Recent Bargaining Updates
Scroll down for older updates, where you will find links to PDFs. 

FYI, it's NEW INFO... Strike / lockout preparation: for information on alternate duties, childcare, and partial picket requests--in event of a strike / lock out--and picketing on our first day, click here

April 8: Movement finally, but not necessarily on our priority areas

Movement, finally! Earlier this week the Bargaining Team signed off on or verbally agreed to a number of important proposals. For instance, all Members will now be able to spend up to $2,000 of our total coverage cap of $3,000 on any currently existing paramedical service (e.g. chiropractic, massage, etc.), including an expanded counselling service that now includes coverage for social work, psychoanalysis, and other professional therapy that was previously not covered.  This will not only provide an increase of up to $1,500 for those who consistently use one form of paramedical service,but it will also greatly reduce the pressure on our Extended Health Benefits (EHB) Fund, allowing the Local to cover a greater range of Member needs. In fact, we have also managed to negotiate an increase to this fund of $50,000!We would like to thank the Employer's Bargaining Team for all their hard work on this one.

Additionally, we have also reached verbal agreement with the Employer on Collective Agreement language that will ensure wage increases always result in an increase in Members’ minimum funding packages, hopefully ending the longstanding, egregious practise by which the Employer reduces non-waged funding in response to wage gains won during collective bargaining. All we need now is a monitoring system to ensure minimum funding packages are not reduced year-to-year for incoming graduate students as a means of pre-emptively clawing back future wage gains. We are close on this issue as well.

In the case of Unit 3 parity, the Employer has tabled a proposal that will ensure no Member will be offered a Graduate Assistantship of less then 135 hours (roughly $4,500). This is important movement in the right direction as at present, roughly 110 Members receive GAships below this threshold. Nevertheless, much work remains in this area. We were recently informed by Members of Unit 3 in various hiring units that many departments now offer only half GAships and force members to work these hours in the Winter term only, which denies Members the opportunity to receive benefits and Graduate Financial Assistance in the first semester of their Masters program. To correct this problem we need to continue to push to increase this minimum work guarantee well above the 135 hour mark. What is more, in total, all of the Employer's present Unit 3 proposals (135 GA hour guarantee; an increase in summer funding; an increased tuition rebate) only ensure Members around $6,600 in funding. This is well below the average funding package of at least $9,000 in many programs. Put simply then, any new Collective Agreement must guarantee at least this average in order to ensure funding packages aren't eroded over time and that the Employer’s proposed minimum hour guarantee cannot become a maximum. Further, all members with non-unionized Research Assistantships must be guaranteed that they will not have this funding clawed back as a result of the Employer's present offer.

Finally, in terms of Unit 2 job security, the Employer has put forward a reasonable Long Service Teaching Stream (LSTA) proposal, their latest “pass” confirming their acceptance of the basic principle that all existing and future LSTAs be renewable every three years on an on-going basis. What has yet to be worked out, however, is both the level of additional compensation for these positions and the precise nature of the review process to be undertaken as part of any given application for renewal. 

On “conversions” (tenure-track promotions) and “minimum entitlement” (minimum work guarantees for those who have worked 2+ years at York), however, the situation is much less promising. There has been absolutely no movement on these issues. Indeed, the Employer has been downright evasive on these topics, sometimes claiming financial hardship and other times pulling out any number of “principled positions” to avoid confronting the issue head on. To give you but a small taste of the frustration we’ve faced in these areas, in response to their concern that conversions are too expensive in this financial climate, we countered with an old proposal originally put forward by a former CUPE Member who now sits on YUFA’s Executive: why not use a formula that links the number of conversions to the number of yearly YUFA hires? Their reply: CUPE Members can always apply for tenure-track positions through the regular channels (this, despite the fact that the Employer has acknowledged that CUPE Unit 2 Members are often unjustly denied tenure-track jobs due to long-standing departmental tensions stemming from the precarity of contract work). Given that we are now but a few days from the April 12^th bargaining deadline, the Employer needs to stop end-running these issues and instead engage in substantive negotiations on these matters.

Overall, then, while we have made important and meaningful progress at the table on some issues in the last few days, we must keep in mind that much of this falls outside of the priority areas as approved by the Membership on February 8th. While we are excited to see the long-standing issue of clawbacks addressed, increased paramedical and EHB Fund coverage, and movement in terms of the renewability of LSTAs, there is still much work to be done in the areas of post-residency fees, conversions, a minimum entitlement for Unit 2 members, and Unit 3 parity. For example, on the issue of Post-Residency fees, the Employer remains opposed to the principle itself, preferring to speak in terms of small (e.g. $210) across-the-board Tuition Rebate (aka “Graduate Financial Assistance”) increases rather than a Post-Residency Rebate. While we would of course never turn down an increase to the GFA, this does not address the fact that upper year graduate students taking no classes, and who actively contribute to York research projects and funding, pay the same tuition as those taking a full course load.

