TL;DR
The Unified Bargaining Committee met with Management at University Inn on Oct. 6. We entered the building following a demonstration outside from members urging management to bargain fairly. Management sent in counters on Article 2 (Academic Freedom), Article 11 (Promotion and Reappointment), Article 19 (Miscellaneous), Article 22A (Conditions of Employment), the Medical School Merger Article, and Article 28 (Fractional Appointments). Rather than offering any alternative language on Article 28, they struck out every word of our original proposal. This is not how bargaining works. This is a refusal to engage with the very principles of equal pay for equal work and job security that our initial proposal outlined. The unions brought counters on Article 16 (Leave and Caregiver Support), Article 25A (Sabbatical Leave), and the Sideletter for Accommodations.
Highlights from the Session
Union Counters on the Leave Articles and Disability Accommodations
The unions brought counters on the Leave Articles and the Side Letter on Disability accommodations. In discussing these articles, it has become clear that management refuses to let go of any control over any current university process. Rather than codifying any procedures around leave and disability in the union contracts, management’s team wants us to sign a contract that is based on existing university policy– policy that they can change at any time they wish. From a practical perspective, this is not bargaining. Management must take our concerns seriously and respond by engaging with our serious, well- considered proposals.
Management is messaging all of us, not just the bargaining team– they are giving us back what appears to be counters, but are in fact strike-throughs of what we have put on the table. This does not come across as an engagement but rather as a rejection of proposals. They have not been countering with alternative language. That’s what we saw with the Leave Articles and Disability Accommodations. These strike-throughs also include nitpicking of minor issues.
Management’s team continues to point to what makes implementation of the language difficult in existing systems, systems for which they are largely responsible. When they counter, they strike all of our language instead of having productive conversations about how the language could interact with their current process or improve the process. For example, with disability accommodations, we are proposing that the university fund accommodations centrally, rather than departmentally. But rather than hearing the human problems, they are insisting that the system is in place and does not need to be changed.
The bottom line is that university policy does not carry the same protections for our members as contract language. We need enforceable articles on these important issues.
Management Counter on Medical School Merger
Management struck most of the union’s language in the article on the medical school merger, claiming that it was still too early in the process to negotiate around any of these issues. The union’s team pushed back, insisting that there were already impacts on workload and class coordination.
PK Agarwalla, from New Jersey Medical School, stated, “Determining what is a mandatorily negotiable position is very subjective, which is why we put together proposals in the first place. We think it would be very reassuring to the membership to have something that is clear.”
There was some discussion over the changes that members are already observing in the New Jersey Medical School and Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. The union’s team will put together a response to management’s counter, keeping in mind members’ ongoing concerns around these issues.
Management Counter on Article 19 – Miscellaneous/Parking
There was some discussion of the specifics of the article, with the union making the point that parking fees should be unified and that members should not have two separate fees based on bargaining units. Management said that they heard concerns and will take another look at the fees and consider the impact of a cap. Management acknowledged that they were open to negotiating a cap on total parking cost, but were not open to a lower cap for those driving electric vehicles. However, their total strike of this language, rather than simply striking the proposed lower cap for electric vehicles, makes the bargaining process much more protracted.
Management Counter on Article 2 – Academic Freedom
Management made concessions in their counter on Article 2 that the union’s team feels positively about. During discussion of this article, the union raised some concerns over the phrase “area of expertise” in section B. Emily Marker, a faculty member from Camden, and a member of the Academic Freedom committee as well as the bargaining team, emphasized that part of scholarly training in the humanities and social sciences is how to train oneself to master new fields. This is why someone like Marker, who was trained in one area of global history (empire and decolonization) can move into a related subfield (in her case, Holocaust and Genocide Studies). The phrase “area of expertise” can be abused to undercut this fundamental aspect of being a scholar.
Cathy Monteleone, president of AAUP-BHSNJ, raised the fact that a doctor could give a class where they talk about the impact of gun violence on community health, and someone could say that’s too political and conflicts with the 2nd amendment. Healthcare and STEM classes can veer into the political, and those faculty members should be protected just the same.
Union negotiators suggested revising this article to simply state the enforceable academic freedom protections, rather than referencing a Policy which is controlled by the university and determined by management alone. Management’s team heard these concerns and signaled that they were open to the union’s proposed language to address that issue. The union’s team plans to return to the next session with language that will hopefully be agreed upon by both teams and ideally lead to a tentative agreement.
Next Steps
The next bargaining session is scheduled for Thursday, Oct. 8 at 10 a.m. at Administrative Services Building II in New Brunswick. The union will prepare discussion points on the Fractional Appointments counter and pass back a union counter on Academic Freedom.