❗ Important: Bargaining and Strike Authorization Updates
Read on to see why the Bargaining Committee urges you to vote Yes to authorize a strike. Strike Demands Strike FAQ
After refusing to bargain with us for months, Columbia gave the team less than 24 hours notice to hold the first session today. Even so, over 100 unit members showed up to bargaining. It was clear to all that Columbia was poorly prepared to discuss either the re-opening plan or last-minute changes to stipend payments.
At our insistence, Columbia agreed not to place arbitrary restrictions on the number of observers present at bargaining sessions. We also demanded that Columbia meet with us at least twice a week moving forward. They will get back to us by Thursday on meeting times for next week.
Weeks ago, our team sent in a proposed reopening plan to address still-present COVID-19 hazards, which the University ignored. Today, we pressed them on their hasty reopening plans which do not allow Zoom for use in teaching and potentially shut down the free and voluntary Covid-19 testing centers. The University denied that testing centers would be shut down (even though some already have) and pointed us to “their website,” which was where we found the plans of the testing closures in the first place. The University stated it would deal with unsafe working conditions in an ad-hoc manner. An ad-hoc, case-by-case approach is not an appropriate response to a pandemic. When our team cited recent reports of unsafe conditions (including packed classrooms with no ventilation and a lack of remote options for quarantining students and workers), Columbia asked us to draft a proposal somehow not remembering that we already sent one. Nonetheless, the BC was able to extract a commitment from the University to read and respond to our working conditions proposal by our next meeting.
We brought up the illegality of unilaterally changing the stipend pay schedule of workers on 9-month appointments, forcing hundreds of student workers to incur additional debt at the beginning of the semester (see this Stipend Change Fact Sheet). We maintained our position that changes to the stipend must be approved by the union, in anticipation of filing an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charge with the NLRB.
We argued that Columbia's decision to give us 0% raises this year constitutes an illegal discontinuance of the established practice of 3% yearly increases, dating back to 2015, in anticipation of filing an additional ULP.
We were invigorated by the energy and excellent turnout at the bargaining session today, which underscores how important open bargaining is and how much stronger we are together.
Columbia's lack of preparation and unwillingness to discuss these crucial issues make it clear that we will need our unit's strength to compel them to take our demands seriously - even the threat of a Strike Authorization Vote has already brought them to the bargaining table on our terms! Check out our FAQ on all things Strike here.
In Solidarity,
Your Bargaining Committee