| 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) |
by Bert Thomas, UCLA Representative, CUE BARGAINING TEAM
(A personal diary, not the Official Report)
at UC RIVERSIDE -- SEPTEMBER 28-30, 2004
THE THREE FACES OF PETE
The other night I heard somebody say: "It all works out in the end; if it hasn't worked out, it isn't the end."
Must not be the end of that "two Bonus Days" thing yet. Hasn't worked out. But it's not because UC tried very hard.
DAY ONE: "HARD BALL OR BEAN-BALL"
At the beginning of the meeting, CUE's Chief Negotiator, Amatullah Alaji-Sabrie, noted with some dismay that our Team Member, Norine Shima, had still not arrived from UC Berkeley. Her supervisor hadn't granted her normal request for Release Time for travel. UC's Lead Negotiator Peter Chester claimed that he'd spoken with Norine's Berkeley department and merely "been informed" that they had refused Norine's routine request. Turns out this was not quite true. When Norine finally arrived at 11:30, she reported that Mr. Chester's role had been somewhat more active in the matter... he had actually instructed her department to deny her request. Then he contended that NONE of us had the right to Release Time for travel, according to his view of the CUE/UC contract... that all of us should make plans to travel on the same day that scheduled bargaining sessions begin. Oooo, them's fightin' words, Pete. And so early in the session.
As new CUE observers from Riverside began to enter the room, Mr. Chester objected to one of them being identified as "a student," and threatened to take his team out of bargaining if the student remained. Someone passed me a note that said "Looks like Peter's team has been muzzled." It was true, most hadn't said a word. Perhaps they were only speechless. The teams have not agreed on any "ground rules," least of all this patently discriminatory one.
CUE's Amatullah called a caucus to discuss what could be the matter with Peter, and to propose some remedies. We decided he was cranky this morning, and that sooner or later he would come to his senses... that this was "a cry for help."
"NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE MY RIGHTS. I'M STILL USING THEM."
Protest sign at Republican Convention, NYC, 2004
Norine Shima of Berkeley was first to the "rescue". Looking him straight in the eye she said: "I resent being held at work, denied Release Time... I was elected by my Local to do this work with you, and I deeply resent the fact that you interceded to block my attendance. My supervisors were gleeful." "Oh, I'm sure they weren't gleeful... " said Peter-the-Busted. CUE's Amatullah wondered aloud how Peter Chester could decide it was in the University's interest to create problems where none had existed. She characterized his written offer on contract extension as "demeaning" and "an insult." "Do I have a big 'S' for 'Stupid' on my head?," she asked. "I didn't mean to insult you?" declared Peter-the-Penitent.
CUE swarmed him with help. Mary Higgins (new Statewide President of CUE!) spoke of a "cynical, political attempt to divide a Collections Department at UC San Francisco by means of a 'partial' re-class" when ALL the clericals were deserving of the management reward. Melinda Gandara of UC Santa Barbara quoted a UC response to the "BERKELEY'S BETRAYAL" report on wages and working conditions, wherein some UC spokesperson (Maria Felde) had written, in effect, that UC might not be the best employer in the world, but at least it wasn't quite the worst." "Not a competition we want to be in, or WIN, is it?" asked Melinda, "competing with slumlords, polluters, and WalMart?" Nancy Kabzenell of UC San Diego spoke of how UC's piddling increases for low-paid workers were turned into pay cuts by the University's double-digit rate hikes for parking and health insurance. Mr. Chester began to speak glowingly of the new 4-tier health plans begun last year and how they were good for low-paid workers and... "TOO EXPENSIVE and probably going up, aren't they?" said Nancy K, finishing his sentence. "They're still a pay cut!" That Nancy... she's just not too patient with feel-good spin. (CUE and other UC worker unions have proposed that health benefits be provided free to all employees making under $40K.)
"THE TROUBLE WITH THE POOR IS POVERTY.
THE TROUBLE WITH THE RICH IS USELESSNESS."
--G.B. Shaw
Sandy Oberlies, Vice-President of the Riverside Local, helped Peter by telling of "benefits" she can't afford, "groceries, bread, and apples from Healthy Share" (a poverty program for feeding the poor), of being a UC Library Assistant since 1985 with certification and training in advanced computer applications and still being unable to make ends meet. "Something is wrong," she said. "I have bread this week for my children because my sister went to a Boy Scout camp and brought me back the leftover hot dog buns!"
Mary Juma, President of the Riverside Local, told of her own experience and that of other mothers who don't see their kids anymore because they're obligated to hold second and third jobs just to get by.
CUE's UC Irvine bargainer, Cynthia Norman, summed it up: "Release time for travel for bargainers has been past practice for several years and now you want to change the interpretation of our original contract language. Peter, you're creating the problem over Release Time for members of our team and suggesting we 'file a grievance'... Is that your idea of a solution?"
Well, yeah... it actually was.
