Results of Temporary Appointments

The Executive Committee has decided to open nominations for candidates to be pro-temmed (temporarily appointed) to fill two vacancies on the Executive Committee and two vacancies on the Bargaining Team, as per Article 14 V.(b) of the bylaws, these nominations closes January 25th. Nominations for a full by-election are to come.

Congratulations to the following member in their temporary appointments to the following positions:
Vice President Unit 1 – Mackenzie Edwards
Lead Steward Unit 4 – Vacant
Bargaining Team Unit 1 – Collin Xia
Bargaining Team Unit 3 – Imran Syed

Bargaining Report: January 8th-16th

Bargaining Update: January 8th-16th

Bargaining Preparation for Conciliation

The Bargaining Team (BT) rang in 2024 with a series of meetings to prepare for our first bargaining meeting of the year with the Employer and our first ever meeting with our Conciliator, Erin White.  We hope that with the arrival of the conciliator the Employer will start to sign off on significant proposals, such as those addressing the cost of living crisis and equity in hiring.

Red Lines Preparation Meetings: January 8th

The BT’s first meeting was to discuss with the Membership what would count as a “red line” (i.e. an issue over which the union would go on strike).  Using the bargaining survey completed by members last year, the BT will suggest to the Membership which proposals should be a priority for bargaining (e.g. wages, job security, equity issues).  With the strong Strike Mandate Vote of 84% voting in favour of strike action if necessary, we are confident that we can either make gains on significant proposals at the bargaining table or show the conciliator that the Employer refuses to take these proposals seriously.  The Red Lines Special General Membership Meeting will take place on January 19th.  You can register for that meeting here.

Special General Membership Meeting: January 12th

At this meeting, the BT reported to the Membership that no progress had been made on monetary proposals at the bargaining table.  The Employer countered some of our proposals with the same inadequate offer that they first gave us in late October.  

However, the most pressing issue for the BT was to have the Unit 2 Job Stability Package (JSP) approved by the Membership so that this proposal could be presented to the employer at the next bargaining session, or to have the proposal withdrawn.  The BT also emphasized that the proposal could not be changed now that we are in conciliation since no changes to existing proposals or new proposals are allowed at this stage of bargaining.  The Membership decided to table the motion to approve the JSP because they needed more time to review such a comprehensive proposal.  

The Membership approved the Strike Policy which lays out how a strike will be conducted.  Once approved, the strike policy allows for the formation of a strike committee which discusses and approves strike strategy for the Membership.  Getting this policy approved and the strike committee formed are important steps to prepare for a strike.  If the Employer insists on refusing our very reasonable demands, then we are now well on our way to preparing for a strike to win those demands!

Conciliator Preparation Meeting and Palestine: January 15th 

At this meeting, we discussed how we would interact with the conciliator, how we would move forward pressuring the Employer to respond to the genocide against the Palestinian people, and how we would ask the Membership for guidance at the Red Lines SGMM.  Regarding the conciliator, we discussed whether she should chair the meetings and if we should do “shuttle diplomacy” (where neither the BT nor the employer’s BT meets in the same room, but communicates only through the conciliator).  Considering the Employer’s disregard for basic rules of civility during meetings (such as not interrupting and refusing to raise their hand when they want to speak), we decided to wait and see whether the conciliator would want to chair the meetings or not.  We also decided not to engage in shuttle diplomacy in this first meeting to gauge the reaction of the conciliator to the Employer’s behaviour.  

The BT remains committed to challenging the Employer’s lack of response in the face of the genocide taking place in Palestine.  We drafted a Statement on Palestine to show the employer and the Conciliator that genocide is a labour issue, especially since members are being disciplined by the Employer for their support of the Palestinian people.  This disciplining has had a chilling effect on the campus as a whole.  Moreover, we wanted to show that no one can be silent while genocide is happening.

We continued our discussion of how to present issues to the Membership to help us all understand which issues are strike issues and which are not.  The BT decided not to go over individual proposals, but to focus on themes (such as, equity, wages, graduate funding, job security, etc.).  A complete chart of our proposals and the Employer’s responses to them can be found here.

Coordinated Pressure on the Employer on Wages Continues

From 2020 to 2023, Bill 124 imposed an unconstitutional 1% per year cap on wages at the same time that we witnessed a steep 15.8% rise in the cost of living. For the past several months, CUPE 3903 has been organizing with other unions on campus to work collectively for retroactive wage increases. Our coordination with the all-unions Cross-Campus Alliance (CCA) has successfully pressured the Employer to present monetary counterproposals sooner than they otherwise would have. But it still took the Employer two months to deliver this inadequate proposal on Oct. 27, which falls well short of addressing past and present levels of inflation. 

