees and their dependents and a fee remission program that covers the entire cost of tuition and fees for employees. The administration has also consistently failed to provide vital information we need to bargain over healthcare and other outstanding issues.

CHILDCARE: the administration rejected our proposal to subsidize employee childcare costs though they recognized the need for a childcare program. One university spokesperson accurately characterized our proposal as “a subsidy program to enhance an [employee’s] ability to matriculate, be gainfully employed and contribute to the mission of the university.”

The next day, another university representative, in rejecting our proposal, said, “The University believes that there are sufficient child care resources provided to most of the individuals that you represent, and those programs are both effective and cost effective…. They provide services at a reasonable cost, recognizing the financial needs of the students.” This remark displayed an arrogant disregard for the realities of life for teaching assistants, readers, and tutors with children, who more often than not face lengthy waitlists and programs that absorb at least half of their monthly wages.

SUMMER SESSION: the administration also was unresponsive to our proposal for rights and wages during summer session equal to those of the rest of the academic year.

Undoubtedly the Administration’s subsequent proposals will reflect some improvements; however, their current proposals have a long, long way to go, and they start off in the wrong direction.

The administration appears to be bargaining in bad faith. Nevertheless, despite their stalling tactics and continual failure to provide meaningful information, we are working hard to get a strong contract by the expiration date of the current agreement, September 30.

The active participation of members around the state has been inspiring, and it will be essential to shake the administration out of its recalcitrance. If you would like more information or would like to get involved, reply to this email or visit http://www.uaw2865.org/contact/contact.php.

Our next bargaining session with the administration is September 10-12.

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: Stalling and Delaying Tactics Continue

September 5, 2007

Our bargaining team met again with the UC administration on Monday, August 27th and Tuesday, August 28th. Unfortunately, the meeting was generally unproductive, as the administration continued with their old shenanigans of stalling and delaying.

We spent most of the time waiting for the administration to finish with their internal meetings and come to the bargaining table. When they finally came to the table, they failed to make counterproposals and they continued to be difficult about scheduling additional bargaining sessions.

Despite this response, we remain optimistic that we can compel the administration to bargain lawfully so we have a fair contract by the end of September. We will be taking a break from bargaining to celebrate the Labor Day holiday, before we meet again with the university on the 5th, 6th, and 7th of September.

To find information about our current contract or how to get in touch with leaders on your campus, please visit www.uaw2865.org.

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: Wages, Childcare, Fees and Leaves Proposals Hit the Table; Healthcare Discussion Heats Up

August 27, 2007

----------------------------------------

Summary: This bargaining session, we gave the university our proposals on wages, childcare, fee remissions and leaves. The healthcare discussion heated up, as the administration continued to withhold critical information. Although the administration has returned to its old ways of using stalling tactics, we reached a tentative agreement on the grievance and arbitration article.

----------------------------------------

According to reports from the University of California Office of the President, our wages are inadequate for the areas we live in while the financial packages for academic student employees are not comparable with the packages students receive at competing universities. You can read the reports yourself from the university’s own websites by visiting http://www.uaw2865.org/news/current.php.

Our wages and fee remissions proposals would help close this competitiveness gap. The wages proposal would provide a one-time pay increase to make up for how far we’ve fallen behind, as well as guaranteed pay increases each year to ensure we stay ahead of the rising cost of living. Our fee remissions proposal would cover all fees for all employees, including campus fees, professional fees, and non-resident tuition.

For academic student employees with children, these financial problems are magnified. Currently, the contract provides us no childcare assistance and there is a lengthy waiting list to get into on-campus childcare facilities. Our childcare proposal would provide a stipend to cover off-campus or on-campus childcare.

We are also proposing a comprehensive leaves package similar to those offered at other universities. Currently, most leaves are provided at the sole discretion of the university. Our proposal includes paid sick leave, paid bereavement leave, paid legal and administrative leave, and paid family and medical leave (which includes paid childbearing and paternity leave).

With regards to our health-benefits proposal, the administration continued to demand that our union pay a high-priced consulting firm to gather data that is necessary to obtain quotes from insurance providers. We invited a healthcare expert with experience in contract negotiations who explained that a client as big as the University of California could easily obtain the necessary information from their current insurance providers at no cost. In response, the administration insisted on using their current research process no matter how inefficient and expensive.

The administration has returned to its old ways of stalling meaningful discussion of critical issues. We proposed numerous dates to meet for additional bargaining sessions, but the administration has been uncooperative in scheduling dates.

On one positive note, we reached a tentative agreement on the grievances and arbitration article. Previously the administration had proposed bureaucratic changes that would have weakened our ability to enforce our rights, but our tentative agreement preserves the status quo—a fair and efficient grievance procedure. In exchange, we agreed to keep the current list of holidays rather than push for additional official days off.

To find information about our current contract or how to get in touch with leaders on your campus, please visit www.uaw2865.org. We are meeting with the university this week but, as discussed above, it is unclear which days we will be meeting. We’ll send you more updates as bargaining progresses.

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: Tentative Agreements Reached on Two Key Articles

August 23, 2007

----------------------------------------

Summary: Our August 13-14 bargaining session proved productive in two key areas: 1) we came to a tentative agreement on the employment files and evaluations article; and 2) we established an electronic method of membership card processing.

----------------------------------------

Our August 13-14 bargaining session with the UC administration proved productive in two key areas. First, we came to a tentative agreement regarding our employment files and evaluations. We retained our right to correct incorrect factual information and to append material to our file. We also won the right to be notified when new material is added to our employment files, which will allow us to review and contest the materials if necessary.

Second, we came to an agreement with the administration to establish an electronic method of processing membership cards and other pertinent information. This will significantly cut down on the amount of time our union spends on processing and reprocessing paperwork, which will also free up more time for union activists to keep in touch with our membership, let people know about our employment rights, and enforce our contract.

We also got the administration to drop some of its proposals that were aimed at reducing our job security and rights as union members.