We must see more movement in these priority areas and we will continue to push the Employer on these issues in these final days of bargaining before the April 12th deadline.

Moving forward, members are reminded of the Special General Membership Meeting on April 12 from 11am-2pm (although members may well vote to extend the meeting). Location: Curtis Lecture Halls I and L (notes will be on the doors re which one, but two are booked so we have overflow space).  

 

April 3: What’s all this talk of a strike? An FAQ for Members of CUPE 3903

CUPE 3903 has been bargaining with the ‘Faculty Relations’ department of YorkU since November. We’re asking that the Employer address our concerns around the jobsecurity of contract faculty, income disparity between PhD and Masters students, inequitable hiring practices for both contract faculty and graduate students, and tuition costs for graduate students who have finished all their course work and examinations. The Employer had little of substance to say about these issues—if they addressed them at all—for the first four months of negotiations.

Only after the Local received a strike mandate on March 16 did the Employer begin to address some of these concerns. What they have come to the table with, however, still doesn’t substantially address the concerns we’ve brought to them.

In response, 3903 has indicated (in accordance with all the legal frameworks that surround negotiations) that the deadline for reaching a deal is April 12, 2012. On this day, 3903 will have a General Membership Meeting, open to every 3903 Member, to discuss whatever offer the Employer has put on the table. It’s at this meeting that the Union will discuss whether this offer should be put forward to the entire membership for ratification. It’s also possible that the Employer could decide to (again, legally) ‘lock out’ the Union and prevent us from working, which they effectively did in 2008 by cancelling classes and closing the University.    

What does ‘being on strike’ actually mean in the context of a university? We’re not an industrial union! Being on strike means withdrawing all the work you do for the University for pay that is not directly related to your own research as a graduate student. This includes Teaching Assistantships, Graduate Assistantships, and some Research Assistantships. For Contract Faculty, being on strike means withdrawing any work you do at York that is done under contract through 3903. It also means walking a picket line at the University to talk to community members and students in order to explain what we’re doing and to show the administration that you’re serious about improving your working conditions and students’ learning conditions.

Strikes hurt students – undergraduate and graduate alike. So, why go on strike?Many of the things that graduate students benefit from at York—like six years of funding for PhD students, tuition indexation for all grad students, summer minimum funding—were the product of work done by 3903 in past bargaining rounds. Things that benefit undergrads—like caps on tutorial sizes (which UofT currently doesn’t have)—were also the product of the work of 3903. Going on strike is a last resort, turned to only if the administration of YorkU won’t adequately respond to our concerns. Whenever we can, we push to get improvements to the working and learning conditions at the University without actually going out on strike.

If a strike happens (and it is an ‘if’) Senate policy 008 protects students who refuse to cross picket lines, stating that they ‘are entitled to immunity from penalty, to reasonable alternative access to materials covered in their absence, to reasonable extensions of deadlines and to such other remedy as Senate deems necessary and consistent with the principle of academic integrity.’ If York decides to cancel classes, they will be responsible for making sure that lectures are made up when classes resume to ensure the semester isn’t lost. If they do not cancel classes, and the University stays open, they have a responsibility to accommodate students who choose to respect our picket lines.

For students who depend on OSAP, YorkU also makes allowances for labour disruptions. After the 2000-2001 strike, York expanded its undergraduate bursary and pushed back the deadline to cover the costs of a school year that was ten months long rather than eight.

If you or your students are applying to grad schools or other programs, schools tend to take into account labour disruptionsand will likely grant extensions to those who might be affected. The 3903 Executive will be more than willing to provide written confirmation of any labour disruption to all those who may require written documentation to this effect.

If there’s a strike...

…should I pay my summer tuition? The Local is encouraging Members to withhold their tuition money until after our new Collective Agreement has been signed. This is because graduate tuition is a significant source of income for the University in the summer – it is, in fact, a larger proportion of their income in the summer than at any other time of the year. If we want to disrupt the Employer’s capacity to operate in the summer we need to withhold this capital. The Local recommends registering for classes to avoid the $200 late registration fee, but holding on to your tuition dollars. That said, members should be aware that there is a 1% interest rate on late tuition.

…what happens to my external scholarships? According to FGS, if you are registered in the summer semester, your external scholarship will not be affected.

…can I come on campus to do my lab research? Yes. If you have ongoing lab work that needs to be taken care of daily you should most certainly attend to this work. Keep in mind, however, that some of your lab work might be CUPE work and should be withdrawn in the context of a strike. If, for instance, you do work for your supervisor that doesn’t contribute to the completion of your own thesis work, it’s covered by the Collective Agreement and you should make arrangements with your supervisor to hold off on this work until any labour action is resolved. If not doing this work will jeopardize the project as a whole, then the Local recommends doing the minimum required to maintain the project’s integrity.

