| Coalition of University Employees (CUE) | 2855 Telegraph Ave., Suite #302, Berkeley, CA 94705 Contact CUE (510) 845-2221 (phone), (510) 845-7444 (FAX) |
| Explanation and Arguments Concerning the Two Wage Offers Mentioned in the Mediator's Proposal (Question #2 on Ballot) |
April 9, 2003
This is an explanation and arguments concerning the two wage offers mentioned in the mediator's proposal.
No one, except the University, can argue that this wage proposal is fair or just. Its only virtue is that it is better than the other wage proposal that UC has agreed to.
Of the two proposals, #1 would cost UC the most financially, because it gives a permanent and base-building increase to every clerical employee.
Wage Proposal #1 treats every UC clerical worker the same, putting us all in the same boat. This reminds us that we have common interests, and a common opponent -- an employer who doesn't consider raising salaries for its lowest-paid workers to be a priority.
The other proposal includes a lump sum payment instead of a base-building increase for the first year of the contract. For most clericals, the amount of that lump sum would be approximately $300-350, and much of that would go to taxes. Paying out this money as a one-time lump sum allows UC once again to refuse to make a permanent commitment to paying fair wages to clericals. The lump sum is retroactive for 11 months instead of retroactive to the time of payout as well as an ongoing loss.
It is true that the other proposal allows for merit step increases but it redefines them in a negative way -- so that a satisfactory performance would result in an increase of only 1/2-step (about 2.25%), instead of the full step increase (approximately 4.5%) that has been widely awarded to employees doing satisfactory work up to now.
Many thousands of UC clerical employees are not eligible for merit increases, because they are already at the top of their range. Temporary and limited term employees are also not eligible for merit step increases. Under this proposal, those clericals would receive only a 1% wage increase starting in the second year of the contract, plus the insulting and inadequate lump sum. Even many of the clericals who are not "topped out" would not receive it. UC's figures show that the turnover rate for clericals in the first year of their employment is over 50%, which means they would be gone before they ever saw this merit increase.
In making this proposal, UC is trying to pit clericals who are eligible for merit increases against those who are not. Don't let the University divide and conquer.
Vote for wage proposal #1, which treats everyone equally.
The advantage of this proposal is the specific language that maintains the step/merit system we have worked so hard to preserve while giving some increase to the entire bargaining unit.
If an employee was in the unit between November 1, 2001 and September 30, 2002, s/he will receive a lump sum payment equivalent to 1% of her/his current salary. This payment will be around $300-350 (based on a mid-range clerical wage).
For the 2002-2003 year, all employees in the unit on October 1, 2002 will receive a "Cost of Living" or range adjustment of 1%. This amount is base building and will be a monthly increase for all employees. For those who are eligible for a merit increase, this amount will be added to your base salary prior to calculating the merit.
All clericals eligible for a step/merit increase will then receive a base building, half step for the 2002-2003 year. A half step increase is approximately 2 - 2.45%, but each step varies due to years of rounding and recalculating based on increases. For those who are not "topped out," this totals a roughly 3.5% increase for 2002-2003.
While this proposal does not treat all employees equally, it does provide a higher increase for those who are merit eligible and preserves the step/merit system in fact rather than theory -- albeit in a form that is troublesome as it degrades the concept of a merit increase. It sets a base building, half-step (approximately 2 - 2.45%) as the standard increase for a satisfactory employee, instead of the full step that has been used in most parts of UC.