On January 16th, 3903 and other unions on campus discussed the Employer’s claims that it does not have the money to meet our proposed wage increases despite handing out lavish bonuses to high-level administrators regardless of their performance and on litigation to prevent wage increases for the York University Faculty Association (YUFA).  Moreover, while York claims it is broke, they are opening a new medical school and they have over $1 billion in deferred maintenance with many buildings at Keele and Glendon are over the critical threshold so that these buildings are unsafe. York  cannot even fix a broken toilet on Glendon’s campus that has been out of order for years.  How does the university’s admin expect to increase, or even maintain, enrolment and retention when they show such blatant disregard for their students and employees?  All of this mismanagement is more confusing when the Auditor General’s Office (AGO) report states that York is in a sound financial position.

Get Involved!

Our union practices open bargaining, meaning all meetings of the Bargaining Team—including our face-to-face meetings with the Employer’s bargaining team—are open to all members of CUPE 3903. All members are encouraged to attend both our weekly Bargaining Team meetings, which take place online, and our meetings with the Employer, which usually take place in a hybrid format. As members of CUPE 3903, you are free to come and go from any of our meetings as your schedules allow. Check the CUPE 3903 website’s calendar for any updates.

Bargaining Report Back: Week of January 17

On January 17, the Bargaining Team and the Employer met for the first time with the government-appointed conciliator, Erinn White.  At our Red lines SGMM on January 19, members reaffirmed the bargaining priorities, particularly significant wage and benefits increases, originally identified in last spring’s bargaining surveys. Unit 2 members passed the job security counterproposals first presented to members at the GMM the week before. 

Bargaining Report Back: Week of January 17

Bargaining Jan. 17th

After the land acknowledgement, the BT, as has been our current practice after October 7th, 2023, read a powerful statement on Palestine, touching upon our CA and the problems of Freedom of Speech, which ended by asking:  “How do we want to be remembered?”

Counters

The BT presented several counters, including on 3903 executive service increase, on the Labour Management Committee, clarifying “Tutor 3” positions, cleaning up the CA to clarify the cap for unit 2, cleaning up various articles, and our insistence that for U2’s who have designed a course we want the right of the designer to mount the course to increase from 36 to 48 months.

Employer Counters

The Employer proposed a counter to our proposal on automatic Personal Expense Reimbursement for U2, where they rather unacceptably suggested a Joint Working committee on Personal Expense Reimbursement.  They also proposed a Letter of Understanding for CUPE 3903’s grievance against misuse of Graduate Assistant Training (GAT) Funds for U3, but which completely disregards what we have already insisted is proper restitution for lost monies and mismanagement of the GAT Funds. We have raised these concerns on several occasions, and the Employer, as evidenced by their most recent Letter of Understanding, continues to dismiss and ignore the proposals we have put forth. 

RED LINES SGMM

We had a redlines SGMM, wherein firstly U2 settled on the January 19th “Job Stability” programs, which are a slight expansion of the handful of programs that already exist.  These should be presented to the employer on Monday January 22.

During the redlines themselves, the membership courageously stood firm with the BT.  We were told by the membership that they were supportive of all that we have put forward.  Especially all units told us (which was also obvious from the surveys done back in Summer 2023) that wages were super important, and something that is a clear redline.  The importance of wages is based on the cost of living crises and the current problems of life in Toronto.  We were also told to stand firm on not allowing the university to restructure our jobs.  In regards to both our wages and benefits proposals, we were told that we had been conservative with our proposals and that we must not bargain them down!

CONCILIATION

We met with the conciliator and discussed very early basic issues and concerns, and set up the guidelines of conciliation.  Conciliation is the last step before we are in a legal strike position. The conciliators are interested in moving the process forward, and keeping communication open between us and the employer, which to be clear, we are trying to do as well, but for the employer’s intransigence.  However, while it is early in the process, conciliation might not lead to a worked out Collective Agreement.  We will continue to insist on developing the best CA we can for you, our members, and while doing so, we wait to see what happens next. 

WHAT’S NEXT?