…should I use the library? In the event of a strike, the Local would encourage members to use University facilities as little as possible. If members absolutely must access the library, however, they should feel free to do so, as refusing to use the library has no impact on York’s finances.

…will exams be cancelled? As mentioned above, under provision 008 the York Senate has an obligation to accommodate students in the event of a strike or lockout. If the University remains open, then it will be up to York whether or not the exam period continues. If the exam period does not continue, and exams are cancelled, York has an obligation to ensure that accommodations are made for our students. 

…will there be a hardship fund? At our Annual General Membership meeting (March 29) a hardship fund of $37,500 (based on estimated solidarity donations from other organizations) was proposed as part of a strike budget. This fund would be available to members in the event that the strike lasts more than one month. Eligibility requirements and application and adjudication processes are to be determined and will be announced as soon as possible if strike action is taken.

…who is eligible to receive strike pay? Only members who are on York’s payroll as of the start of the strike are eligible to receive strike pay. In other words, members who have contracts that started in September and end in April would be eligible for strike pay as would members who have contracts that started in January and end in April.

…how much is strike pay? How many hours must I perform strike duties in order to receive strike pay?Strike pay for all members is $200 per week ($800 per month). There are typically two shifts per day of four hours each. Members must engage in strike duties for 20 hours per week in order to receive strike pay. In the event that members cannot do 20 hours in a given week (for example, because of teaching commitments at another university), you must make arrangements with the Strike Coordinator in charge of strike pay forms and your strike pay will be pro-rated.

…what strike duties can I perform to receive strike pay? Generally, members must picket in order to receive strike pay. If this is impossible due to mobility or other documented health issues, alternative duty will be arranged. According to CUPE National policy, members cannot receive strike pay for attending meetings.

…what about my health benefits? The Local is attempting to negotiate a premium amount with the Employer that CUPE National will pay using the National Strike Fund to ensure that our Sun Life Coverage continues. If the Employer does not agree to this, CUPE National will use the National Strike Fund to provide interim benefits coverage for us. Since in either case the National Strike Fund will be used to pay for health benefits, members must perform strike duty in order for your benefits to continue. 

…what about my Employment Insurance? Those members who are eligible generally will not be able to receive EI if they are directly participating in a strike/lockout. There may be exceptions to this, however; when the Local contacted Service Canada on this issue we were told that “all claims for EI must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.” The Local therefore encourages eligible members to apply for EI. If you are rejected, you can appeal the decision with Service Canada.

 

March 28: Some movement, significant distance to go 

On Thursday March 22, we met with both the Employer and the conciliator for the fourth and final time. After this point, conciliation becomes mediation in the lead up to April 12th – the official bargaining deadline and the first day the Local will be in a legal strike position. As an act of good faith, we also agreed to meet the Employer on Friday the 23rd while we await mediation. On Thursday, we tabled a new proposal package very similar to our March 13th Memorandum of Settlement (MOS). Our March 13th MOS set out a 12% total compensation package (4% per year) inclusive of wages, benefits and our four priority proposals:

 anti-claw back language to prevent the Employer from rolling back research monies in response to wage gains won during bargaining;
 tuition rebates (post-residency fees) for graduate students who no longer take classes;
 a minimum funding packages for Graduate/Research Assistants similar to those already received by TAs; and
 continuing appointments for CUPE faculty (e.g. renewable three year three course contracts for long service faculty, the restoration of tenure-track promotions, and a minimum work entitlement for those who have taught at York for at least two years).

Our prior MOS expired on March 15th after the Employer refused to sign. By re-tabling a similar proposal package, we have clearly communicated to the Employer what we want to get out of this round. At the same time however, our most recent offer includes a number of the Employer's counter-proposals, signalling our willingness to continue negotiations. 

Given that the Employer has all but ignored our priority concerns, on Thursday we once again walked them through the four priority proposals passed by the Membership on February 8th.  We once again outlined the rational behind post-residency fees, making clear that it is simply unfair that upper-year graduate students taking no courses pay the same as first year graduate students taking three to five classes per term. Their response was simple: NO. In the Employer's view there is an invisible “boundary” dividing student life from work life and tuition falls squarely on the side of student life. This, despite the fact that our Collective Agreements have, since the mid 1990s, contained language on Tuition Indexation and Graduate (Student) Financial Assistance, to say nothing of our existing funds covering portions of our student research costs and conference travel expenses. Put simply, this “boundary” is a mere fiction!

