| Coalition of University Employees (CUE) | 2855 Telegraph Ave., Suite #302, Berkeley, CA 94705 Contact CUE (510) 845-2221 (phone), (510) 845-7444 (FAX) |
NOTES FROM THE BARGAINING BUBBLE #15
by Bert Thomas, UCLA Representative, CUE BARGAINING TEAM
(A personal diary, not the Official Report)
LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LAB, May 19, 2005 & June 16, 2005;
UC RIVERSIDE, June 1-3, 2005
UC: NICE PEOPLE DOING NICE THINGS
NURSES (CNA) SET STRIKE VOTE JUNE 28 TO JULY 7!
(MORE IN THE NEXT BUBBLE, #16)
Kudos to those who volunteered to serve on the CUE MEDIA TASK FORCE a week before the CUE STRIKE ON ANCIENT ISSUES (dating from Re-Opener bargaining 2003-04). You rose to the occasion by contacting media outlets in your respective Locals without benefit of much formal training or cultivated media relations. We sent out 3 or 4 press releases Statewide and Internationally (through Pacifica Radio) sheerly on the ingenuity of CUEsters from every campus. Pretty remarkable smoke-signals if you ask me...the University is still complaining. Bigger, stronger unions than CUE applauded our accomplishment and joined us on the picket lines. You all ROCK. (Like to help in the future? Reply to this, I'll pass it on.)
Your sturdy correspondent herewith makes an attempt to catch up.
Following two bargaining sessions at the Lab--on May 19th and June 16th--the 200+ CUE-represented workers at the Lab voted to accept the last of several "New, Improved, Revised, Last/Best/Final Offer's" from Lab Negotiator, Bill Elkins, bless his heart...the very last of these made over the phone. Local CUE officers Paijoun MontannaBronte, Edith Perry, and Helane Carpenter...with CUE Chief Negotiator Amatullah Alaji-Sabrie, Chief Steward Margy Wilkinson, CUE President Mary Higgins, Kevin Parks of Santa Cruz and yours truly from the CUE Successor Bargaining Team, were merciless in challenging the methodology, numbers, and policies that have given rise to CUE members' charges of favoritism/racism in awarding of pay increases, promotions, and reclassifications. CUE workers at the Lab already make significantly better wages within their classifications than you do, but their arguments at the table slowly turned the spotlight on this dark corner of "management discretion" and eliminated much of it. Despite Lab management concern over future funding uncertainly from the DOE, the wage proposal guarantees salary range adjustments for 2005 and 2006 and guaranteed merit pools for 2004-2007. (See the CUE web site to view the agreement in detail.)
The proposal also includes CUE's negotiated right to hold Semi-Annual Labor/Management meetings on equity matters with a committee of 3 CUE members, 3 Management members, and one "neutral" member agreed on by both sides...a Tie-Breaker, in effect.
And because I'm pretty sure they'll read this, let me mention UC's Lab Negotiator Bill Elkins as a mostly decent guy caught like Howard the Duck "in a world he never made..." and his sole co-bargainer on this final occasion, Shada Kuba, (freed for the day from duties on UC Negotiator Peter Chester's "big table" team) whose contribution to the meeting and the mostly peaceful, productive atmosphere of discussions was both noted and appreciated by everyone on the CUE team. I mean, now that the Lab settlement is a done deal, it can be said of Bill Elkins that he came to respect the CUE Team and spoke more candidly of the constraints imposed on him by "Senior Management". You could always tell...when things coming out of his mouth seemed kinda goofy...that he was in a spiritual dilemma, where he found himself between a decent respect for the truth and the "company line." For example, when he was saying several times at the bargaining table that unexpended funds for clerical raises were returned to the funding entity (the State, the Dept. of Energy, etc.) and the financial guy on his team, Matthew Mleczko, said "well, uh, not exactly"...it was plain that Matthew hadn't had enough of the UC KoolAid that day, and Bill was busted.
This is important for a couple of reasons:
Anyhow, I started to say that Bill Elkins really tried to serve his various masters, including his CUE-represented Lab workers, and it looks like he may have pulled it off. With the assistance of the aforementioned CUE Team, whose performance was proud, firm and astute. Congratulations to all for what appears to be a much improved agreement with the Berkeley Lab.
