Bargaining Session #4: Our first agreement and an update on the prohibition against discrimination and harassment
Hello all,
Erin Battat here with an update from our fourth bargaining session on Wednesday, June 12th.
First, I want to encourage everyone to attend our Bargaining Town Hall on Tuesday June 18th, 7:30-8:30 p.m. via zoom to discuss our bargaining challenges and what we need to do to win a strong contract. (Click here to register and receive the zoom link). Making progress at the table depends on having a unified and active union overall. Please join us in this Town Hall to learn more about how your actions beyond the bargaining committee will win a strong contract!
The fourth session was an active back-and-forth, with the College countering on five of our proposals and the union countering on six (see our proposal tracker and summaries below). In total, there are 20 proposals on the table, 18 initiated by the union and two initiated by College.
The bargaining committee is delighted to report that we reached our first tentative agreement (TA) with the College on one of our proposals! With a few minor adjustments, the College agreed to our proposal for a Union Management Committee, which will consist of up to seven bargaining unit members who will meet with the College on a monthly basis to discuss issues relating to our working conditions. (Think FIPAC + power). There’s no doubt that a room full of observers (and more on zoom) helped move this process forward. It feels great to take this first tangible step towards a strong contract!
Now that bargaining is in full swing, an important point of contention has emerged that we want to bring to your attention.
Our proposal on the Prohibition Against Discrimination and Harassment (read here) ensures that BUEs who believe they have experienced discrimination or harassment can file a grievance, which is the process by which we enforce the contract. The grievance procedure allows BUEs to request a remedy, delineates clear timelines for the College to respond, and allows for a neutral, third-party arbitrator if a resolution can’t be reached. In contrast, the College’s counter-proposal excludes claims of discrimination and harassment from the grievance procedure, requiring BUEs to go through their internal Title IX procedures instead. According to the College’s existing policy, any assistance to an employee “is at the College’s sole discretion.” Whereas our proposal offers BUEs the choice to pursue a grievance, Title IX, or both, the College wants to limit our choices and maintain control over the process. Our position is that the grievance procedure and Title IX are different and complementary processes: the grievance procedure allows for an immediate remedy, while Title IX initiates an investigation. Imagine, for example, you are being harassed by someone in your building. Through Title IX, you could initiate an investigation, and if the person is found guilty, they would be subject to discipline. Through the grievance procedure, you could protect yourself, regardless of the outcome, by getting your office moved to another location while the investigation is underway.
This issue has huge stakes in particular for women and other historically marginalized groups in Higher Ed. If we win the right to grieve discrimination and harassment, we set the standard for other unions, including those representing graduate students and postdocs who are particularly vulnerable. We hope that Wellesley will do the right thing, especially given its mission as a historically women’s college. In fact, in her 2019 testimony before the US house of Representatives concerning sexual harassment in academic STEM fields, President Johnson recommended that academic institutions “should move beyond interventions or policies that represent basic legal compliance” and should “provide support for the target,” including access to services, alternative means of reporting incidents, protections from retaliation, and support for reintegrating back into the workplace. Wellesley has an opportunity to put President Johnson’s recommendations into practice by giving BUEs the option to seek support through a union grievance procedure.
Come to the town hall Tuesday June 18th, 7:30-8:30 p.m. on zoom to learn more about this issue and what actions we can take as a union to win protections for women and marginalized groups on our campus and in higher ed overall! (Click here to register and receive the zoom link).
Our counterproposals:
Prohibition Against Discrimination and Harassment (read here): As noted above, we stand firm in our position that BUEs should have the choice to file discrimination and harassment claims through a grievance procedure, Title IX, or both. The College wants to exclude claims of discrimination and harassment from the grievance procedure, taking a step back for women in Higher Ed.
Employment Records (read here): We reasserted our position that BUEs shall have unlimited access to employment records online.
Job Postings (read here): We reasserted our position that employment opportunities be posted for 30 calendar days before review to ensure an equitable application process. We will continue to negotiate a compromise with provisions for an expedited process in the case of unexpected vacancies.
Grievance and Arbitration (read here): We heard the College’s concern about the long timeline for filing a grievance and reduced this timeline from 90 to 75 business days, which aligns with the length of a semester. We reasserted our shorter timelines of 3 business days for the College to meet with the grievant and to respond in writing to ensure that problems are resolved quickly.
Intellectual Property (read here): We struck the College’s exceptions to a BUE’s right to intellectual property, which were described in legal terminology, and asked for clarification in more accessible language for our members. We reasserted our provision to ensure that BUEs have the right to address disputes through the Grievance and Arbitration procedure, which offers a fair and mutually agreed upon process for enforcing the contract.
Health and Safety (read here): We restored our language that delineates more specific timelines for remedying unsafe working conditions and made it clear the College is accountable for ensuring a safe workplace. We responded to the College’s request for more concrete specifications for preventing mold exposure by aligning our proposal with the College’s existing Mold Management Program.
The College’s counterproposals:
Severability (read here): Both Parties agree on the fundamental purpose of this proposal, which says that if a provision of the contract is found to be illegal, the rest of the contract will still remain valid. The College proposed a two-step process that entails a preliminary meeting to determine whether the problematic provision needs to be renegotiated. Our position is that the renegotiation should be automatic if initiated by either party (the College or the Union).
Academic Freedom (read here): The College struck our language and replaced it with the text from the 1940 AAUP Statement on Academic Freedom. It is our position that this statement needs to be adapted and updated for Wellesley College in 2024, with added protections for non-tenure track faculty. In particular, we insist that student evaluations that penalize a BUE for expressing views related to their expertise or the content of the course shall not be considered in our evaluation.
Discipline and Dismissal (read here): The College maintains that BUEs are not entitled to have a union representative present when discipline is administered, while we maintain that we are entitled to union representation at any time in the process.
Union Management Committee (read here): As mentioned above, the College’s counterproposal agreed with our major points, such as more BUE representatives and more frequent meetings. We made one modification to this proposal and then reached agreement with the College!
Union Rights and Access (read here): The College is opposed to providing the union with frequently updated lists of Bargaining Unit Employees and including welcome materials and an orientation upon hire. We will continue to negotiate our position to ensure every new bargaining unit employee understands their rights as a member of our union.
Job Postings (read here): In a move rarely seen this early in bargaining, the College countered on our Job Postings counterproposal during the session, responding to our insistence that we make substantive progress during sessions. We will consider this counterproposal as we prepare for our next session.
The Bargaining Committee expresses our gratitude for our steadfast observers and for the new faces in the room, which made for a supportive and productive bargaining session. We encourage all of you to join our town hall on Tuesday June 18th, 7:30-8:30 p.m. on zoom (Click here to register and receive the zoom link).
Best,
Erin Battat on behalf of the Bargaining Committee