| Coalition of University Employees (CUE) CUE TEAMSTERS LOCAL 2010 | 2855 Telegraph Ave., Suite #301, Berkeley, CA 94705 Contact CUE (510) 845-2221 (phone), (510) 845-7444 (FAX) |
NOTES FROM THE BARGAINING BUBBLE #4
by Bert Thomas, UCLA Representative, CUE BARGAINING TEAM
(A personal diary, not the Official Report)
at UC SAN FRANCISCO -- SEPTEMBER 7-8, 2004
TOTE THAT BARGE, LIFT THAT BALE, TAKE A VACATION...
Please forgive the tardiness of this "Bubble". I got a week behind taking our Chancellor Al Carnesale's advice. If you were lucky enough, close enough, able-bodied enough, or had access to the email invite early enough...you got to hear "Photo-Op Al" stand there at the 1st Annual UCLA Staff Picnic, advising God and everybody to "take a vacation." All of us who hadn't had a raise or a rest or a properly staffed workplace in a few years. Nope, you won't be getting that raise or that rest soon, he seemed to say, so why don't you take a vacation and come back refreshed to work even harder for dear ol' UC. He didn't say how we were supposed to pay for it...pretty sure it never crossed his mind, on account of he doesn't have the same kind of living wage problems as those of us in Low-Pay/High-Rent and Cost-of-Living Land. I wonder if someone writes that stuff for him or if it just comes natural.
Anyhow, thanks a heap for the counsel, Massa Al. It'll take me about 3 months to pay off that week in Tahoe at a cheap motel. But it was a heckuva swell idea.
CUE's BOLD PROPOSAL IN SAN FRANCISCO.
UC's...uh...RESPONSE.
At the end of "Bubble 3" a few weeks back, I mentioned that CUE's Chief Negotiator, Amatullah Alaji-Sabrie, had offered to provide the services of Steve Barber, a well-known and respected facilitator, with credentials in industry and government, to assist with a single day of our San Francisco meetings early this month. I might have even sounded hopeful.
Moments after pressing the "Send" button, however, I received word that the University's Lead Negotiator, Peter Chester, had turned down the offer. Hopes crushed, I determined to attend the San Francisco meetings with a vengeful heart and maybe a book of Elizabethan insults. As it turns out, neither of these made it through airport security. Or my failing memory.
DAY ONE IN THE GRAY MAZE
We sat down with the UC team on Tuesday the 7th in another of the University's nondescript conference rooms in another of its nondescript buildings (Who designs these places? Army Corps of Engineers?) and got down to the serious business of what's called "demand/explanation". That means going through the contract, article by article, saying what they want, saying what we want, nobody agreeing on much. We've been doing this since the beginning back in July...I guess we're about two-thirds of the way through now. Early in the meeting, CUE's Amatullah asked for UC's response to CUE's counter-proposal on the two "Bonus Days" in exchange for extending the contract from the end of this month (September 30) until the end of December. This gave rise to a somewhat jumbled response from Peter Chester wherein "University policy" was cited as the reason for something or other, and that the University would be happy to extend the contract, of course, but was not offering anything in return, because "that's not how this works." CUE's Amatullah, wondering how this works, asked Peter what we of CUE could do to speed up this process. Mr. Chester replied that we could "get through this demand/explanation phase, and, uh...take stock of the situation." Amatullah pointed out that virtually all of our jurisdiction email to the Bargaining Team indicates that no one believes the "two Bonus Days" offer--tied to acceptance of a 3-year agreement with no guaranteed wage increases--is fair or acceptable. "It was a bad move," she said.
"I hear you," he said.
AN EARFUL OF OTHER ITEMS
Another thing Peter Chester got to hear was employee dissatisfaction with the University's "self-insurance" for Disability matters with an outfit called "Liberty Mutual". In fact, if you, too, have had a test of patience in dealing with UC's Disability Insurance carrier, the CUE Bargaining Team would like to hear from you. I had thought cases of slow, unhelpful service with this firm (and for that matter, with Paragon, UC's Workers' Comp Insurance carrier) were isolated incidents, but I heard a lot more of them in this discussion and began to detect what seemed like a pattern. So the team is curious. Even the University's team members seemed surprised at the number and scope of stories reported from all campuses. Let us know, won't you? An "insurance carrier" that collects enormous premiums and never pays a claim will look very good to its stockholders...until it gets caught.
