I just got in from the GMM (well, in fairness, I had dinner and THEN I came on here). For future reference, these things are LONNNNNNG. Today it went from 2:30 to 7:00 and that is SHORT in comparison to the usual, so I would give people at least 8 hours from when these meetings are scheduled to start to when you hear something.
So here I am 8 hours later, and I’m posting here because I’m trying to keep York LJ in the loop as much as possible. I'm exhausted after a day of picketing followed by hours of meetings so I'm going to do a BRIEF update on tonight's meeting.
I would like to reiterate that, as with ALL my posts and comments, I am speaking for myself and myself only. The following are my personal interpretations and are not representative of any wider body. I make no claim to be unbiased (in fact I encourage you to recognize that there is a ton of bias apparent in pretty much every last thing you will hear from anyone, on either side, during this strike). Also, I am not an expert. I am not on the bargaining team. I may make mistakes with my numbers, and I don’t know all the little details. I’m just giving you my best understanding of the information I am receiving as a 3903 member.
That all being said...
Tonight's meeting accomplished ONE big thing. The members in attendance (which I would estimate at about 500) voted STRONGLY to send the bargaining team back to the table with the flexibility to bargain at their discretion.
What does that mean? More than it sounds like.
As I wrote in a comment on the post a few down from this, the last GMM tied the hands of the bargaining team and stopped them from going to the table with a substantial new plan.
Tonight's meeting ensured that the bargaining team has the power to move forward. It is my understanding that they will invite the employer back to the table by putting forward significant changes in their current bargaining position as explained in their most frequent framework.
My really brief interpretation of these changes:
- Currently there are more than 150 outstanding demands on the table, where as the new framework would narrow it to closer to 20 (about 10 are monetary, about 10 have to do with issues like equity and job safety and language in the collective agreement)
- The current 150 demands would amount to a 41% increase in the value of the collective agreement over 2 years. (Note that is the ENTIRE collective agreement, not just wages. That is an increase in the value of wages + funds + benefits, etc. etc.) Where as the new framework would drop the ENTIRE value of the demands to a 15% increase to the collective agreement (7.5% each year over 2 years.)
A few other points that were stressed by the bargaining team (as I understand them):
- the last proposal the employer made to the bargaining team before the strike had a value of a 2.7% increase per year over 3 years to the total collective agreement (not in wages, in the value of the whole collective agreement)
- other unions associated with the university have recently negotiated collective agreement increases more in the range of 4% per year, and the university has admitted that they have not made their best possible offer to us yet
- 7.5% per year is JUST a starting point for the new negotiations. The whole point of bargaining is that the two sides begin at separate starting points and find a middle ground. (And interestingly enough, the exact numeric middle ground between 2.7 and 7.5 is 5.1% which is not drastically more than other unions at York have gotten in recent contract negotiations - so it is believed to be a reasonable goal.)
- Some of the key issues in returning to the table are not strictly monetary, like job security for Contract Faculty which a big part of the membership seems to think is one of the key demands
Thus, the bargaining team should now call the employer back to the table with a sincere offer of significant changes in their demands. The distance between the two positions is now a lot more reasonable, (at one end 2.7% to the total contract per year for 3 years, at the other end 7.5% to the total contract per year for 2 years).
It is my hope that the university recognizes this as a significant change in demands, and recognizes that it is the desire of the union to move forward and find a resolution and get classes back in session. It is my hope that the administration returns to the table with a sincere intention to find middle ground.
If that occurs, negotiations could move forward significantly next week, and the best case scenario would give us a tentative agreement that puts us back in classes on December 1st. However, this is a BEST CASE SCENARIO. It is also possible that the university will not come back to the table, arguing that our new proposal isn’t good enough, or that they will continue their hard line on binding arbitration. It is also possible that negotiations will move forward, but slowly, in which case we’re looking more reasonably at another couple weeks. This last paragraph, however, is just educated speculation on my part.
Again, this is just one perspective but I hope it at least provides this community with more information. I think it’s great that places like this exist so that members of the York community can talk to each other. So, stay aware. Keep an open mind and be critical about everything you read (including this post itself!) And try to stay positive and friendly, it’ll make this all a lot less grueling for EVERYONE. And sorry... apparently I suck at being brief.
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
raevenus's Friends Page
stressed