We are currently bargaining with the administration from August 21-23, and our next bargaining session is slated for August 27-28. If you have any questions or would like to get more involved, please visit www.uaw2865.org for campus-specific contact information and to check out the current contract.

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: UAW, UC Administration Reach Tentative Agreement on Non-Discrimination; UC Unresponsive on other Proposals

August 17, 2007

----------------------------------------

Summary: In our August 7-9 bargaining session, our union and the UC administration came to tentative agreement on the nondiscrimination article. In addition, the administration presented us with a proposal on posting which was unresponsive to our central concerns. We, on the other hand, presented them with our comprehensive health proposal. The administration continues to bargain at a glacial pace and employ obstructionist tactics to delay progress.

----------------------------------------

In our bargaining session on August 7-9, we reached an agreement with the UC administration which bars discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and gender identity. This agreement contains a broad and cutting-edge definition of gender identity, which includes protections around gender expression. This progress is essential in fully protecting gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex people against discrimination and keeps our union at the forefront of the fight for social justice.

The administration finally countered our proposal on the posting of job opportunities and hiring policies. We consider their proposal to be unresponsive to our demand that they institute deadlines for departments to post information about available positions and make hiring decisions more transparent.

Our bargaining team also presented our comprehensive proposal to strengthen our health benefits. The proposal creates programs to expand health benefits to undergraduate employees and to our family members in addition to closing up gaps in existing coverage with supplemental benefits for dental, vision, prescription, and transgender needs. The proposal also establishes a health reimbursement fund to pay health costs not covered by these programs.

The administration has, unfortunately, been using a number of obstructionist tactics to delay progress on the important issue of health benefits. For instance, they have claimed that our union has no right to essential data about its members’ health care and they have refused to give us information on adding benefits unless we pay to bring in their overpriced consultants.

Despite the administration’s general unresponsiveness, we consider the tentative agreement to protect teaching assistants, tutors and readers from discrimination based on pregnancy or gender identity a significant victory.

To find information about our current contract or how to get in touch with leaders on your campus, please visit: www.uaw2865.org/news/bargaining.php. We met with the administration on August 13-14 and will meet with them again on the 21st through 23nd. We’ll send you more updates soon.

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: UC Inches Toward a Better Contract; Miles of Progress to Go

August 6, 2007

Our union bargaining team met with the UC Administration Thursday and Friday, July 27 and 28. We had productive exchanges over several important topics. However, much more progress is needed for us to achieve our goal of getting a strong new contract by September 30 (the expiration date of the current contract).

We made progress in strengthening our non-discrimination rights; the administration’s latest proposal was responsive to ours, including protections against discrimination due to pregnancy and gender identity.

We also exchanged proposals with the administration over workload and appointment notification. Although we had productive discussions about our concerns on workload and appointment notification issues, the administration’s proposals only address vague possibilities rather than enforceable rights.

The administration moved towards our proposal to address the concern that many employees are working unreasonably long hours to finish work, typically during midterms and finals weeks. Unfortunately, their proposal excluded readers and tutors, while the protections for TAs were too weak to be acceptable.

Our website has been recently updated. There you can find contact information for your campus’s bargaining team members or check out the current contract. You can also read a summary of the initial proposals that the union and the administration exchanged at the start of bargaining in the spring. Our next bargaining session with the administration will take place August 7-9.

UAW 2865 Bargaining Update: Progress Made in Setting the Tone for Upcoming Bargaining

June 27, 2007

The recent grade-in/tutor-in turned out over a thousand TA’s, readers, and tutors across seven campuses, highlighting our demand for better protections against excessive workload. This action was a success! Our willingness to take action around important issues is a vital part of negotiations. Many thanks to all those who participated.

In the bargaining session that took place June 18th and 19th, we made progress towards adding protections against discrimination on the basis of pregnancy or gender identity. This discussion will continue into the next bargaining session and we are hopeful that a tentative agreement can be reached in this area fairly soon.

Though we are still focusing on non-economic issues before moving to topics such as wages and benefits, we began preliminary discussions on healthcare and we agreed to devote some time towards this important topic during the next bargaining sessions.

Fruitful discussions on complex issues such as healthcare are hindered if the union is not informed of relevant facts. In fact, the administration has a legal obligation to provide the union with information relevant to bargaining. Unfortunately, we had to remind the administration that they have not yet fulfilled their obligation to address our requests for information on healthcare.

The next bargaining session will take place on July 9th and 10th. Please visit our newly revamped homepage http://www.uaw2865.org for campus-specific contact information and to check out the current contract.

UAW Action Reminder and Bargaining Update: Now's the Time to Send a Strong Message to UC Admin!

June 11, 2007

When we began our contract negotiations with the university administration earlier this spring, both parties agreed to concentrate on non-economic issues (e.g., workload) before focusing on economic issues (e.g., wages). This was the case with our most recent round of negotiations, which took place on June 4th and 5th, and we anticipate that the next few bargaining sessions will also be devoted to non-economic issues.

Several proposals were exchanged at this session, but the bulk of the time was spent discussing our proposals on workload, appointment notification, and the posting of jobs. Throughout these discussions, we highlighted the importance of transparency in how hiring decisions are made and what is expected of us as employees. Again, UC admin dismissed this need and insisted that added transparency would be "problematic."

We also stressed the importance of having workload disputes resolved by a neutral third-party arbitrator. The admin balked at this proposal citing the "unique" approaches taken by professors in assigning workload; something, they argued, an "outsider" (i.e., an arbitrator with extensive knowledge of employment issues) could not understand.

Despite this, we were able to engage in productive discussions over workload. We again emphasized the impact of increasing class, section, and lab sizes on the amount and type of work we do as tutors, readers, and teaching assistants as well as our overall working conditions.

However, by the end of the meeting, the admin fell back into their old habit of stalling and refused to offer us a counterproposal on our workload article, going back on their agreement to bargain over this issue.

