June 1, 2023

We had a very busy bargaining day on Tuesday, May 30th:

TL;DR:

  • We presented two counters on Accommodations and Management Rights
  • We received four counters from Admin: Anti-Discrimination, Immigration, Respectful Work Environment, and Discipline
  • We asked clarifying questions about management’s concerns about a wages proposal timeline and their anti-discrimination and equity-related counterproposals
Please read on for more details. As a reminder, you can review the full proposals presented in the Bargaining Center online (updated within 24 hours following each bargaining session).

We presented an Accommodations counterproposal in which we maintained language that a communication timeline for accommodations needs to be followed, addressing concerns from academic student employees (ASEs) that the accommodations process moves too slowly. We did not accept management’s language that documentation would be required for a pregnant ASE to receive workplace accommodations. In addition, we continue to assert that ASEs are the final decider in the accommodations they receive. Admin has continuously removed any language regarding accommodations being voluntary and equitable. We will continue to advocate for this language as it is important to protect ASEs and ensure they have power in these processes. We accepted management’s proposed language changes to make the first part of the proposal general to all types of workplace accommodations rather than specific to disability-related accommodations. We believe this will allow ASEs to have more support and receive accommodations for their unique circumstances. Management continues to push back on any proposed language they see as providing further support and resources beyond what has legal precedent and is written in University policy. We have asserted that these precedents do not provide adequate protection and support for individuals in our bargaining unit, but management continues to assert that they cannot do anything beyond legal standard. 

For the Management Rights counterproposal, we drew from language agreed to at UW in their collective bargaining agreement (CBA), and language that we believe to be consistent with the collective bargaining statute that applies to our unit. This article also aligns with proposals that have already been passed during bargaining sessions and contains language we know and are comfortable with. 

Following the presentation of our counterproposals, admin returned our proposal on Anti-discrimination, but they changed the naming convention of the proposal to Non-discrimination, moving away from language that situates admin as actively against discrimination. They also cut our language of protected classes and identities, citing that our proposals have to follow university policy language for the sake of continuity and limited our original proposal language regarding the University providing all- gender restrooms to ASEs,  including removing language that the University has to provide all ASEs with access to all gender restrooms. In their counter they stated that if an ASE does not have access to an all gender restroom, they can work with their supervisor to figure out alternatives, but could not come up with ideas on what this would look like in practice. ​​Admin rejected our longer grievance timeline for issues pertaining to discrimination and harassment, and claimed that they cannot take issues of discrimination and harassment to arbitration. We are continuing to have a back and forth conversation about how the grievance procedure will apply to issues of discrimination and harassment. 

Admin’s counterproposal on Respectful Work Environment removed all of our specific language detailing abusive behavior, effective responses to that behavior, and reporting options or solutions for ASE’s who experience abusive behavior. They also gave the proposal a new title of Workplace Behavior. Admin claimed that defining inappropriate behavior in the workplace that is not already covered by harassment or discrimination language is too broad and multifaceted to be able to contractualize. In general, in these counters Admin continued to assert that they have no interest in language that goes beyond legal protections, despite the insufficiency of current policies and the existence of additional language already existing in CBAs at other universities.

The counter admin presented for Immigration struck out a good portion of our original proposal. They claimed that most of what we proposed is beyond what they can commit to or contractualize, stating that it is unrealistic for the University to provide support to students in the ways we proposed (i.e., providing access to immigration legal counsel, working with students to maintain visa status, covering cost of work visas, providing housing to ASEs relocating to the US), insisting that visa status is only of concern prior to employment. 

Admin also gave us a counter on Discipline. As seen in their proposal, there’s still tension in what language is used to describe Discipline as a workplace concept. Admin continues to posit that the union intends to block an ASE from communicating during investigatory interviews. This is not the case, and is an inaccurate characterization of our fight for fair union representation when an ASE is subject to an investigatory interview. They have also suggested framing administrative leave as ‘home assignment’, believing that it’s more in line with the typical work capacities of an ASE. 

Based on admin’s comments in our last bargaining session regarding the timeline of proposals that might impact the budget, specifically surrounding Wages, we asked clarifying questions about their timelines and expectations about proposals with economic impacts. They clarified that while they typically have budget conversations about the upcoming academic year in June and July, they do not have a hard deadline on when changes to wages and other monetary proposals need to be agreed to. They expressed concerns about the administrative burden that would be incurred by adopting a different wage structure than is currently in use at WSU, and the need to have a full understanding of any of our proposals that might be impacted by the budget in order to make decisions about any of these proposals. We acknowledged their concerns, and reiterated that our goal is to carefully prepare a wages proposal that is well-informed and well argued, as the agreement we come to will have lasting impacts for ASE’s and the university. 

We will work over the coming weeks to prepare proposals on wages and fees, as well as other monetarily impacted proposals, and look forward to talking more with the bargaining unit about these proposals at our upcoming meetings. 

Bargaining Continues!
Throughout the summer, we will continue to bargain for better employment standards for all TAs, RAs, GAs, tutors, graders, and other ASEs. Here are the bargaining dates for the remainder of summer:

June 6, Jun 21, July 12, July 20, August 2 (10-5), August 15 (10-5)

*Unless otherwise specified, these days run from 9AM to 5PM.

As always, all ASEs are welcome to participate in bargaining by RSVPing here. You are welcome to come for any amount of time and participate however you feel comfortable; stopping by just to listen in is great too! You can also join workgroups or the weekly bargaining committee meeting by RSVP’ing here. 

Don’t see a way you’d like to get involved in bargaining & organizing? Have other questions? Email contact@wsucase.org, and someone will be in touch soon!

 In Solidarity,

WSU-CASE Bargaining Committee:
Acacia Patterson, Physics & Astronomy (Pullman)
Adam Bozman, Carson College of Business – Finance (Pullman)
Andre Diehl, Comparative Ethnic Studies (Pullman)
Arianna Gonzales, Psychology (Pullman)
Aurora Brinkman, Psychology (Pullman)
Chelsea Mitchell, School of the Environment (Puyallup Research and Extension Center)
Chia-Hui Chen, Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (Spokane)
Claudia Skinner, School of Languages, Cultures, and Race (Pullman)
Cody Lauritsen, College of Veterinary Medicine (Pullman)
Coty Jasper, Integrative Physiology & Neuroscience (Vancouver)
Dano Holt, School of the Environment (Pullman)
Evan Domsic, Crop and Soil Science (Mount Vernon NWREC)
Gavin Doyle, English (Pullman)
Hannah Cohen, Veterinary Clinical Sciences (Pullman)
Kartik Sreedhar, Physics & Astronomy (Pullman)
Kayla Spawton, Plant Pathology (Mount Vernon NWREC)
Kelsey King, School of Biological Sciences (Vancouver)
Miles Hopkins, School of the Environment (Pullman)
Miranda Zuniga-Kennedy, Clinical Psychology (Pullman)
Naseeha Cardwell, Chemical Engineering & Bioengineering (Pullman/Tri-Cities)
Natalie Yaw, Chemistry (Pullman)
Ninh Khuu, Plant Pathology (Prosser)
Peter Obi, Pharmaceutical Sciences (Spokane)
Raymond Bennett, Psychology (Pullman)
Rebecca Evans, Biology (Vancouver)
Shawn Domgaard, Communication (Pullman)
Tazin Rahman, Electrical Engineering & Computer Science (Pullman)
Tholen Justin Blasko, Animal Sciences (Pullman)
Victor Moore, History (Pullman)
Victoria Oyanna, Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (Spokane)
Whitney Shervey, Sociology (Pullman)
Yiran Guo, Mechanical and Materials Engineering (Pullman)