Upcoming Meetings with the Employer (Registration Required):

CUPE 3903 is committed to open bargaining, which means all members are welcome to attend bargaining meetings to observe, pass notes to the bargaining team, and participate in bargaining team caucuses. At this point in the process, the bargaining team is working with a conciliator appointed by the Ministry of Labour. This is a hybrid meeting. For those attending in person, the room location is 519 Kaneff Tower. For those attending remotely, registration is required. Please register in advance to avoid delays in accessing these meetings:

January 22, 2024 @ 10:00 am – 5:00 pm

https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZ0rdO6tpjMrGdwy2reZhym22PBeswf6GBUb

February 2, 2024 @ 2:00 pm – 5:00 pm

 https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZIvdO2qrj8oEtW2Sorgmj8mO8Pde9MgekBb

Accessibility: For all bargaining meetings with the Employer, CART closed captioning will be available. If you require ASL interpretation or reimbursement for childcare/caregiver/attendant care or have any other requests for accommodation, please contact our Equity Officer, Nadia Kanani, at cupe3903equity@gmail.com.

 

Upcoming Bargaining team meetings (no Registration required):

Friday, January 26, 3:00–5:00 PM

 https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87887091193?pwd=QWJpZk9CbTh5UXNabnc1Q2duUGVzZz09

Wednesday, January 31, 11:00 AM–1:00 PM : https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85294835318?pwd=a3ltQjBCZG1SMEdYWmZjT3hGVGFydz09

Joint Executive and Bargaining Team Meeting

This is a joint Bargaining Team and Executive committee meeting to focus on bargaining strategies. All members are welcome to join.

Jan. 29, 1-4pm BT-Exec Meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84758505282?pwd=b3VGakg1VEhhTU11OFJpdjU0MlBYZz09

Nominations Open for Vacancies on Bargaining Team and Executive Committee

Nominations Open for Vacancies on Bargaining Team and Executive Committee

The Executive Committee has decided to open nominations for candidates to be pro-temmed (temporarily appointed) to fill two vacancies on the Executive Committee and two vacancies on the Bargaining Team, as per Article 14 V.(b) of the bylaws. Nominations for a full by-election will open later this month.

The following positions are available to members in good standing of the relevant bargaining unit:
Vice President Unit 1
Lead Steward Unit 4
Bargaining Team Unit 1
Bargaining Team Unit 3

For more information or to nominate yourself for the position, please email Chairperson Stephanie Latella at cupe3903chairperson@gmail.com by noon on January 25.

Bargaining Team Report for the week of December 18-22

In Wake of Strong Strike Mandate Vote, BT Urges Employer to Sign Off on Agreed-To Items!

Bargaining Team Report for the week of December 18-22

Bargaining finished for the year as the Bargaining Team met with the Employer on December 19. There has been some positive movement as two sign-offs were finalized this week. However, we have yet to see significant movement on a number of items, or even any response at all on many proposals. Members expressed their commitment to the issues on the table with a strong strike mandate vote of 84% in favor of strike action if necessary.

Counterproposals from CUPE 3903

Unit 1 (full-time grad students with teaching contracts) presented a counterproposal on Article 10 to provide more clarity about the different sources of funding that can make up the total remuneration for Unit 1 members — e.g., TA salary, Grant-In-Aid (GIA), Graduate Financial Assistance (GFA), York Graduate Fellowship, and the International Tuition Offset (ITO). This counterproposal was a response to the Employer’s proposed restructuring of Article 10. While there is agreement that Article 10 needs to be reorganized to make sources of funding clearer for graduate students (in Units 1 and 3), CUPE 3903 is advocating for changes that would outline graduate funding in as holistic and clear a manner as possible. These changes would be in addition to the across-the-board increases to wages, GIA, GFA, and the York Graduate Fellowship that CUPE 3903 has already proposed.  

For the Letter of Understanding: Severance (in the Unit 2 CA), the Union had proposed new language to ensure that leaves of absence for Human Rights protected grounds would not interfere with severance eligibility. The Employer made some minor modifications to that new language, which the Union incorporated.

The BT also presented all Units responses for Article 8 (Discipline) and Article 4.06 (Printing Agreement). On Article 8, the Union accepted some of the Employer’s housekeeping changes, while standing firm on our proposal that discipline processes must disclose the supporting evidence that is the basis of the discipline before the initial meeting. The printing agreement counter proposed that the Employer should assume the responsibility of distributing an electronic version of the collective agreement to each new employee. 

Counterproposals from Employer

The Employer came back with a counterproposal to the Unit 2 workload proposal; however, this counter is only for Type 2 or tutorial work. While the employer has so far not engaged with setting out parameters for the number of hours associated with Type 1 or course director work, the language to protect against overwork of Type 2 positions is a meaningful gain for the Union. 