You don't gotta be smart to be a Regent...just gotta be rich. And shallow.
On May 25th--while CUE was trying to get 4 or 5% guaranteed money for clerical workers--the Regents approved a 61% pay raise for their Treasurer, DAVID RUSS, to grant him a really competitive corporate salary, $450,000 per year. Nice negotiating, Dave! And I bet you ain't having to wait on that danged old "Governor's Compact" to see it show up on your check. As our Chief Negotiator Amatullah said at the bargaining table: "We'd like to get paid out of THAT pot of money...which pot is that, Peter?" (Peter Chester, UC's Negotiator on the Successor Agreement, had no answer except to indicate it was a different pot.)
And to our fine Board of Regents: "GREAT TIMING, YOUR EXCELLENCIES! You win the prize for BEST UNION ORGANIZING EFFORT BY AN OBLIVIOUS BOARD!" Our sincerest thanks and congratulations from all the Little People...
PARKING SYSTEMS: NOBODY LOVES 'EM BUT THE CHANCELLORS
Riverside bargaining meetings were concerned, in the main, with a continuation of Parking testimony...this time with focus on the southern campuses: at UCLA, IRVINE, RIVERSIDE, SANTA BARBARA, & SAN DIEGO. Questioning was rigorous and astute from CUE Statewide President and Bargainer, Mary Higgins, with important help from Monika Hobson of CUE Irvine. There was detail enough to make your eyes glaze over. OK...MY eyes. Ms. Higgins has been a University employee for more than 30 years and seems to know more about parking facility construction and funding than the people she was questioning. Again and again, we learned of the rich variety of seat-of-the-pants parking administration on every campus by and from people who were mighty ordinary...paid very well, to be sure, but trying very hard to carry on practices and procedures established by a crew of mighty ordinary people before them. Each campus' parking arrangements and fees differ in some fundamental way from every other. My ears pricked up, of course, when we got to UCLA's parking folks. I had been on the Local parking bargaining team some 3 or 4 years ago when our team member, Anita Windom-Jones (may her name be celebrated in the annals of CUE-LA), pointed up a line-item in the Bruin parking budget for a $3 million expenditure called: "Land Rent", roughly 10% of UCLA's parking budget. "Really!" she said at the time. "I thought the land was donated to the University...are you paying rent to yourselves and calling it an expense?" Well, yeah, they were. And they still are. UCLA Parking spokesperson, Rene Fortier, on the phone to us in Riverside, asserted that this was part of "running the department like a business." When we later spoke with Carolyn MacIntyre, speaking for the UCLA/Santa Monica parking location, I asked the same question and she said "Of course not, we don't pay land rent on the lot because we own it." Well, dang, girls and boys...they can't both be right. I asked Ms. Fortier "Whose name goes on that check for 'land rent'? Who's the payee?"; "It's not a check," she said, "It's a disbursement to the Chancellor's Discretionary Fund." I'm just taking a stab in the dark here, but I'll bet that $3+million disbursement meets the legal definition of fraud...that paying "rent" to yourself (wouldn't you like to do that?) and padding what looks for all the world like a slush fund for Chancellor Al Carnesale. Life is good, ain't it, Al? Don't go changin'. Been about 4 years since this accounting anomaly was revealed and publicized. Does that mean that UCLA parking folk won't cease-and-desist until they're forced to? Pretty much.
CUE believes, after all the parking testimony, that UC parking systems throughout the state are fit subjects for a thorough audit. They appear to be a hodgepodge of projects, contracts, and slapdash planning...funding for which is placed squarely on the backs of the public, employees, students, and medical patients, with little or no regard for fairness and equity. We were astonished to discover from Mary Higgins' questioning that at least one project had been under construction for two years without any funding in place. "Oh well, we'll just impose those new parking rates." Not a problem for people making big money, but $600-900 a year just to park your car where you work can sure trash the net income of somebody making only $30K or less and trying to raise a family. The folks across the table from us have all said at one time or another that they "haven't had a raise, either." It's an argument that brings tears to my eyes. Compared to us, they don't need one...their mortgage payment is a "quality problem" that few of us have. We're still struggling with "rent." It's painful to realize that many of them don't even care.