In light of the administration's stalling tactics, it's crucial that you participate in the grade-in/tutor-in actions that are taking place on all of the quarter campuses this finals week. Join us in sending the admin a strong message that these issues are important to us, and we'll take that message back to our next bargaining session on June 18th!

Please visit www.uaw2865.org for campus-specific contact information and to check out the current contract.

UAW Bargaining Update: UC Administration Stalls, UAW Pushes forward on Workload Protections and Employment Rights

May 29, 2007

On May 21st and 22nd we met with the UC administration after agreeing to negotiate over our workload protections and access to important information concerning our employment.

Unfortunately, the administration stalled negotiations by coming to our meeting unprepared to negotiate and by sending a chief negotiator who did not have the authority to make decisions. This is not surprising, given that the administration has a history of using stalling tactics to undermine bargaining.

We succeeded, however, in getting the administration to engage in substantive discussions by the second day of negotiations. Class and section sizes are ballooning every year, which has an impact both on us as workers and on the quality of education at the university. Solutions need to be proactive, preventing excessive workload before it becomes a problem.

Our prior proposal includes such solutions. However, although the administration finally admitted that class size does impact our workload, their counterproposal, given on May 22nd, did not address this issue.

The administration was also unresponsive to our concerns about improving the university’s practice of notifying TAs, readers and tutors of job appointments. It’s important to be notified earlier of job opportunities and job offers so that we can plan our lives, without having to scramble to find jobs at the last minute.

Although the administration has been dragging its feet on these important issues, our bargaining team, which consists of teaching assistants, readers and tutors, intends to secure a strong, new contract before the end of September and will continue to push the university to do what’s right.

Our next bargaining session is scheduled for June 4th and 5th. We plan to negotiate over employee workload and transparency in employment policies (including job posting requirements and access to employment files) and we expect the administration will come prepared to bargain.

Of course, our union is only as strong as its members. If you have any questions or want to get involved, please contact your campus union office. A copy of our current contract is also available on this site.

In solidarity,

UAW 2865 Bargaining Committee

Tarone Bittner, Davis Unit Chair
Toi Carter, Riverside Recording Secretary
Meaghan Chadwick, Merced Unit Chair
Cassandra Engeman, Santa Barbara Recording Secretary
Michelle Gallagher, Los Angeles Unit Chair
Tim Gutierrez, Davis Recording Secretary
Adam Hefty, Santa Cruz Recording Secretary
Samantha Iyer, Berkeley Recording Secretary
Jamie Keeton, Los Angeles Recording Secretary
Daraka Larimore-Hall, Santa Barbara Unit Chair
Christine Petit, Riverside Unit Chair
Dan Roth, Berkeley Unit Chair
David Selby, San Diego Unit Chair
Sara Smith, Santa Cruz Unit Chair
Coral Wheeler, Irvine Recording Secretary

Bargaining Update: Strengthening Our Rights on Workload Protections, Job Postings, & Employment Files

May 15, 2007

The UAW Local 2865 bargaining team met May 7 and 8 with representatives of the University of California. We had frank exchanges over several issues of importance to teaching assistants, readers, and tutors.

WORKLOAD

Class, Section, and Lab Size: The union is proposing to limit out-of-control classroom size growth, which would both increase the quality of education and prevent excessive workload. The university reiterated its opposition to bargaining over this issue several times, but eventually engaged in dialogue.

Tutoring No-Shows: The union is proposing that all tutors should be guaranteed pay for their tutoring sessions when their students fail to show-up. Though university representatives seemed affronted by the idea, it is important for tutors to be compensated in these situations.

Expedited Workload Arbitration: We need a fairer, more efficient process for resolving issues where employees have excessive workload. We want to make sure workload issues are resolved swiftly, by a neutral, third-party arbitrator.

EMPLOYMENT FILES

Currently, the university does NOT notify employees when new material is added to their employment files The university should notify employees whenever new material is added and employees should be able to correct any incorrect information in the file.

POSTING

The university should post employment opportunities on its website at least 60 days before the start of any term and departments should post their hiring criteria and policies on their websites. Though the university rejected this proposal, this information is essential for the transparent functioning of the university.

UNIVERSITY PROPOSALS

The university made several proposals as well, which were unresponsive to the needs and concerns of tutors, readers, and TAs. Among these was a proposal to eliminate certain job titles, such as the Teaching Fellow title at several campuses. The union's proposal would utilize these titles to create a "step system" which rewards experienced employees with higher pay.

The university representatives' attitude in negotiations varied from hostility towards our concerns, refusing to engage with their substance and asserting that many of our proposals fall within their "managerial rights"-but at times they engaged in productive dialogue.

We hope that the latter approach continues, but it will require membership involvement to achieve our goals for a strong fourth contract. If you have questions or would like to get more involved, please contact your campus office. A copy of the current contract is also available on the website.

Bargaining Update: UC Wants to Roll Back Our Benefits & Rights

April 22, 2007

The UAW Local 2865 bargaining team met Monday, April 16 with university representatives to discuss changes the university would like to make to our contract.

Unfortunately, the bargaining team was alarmed by the uncooperative, antiunion tactics of the university. The university is proposing to cut a number of critical benefits and roll back several groundbreaking union victories. Not only would these cuts and rollbacks have a negative financial impact on all our members, they would also undermine the ability of UC to continue to be competitive, encourage diversity, and attract the best and brightest.

FEE REMISSIONS
At the same time that we are proposing to expand the types of fees covered and who is eligible to receive remissions, the university is proposing to end full fee remissions for graduate-student employees, proposing instead to cap remissions. What this would mean is that whenever fees increaseâ€”which is the unfortunate trendâ€”we would end up paying that increase out-of-pocket.

HEALTH INSURANCE
Additionally, under the current contract, many of us have our health insurance premium fully covered. Again, while we are proposing to expand the types of fees covered and who is eligible to receive remissions, the university is proposing to cap our health insurance premium remissions at a fixed dollar amount, thus transferring the rising cost of health care onto us. Given that the health plans at many campuses are already inadequate and steadily deteriorating, this proposal is unacceptable.