At the end of the day, Mr. Chester--still on a roll--proposed that the teams return to the "traditional" seating scheme, on opposite sides of the table for the next session. One of his team-mates proposed to buy him a cocktail after the meeting.
An efficacious diagnosis and prescription, methinks, because the next day it was:
"UC... FEEL THE LOVE"
Not only was the room configured in the "interest-based" setup CUE had devised at our last session in San Francisco (two of them next to two of us next to two of them, etc.), but they were all seated and behaving sweetly when we entered the room. Peter took Amatullah aside to say that he was dropping his objection to the presence of "students" for now (two or three of the members of our team are also "students"). There was no further mention of the bitter Release-Time-for-travel issue that had gotten the first day off to such a rocky and time-consuming start.
We made pretty good progress in a day of discussions on potentially contentious issues. My, my... what a difference a day made... though none of what we discuss just now is for keeps. It's still "demand/explanation" of our respective positions. It's supposed to make the actual bargaining on contract articles go faster, once we begin that process. A better way to say it in "interest-based"-ese would be to call it "explanation of our respective interests, and introduction of proposals for making them real in an elegant new agreement." I would note, also, that Mr. Doug Owens of UPTE, representing the interest and solidarity of Professional & Technical Employees, was also present. CUE's bargaining effort has attracted, and continues to attract, the support of a growing Coalition of the University's worker unions. Yay for them and Yay for us.
At the end of the day, UC's Mr. Chester was still on good behavior. And it was plain he wanted us to extend the contract... for lo, he offered his team's participation in three days of training/facilitation with CUE's Interest-Based Bargaining consultant and really-cool-guy, Steve Barber. But, while the offer to be trained in CUE's new paradigm of negotiation was welcome and encouraging, there was no mention of the much ballyhooed "bonus days" offered to virtually every other employee at UC for the coming holidays. It was not included in the offer, for some reason. And it made no sense. If 18,000 clerical workers were made to work on the two days, then their supervisors (who've been given the time off) would be forced to work also; an army of pissed-off clerical workers roaming the halls unsupervised would be... unthinkable.
DAY THREE: "PETE, YOU MADE THE PANTS TOO SHORT"
This day, September 30th, was Zero Hour on the CUE/UC contract. The agreement would expire at midnight.
Overnight, the CUE Team had decided we couldn't accept the University's proposal to extend the contract without the Two Bonus Days included. And Amatullah was ill from a dining experience that had featured some apparently overripe shrimp. In her absence before the meeting, our team prepared a counter-proposal which would include the two Bonus Days in exchange for extending the contract to November 15th.
We presented the counter-proposal, and adjourned for lunch, hoping Amatullah would be sufficiently recovered to join us when we returned. Amatullah joined us after 2:00pm, looking pretty peaked. No wonder everybody loves her so much.
Peter Chester had written some stuff on the wall attempting, without success, to demonstrate that CUE was guilty of regressive bargaining for offering to extend the contract to November 15th rather than December 31st, 2004, as we had proposed originally. It was pointed out that Mr. Chester, himself, had used the date of November 15th in a counter-proposal to CUE's original offer, and we had used it in our new proposal to honor his expressed preference. Well, it seems he no longer preferred it. But he was danged if he was gonna put those two Bonus Days on the table.
The University seemed anxious to have the contract extended "at least two weeks" for some reason... but not anxious enough to grant the two Bonus Days as well. Peter promised that if we would extend the contract a couple of weeks, he would "push real hard to get a decision"... from those above him, presumably. I remember asking him what "decision" he would "push real hard to get"... but he declined to specify.
MORE WILL BE REVEALED
Thus, the three-day session ended. The contract expired at midnight, and we are now in what's called "Status Quo." It's a legal condition wherein Management may not institute changes in working conditions or work rules, and most CUE grievances arising after the expiration date may not be subject to arbitration. There are other features of "Status Quo", but these are the main ones. CUE's Mary Higgins pointed out that clerical workers have actually spent more time working WITHOUT a contract than WITH one over the past 5-6 years. "We have more experience under Status Quo. If there's an advantage to bargaining with the University while we're under contract, we'd love to be convinced. You have till midnight."
MIDNIGHT CAME AND WENT
The contract expired. The new Statewide Leadership of CUE will be notifying everyone soon about what this means to each of us. The first thing it means is that your membership--your REAL activism in CUE--is more important than ever. Find out what you can do here at UCLA Local 4 by calling our TWO new Organizers:
Contact information for other CUE locals here:
http://www.cueunion.org/membership_info/locals.php
When possible, we want to see you at these Bargaining meetings to hear and
to be heard. We want your emails and interests expressed.
We will meet our UC bargaining buddies again at UC Davis on October 19th & 20th. Then, the following week, we'll spend three days with them in San Diego at UCSD. This will be the first time our contract negotiations have ever taken place ON CAMPUS in San Diego, a ferociously anti-labor campus. We can't wait.
Feel free to 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 your boss can find them.
Be brave. Stay strong.
--BT
8-Oct-04