The Employer also introduced a counterproposal to an all Unit’s proposal for ongoing consultation about policy covering workplace accommodations. The Employer counter is a letter of agreement for a single collective agreement that would provide two meetings a year in which the Union would receive data and discuss the experiences of members with the accommodations process. While we are encouraged to see the Employer engaging with its responsibilities, this counterproposal falls short of the necessity to treat accommodations as a tripartite process where the Union and members have a say.

Signing off on agreed to items

From the first time we have seen the Employer’s “comprehensive package”, they have said that their proposals are an all-or-nothing package deal. While they have since agreed to sign off on particular items–indicating it isn’t quite all-or-nothing,–they have been reluctant to remove language that says agreement to one proposal is agreement to all proposals. Since the Employer’s framework in effect asks us to commit to their incomplete “Schedule C,’ which we would not and could not do, the Employer’s seems quite meaningless.  After many attempts to ask about their rationale and articulate our position, the BT has decided to proceed in the way we always have: finding agreement on individual proposals until there is a settlement agreement. 

As of December 21st, CUPE 3903 and the Employer have signed off on two proposals, both of which improve access to Union processes: 

  • Unit 2 Article 12.19 Appointment Information and 
  • Unit 3 Article 11.05.4 Executive Service.

Get Involved! Upcoming Bargaining Meetings

Our union practices open bargaining, meaning all meetings of the Bargaining Team—including our face-to-face meetings with the Employer’s bargaining team—are open to all members of CUPE 3903. All members are encouraged to attend both our weekly Bargaining Team meetings, which take place online, and our meetings with the Employer, which usually take place in a hybrid format. As members of CUPE 3903, you are free to come and go from any of our meetings as your schedules allow. Check the CUPE 3903 website’s calendar for any updates.

Bargaining Meetings with the Employer

Due to shorter meetings this month, all bargaining meetings with the Employer are taking place online only. Register in advance using the links below.

Wednesday, January 17, 10:00 AM–5:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance.

Monday, January 22, 10:00 AM–5:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance.

Friday, February 2, 10:00 AM–5:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance.

Bargaining Team Meetings:

Monday, January 8, 11:00 AM–1:00 PM

 https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89208871125?pwd=cmthR1pOcUR4WWZUQnRTYUYvT1dWUT09

Moday, January 15, 3:00–5:00 PM

 https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82879493743?pwd=RkYwOHRBN21Nelk0QlBHa3FsRXpPdz09

Friday, January 26, 3:00–5:00 PM

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87887091193?pwd=QWJpZk9CbTh5UXNabnc1Q2duUGVzZz09

Wednesday, January 31, 11:00 AM–1:00 PM

 https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85294835318?pwd=a3ltQjBCZG1SMEdYWmZjT3hGVGFydz09

 

CUPE 3903 Members Vote Strongly in Favour of a Strike Mandate at 84%

Since June 2023, the bargaining team has presented 109 proposals and have sat down for countless hours of negotiations with York University, with the collective agreements for CUPE 3903 Units 1, 2, and 3 expiring on August 31, 2023. Despite our best efforts there has not been any significant progress so far at the bargaining table in any of our priority areas and their wage offer is well below inflation. It has been made clear that winning significant improvements to wages and benefits is a central issue for members in this round of negotiations.

Contract faculty, teaching assistants, and graduate assistants came out in force during the Strike Mandate Vote, from December 11th to 18th, to vote in favour of a strike mandate by a strong margin of 84%.  Full results below.

This strong strike mandate shows support for the bargaining team and the priorities being negotiated at the table. It shows that we can get gains on key issues: keeping up with the cost of living; protecting our rights to fair and equitable grievance processes; ensuring resources for members who experience racialized discrimination, harassment, and violence on the job; advancing job stability; and managing workload at both ends — in relation to overwork, and loss of work due to restructuring. It shows that we are unified, and, if necessary, that our proposals are worth fighting for.

The Bargaining Team can now return to the bargaining table empowered to negotiate a contract for all three units that reflects what we deserve! A deal is possible and likely as long as the employer returns to negotiations in good faith, but the membership needs to see real improvements in our priority areas.

Strike Mandate Vote Result Summary:

Unit 1
YES / OUI – 699 (87.5%)
NO / NON – 100 (12.5%)

Unit 2
YES / OUI – 470 (78.1%)
NO / NON – 132 (21.9%)

Unit 3*
YES / OUI – 6 (100.0%)
NO / NON – 0 (0.0%)

Turnout: 1407 (48.8%) of 2886 electors voted in this ballot. This is a very strong turnout for the academic sector, and is near our all time high (53.7%).

* Unit 3—full-time graduate students employed in research, administrative, or clerical work—has been under constant attack since 2016 with York University’s deep pattern of union-busting tactics. Click here to take a deeper dive into the history of Unit 3.