The university also made several proposals which would prevent teaching assistants, readers, and tutors from being informed of their rights, and which would limit our rights to express solidarity with workers in other campus unions.

The university is proposing to take us in the wrong direction. This is unacceptable. As bargaining continues, we will keep you informed of developments at the bargaining table and opportunities to participate in winning a great fourth contract. If you have questions or would like to get more involved, please reply to this message or contact your campus office. http://www.uaw2865.org/contact.html

In solidarity,

UAW 2865 Bargaining Committee

Tarone Bittner, Davis Unit Chair
Toi Carter, Riverside Recording Secretary
Meaghan Chadwick, Merced Unit Chair
Cassandra Engeman, Santa Barbara Recording Secretary
Michelle Gallagher, Los Angeles Unit Chair
Tim Gutierrez, Davis Recording Secretary
Adam Hefty, Santa Cruz Recording Secretary
Samantha Iyer, Berkeley Recording Secretary
Jamie Keeton, Los Angeles Recording Secretary
Daraka Larimore-Hall, Santa Barbara Unit Chair
Christine Petit, Riverside Unit Chair
Dan Roth, Berkeley Unit Chair
David Selby, San Diego Unit Chair
Sara Smith, Santa Cruz Unit Chair
Coral Wheeler, Irvine Recording Secretary
Kelly Wurtz, San Diego Recording Secretary

UAW Local 2865 Bargaining Update

March 20, 2007

Our bargaining team has had the first of many meetings with the University. On March 13th, our team sat down with the University's bargaining team in order to explain our opening proposals and answer questions about them. On April 16th, the University will present their opening proposals to us. Negotiations will continue through the summer. We intend to have a new, strong contract by September 30 (the expiration date of the current contract).

We are bargaining to strengthen our contract through obtaining better health care, higher wages, campus fee remissions, non-resident tuition remissions, greater appointment rights and enforceable workload protections. We will be pushing for dependent health benefits (including coverage for domestic partners), as well as for trans-inclusive coverage. It is through bargaining for these issues that we hope to achieve our three goals: economic security, non-economic security and contributing to social justice.

If you have questions or would like to get more involved, call your campus office. We will keep you updated via email and at monthly membership meetings as things develop.

In solidarity,

UAW 2865 Bargaining Committee

Tarone Bittner, Davis Unit Chair
Toi Carter, Riverside Recording Secretary
Meaghan Chadwick, Merced Unit Chair
Cassandra Engeman, Santa Barbara Recording Secretary
Michelle Gallagher, Los Angeles Unit Chair
Tim Gutierrez, Davis Recording Secretary
Adam Hefty, Santa Cruz Recording Secretary
Samantha Iyer, Berkeley Recording Secretary
Jamie Keeton, Los Angeles Recording Secretary
Daraka Larimore-Hall, Santa Barbara Unit Chair
Christine Petit, Riverside Unit Chair
Dan Roth, Berkeley Unit Chair
David Selby, San Diego Unit Chair
Sara Smith, Santa Cruz Unit Chair
Coral Wheeler, Irvine Recording Secretary
Kelly Wurtz, San Diego Recording Secretary

SUMMARY OF INITIAL PROPOSALS FOR OUR 4TH CONTRACT

Our third contract expires September 30, 2007. This contract is a legally binding document that specifies the terms of our employment, including rights and protections, as well as benefits and wages.

The union and the university administration are currently negotiating the terms of our fourth contract. Both parties opened negotiations by providing a comprehensive list of initial proposals. We made our proposals on March 1, 2007, while the administration made its proposals on April 2, 2007. The following is a summary of these proposals.

Our proposals were based on membership feedback (including bargaining surveys and one-on-one conversations) and our experiences as teaching assistants, readers, and tutors at the University of California. We’re committed to fighting for both economic and non-economic improvements, to guarantee fairness and respect for all employees and to ensure that the UC remains a leader in social justice and quality of education.

Appointment Notification
Our Proposal: Our proposal called for accurate, detailed, and timely notification of job appointments. Employees should be offered jobs and be given detailed documentation of their duties and scheduling obligations well before the term starts. Improving appointment notification would provide greater job security.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration proposed bureaucratic changes to employment paperwork.

Child Care
Our Proposal: We proposed to increase the affordability and accessibility of childcare for all employees.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose changes to this article.

Defined Contribution Plan
Our Proposal: We did not propose changes to this article.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration proposed to be able to alter employee participation in the DCP (a retirement plan).

Employment Files and Evaluations
Our Proposal: We proposed a fairer, more transparent evaluation process. The university should notify employees when new material is added to their employment files. Employees should be able to correct any incorrect information in their files.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration proposed to limit what information can be corrected in employee files. Employees would also have to fill out additional paperwork in order for representatives to review their employment files.

Fee Remissions
Our Proposal: As a benefit of employment for most employees the university currently pays 100% of education and registration fees, but not campus fees or other fees. We proposed to expand the fee remission program to cover all employees (including undergraduates, international students and out-of-state students) and all types of fees (including campus fees, education, registration, and professional fees).

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration proposed to abolish 100% fee remissions for education and registration fees. It would establish a fixed dollar amount for these fee remissions, so any future fee increases would not be covered.

Grievance and Arbitration
Our Proposal: We did not propose changes to this article.

The Administration’s Proposal: The grievance procedure would be complicated in various ways, making it more difficult to enforce our rights.

Health Benefits
Our Proposal: Currently the university remits 100% of the student health insurance fee as a benefit of employment for most employees. We proposed that all employees be provided with full medical, dental, and vision coverage, including transgender-appropriate healthcare services and coverage for our spouses, dependents, and domestic partners.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration proposed to abolish 100% remissions of health insurance fees. It would establish a fixed dollar amount for health insurance fee remissions, so any future fee increases would not be covered.

