Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 13:50:07 -0800
From: pres@u.washington.edu
Subject: Update on the Pending Teaching Assistant Strike
Sent to: All members of the University of Washington Community
Sent from: President Richard L. McCormick
Subject: Update on the Pending Teaching Assistant Strike
A strike by teaching assistants has been announced for Monday, December 4th. This strike is taking place because the Graduate Student Employee Action Coalition/United Auto Workers (GSEAC/UAW) is demanding that the University bargain without a legal framework. No other union on campus, and no public employee union in the state, bargains without a legal framework. In every case, the legal framework includes a prohibition against striking and provides for alternative measures of resolving disputes.
The position of the University administration is that, while we are willing to work with GSEAC/UAW, we must have a legal framework before we can engage in bargaining. This is not a unique posture. We have exactly this kind of legal framework for each of the 33 bargaining units, organized by nine unions, with which we work quite successfully. In each case, the enabling legislation was in place before the University entered into bargaining with the unit. The reasons that we must have a legal framework before we begin collective bargaining are outlined in the document that follows this memo.
Over the course of the past several weeks the University administration has taken two major steps to reach an accommodation with GSEAC/UAW. First, we moved from our long- standing position of opposing enabling legislation to our current position of actively working together with union leadership and GSEAC/UAW for such legislation, with the understanding that following its passage we would recognize and bargain in good faith with GSEAC/UAW.
Accordingly, the Administration has initiated a series of meetings with GSEAC/UAW to discuss how we can work together to develop legislation we could jointly support in Olympia. Together, we have made considerable progress in this area. The administration believes that if we can avoid a strike and go together to Olympia in advocating for legislation, we are much more likely to be able to create a legal framework that will serve the needs of the union and the University. Conversely, it is clear that a strike will make this much more difficult.
Until now, we have kept silent about these discussions with GSEAC/UAW, hoping that we would be able to achieve a cooperative approach to seeking the legislation the University must have in order to bargain with a union. We have now decided that it is important for everyone to understand fully the position of the University administration and what we have offered GSEAC/UAW.
This brings me to the second major step the administration has taken. A principal demand of GSEAC/UAW has been that the University recognize it as the representative of all teaching assistants right now, prior to enactment of a legal framework. On November 29th we communicated to GSEAC/UAW that we are prepared to recognize the union as the representative for those teaching assistants who have signed cards and who are enrolled in academic programs, in exchange for canceling their strike plans and for working cooperatively with us to achieve the necessary legislation. Once the legislation is passed, we will immediately recognize GSEAC/UAW, without the election that would otherwise be required, as the exclusive bargaining agent for all teaching assistants and begin bargaining.
This is a reasonable offer. It is an act of good faith. As of this time, GSEAC/UAW has not accepted this proposal. The only reason GSEAC/UAW is going on strike is their demand for bargaining without a legal framework.
It remains our hope that GSEAC/UAW will decide that it is in the best interests of teaching assistants, all students and the University as a whole to cancel their plans for a strike and work together with us to pass the kind of legislation that frames the bargaining relationship for all other unionized public employees at the University of Washington and throughout the state.
* * * * *
Statement from the Office of the President on the need for a legal framework for bargaining with the Graduate Student Employee Action Coalition/United Auto Workers (GSEAC/UAW).
The University of Washington is actively working toward the passage of legislation that would provide a legal framework for bargaining with teaching assistants represented by GSEAC/UAW. This is necessary before the University can begin bargaining with GSEAC/UAW because (1) without a legal framework there are no defined limits to what can be bargained; (2) without a legal framework there is no reliable process to resolve disputes short of litigation or strikes; and (3) without a legal framework recognition can be lawfully extended only to those who have voted in favor of a union, leaving the University exposed to serious legal and operational liabilities.
Earlier this year, a significant majority of University of Washington teaching assistants voted in favor of being represented by a union, GSEAC/UAW. This is part of a national trend toward union representation for teaching assistants, which now includes the University of Wisconsin and the University of California, among other public universities. The administration of the University of Washington believes that our teaching assistants should be able to choose to be represented by GSEAC/UAW. The next step is to create legislation that would make this possible.