Bargaining Team Report for the week of December 11-15

BT Urges Employer to Sign Off on Agreed-To Items, Counters on Wages in Coordination with Other Unions

Bargaining Team Report for the week of December 11-15

CUPE 3903’s Strike Mandate Vote gave the Bargaining Team (BT) a busy week, with two SGMMs in addition to three meetings with the Employer and our weekly BT prep meeting. At the two SGMMs, the BT presented to the membership on some of the many reasons to vote “yes” on the strike mandate. A strong strike mandate gives us leverage for gains on key issues: keeping up with the cost of living; protecting our rights to fair and equitable grievance processes; ensuring resources for members who experience racialized discrimination, harassment, and violence on the job; advancing job stability; and managing workload at both ends — in relation to overwork, and loss of work due to restructuring. In meetings with the Employer, we countered on our retroactive wage demands (in coordination with four other unions on campus), initiated the process of signing off on agreed-to proposals, and rejected the omnibus style of the Employer’s unilaterally initiated “Framework for Settlement.” The BT continued to seek clarification on aspects of the Employer’s “Schedule C” (non-monetary proposal package) and Unit 3 presented a counterproposal on funding sources. 

Coordinated Pressure for Retroactive Wage Increases

From 2020 to 2023, Bill 124 imposed an unconstitutional 1% per year cap on wages at the same time that we witnessed a steep 15.8% rise in the cost of living. For the past several months, CUPE 3903 has been organizing with other unions on campus to work collectively for retroactive wage increases. Our coordination with the all-unions Cross-Campus Alliance (CCA) has successfully pressured the Employer to present monetary counterproposals sooner than they otherwise would have. But it still took the Employer two months to deliver this inadequate proposal on Oct. 27, which falls well short of addressing past and present levels of inflation. 

On Dec. 11, we presented a counterproposal (along with YUFA, YUSA, OHFA, and CUPE 1356) to retroactively increase wages by 4% per year (in addition to the previous 1% per year increases), paid out as a lump sum to all those who were members during any part of the Bill 124 three-year moderation period. These are the increases required to keep pace with inflation; anything less entails a concessionary loss of real wages. We are holding firm on our wage increase demands for the next collective agreement: 7% per year for 2023-24 and 2024-25, 5% for 2025-26 (and indexed to CPI going forward). 

Signing Off on Agreed-To Items, Rejecting Unilateral Frameworks

On Oct. 27, the Employer presented a “Framework for Settlement” with three sections: Schedule A (retroactive wage increases), Schedule B (monetary proposals for the next collective agreement), and Schedule C (an empty placeholder for non-monetary proposals). The Employer has slowly added to their “comprehensive” Schedule C, with proposals and counterproposals presented on Nov. 24 and Nov. 30. In their preamble to Schedule C, they included the following language: “agreement to all proposals in this Comprehensive Framework, including Schedules ‘A’ and ‘B’, is subject to agreement to all items that will be contained in Schedule ‘C.’” In other words, the Employer is trying to tie agreement on monetary items to agreement upon non-monetary items. We reject this approach that seeks to do an end-run around collective bargaining.

Despite the “all or nothing” language, there is nothing “comprehensive” about the Employer’s packages. They fail to engage with most of our proposals on graduate funding, job stability, class sizes, and workload. Moreover, we are concerned that the employer’s approach in their framework for settlement introduces unnecessary and unilateral barriers to our ability to conclude discussion on agreed-to items. Because the Employer’s framework says we have to agree to everything before we can agree to anything, it introduces an obstacle to moving forward. 

On Dec. 13, the BT initiated the long-established process around agreed-to items by presenting a counterproposal on Article 12.9 and indicating that we were ready to sign off on it. The Employer’s initial response was contradictory: they said they considered the item “agreed-to” but stopped short of agreeing to sign off on it, suggesting instead that there should be a new ‘Schedule D’ where agreed-to items would be parked while bargaining continues. Members of the BT pushed back against the Employer’s lack of clarity, which prompted the Employer to change course and send us a sign-off form the following day with the statement that a sign off “signifies that [an] item is resolved and agreed to and need not be further addressed.” From our perspective, this sentiment renders null and void the “all or nothing” aspect of the Employer’s framework since signing off on agreed-to items means that they would no longer be subject to negotiations and would become part of the Memorandum of Settlement, and ultimately part of the renewal Collective Agreement. 