Holidays
Our Proposal: We proposed additional paid holidays.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose changes to this article.

Leaves
Our Proposal: We proposed paid leaves for employees to deal with major life events and other important obligations and professional events.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration proposed updates to comply with university policy.

No Strikes
Our Proposal: We did not propose changes to this article.

The Administration’s Proposal: Under current contract language and state and federal law, individual TAs, readers, and tutors have a right to freedom of expression in regards to strikes or labor actions by other UC unions. The administration’s proposal would restrict this freedom of expression and limit employees’ ability to express solidarity with other campus workers.

Non-Discrimination in Employment
Our Proposal: We proposed to strengthen and expand our protections against discrimination to include protections against discrimination due to pregnancy, gender identity (including gender expression), and criminal record.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration proposed to align non-discrimination protections with UC policy.

Parking and Transit
Our Proposal: We proposed a reduction in work travel costs through affordable, accessible parking and free mass transit and alternative transit.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose changes to this article.

Posting of Available Jobs
Our Proposal: We proposed to establish an earlier timeline for posting job opportunities and improved transparency of job postings and hiring criteria.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose changes to this article.

Recognition
Our Proposal: We did not propose changes to this article.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration is proposing to delete certain job titles and codes.

Summer Session
Our Proposal: We proposed that summer session employees' rights and compensation be comparable to the rest of the academic year, including job security rights.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose changes to this article.

Union Access and Rights
Our Proposal: Currently, we are informed about our union benefits and rights at an orientation, which we are paid to attend. We did not propose changes to this article.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration's proposal would prevent new employees from being informed of their union rights and benefits at orientation.

Wages
Our Proposal: We proposed to receive wage increases that reward our contribution to the mission of the university and reflect the cost of living in California. Pay disparities should be eliminated and tutors should be guaranteed pay for all tutoring no-shows.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose any substantial changes to wages.

Workload
Our Proposal: We proposed to strengthen workload protections and ensure that employees are not required to work for more hours than they’re being paid. Issues of overwork would be proactively addressed by increased, enforceable protections against excessive class, lab, and section size. In those cases where the class-size policies could reasonably be expected to cause a workload problem, they would also be grievable. Our proposal would also establish a fairer process for resolving workload disputes, including neutral, third-party arbitration and the ability of groups of employees, and the union, to raise workload disputes.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose changes to this article.

Workspace and Instructional Support
Our Proposal: We proposed that all employees be provided with adequate workspace and instructional support, including office space, ergonomic equipment, computers, etc.

The Administration’s Proposal: The administration did not propose changes to this article.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ANALYSES OF FEES & WAGES FOR ACADEMIC STUDENT EMPLOYEES

Below are several documents produced by the University of California (UC) that support the need for increased compensation for Academic Student Employees working at UC. For further information on our current negotiations, please read our bargaining updates and contact your campus office.

NON-RESIDENT TUITION FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS
At the May 10, 2006 meeting of the UC Academic Senate Faculty, 83% of voting members felt that non-resident tuition was an undue burden for graduate students.

NON-RESIDENT TUITION FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS
An August 8, 2006 letter to UC President Dynes from the Chair of the Academic Council endorsing the Competitive Graduate Student Financial Support Advisory Committee's recommendation that non-resident tuition is an undue burden for graduate students.

COMPARABILITY OF GRADUATE STUDENT WAGES
University of California Office of the President's findings on how low wages are for UC graduate students versus comparable institutions.

GRADUATE STUDENT WAGES & FEES
Final Academic Council Committee report on the need for increased graduate student compensation (June, 2006).

2007 - 2008 GRADUATE STUDENT EXPENSE BUDGET
How much it costs to be a graduate student (projected living expenses) according to the University of California.

2007 - 2008 UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT EXPENSE BUDGET
How much it costs to be an undergraduate student (projected living expenses) according to the University of California.

Wages at UC Uncompetitive, Grossly Inadequate to Cover Cost of Living

According to the UC administration’s own estimates, academic student employees (ASEs)don’t earn enough money to meet our living and educational expenses while enrolled as students in the University of California (UC) system.

Teaching Assistants (TAs) in the UC system, typically make about $15,610.50 per academic year. However, per the UC Office of the President, the average cost of living for a graduate student is $20,496. On some campuses, the cost of living is thousands of dollars higher than that average. At Irvine, for example, the cost of living for graduate students is estimated at $24,105. The administration is not proposing any guaranteed wage increase in the coming years.

The UC says that we make thousands of dollars less per year than what we need to live, and we agree. When we raised this issue at the bargaining table, one administration official told us that ASEs should look to sources of “personal and familial wealth” to fund their lives while they are in school, as if ASEs were independently wealthy.

As ASEs, it’s our job to prepare the finest minds in the great state of California for entry into the workforce and life beyond college. In order to do this, we need to be able to afford basic necessities. Opportunities to contribute to higher education, at a public institution that prides itself on its diversity, cannot just be for those who have independent sources of wealth or are willing to take on incredible amounts of debt.

Are ASEs at the institutions with which the UC competes facing the same economic hardships? No. ASEs at our competitor institutions are making an average of $23,390 in California dollars per academic year for twenty hours of work per week. That’s a difference of $7,780--about 50% more than what we make at UC.

The UC itself identifies a competitiveness gap (see Table 9, pg. 13) with respect to net stipends (which include fellowships as well as TA and RA wages). At UCLA for example, the competitiveness gap was $6081 in 2004 ($6,548.16 in 2007 dollars). How is the UC supposed to attract the best and brightest, when the best and brightest are surely smart enough to figure out that if they want to be able to afford to feed, clothe and house themselves, they better go elsewhere for their education?

The picture is even worse for readers and tutors, who make far less than TAs. The UC pays the typical undergraduate tutor less than $200 per paycheck and less than $15/hr. At the same time, the UC estimates undergraduate non-fee expenses at $14,664 per year. Even if a reader works for the entire academic year at 20 hours a week, the cost of living typically exceeds their yearly wages by over $1,000. If the UC aims to fulfill its commitments to diversity in higher education, it needs to increase wages for both readers and tutors.