UC proposed to add "sympathy strikes" to the No Strike article. Peter Chester said he believed it was already there. It isn't. UC may be willing to test the point in some way, but CUE's legal counsel and bargaining history say there is no such prohibition against strikes declared in sympathy with other unions. Nor is there ever likely to be.
UC also proposed to strike "HIV status" from contract language listing specific protected conditions in the Non-Discrimination in Employment article. CUE's position is that all medical conditions should be protected whether they are specifically listed or not. Same for Race, Religion, Marital Status, Gender Identity, and everything else. No employment discrimination allowed.
The day wasn't much fun, as you can tell. All very "positional" and kind of crappy to talk about. Not exactly a bell-ringer, but necessary I suppose.
DAY TWO, SINGING "KUMBAYA"
Wednesday, September 8th, the CUE team arranged chairs in the bargaining room so that UC's team members and ours were interspersed among each other--two of them, two of us--in a circle of participants...our Amatullah's suggestion, bless her heart. And the day went entirely differently.
The teams revisited the subjects of Non-Discrimination and Sympathy strikes. Of the latter, both teams promised to look into previous no-strike discussions to determine clearly what conclusions had been reached in earlier negotiations. Of the former, we wanted to clarify that a supervisor's requirement for "medical certification" (a doctor's note) may not include--and should specifically exclude--information about the employee's "medical diagnosis". Our University friends seemed to understand exactly what we were talking about: ignorant or frightened supervisors might try to dig up "personal" information on employees they don't like in order to find ways to discipline or terminate them. At times, we've felt that the University believes its entire management structure is composed of people who are all intelligent, sane and well-adjusted. After hearing the testimony of CUE-member guests from San Francisco and the experiences of Bargaining Team members here, they did not press the point.
Just before lunch, CUE's Amatullah suggested a group "check-in" on everyone's attitudes toward the progress of our negotiations. This turned out to be a remarkable point in the San Francisco meetings. CUE team members and CUE guests from UCSF spoke of homes they could never hope to own, the grace and indulgence of certain bosses who granted them favors out of sympathy while others were too selfish and mean-spirited to be generous with those they managed. Some spoke of a "poverty lifestyle" and being part of the "Underclass" after as much as 25 years in service to the University. Some spoke of how the University's bargaining positions felt like a "war" between upper and lower class waged by "tricky people" using "tricky tactics" to keep rich white kids in school while students of color vanish from the campuses except as low-paid workers. Some CUE members observed that even in these bargaining meetings the University spokesman gives lip service to how much we are "respected" and "valued" while offering nothing respectable or valuable as fair payment or reward. "Money, money, money!" said the CUE representative from UCSD, Nancy Kabzenell, adding that she sensed the corruption 25 years ago when the first "executives" began to appear, mimicking some "corporate model". She said she was "still trying to find UC's heart."
And yes, the University's team members checked in, too: Shada Kuba (LBNL), Kelly Sheridan (UCSF) and Patty Donnelly (UCOP) all seemed to report a vague wish that discussions could move ahead faster. Patty Donnelly had arrived late owing to a responsibility to drop off her child somewhere, and was silent when reminded by a CUE member that such actions would get her "written up or disciplined" by a foolish supervisor at virtually any of the University's workplaces. Lead Negotiator Peter Chester (UCOP) spoke of "the process" and "University policy". He said "Hopefully, this process will result in a positive outcome." Danny Gray (UCLA), alluding to his contemplated absence from the UC team at the end of Demand/Explanation, said: "I'm going to miss this...I really respect and admire the people in CUE." And somewhat later, when CUE Bargainer Stacey Fullwiler of UC Riverside was imploring Peter Chester in tears to tell his bosses-President Dynes, the Regents, Joe Mullinix, Judy Boyette, Hershman, etc.-to "please CARE!"...that she couldn't even "afford to be an adult!"...at that moment, when the Bargaining Room was stunned into helpless silence, Lynn Thompson of UCLA said: "I have to do this...", got up and went to Stacey and hugged her. The University's heart has been detected. It beats in several bodies on its own bargaining team.