Counterproposals and Clarifying Employer’s Schedule C

On Dec. 11, the Employer presented a counterproposal on the Ways and Means and Professional Development funds that aligns with the union’s understanding of what the base amounts of these funds are that should be automatically carried over into the next collective agreement. This had previously been a source of disagreement (see reports from week of September 18 and week of September 25). 

On Dec. 14, the Unit 3 members of the BT presented a counterproposal on Articles 10 and 15. The main goal of the counterproposal is to make sources of funding for Unit 3 members more clear and to require that postings clearly identify the financial value of a contract (including wages, Grant-in-Aid, and Graduate Financial Assistance). In the counterproposal, the union has suggested dates on offers of appointments for Graduate Assistantships, and we have included a proposal to prioritize the hiring of qualified Master’s students for said positions. 

Throughout the three meetings with the Employer, the BT sought clarification from the Employer on varying aspects of their Schedule C (non-monetary proposals), including questions from Unit 1 on graduate funding. 

Get Involved! Upcoming Bargaining Meetings

Our union practices open bargaining, meaning all meetings of the Bargaining Team—including our face-to-face meetings with the Employer’s bargaining team—are open to all members of CUPE 3903. All members are encouraged to attend both our weekly Bargaining Team meetings, which take place online, and our meetings with the Employer, which usually take place in a hybrid format. As members of CUPE 3903, you are free to come and go from any of our meetings as your schedules allow. Check the CUPE 3903 website’s calendar for any updates.

Bargaining Meetings with the Employer

Due to shorter meetings this month, all December bargaining meetings with the Employer are taking place online only. Register in advance using the links below.

Tuesday, December 19, 1:00 PM–3:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance.

Bargaining Team Meetings:

Tuesday, December 19, 10:00 AM–12:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance.

Nominations Open for Unit 3 Vacancies on Bargaining Team and Executive Committee

Nominations Open for Unit 3 Vacancies on Bargaining Team and Executive Committee
The Executive Committee has decided to open nominations for candidates to be pro-temmed (temporarily appointed) to fill a Unit 3 vacancy on the Bargaining Team and the position of Lead Steward Unit 3, as per Article 14 V.(b) of the bylaws. Nominations for a full by-election will open in January.
Any Unit 3 member in good standing is eligible to hold either position. For more information or to nominate yourself for the position, please email Chairperson Stephanie Latella at cupe3903chairperson@gmail.com by noon on December 19.

Bargaining Team Report for the week of December 1–8 

The Bargaining Team Coordinates Wage Counterproposal with Cross-Campus Alliance and Continues Consultations with Members on Job Stability

Bargaining Team Report for the week of December 1–8 

With no bargaining meetings with the Employer and no General Membership Meetings this week, the Bargaining Team continued to go over the Employer’s still incomplete “Schedule C” from its November 30 Framework for Settlement. In our cooperation with other labour unions on campus, we reached an agreement on a coordinated counterproposal in our ongoing wage reopener negotiations. The Bargaining Team welcomed its newest member, and it continued its widespread consultation on job stability counterproposals at a Town Hall forum on December 8 and its preparations for the Strike Mandate Vote (SMV) GMM and the next meeting with the Employer, both on December 11. We call on all members to show their support for each other and their bargaining team by voting YES in this week’s strike mandate vote so we can get the best possible deal possible!

The BT Welcomes Its Newest Unit 1 Member

The conclusion of a closely contested by-election to fill a vacant Unit 1 spot on the Bargaining Team saw Alex Wilson, a member of the Bargaining Mobilization Committee and steward for Science and Technology Studies. We congratulate both candidates and welcome Alex to our ranks. 

The Cross-Campus Alliance Continues to Coordinate on Retroactive Wage Demands

This week, members of the BT and the Executive Committee met with representatives of other campus labour unions that have been coordinating bargaining their wage re-opener demands. Collectively the all-unions Cross-Campus Alliance (CCA) agreed to adjust our wage demands covering the three-year, Bill 124 wage freeze period to a level that allows us all to cover the dramatic rise in the cost of living during our previous collective agreements (15.8%). For maximum effect, the CCA will send its wage counterproposal to the Employer at the same time as we are delivering our own wage counterproposal at the bargaining table this week.

Unit 2 Town Hall Rethinks Job Stability, Reveals Distrust of the Employer

On December 8, the Union hosted a virtual Unit 2 Town Hall to strategize our next steps and counter-proposals after the Employer rejected our proposal for a Graduated Job Stability Program and presented instead their version of the job stability program that the Union and the Employer had been negotiating in the failed Joint Job Stability Committee process. The Bargaining Team had proposed the GJSP as a more comprehensive take on programs already existing in our Collective Agreement, but some members spoke at the Town Hall of their reservations about the comprehensive proposals tabled by both sides in bargaining. In an informal poll, members indicated that they now preferred to go in another direction, concentrating on strengthening existing job stability programs. Members’ reservations about dramatic changes reveal that, despite the gaping holes in our existing system of job security, members have little faith in the Employer not to manipulate proposed programs in a way that will make us worse off. 