The wage package our union is proposing is modest in its aim. It is designed to close the competitiveness gap and address the difference between our current wages and cost of living.

Expanded UC Fee Remission Program Necessary for California

Imagine a job where most or all of your wages were funneled right back to your employer at the end of the month. How would you afford basic living expenses like food, rent, and utilities?

Unfortunately, that’s the reality for many academic student employees (ASEs) at the University of California (UC), since paying registration fees, education fees, campus fees and, if applicable, nonresident tuition and professional school fees is a condition of employment.

Our union is proposing that all fees be remitted for graduate and undergraduate employees alike. Such an expanded fee remission program would help ensure that the UC is accessible, affordable, and committed to attracting diversity.

Under the current contract, graduate students working as ASEs for at least 10 hours per week already get education, registration and health care fees remitted. We don’t currently receive fee remissions for other fees, such as non-resident tuition, campus fees, professional school fees, or registration and education fees for undergraduate employees. Going forward, the fee remission program must be expanded to include all fees.

The remission of these fees is necessary not only because ASEs typically make thousands of dollars less per year than they need to live (even before these fees are taken into consideration, see the web article on wages) and not only because no one should have to pay to work, but also because the State of California would be well served by eliminating disincentives to accepting admission to UC institutions.

Part of the UC’s job as a public institution is to serve the community by providing the quality education students need in order to make positive contributions to the economy. As the state population grows, this part of the UC’s mission can only be accomplished by absorbing more students into the system. But excessive fees constitute incentives for students to look beyond California for their higher education, draining valuable talent from the state.

Nonresident Tuition
Nonresident tuition hits out-of-state and international ASEs hard in the pocketbook. International student enrollment has been dropping, largely due to the uncompetitive nature of UC financial packages. Nonresident ASEs pay approximately 50% of their salary back to the university in the form of fees, leaving them with almost nothing to live on.

UC itself recognizes the vital need to attract international and out-of-state ASEs:
“The quality of the University’s educational and research programs depends upon our attracting outstanding students to our graduate programs. In particular, it is important that, like other major research universities, the University of California seek out and recruit applicants, regardless of residence, who are truly exceptional and whose presence at UC improves the overall quality of our teaching and research. International students, in particular, have an important educational impact on both graduate and undergraduate U.S. students by raising their knowledge of global issues and other societies and nations.”
Report Title: Final Committee Report and Recommendations to the Provost (see page 14)
Committee: Competitive Graduate Student Financial Support Advisory Committee

The UC’s Competitive Graduate Student Financial Support Advisory Committee recommends eliminating nonresident tuition for most doctoral students in 2007-2008 (see page v). We agree with this recommendation; that’s why our bargaining demands include nonresident tuition remissions for academic student employees.

Campus Fees
Campus fees can add up to several hundred dollars per year in costs to ASEs, depending on the campus. All academic student employees who are registered students have to pay these fees, which cover expenses like campus facilities, transportation programs, and student initiatives.

The administration claims that academic student employees should have to pay these fees since students vote them on themselves. This argument is seriously flawed.

First, campus fees can be and have been unilaterally increased once they have been established. Berkeley’s Student Center Fee has increased significantly without a referendum. And to take another example, UCLA’s Ackerman Student Union Fee went from $7.50 to $51.00 without a referendum in 1997.

Second, on some campuses, like Davis and Berkeley, the Chancellor can unilaterally establish a fee or increase of an existing fee if the fee is necessary for the health and safety of students without even consulting the student body. As such, it’s a gross and misleading over-simplification to say that we vote these fees upon ourselves.

The role of the student fee referendum is typically advisory. Students do not have the final authority to permanently rescind or reduce fees. The administration could always unilaterally re-impose these fees. All this is to say that campus fee remissions are a necessary benefit for ASEs. Securing 100% remission of these fees is the only way to defend ourselves against University administrators’ ability to increase these fees at-will.

Undergraduate registration and education fees
Undergraduate ASEs do the same job as graduate ASEs and work just as hard, but a graduate student working 10 hours a week for a full academic year gets over $6,500 in registration fees paid whereas an undergraduate gets no fee remissions. This disparity needs to be eliminated.

Meanwhile, undergraduate fees are again on the rise. Most undergraduate tutors make less than $200 per paycheck. This year, unless compensation significantly increases, many such tutors will have to devote all of their wages to registration and other fees.

Professional School Fees
Potential ASEs hoping to use their wages to pay their professional school fees should think again. In 2006-07, the average Law, Medical, Business, and Dental School professional fees topped $15,000. That’s almost the entirety of a TA’s wages for an academic year, and well above what the typical tutor or reader is paid. And don’t forget that professional school students pay these fees on top of regular registration, education and campus fees.

That means that the net wages of a professional school student working for an entire year is less than –$5,389.50 before they even pay their living expenses. The University of California prides itself on its commitment to diversity. But attracting a diverse population of professional school students is not accomplished by charging potential employees and future key contributors to the wealth of California more than you are paying them.

Training the future workforce of California and attracting talent to the state would be far easier if the fee disincentives were eliminated for academic student employees. The administration can start to more effectively reach this goal by providing full fee and tuition remissions for all ASEs.

Wal Mart or UC? When it comes to health care, it's hard to tell the difference

When academic student employees with spouses, partners or children start work at the University of California, they usually aren’t thinking about how similar their family’s health care options are to that of America’s most anti-worker company:

Wal Mart.

When new employees start work at Wal Mart, questions about health care benefits are answered with a brochure on how to apply for public assistance. This is the exact same thing that happens at many UC campuses when academic student employees ask a simple question: how can I get health care for my child, spouse or partner?

And that’s the good news. If you’re a non-resident, you’re not even eligible for public assistance health care. Your only option is to buy expensive health insurance plans wherein you, the international ASE, are on the hook for the full premium for your dependents’ benefits.

