CUE NEWSLETTER NO. 4
Fall 1996
E-Mail: The Cyberwave That Management Couldn't Stop
CUE gets partial credit for the fact that UC's new systemwide policy on email use is no longer the anti-staff and anti-union document it was when it was drafted a year ago. Unofficial sources at UCOP reported to us that the proposed policy, which sought to severely restrict use of email by staff, elicited such a wave of protest that fundamental changes were quickly made.One of the changes in the new policy (which is available on the WWW at UC Email Policy and which should be read by every user of email) is reflected in this sentence: "University electronic mail services may be used for incidental personal purposes provided that, in addition to the foregoing constraints and conditions, such use does not (i) directly or indirectly interfere with the University operation of computing facilities or electronic mail services; (ii) burden the University with noticeable incremental cost; or (iii) interfere with the email user's employment or other obligations to the University." While the policy pledges UC's respect for the privacy of users in most cases, CUE reminds users that the employer has the ability to read email, even messages that have been deleted.
Go to Table of Contents
What Do We Think? Incentive Awards
This summer, CUE asked UC clericals to send us stories, good and bad, about how the incentive program is being implemented where they work. What we are learning is that the situation is very different not only at each campus, but from department to department within each campus. We received many responses, but few people wanted to be quoted because they were concerned it might affect their ability to get an award in the future.We've learned that in some places the awards are given out according to the recommendation of a supervisor, while in others there are "peer review" or "selection" committees. In some departments the money was given out equally to all employees. That method was expressly forbidden in other departments. Several people were satisfied that the awards had been given out fairly in their department, particularly in those locations where the money was distributed equally and according to the percentage of time worked.
Some people said they trusted their supervisor to even-handedly evaluate who deserved an award; many more were less than happy with the way people were selected for awards. Even those who received an award were concerned about the possibilities for unfair treatment, citing the lack of consistent systemwide guidelines or objective criteria according to which awards were be distributed. One message we received was "We've been led to believe that these incentive awards are given to people who have done 'special projects.' Well, our managers never give us (clericals) 'special projects,' so how would we ever be able to get nominated for these awards."
From LA we heard that in one department only employees who are willing to violate labor codes got an award: "I will never get one, because I'm not willing to work evenings or weekends without comp time."
Even the tax rate was not consistent from campus to campus. In San Diego the awards were taxed at levels as low as 15%; in LA, the payroll department announced that the awards were to be taxed at 28%. At Davis a person receiving a $300 award took home only $171 because the tax rate was 43%.
Some people pointed out that incentive awards have replaced Special Performance Awards, which were exclusively for employees who had reached the top of their range. Although there were problems with the Special Performance system, at least it partially compensated for the pay ceiling encountered by long-term employees.
Several people cited the divisive effects of the incentive awards. One person wrote, "We have all been working above and beyond our scope of duties due to the layoffs that we have had, and it is quite upsetting that only one member of our department received the award, when all of us more than deserve some type of 'reward'." Another summerized "Favoritism is a real problem."
Last year, the money used for the award program was intended by the State Legislature for cost-of-living increases for all of us. The University skimmed off .8% of that money to fund the awards. Yet these awards do not build our base salaries or contribute to retirement credit in the same way that cost of living increases do. Says Carol Schnitter of Davis, "I have a friend who has worked part time at Mervyn's for 7 years....her salary has gone from $5.25/hr. to $10/hr. due to annual cost-of-living raises and senority/promotional raises. There is absolutely no way our University salaries have kept pace."
Some employees surmised that UC's primary motive for these awards was to save money. Do these incentive awards result in salary savings for UC? If so, where did the money go? When asked, university representatives couldn't say if the money from last year was even completely distributed, or to whom. CUE, in coalition with other UC groups, is working with State Senator Lockyer's office to investigate how last year's money was spent.
UC's incentive awards are part of a bigger picture. From the begininning, the Human Resources Management Initiatives (HRMI), which management says does not apply to clerical employees, encouraged one-time special payments such as incentive awards instead of across-the-board increases.
If you have a story or opinion about these awards, we'd be glad to hear it. Although CUE does not yet have the right to negotiate on behalf of clerical employees, we intend to encourage open discussion of UC's pay policies and to put pressure on UC for more equitable pay programs.
The Card Drive Full speed ahead
CUE's president, Elinor Levine, says the card campaign -- to collect signatures from some 7,000 UC clericals calling for a representation election -- is going "extremely well." She reports "We were afraid that staff might have reservations about signing cards because people get asked to sign so many things, but hardly anyone turns us down." Levine points out that the only clericals who would not want an election are the people who are pleased with things as they are, and who think the present union is doing a good job. Having an election appeals to clericals who want a better union and who just want a chance to think about their options and cast a vote.The cards being circulated call for two things: an election, and the inclusion of "Coalition of University Employees" on the ballot. If enough cards are collected, the ballot choices will be CUE, AFSCME (the present union), and No Representation.
When clerical employees sign cards, they are helping to bring about the election. They are not joining, they are not voting, they are not even promising how they will vote. "But of course we want every one to vote for us, and to join," explains Levine. AFSCME will continue to be the official union for UC clerical workers until an election is called and it is voted out.
CUE has until mid-March 1997 to collect signatures. The cards will then be reviewed by the State of California's Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), and if there are enough valid cards, the PERB will administer a secret ballot election among UC's 17,000 - 18,000 clerical employees. Only CUE and the PERB will see the signed cards.