We also reiterated our commitment to pursing parity for all graduate students, arguing that it is inequitable that Teaching Assistants make $6,000-9,000 more then Graduate/Research Assistants (GAs), despite the fact that GA work often contributes directly to the production and/or improvement of course curriculum. What is more, we also expressed our disappointment that the Employer has, over the years, been rolling back GA hours and including within their funding packages tuition rebates meant to be added on top of their existing funding. Their response: they will increase summer funding for GAs from $700 to $950 (to $1,000 in 2013) but they make no guarantees that this increase will not be clawed back by reductions in Fall-Winter funding. Even worse, the Employer is unwilling to even consider minimum funding packages for Unit 3 because, in their opinion, York has never accepted the principle that they owe a “multiyear commitment to Masters Students” (despite the fact that many Masters programs are advertised as two year degrees and the average completion time for many one year degrees is now close to two years).

In discussing our continuing appointments proposals we argued that very few workplaces in Canada require their employees to work ten, 15, or 20 years before gaining access to multiyear contracts. We also stressed that, like any workplace in Canada, CUPE faculty deserve access to promotions and that it is simply unacceptable that the Employer has asked for a reduction in the number of tenure-track promotions available to our Members while simultaneously committing to hiring 30 new YUFA faculty (YUFA is the full-time faculty association at York). The Employer's response was once again disappointing. They reaffirmed that they will only consider renewable contracts for long service Members if they submit to a detailed review of their teaching abilities by a YUFA member every three years. This, in our opinion, is insulting given that YUFA faculty are only subject to review after seven years of service. Additionally, the Employer also made clear that they are unwilling to consider any proposals that would provide continuing appointments or, as they call it, “complement guarantees” to individual CUPE faculty or CUPE as a whole. More generally, they made clear that, as an employer, they wish to maintain maximum “flexibility” in labour relations (translation: they wish to retain the right to cut as many positions and/or programs as they see fit). In response, we made it clear that there are in fact ways around this "problem" and that it is possible to provide continuing appointments without necessarily guaranteeing people so-called “jobs for life”. We also pointed out that similar programs already exist for college instructors. Finally, on the issue of tenure-track conversions, the Employer's response was simple: they don’t have the money to hire tenure-track professors. At the same time, however, they confirmed that there would be another 30 “strategic” YUFA appointments later this year. In other words, they have the money to hire; they simply don't want to hire us! 

If there is one area where we have made headway it is on the issue of wage claw-backs. Up until Friday the 23rd, the Employer had consistently denied that this problem exists (while costing these non-existent wage gains against the value of our agreements). During Friday's bargaining session, however, they acknowledged that every member should receive wage gains over and above the value of their minimum funding packages (as set out in their offers of admission). This is a good sign. Nevertheless, they were also clear that they are unwilling to deal with this problem on an "across the board" basis (by including within our agreements language similar to that laid out in UofT's contract), preferring instead to create a fund that Members could apply to in order to gain access to wage gains won this round. This is clearly unacceptable. On the one hand, it puts the onus on the Local to ensure legally negotiated wage gains are realized by each Member. On the other, it presents the issue of wage-claw backs as a monetary demand to be counted against our total compensation package, rather than a non-monetary protection (again, it is important to remember they already cost these increases as part of our wage demand, meaning they are effectively double costing these monies).

The Employer also came forward with a number of other small monetary proposals. For instance, they have now offered to increase Graduate Financial Assistance for international students by $125, the Graduate Student Bursary by $20,000 and the Research Cost Fund by $20,000 ($40,000 in year two). Overall, the Employer has increased its total compensation package by about 1% per year since the beginning of conciliation. This is a good start. 

To put this in perspective however, even with these increases the Employer's present total compensation offer is only 1.9% per year, more than 3.5% less per year than we received in our last contract and roughly 2.5% less than U of T will receive per year for the next three years as laid out in their new collective agreement. Thus, while we appreciate their latest movement, we nonetheless remain miles apart.    

(Note: while the Employer recently increased its wage offer from 1% to 2% per year, wages only account for around 75% of the value of our contracts, the other 25% being made up of funds, leaves, benefits, etc. This means that their present wage offer represents around 1.5% growth on the value of our past agreement; the remainder of their proposals amounting to a mere 0.4% growth per year.)

 

For earlier updates, click the link to access a PDF

• March 20: CUPE3903 calls No Board: click here
• March 16. CUPE  3903 gives strike mandate: click here 
• March 13: Union tables new offer; employer tables concessions: click here
• March 8. Conciliation update, meetings reminder: click here
• March 7: backgrounder about what we are bargaining for in this round and a frequently asked questions page about a strike mandate vote: click here for Units 1 & 3 and here for Unit 2
• March 6: click here
• February 24, 2012: click here
• January 24, 2012: click here
• January 22, 2012. A message from the Executive Committee and Bargaining Team regarding proposals click here
• January 18, 2012: click here
• December 12, 2011: click here
• To access a PDF that includes all updates to date, click here
   

Summary of our proposals
Click the image below for the complete proposal package still being negotiated (union proposals presented to the Employer in conciliation) [your browser will open a PDF].