For example: Let’s say you’re an international GSI at UC Berkeley. You have a wife and a child. The cheapest health care option available through the University to insure just your child is $160/month – approximately 10% of a typical GSI’s monthly wage. To enroll your entire family, the least expensive plan costs $554 – greater than one-third of a GSI’s wages.

At UCLA the picture is even bleaker. Dependent health care costs almost $300/month. In exchange for $300/month, our dependents receive an “illness and injury” plan that expressly excludes wellness and preventative health care. Furthermore, the plan language is so confusing that it’s not immediately clear which basic diagnostic services are covered and under what circumstances they would be covered.

And those are just the problems with dependent health care. The Student Health Insurance Plan (SHIP, USHIP, GSHIP, etc.) is fraught with shortcomings. For example, the formulary used by most campuses to determine what prescription drugs are covered is highly restricted. Many name brand drugs are either not available at all or available only at extraordinary expense. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that at many campuses, prescriptions can only be affordably filled at one pharmacy.

Furthermore, this last year brought many negative changes to SHIP. At UCLA, diagnostic tests now cost more than ever. In fact, it’s now possible to reach the annual out-of-pocket expense cap ($1,000) after a single round of pre-natal health care visits. This is all on top of the fact that on almost every campus, the student health center is a mandatory “first stop,” which often means long waits to see physicians and little to no ability to choose your primary care physician.

Even worse, undergraduate ASEs do not receive any health care benefits as a part of their jobs, even though they perform the same work as their graduate ASE counterparts.

This health care crisis is decreasing the attractiveness of the University of California for the world’s best students and directly contributes to the University’s growing competitiveness problems. That’s why we’re proposing major improvements in health care for ASEs in current contract talks. In addition to covering our dependents, we’re also proposing improvements to primary care, dental and vision, as well as gender confirmation procedures. Such improvements are key to making UC an attractive place to study for students with diverse health care needs.

The University of California is big. But that’s no reason for it to behave like a big box retailer towards its employees on health care issues. As the largest public research university in the world, it’s time for UC to live up to its commitment to recruit a diverse graduate student population by doing better than the worst employer in America when it comes health care.

ASE Parents Speak Out on UC’s Anti-Family Policies

In our Sept. 5-7 bargaining session, the administration claimed that child care resources on UC campuses were both sufficient for academic student employees and cost effective. We were shocked at how out of touch the administration was, and so were academic student employees from every UC campus.

On Thursday, Sept. 20th a delegation of academic student employees who are also parents went to the bargaining table at UCLA and spoke their minds to the administration’s dubious claims. Parents from UC campuses who were unable to attend also submitted testimonials describing the harsh realities of life as an ASE parent working in the UC system.

We read testimonials from every single UC campus into the record. From the shared experiences of the parents, it became abundantly clear that UC’s anti-family policies need a major change, and that the best way to do it is though our proposals on child care, healthcare, and leaves.

The reality is that parents are typically waiting years to get their children into UC childcare facilities, facilities which are clearly inadequate. Not only are the costs extreme, but these facilities do not even operate during the hours academic student employees are often required to work.

A TA from UCLA reports spending $1800 a month on childcare services that do not extend into the evening hours which is when she will soon be holding section for the fall quarter.

At Berkeley, a parent with an infant will be paying $1,000 per month unless they qualify for subsidized care. If they don’t get in, which is the more typical case, childcare costs can easily exceed the monthly salary of a teaching assistant. That is why we are proposing subsidies adequate to meet the needs of parents, whether their child is lucky enough to have been accepted into UC childcare or not.

Working parents are often forced, by circumstances created by the UC, to have fellow graduate students watch their children in department buildings, to bring children to section, to call in favors from family and friends and to put their children into cheap, substandard, unregulated childcare facilities in order to contribute to the research mission of the university and complete their degrees.

And the anti-family nature of UC’s policies is not limited to the inadequacy of its childcare facilities. Lactation rooms are scarce on almost all campuses, forcing new mothers to seek out secluded nooks, basements and abandoned offices for lactation needs.

Further, academic student employees at most campuses are expected to maintain the same progress to degree even when a newborn enters their lives. That includes meeting TAing requirements, even though it is more cost effective, given current TA pay and the lack of adequate childcare facilities, to care for a child at home.

The link between our healthcare, leaves, and childcare proposals for families working at the UC should be clear. Currently, many new parents choose to go on leave from the university, because working doesn’t cover the cost of childcare and childcare isn’t provided by the UC. Unfortunately, these parents lose the right to purchase dependent health insurance (on those campuses where it can be purchased at all).

Even if a parent keeps working, the cost of dependant health care is extreme, up to almost $300 per month at UCLA. In fact, the cost of health care is not affordable to academic student employees, since according to the UC, they don’t make enough to live on even if they don’t have children [see the web article on wages]. The added cost of health care for children makes it all the more important for parents to have the necessary resources in terms of child-care funding.

Our union is proposing paid parental leave which includes childbearing leave and can be used by either parent. If an employee has to take off time in order to care for a child, they will not lose their health coverage.

We are also proposing a package of leaves to ensure ASEs have time off to deal with life’s necessities: bereavement leave, so that if a family member dies, employees can have the proper amount of time to grieve and take care of end-of-life responsibilities while still meeting living expenses, and sick leave and emergency leave, so that individual ASEs and ASEs and their families can deal with situations such as illnesses and childcare emergencies that arise without warning and disrupt daily life.

For health care, we are proposing that dependant health care be expanded and fully paid for by the university. No child should have to go without health care just because the only job their parent’s department permits them to hold doesn’t pay enough money to cover childcare, let alone any other living expenses.

Take Action Now
Call the Provosts, Chancellors, and Executive Vice Chancellors
Send the Message: Avert the ULP Strike, Bargain Fairly Now

UAW Local 2865, the union representing over 12,000 Teaching Assistants, Graders and Tutors at the University of California, has been negotiating for a new agreement with UC since March. The current contract expires this Sunday – September 30.