The only problem facing CUE card collectors is the size of the project. Levine states, "We need to have cards from a third of all clericals systemwide. We're aiming for 7,000, and that is a huge number. UC clericals are spread form San Diego to Davis and are in some pretty remote places in between. We definitely can use help from any clerical who wants to help us succeed in this project."
Clericals on separate campuses are forming CUE steering committees to oversee local card collection. According to Jennifer Roth, who co-chairs the San Diego committee with Teresa Lass, the campaign is "a wonderful opportunity to give clerical workers a choice about their union representation. And I love being part of an effort to provide clerical staff with more active and communicative union representation."
Who Joins CUE
One of the first UC clericals to join CUE was Susan Martinez, a ___Assistant II at UC Santa Cruz, where she works with payroll and personnel. Martinez has a positive attitude toward her job. "I love my job here at the University: I have responsibility, I work with great people, and I love parking in the remote parking lot so I can walk to work and appreciate this wonderful view every day in all types of weather." Her cheerful attitude does not get in the way of her view that unions are not only good, but necessary.What does Martinez think the union should be doing? She cites the differences in how UC compensates upper management and the general clerical work force, and she recalls that UCSC was building huge new buildings while actually cutting clerical wages a few years ago. "We are seeing more temps in our jobs who don't get benefits, who are at the mercy of the University's policies, and who, if this trend continues, will eventually undermine the security of all our jobs as we know them. I want a strong union that will stop this trend."
Martinez sees UC's problems in a larger context. "The direction of our economy is toward a global economy run by corporations who have no humanistic concerns at all. Indeed, their goals are for highest profits with lowest overhead. If 'we citizens' don't become actively involved in countering this direction, we will continue on the road toward higher unemployment, lower wages, and a higher percentage of people on the dole. I see this corporate direction slowing permeating the University's management."
We asked her how a strong union could deal with this situation. "By demanding strong wages, basic benefits and respect, the Union can help to re-route the University onto a more humanistic approach toward its worker on all levels instead of taking a corporate attitude of cutbacks." What does she look for in a new and different union? "I want a union to show more guts in the fact of the University's demands. I know its not that easy, but with a large membership, I think we can make the University acknowledge that we do have potential power that can be tapped if necessary.
Susan Martinez was introduced to unions through the Teamsters, which she joined when she worked in a frozen food plant "many, many years ago." According to Martinez, she was moved by "the sense of pride the older workers, mostly women on the lines, had in being union members." Talking to Martinez, who now spends much of her own time in support activities for the United Farm Workers, one knows that she had brought more than a keen understanding from her years of work and union experiences; she's brought the pride and dignity she witnessed "many, many years ago."
Why should I join CUE?
Why A New Union?
To protect our jobs and benefits, and to improve wages and working conditions. Does any UC clerical think that the present union is doing a good job?The irony is that widespread depression about the current union's ineffectiveness is an obstacle we must now overcome in order to replace it with a union that will serve our needs. After years of suffering ineffective representation, we need to remind ourselves that effective unions are possible.
UC has a reputation for good job security and benefits, but they need protection. In the last few years, hundreds of UC clericals have been laid off. Our pay level, cut by 5% a few years ago, no longer keeps up with the cost-of-living. Subcontracting, administrative clustering, and job loss through attrition continue to reduce the number of jobs and increase the work load for remaining staff. Gradually the quality of health benefits erodes as co-payments increase for most plans. The redirection of funds toward incentive awards and away from pay raises degrades present income levels as well as our anticipated retirement pensions.
While the present clerical union's membership level and effectiveness are at an all-time low, other unions are successfully organizing at UC to protect their members, and we intend to be a part of this movement. The interns and residents at UC's hospitals have recently collected enough signatures to call for a union election. UC's research professionals did the same thing, giving their union an overwhelming vote of support. UC technical employees collected cards calling for an election, voted for a new union and are now bargaining their first contract. Like UC interns, residents, professionals and technicals, UC clericals need and can have a strong union.
Why Join?
If we choose a union to represent us but it has only a few members, it is a union in name only, and it cannot be effective. The structure of a union is, or should be, fundamentally different from a business or even a university. To be effective, it must be democratic and not run from the top. The greater the number of people participating in the union, the stronger we will be.
Why Pay Dues?
Last but not least, CUE needs as much financial support as we can muster. We rely entirely on our membership dues for printing and distributing our literature, for traveling to campuses for organizing, and all of our bills. By contrast, UC will spend massive amounts of money in an attempt to defeat us, just as they did when they tried to defeat other unions in other election campaigns.We know it is a struggle for many clericals to support themselves and their families, so we've adopted a FLEXIBLE DUES STRUCTURE - every member may choose his or her dues amount. Initially we set dues for full-time workers at $15.00 per month, $7.50 for part-time workers. But now, if you want to participate, and want your dues to be $5.00 per month, you're still welcome to become a member. Your involvement and your $5.00 are very important to CUE. We have many people who are voluntarily paying $15.00 per month or more. We have a number who pay less. All are valued members in good standing, and every one of them is making an investment that will pay off for all UC workers in the future.
Please join us in this endeavor because we can't do it for you unless we do it with you.
Say NO to the Lie of CCRI NO on Proposition 209
CUE supports affirmative action as a mechanism for equal opportunity. Thus, CUE urges all those who favor an end to discrimination to vote NO on California's Proposition 209 this fall. Holding this position, we're in pretty interesting company, ranging from Republican warrior Colin Powell to rapper Snoop Doggy Dog. OK, count us in.