Representatives of the University administration are currently working to establish legislation that would provide a legal framework for bargaining with GSEAC/UAW as the representative for UW teaching assistants, readers, graders and tutors. We are confident that, once a legal framework is established, the University can work successfully with GSEAC/UAW.
We are optimistic about being able to achieve the needed legislation in an expeditious manner. In fact, in the most recent legislative session the University worked successfully with the Classified Staff Association to achieve legislation amending the legal framework that guides that relationship.
The University of Washington, a public institution operated under the laws of Washington State, currently recognizes thirty- three bargaining units, organized by nine unions, for purposes of bargaining. Each of these bargaining units operates within the structure of a legal framework provided by legislation, as do all unionized public employees in the state of Washington. In each case, the legal framework defines the bargaining unit, specifies the scope of what issues are subject to bargaining, and provides for mechanisms to resolve disputes. Also, in each case the union is recognized as the exclusive representative for all employees in the bargaining unit.
At this time, many of our teaching assistants are asking that we begin bargaining with GSEAC/UAW as their union right now, without a legal framework for doing so. The Faculty Senate has passed a resolution urging the administration to begin bargaining with GSEAC/UAW. We have consulted with other universities and with legal counsel. There are three main reasons why the University needs a legal framework established by the Legislature in order to bargain with a union:
1. Without a legal framework, the scope of bargaining would not be regulated. In any bargaining relationship, one of the most difficult problems is to determine the scope of issues that the union and employer must bargain over. A legal framework defines this scope. Without rules establishing that certain subjects are off limits to bargaining, core academic prerogatives (course content, textbook choices, grading policies, class size, and other matters) could be jeopardized. The University of Wisconsin, in 1969, recognized a union without a legal framework. Over a period of ten years the university negotiated five contracts, each lasting about a year, and the campus endured two strikes, one lasting two weeks and one lasting five. Class size, how TA appointments were made, and how and what to teach were ongoing matters of dispute. Ultimately, in 1980, the university rescinded recognition of the union. Legislation extending collective bargaining rights to teaching assistants was passed in 1986, and the current union contract at the University of Wisconsin operates within this legal framework.
2. Without a legal framework, there is no method for resolving disputes short of litigation or strike. With a legal framework, there is an established procedure to resolve disputes. If a union believes that an employer has committed an unfair labor practice, the union can file a charge with the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC), which is empowered to conduct a hearing and issue a decision resolving the dispute. It has been suggested that Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 49.08 would provide such a mechanism for resolving disputes. A careful analysis of RCW 49.08 clearly establishes its inadequacy for dispute resolution in the absence of a legal framework. While this statute may afford a voluntary dispute resolution process, it does not provide substantive rules under which a given dispute could be resolved. With a conventional legal framework, procedures for dispute resolution help avoid strikes in which neither side wins. It is essential that the University and its unions have similar recourse for resolving bargaining disputes rather than being forced to seek resolution through litigation or strikes.
3. Without a legal framework, recognition can legally apply only to those students who have voted to be represented by GSEAC/UAW; we cannot, by law, extend recognition to GSEAC/UAW as the exclusive union for all teaching assistants. With a legal framework, the degree of support reported by GSEAC/UAW (approximately 80% in favor of representation), would be sufficient to establish GSEAC/UAW as the bargaining representation for all teaching assistants, even those who oppose the organizing campaign, as some do. Without legislation, however, exclusive recognition is not permitted. Attorney General Legal Opinion 1994 No. 16 holds that a university does not have the statutory authority allowing it to recognize an exclusive bargaining representation absent legislation.
Entering into bargaining on a non-exclusive basis would create unacceptable liabilities. We could face the prospect of multiple negotiations with multiple groups of teaching assistants. For that matter, any group of employees not currently represented by a union could demand recognition and bargaining, and initiate litigation if they were rejected. The administration of the University of Washington cannot expose the institution to the liabilities that unregulated bargaining of a non-exclusive bargaining unit would entail.
For these reasons, it is the policy of the University of Washington to require a legal framework before bargaining can begin. We are making the establishment of such a legal framework for a teaching assistant union, through legislation, a top priority. Our commitment to achieve this is absolutely genuine, and we are actively in discussions with legislators and labor leaders in pursuing the most efficient pathway to successful legislation. We want to work with GSEAC/UAW, with the same sort of legal framework that supports all our other relationships with unions.