CRU Bargaining Update #18 – August 7, 2026

 TL;DR

On August 7 the Coalition of Rutgers Unions (CRU) held a bargaining session with the Rutgers administration for 20,000 union-represented faculty and staff across the university. Union representatives from across CRU spent an hour presenting four proposals addressing Flex Work, Fiscal-Emergency, Health Benefits, and workplace Health and Safety., This CRU session had been scheduled for four hours; however, after the one hour, University management went into caucus from which they did not return. Instead, they asked for time to review our proposals and suggested a tentative date of September 4 for the next CRU bargaining session. 

Highlights of the Session

The session was chaired by President of the Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union, Heather Pierce. Unlike bargaining sessions involving only our three faculty unions, this session brought together the seven unions represented by the Coalition of Rutgers Unions to address issues affecting most Rutgers workers. The coalition presented four proposals intended to establish stronger and more consistent protections across the contracts of participating CRU unions.

Represented were:

Together, we presented proposals addressing shared concerns affecting workers across the University.

Fair and Transparent Policies on Flex Work

HPAE 5094 Co-President, Ryan Novosielski presented the coalition’s flexible-work proposal which updates current policy and would establish a fair and transparent process for employees requesting remote, hybrid, compressed, and other flexible work arrangements. The proposal codifies and makes transparent what is currently working in existing practices and addresses the need to evaluate requests with reference to employees’ actual job responsibilities and specific operational needs, not blanket prohibitions. Supervisors would be required to provide written explanations when arrangements are denied or revoked, and employees would have the right to challenge those decisions through the grievance and arbitration process. This proposal also strikes language in the current contract that practically excludes fully remote work. Management expressed pushback on changing remote work policies. 

The proposal would also protect established arrangements from being ended without justification. Before discontinuing an arrangement that has been in place for more than six months, Rutgers would have to demonstrate a measurable decline in the employee’s performance or the department’s efficiency. The coalition also proposed regular reporting to the unions so that we can identify inconsistencies in how flexible-work requests are handled across the University.

Striking “Fiscal Emergency” Provisions from the Existing Contract Language

Rutgers AAUP-AFT President, Becky Givan presented the coalition’s proposal to remove the existing fiscal-emergency language from current CRU contract language that currently makes negotiated economic provisions subject to Rutgers receiving and allocating what it considers adequate state funding. It also establishes a process through which the University may declare a fiscal emergency and withhold negotiated raises or other economic provisions.

Our proposal would strike this language from the existing contracts. Rutgers should not be able to avoid its contractual economic commitments by unilaterally determining that adequate funding is unavailable or that a fiscal emergency exists. RAFU and Rutgers AAUP-AFT Presidents, Heather Pierce and Becky Givan, responded to pushback from management on this issue, stating that union members bargain for raises and other economic provisions, and those agreements must be honored.

Expanding Access to Affordable and Inclusive Health Benefits

Executive Director of Rutgers AAUP-AFT and RAFU, Patrick Nowlan presented a broad health-benefits proposal addressing cross-union healthcare access, employee costs, enrollment problems, and Rutgers’ unusually high fringe-benefit rate.

The coalition proposed that Rutgers and CRU jointly advocate for state action to establish fringe rates that reflect the actual cost of employee benefits and to increase the number of state-funded positions at Rutgers. In discussion, it was proposed that this process has been and should continue to be collaborative between management and CRU unions. The proposal also calls for expanded health-benefit eligibility within the State Health Benefits Program for adjunct faculty, lecturers, and other part-time employees on par with other fulltime Rutgers employees.

RAFU President, Heather Pierce explained that while many adjunct faculty (Lecturers at Rutgers) teach full-time course loads or more at Rutgers and across multiple state colleges and universities in New Jersey, they are still treated according to an outdated model of adjuncts as professionals who teach only occasionally and receive healthcare through full-time employment elsewhere. They are currently unable to count work at multiple campuses for full-time eligibility in the SHBP. We emphasized that healthcare eligibility must reflect the actual lives and working conditions of Rutgers employees. Eligibility based on state-wide teaching loads is a campaign that RAFU is currently working on with other adjunct faculty unions in coordination with AFT New Jersey. 

Rutgers AAUP-AFT President, Becky Givan pointed out that access to healthcare is too often shaped by misapprehensions about who workers are and what they need. Graduate workers are shuttled between TA/GA positions, which fall under RUAAUP-AFT contracts and provide employee health benefits, and Graduate Fellow positions, which offer access only to expensive student healthcare plans designed primarily for the typical young, single, undergraduate — even though graduate workers are often older and may have families to support. 

Additional provisions would cap employee premium contributions, eliminate the State Health Benefits Program’s 60-day waiting period, and require Rutgers to provide temporary coverage to newly hired employees until that change is enacted. The proposal would also strengthen enrollment assistance and notification requirements for new employees, international scholars, part-time employees, and others who become newly eligible for benefits. All Rutgers employees who work at least half of a full-time workload should be eligible for health benefits.

The coalition also proposed vision care reimbursements for employees and their dependents and more comprehensive, inclusive coverage for fertility treatment and preservation. These protections would explicitly address barriers faced by LGBTQ+ employees and employees undergoing gender-affirming care. A final proposal would allow the surviving spouse of a deceased Rutgers retiree the dignity of staying on their retiree health plan.

Stronger, Enforceable Health and Safety Protections

HPAE Co-President, Ryan Novosielski presented the coalition’s health-and-safety proposal, which would establish foundational protections across participating CRU contracts while preserving stronger language already contained in individual agreements.

The proposal would require Rutgers to investigate reported hazards immediately and make an initial determination within 48 hours. When conditions pose an imminent danger, this proposal would empower the employee to remove themselves from the situation,, including through relocation, remote work, early dismissal, or another practical remedy depending on the work performed. Employees and their unions would be able to challenge Rutgers’ safety determinations through expedited grievance and arbitration procedures.

The proposal would also give unions timely access to requested safety information and allow qualified union-retained experts to inspect potentially unsafe or unhealthy conditions. It includes protections addressing unsafe workplace temperatures, violence prevention, parking and facility security, safety escorts, and prompt notification of reported threats.

A joint CRU–Rutgers Health and Safety Committee would meet at least quarterly to discuss unresolved complaints and other safety concerns. Employees who report hazards would be explicitly protected from retaliation, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination.

Next steps: 

After a little more than an hour of coalition presentations, University management went into caucus. Management suggested a tentative date of September 4th for the next CRU bargaining session. We will continue to keep members updated as bargaining proceeds and we can not win without your support and participation.

Other Upcoming Events

Click here for a full calendar