WAGES: SHOOT-OUT AT RIVERSIDE... "THINK ABOUT IT, PETE!"
On Day 2, June 2nd, Mr. Chester began with: "Your wage proposal...where is it?"; "What didn't you understand, Peter, from what I said yesterday?" said CUE's Amatullah, "We're still waiting on your response to our information request about the actual net cost of a 1% increase. You've only made excuses for not giving us the information." The University's announced figure of $4.77 million does not take into account UC's considerable savings as a result of staff turnover when a worker quits, retires, is laid off or re-classed out of the clerical bargaining unit. CUE believes the $4.77 million figure is considerably lower than the 1% salary increase figure requested in the Regental budget. The University has consistently refused to provide the budget request information...or the turnover salary savings information. The CUE team maintains that a consensus must be reached on these numbers before a sensible proposal and discussion can go forward. And the discussion rapidly went south.
Soon, Chester was charging the CUE team with failure to work as hard on wage proposals as he had worked...CUE's Chief Negotiator Amatullah Alaji-Sabrie was firing back with charges that the University was deliberately withholding information that would confirm CUE's figures, CUE President, Mary Higgins and Bargainer, Cynthia Norman (and yeah, probably me and Alice Guillory of UCSF were in on it, too) challenging Mr. Chester's most cherished criticisms of CUE's "professionalism" and such. His arch defender, Susan Wright of UC San Francisco was on her feet, gathering papers, saying: "I don't need to be here!" and Peter Chester gathering his to say: "This is a waste of our time!" And lo, a sensible voice arose on the field of battle...one that everyone was somehow anxious to hear...that of Lynne Thompson, University Bargainer from Labor Relations at UCLA: "They're saying they need some information, and they're not going to submit a proposal without it. So let's talk about something else..." You had to be there, maybe...but it was like the voice of an angel.
Mr. Chester declared a caucus, and Alternate Bargainer from Berkeley, Joshua Sanderford, followed Peter out of the room saying: "Think about it, Pete! It's simple as ABC...get us the information, we do a proposal! Think about it, Pete!"
"IT'S POSSIBLE TO HONOR A STRIKE AND STILL GO TO WORK AND DO YOUR JOB...THAT'S WHAT I WOULD'VE DONE."
Thus spracht the University's Negotiator, Mr. Chester. Now, there's a guy you'd want on the picket line with you. Brave, committed, knows how to take a bold stand for the good of the team.
Done with parking for now, UC's Negotiator presented the CUE team with approximately 10 new counter-proposals on "non-economic" contract articles, one of which was "NO STRIKES/SYMPATHY STRIKES". Sure, he'd just learned of CUE's Strike announcement over the re-opener issues of 2003-04. And the game of strike intimidation was on. Need strike advice? Counsel on your rights as a worker? How about understanding of "Interest Based Bargaining"? Ask Peter. The guy's an authority, bless his heart. Courage, commitment, "good faith," and all that. He's your man.
AND SO, HE PITCHES "IMPASSE" ...AGAIN
"We believe in our collective hearts that we are getting close to the end," said UC's Chester, "and we believe you'll see that in these proposals there are concessions...trying to reach an agreement."
CUE Chief Negotiator, Amatullah Alaji-Sabrie, promised Mr. Chester that we would be grateful to find that this was true, but that it would take time to review them carefully, since the changes had not been clearly marked per bargaining custom. She noted that pay raises for union-represented people appeared to be tied to the "Governor's Compact" funding while the upper-classes at UC enjoyed immediate and comparatively spectacular increases with no such legislative or gubernatorial constraints. We wondered if that had something to do with a UC strategy for union-busting. Mr. Chester replied that the University was "confident" of the legislative funding for at least the first year of the Governor's Compact. CUE Bargainer Cynthia Norman of Irvine commented that "If you're so confident of that, why don't you just guarantee it, like you do with executive pay? Why do we have to wait-and-see?"
It was too good a question.
And it was 4:45pm. UC caucused for the rest of the day while we assigned study of UC's non-economic proposals to members of our own team, looking for the "concessions".