A San Francisco CUE member, Gloria Johansen, spoke powerfully, passionately, persuasively -- and directly -- to Peter Chester in a way that charmed and dazzled the whole room. He seemed to "hear" her and begin to understand, for the moment at least, the depth of employee hardship and dismay among those whose service to the University has been long and loyal. Her presence and remarks were unexpected and unplanned. Our Chief Negotiator called her "an absolute delight."
CUE's Amatullah Alaji-Sabrie summarized the team's effort with another explanation of Interest-Based Negotiation practices, saying: "It is collaborative rather than adversarial. I encourage the University to change, not just with CUE, but with all workers at UC. The traditional/positional model of bargaining hasn't worked...has led only to impasse and mediation...a waste of time and resources for both of us." She suggested again that we of CUE want to understand the University's real interests and to be certain that the University understands ours, so that we may be partners in the elegant solutions we know are achievable when both parties are truthful and sincerely interested in problem-solving rather than the brute assertion of power.
SUMMARY AND PREACHMENT BY THE OLD DUDE
And so, the day ended.
I do not believe Peter Chester's UC team is unmoved by the honest declarations of CUE's team members and campus guests who struggle aloud to understand the "corporate" University's interest in suppressing wages and rights of its own employees...people it claims to value and respect. Indeed, Mr. Chester struggles to make sense when he says these things and, in the next breath, repeats an insulting "offer". The logical disconnect is breathtaking at times. There is no guaranteed money in the University's 3-year proposal. There are nervous, inappropriate jokes...unresponsive responses...rather silly, unattractive incentives to conclude the process quickly, as though the University's offers were being created by anonymous "neocons" in high office, who are, for whatever reason, utterly unfamiliar with worker reality and expect us to greet these proposals with tosses of rose petals. It is often hard to take Mr. Chesters' statements seriously. Even members of his team seem uncomfortable with the strings apparently being pulled by those above them: Dynes, Hershman, Boyette, Mullinix, certain members of the Board of Regents.
Perhaps a number of the mighty and mighty-well-paid remain irritated that this feisty little union of 18,000 clerical workers was the one that forced them to admit:
It seems a peculiar thing to say to people whose wages have been stagnant for roughly 10 years, who labor at pay rates roughly 20% below market parity according to the University's own research...and who are avowedly "respected and valued employees". They're saying, in effect, that they can "recruit" us off the bus and "retention" is not a problem...we're too docile and compliant to make any trouble.
"YOU KIDS PLAY NICE."
Even I am trying to behave better, to be less "cute and impertinent" in my remarks here...to avoid the strong impulse to bathe them all in the liquid amber of my evil wit. We have reason to think they are reading these "Bubbles"...we have taken no precautions to prevent it, certainly. It's a personal challenge to report without rancor, given the difference between their pay rates and mine. I love every member of this CUE Bargaining Team. And I'm even starting to like a few of UC's. Go figure.
We meet with them again for three days in Riverside next week, September 28-30.
MEANTIME...
Know that you are always in our thoughts. We want to see you at these Bargaining meetings to hear and to be heard. We want your emails and interests expressed. The University is always surprised at the depth of your concern and activism. I've found it makes us tall and better-looking just to know that you're paying attention and not afraid.
JOIN CUE, if you haven't yet. I mean really join. The University counts our numbers, same as we do, and Real Membership is cheap by any standard. Costs well under a dollar a month for virtually everyone. Please don't assume you're already a member. Make sure that you're a REAL MEMBER. Call our other brand new Organizer, ROUDRIK EBRAHIM, at his Local 4 office number: 310/473-8710.
And I'd be grateful if you could pass this message along to friends and co-workers, especially those who have no email access in their workplaces. Print it, make copies, and leave them where management can find them.
Blessins,
--BT
24-Sep-04