Because the Town Hall, as in informal forum not included in our bylaws, was never meant to be, nor could be, a decision-making body, the Bargaining Team will be seeking at the very next GMM at which binding motions can be passed—that is, at the first scheduled membership meeting in the new year—clear direction from members about what job stability counterproposals they want us to bargain for on their behalf. In the meantime, we will focus at the bargaining table on proposals that have clear, widespread support, like our demands on wages and benefits. We urge members to focus on what we agree on in our bargaining unit and in our union, and we will continue to do the same at the bargaining table!

Give Your Bargaining Team a Strong Strike Mandate: Vote YES, Dec. 11–18

Having filed for conciliation last week, our Union is taking the next step in our fight for the best possible deal for all members. The Strike Mandate Vote (SMV) taking place this week, December 11 to 18, is your opportunity to vote YES to salary and benefits increases that keep up with inflation! It’s your opportunity to give the Bargaining Team the leverage it needs at the bargaining table to win concessions from the Employer on issues that are important to all our members, especially much-needed improvements to wages and benefits. We can show the Employer the collective power of our membership by voting YES in the upcoming strike mandate vote that will take place December 11–18. Voting YES  gives the Executive Committee a mandate to call a strike, if necessary. You can join the mobilization efforts for this vote by signing up for phone banking and departmental events where members can talk to each other about what’s on the table and how we can fight for it. 

Once we have a strike mandate, we’ll hold a “Red Lines” GMM at which the membership can determine the key items we are willing to strike for. No decision to go on strike will be taken without another vote of the full membership. Such a vote will take place, if necessary, at a “Final Offer” Special General Membership Meeting to be held if and when bargaining reaches an impasse. 

Get Involved! Upcoming Bargaining Meetings

Our union practices open bargaining, meaning all meetings of the Bargaining Team—including our face-to-face meetings with the Employer’s bargaining team—are open to all members of CUPE 3903. All members are encouraged to attend both our weekly Bargaining Team meetings, which take place online, and our meetings with the Employer, which usually take place in a hybrid format. As members of CUPE 3903, you are free to come and go from any of our meetings as your schedules allow. Check the CUPE 3903 website’s calendar for any updates.

Bargaining Meetings with the Employer

Due to scheduling issues, all December bargaining meetings with the Employer are taking place online only. Register in advance using the links below.

Wednesday, December 13, 10:00 AM–12:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance.

Thursday, December 14, 10:00 AM–12:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance..

Tuesday, December 19, 10:00 AM–3:00 PM

Register for the Zoom meeting in advance.

Bargaining Team Meetings:

Tuesday, December 12, 1:00–3:00 PM

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81511501110?pwd=Tzh0WDlMZjlEMVEwVzRMTnFoUlVOdz09 

Monday, December 18, 1:00–3:00 PM

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81511501110?pwd=Tzh0WDlMZjlEMVEwVzRMTnFoUlVOdz09 

Letter from the Bargaining Team: Why We Need a Strong Strike Mandate

Letter from the Bargaining Team: Why We Need a Strong Strike Mandate

By now, you will likely have heard that CUPE 3903 is calling for a Strike Mandate Vote between December 11th and December 18th. As the people who have sat across from the employer trying to negotiate new contracts for Units 1, 2, and 3, we, the Bargaining Team, wanted to explain why we are asking you to vote YES in the strike mandate vote.

Why a Strike Mandate? Why Now?

We have been bargaining since June 2023. In that time, we have presented 109 proposals, but the Employer has not meaningfully engaged with them. You can see all the Union and Employer proposals on the Bargaining Proposals page or read on for highlights. Nothing the Employer has proposed amounts to significant changes that address our current issues, and their wage offer is well below inflation.

None of this is surprising. Unfortunately, this employer has never, in living memory, made significant movement at the bargaining table before the bargaining team received a strike mandate. Without that mandate to act as leverage, the employer has zero incentive to bargain and has essentially told us as much. The Employer has repeatedly stated that we are not yet at the “stage of bargaining” in which they are willing to discuss further our monetary proposals, for example.