Because of the University’s bad faith bargaining, there is a strong chance that Academic Student Employees will be forced to strike. In fact, over 6,500 of our members from around the state have signed-on to a public statement, promising to hold the University accountable for their stalling with direct action.

Local 2865's bargaining team remains optimistic that agreement can be reached with the University by Sunday. However, the UAW needs your help to put pressure on University administrators to negotiate fairly and settle a contract.

Please help by taking action now. Call:

UC Provost Rory Hume @ (510) 987-9020,
the Chancellor at your nearest UC campus, and
the Executive Vice Chancellor at your nearest UC campus

...and urge her/him to take action to bargain fairly and avert a strike NOW. You can find the contact information for all the UC Chancellors and Executive Vice Chancellors below:

Campus	Chancellor	Executive Vice Chancellors
Berkeley	Robert J. Birgeneau (510) 642-7464	George W. Breslauer 510-642-1961


Merced	Steve Kang (209) 228-4417	Keith Alley (209) 228-4439


Davis	Larry Vanderhoef (530) 752-2065	Barbara Horwitz (530) 752-4964


Santa Cruz	George Blumenthal (831) 459-2058	David Kliger (831) 459-2058


Santa Barbara	Henry T. Yang (805) 893-2231	Gene Lucas (805) 893-2785


Los Angeles	Gene Block (310) 825-2151	Scott L. Waugh (310) 825-2052


Irvine	Michael V. Drake (949) 824-5111	Michael R. Gottfredson 949.824.6296


Riverside	Robert Grey (951) 827-5201	Ellen A. Wartella (951) 827-5034


San Diego	Marye Anne Fox (858) 534-3135	Marjorie Caserio (858) 534-0099 or Paul Drake (858) 534-6073

***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
6,154 UAW 2865 MEMBERS DEMAND THAT UC NEGOTIATE FAIRLY
UNION MEMBERS MOBILIZED FOR A STRONG CONTRACT BY 9/30

Contact: Scott Bailey Clifthorne, President (510) 549 3863

September 18, 2007

(California) – 6,154 members of UAW 2865, the Union representing over 12,000 Teaching Assistants, Tutors, and Readers throughout the University of California system, have signed on to a public statement calling on UC to negotiate fairly and reach agreement by September 30. The text of the statement can be seen below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STATEMENT TEXT:

We, the undersigned Union members, call upon the University Administration to abide by its duty to bargain with the UAW in a productive, constructive, and lawful manner so that by the expiration date of the current contract we have a new contract to ratify, which includes:

wages that are on par with ASEs at UC-competitor institutions and which reflect the high cost of UC attendance and living expenses in UC communities;
full fee and tuition remissions;
improved health coverage;
family-friendly provisions including child care, parental leave, and health coverage for our dependents, spouses and partners;
enhanced workload rights that address increasing class sizes and the ability to enforce these rights through arbitration;
increased transparency in hiring decisions;
summer-session compensation and rights that are the same as the academic year;
the preservation of our right to bargain campus issues on individual campuses;
our right to stand in solidarity with other UC employees when they are striking.

Our work at the University is vital to its mission, and our working conditions directly impact the learning conditions of its students. If the University Administration refuses to acknowledge our demands and delays passage of a new contract, we are committed to taking whatever steps are necessary to ensure compliance, up to and including direct action, if called upon to do so by the Union.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Members are really fired up about contract negotiations,” said UCLA Biomedical Engineering Teaching Assistant Mark Roden. “We’re fighting for very important rights and benefits right now. As the statement clearly shows, the majority demands that the University bargain fairly.”

“Our membership is highly mobilized. Not only have 6,154 members already signed this public statement, but the number continues to grow,” said Samantha Iyer, Reader and Bargaining Team member from UC Berkeley. “Everyone is highly focused on and working toward reaching agreement by contract expiration. Despite the University’s unwillingness to engage and foot dragging on important issues, we are at the table, ready to reach agreement by September 30.”

The UAW and the U.C. have been in contract talks for a fourth agreement since March. An electronic version of the Union’s bargaining demands and this public statement are available at http://www.uaw2865.org. Academic Student Employees perform a majority of face-to-face education at the University of California. Nationally, the UAW represents over 27,000 Academic Student Employees at colleges and universities.

***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CHARGES FILED AGAINST UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
UAW 2865 DEMANDS THAT UC BARGAIN FAIRLY AND LAWFULLY: STRIKE LOOMS

Contact: Daraka Larimore-Hall, (510) 549 3863

September 27, 2007

(California) – UAW 2865, the Union representing over 12,000 Teaching Assistants, Tutors, and Readers throughout the University of California system, is in the process of filing dozens of unfair labor practice (ULPs) charges against the University of California today. “These unfair practice charges demonstrate that the University has been engaging in bad faith bargaining and obstructing efforts to reach agreement on issues of import to the daily lives of Teaching Assistants, Tutors, and Readers,” said Tarone Bittner, Sociology TA and Bargaining Committee member from UC Davis.

The Union may call a strike over these ULPs if the charges are not resolved and agreement reached by the expiration of the current contract, this Sunday, September 30th. “We’re prepared to strike if UC persists with their unfair labor practices,” said Coral Wheeler, Physics TA and Bargaining Committee member from UC Irvine.

The parties are currently engaged in successor negotiations for UAW 2865's contract. UAW 2865 recently released a public statement which, at the time of this release, had over 6,500 signatures from members. The statement calls upon the University of California to negotiate fairly and reach agreement with UAW 2865 by contract expiration.

The UAW and the UC have been in contract talks for a fourth agreement since March. An electronic version of the Union’s bargaining demands is available at http://www.uaw2865.org. Academic Student Employees perform a majority of face-to-face education at the University of California. Nationally, the UAW represents over 27,000 Academic Student Employees at colleges and universities.