WAGES, DRAMA, DISAPPOINTMENT
It was Day 3 in Riverside. And from the outset, it was clear that UC's strategic intention was to move the Wages article to impasse. It was just as clear that CUE was not willing to go there. CUE's Bargainer from Santa Barbara, Melinda Gandara, explained that the cost of 1% of bargaining unit payroll (LESS the staff-turnover savings discussed earlier) was information also requested by UPTE in their contract negotiations, and in their frustration with the University's refusal to provide the information, UPTE had calculated their own figure, absent any "algorithm" from the University. Peter Chester reported that there had been "violent disagreement" over the result. "But that tells me the University has the information, and simply refuses to provide it. Why is that, Peter?" Mr. Chester said: "I can get a response to you on your information request...I may not be able to give you the data you requested."
What a remarkable answer. Then UC suddenly declared another caucus in order to present another wage proposal. Some of us dared to feel hopeful.
Silly us. When the University team returned, they presented us with the same 12% built on the AFSCME template (conditional on State funding) with additional provisos that we "pass through" (accept without negotiation) the University increases in parking and benefits costs. And for some real fun, we had to accept this fine offer with a gun to our heads. "This proposal will remain on the table and subject to tentative agreement until 5:00 pm June 10, 2005."
"Or else!" said CUE's Mary Higgins, laughing. June 10th was the Friday before the Re-Openers Strike. Mr. Chester's offer was met with a chorus of disapproval, his "deadline" with loud derision. Chief Negotiator Amatullah Alaji-Sabrie explained our reaction by calling Peter Chester and his wage proposal "dishonest" three times. "And then you expect us to join you in declaring 'impasse'? After what the University did to us in 2003-04? That's why we're striking in a little more than a week! Do you honestly believe we are that stupid? Your offer is insulting and dishonest! YOU are insulting and dishonest!"
"Please don't call me dishonest!" he said, as he gathered up his team and left the room again. Oh well...it was lunch time.
The rest of the day was frosty and correct. CUE's "checkout" was firm and ...terse. "You started these bargaining sessions by saying it was going to be Win-Win..." commented Alice Guillory of CUE San Francisco, "but that's not how it's been at all. The University's done itself a disservice with all these big raises for executives and nothing for people who actually do the work."
It seemed we all had things to do after that. Peter Chester had another bargaining failure to report to the Office of President Bob Dynes. And us? We all had threats of University "discipline" to defy, and picket lines to join. We were a little scared like many of you, but we were sure we'd have more fun.
(And we did, too! Congratulations, CUE workers at UCLA and everywhere else. You were brave and outrageous.)
FRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS WORK Un-CUE-ed
You can now JOIN CUE ONLINE at:
http://www.cueunion.org/membership_info/membformweb.pdf
Fill out the form, print, sign and mail it. Your
membership sends a clear message to the University.
There are 17,000 of us from Santa Cruz to San Diego.
Together, we cannot be ignored or treated with the usual
contempt. Need help at Local 4? Visit our website (below) or call our
mighty Organizers:
THE STRIKE FUND...FRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS TAKE ALL THE RISK, EITHER
Some of you crossed picket lines, didn't strike because you were afraid. It's OK, get over it. The University's threats and intimidation efforts had the desired effect. We understand. But I'd like to pass along to you the advice of CUEster Lisa Mohan of UCLA who suggests that a win-win way for workers to gain dignity (and salve an injured conscience maybe) is to donate an hour or two's pay to the CUE STRIKE FUND. Everyone disciplined, threatened, or otherwise intimidated is being aggressively represented by CUE attorneys. The ULP's (Unfair Labor Practice charges) are stacking up like...well, like a UC parking structure at 9am. It's expensive and your help in behalf of your co-workers is appreciated. Send it to:
CUE Bookkeeper
ATTN: Strike Fund
2855 Telegraph Avenue - Ste. 302
Berkeley, CA 94705
Solidarity is Intelligent. Fun. And Powerful.
Blessins,
--BT (yer laid-off posterboy)
(Bert Thomas, CUE's UCLA Bargaining Representative)
7.1.2005
Or get your Bubbles at the UCLA website.