We are asking for a strike mandate now to move bargaining forward so we can fight for what you need. The employer has repeatedly booked entire bargaining days only to remain in the room for barely an hour. We waited weeks for their “comprehensive” framework-for-settlement package which, when they finally presented it, amounted to nothing significant. These delaying tactics are intentional and strategic. The Employer knows that the longer bargaining drags on, the less leverage the threat of a strike gives us. If our union’s past experience with strikes has taught us anything, it’s that the threat of a strike carries far more weight earlier (in the fall/winter term), rather than later. We need to act now.

What’s at Stake?

What is it, exactly, that we need leverage to get? Here is an update on where we’re at for four priority areas.

Addressing the Cost of Living Crisis

Winning significant improvements to wages and benefits is a central issue, if not the central issue, in this round of negotiations. Members made that clear in the Bargaining Surveys conducted earlier this year. Inflation over the last three years has sky-rocketed (the Bank of Canada Inflation Calculator uses a change rate of +15% for this period), while our wages have been artificially suppressed at 1% per year due to Bill 124, which has since been found unconstitutional. The cost of everything – food, housing, utilities, medical expenses – has gone up dramatically. This is a reality highlighted in our bargaining surveys, and recently in the National Post. We need the leverage of a YES vote to ensure that increases to our salaries and benefits keep ahead of the rising cost of living so that we can afford the necessities of life.

Protecting Our Rights

The Employer opened this round of bargaining with proposals to make it easier to discipline members and harder to file discrimination and harassment grievances. While we experienced our first bargaining win when they recently withdrew a discipline proposal that would have made it easier to initiate disciplinary procedures against our members, there are still many protections that members need. We need to vote YES to protect all members, especially in light of York University’s recently demonstrated repression of academic freedom and trampling of due process.

Job Stability

Both Unit 2 (contract faculty) and Unit 3 (graduate and research assistants) need to see serious solutions to address job stability. We need a strong YES vote to address job losses due to restructuring and to counter the union-busting tactics the Employer has used to eliminate Unit 3 jobs. The Bargaining Team is now in the process, begun at a town hall meeting on December 8, of consulting with members to develop our counterproposals to the Employer’s job stability proposal of November 30. No matter how we respond at the table, we will need the membership behind us—and working with us—at every step. Let us be clear: without a YES vote, we cannot achieve any gains on job stability for contract faculty.

Working Conditions

Our working conditions are students’ learning conditions! The COVID-19 pandemic has changed how we teach. New technologies and pedagogies, along with increasing student needs, have created new workload requirements. We need to vote YES to get the workload protections that will improve our students’ learning conditions.

How to Vote

We will be opening the strike mandate vote at 3:00 PM after the December 11th Special General Membership Meeting, and it will remain open until 5:00 PM December 18th. If you can’t make the December 11th meeting but want to hear from the bargaining team and discuss bargaining before voting, there will be a second Special General Membership Meeting on December 14th.

The vote will take place online, through Simply Voting. The ballots are sent to the email list we receive from the Employer; sometimes this is your York University employee email address. If you are having issues finding your ballot from Simply Voting once the vote opens, please try the following things:

  1. Check your employee email address

  2. Check any other email addresses that York University may have on file.

  3. Check your junk mail on your emails as well

  4. Try searching ‘Simply Voting’ in your inbox (the email comes from vote@simplyvoting.com)

If you STILL can’t find your SMV ballot, please the sectreasurer3903@gmail.com your full name, primary email address, and your employee number.

If you do not have a current contract but have held one within the last 12 months, you are a political member and are eligible to vote. Please email sectreasurer3903@gmail.com with your full name, primary email address, and your former employee number to receive your electronic ballot.

What Happens After a YES Vote

A strike mandate is a necessary legal step that allows us to strike, if necessary. It doesn’t mean we will go on strike. If negotiations continue to go nowhere and the Employer’s proposals remain unacceptable, the Bargaining Team and Executive may, in the next few months, recommend we take strike action. The decision about whether to go out on strike, however, will be made by another vote of the membership.

What Happens If We Do Eventually Strike

It’s reasonable to worry about what a strike could mean.

Taking strike action would mean we collectively withdraw our labour to pressure the Employer to concede ground on our key demands. For members who are also graduate students, striking as an employee of York would affect neither your status as a student at York nor your academic work.

Every member who participates in the strike, whether through traditional picket lines or other approved strike duties, will receive strike pay from CUPE National of $60/day for a four-hour shift.

During a strike, CUPE 3903 would hold weekly General Membership Meetings, at which the membership would direct the Executive, the Bargaining Team, and the Strike Committee about how, and whether, the strike would continue. In sum, strikes are by and for the membership, to achieve the goals we set out together.