Graduate Assistants Bargaining

The parties met on Friday, March 8, to continue collective bargaining negotiations.

The university bargaining team provided multiple counterproposals during the bargaining session.

•    The university bargaining team provided a counterproposal related to Article 19 (Labor Management Meetings). OSU’s counterproposal accepted many elements previously proposed by the CGE bargaining team and declined the addition of language that could create a grievance remedy relating to labor management meetings.  OSU believes that labor management meetings are intended to be collaborative opportunities for the parties to discuss matters of importance, and believes that creating a new grievance remedy within this article relating to labor management meetings does not foster such collaboration.
•    The university’s bargaining team returned a counterproposal on Article 26 (Work-related Injuries or Illness) in which OSU restored language CGE proposed to delete that indicates the university will make a good faith effort to accommodate an employee’s needs related to workplace injuries or illness.  The OSU bargaining team noted that accommodations related to workplace injury are navigated through the worker compensation process and accommodations process administered through the Office of Equal Opportunity and Access (EOA). 
•    The university bargaining team also shared the university’s counter proposal to CGE’s proposal relating to Article 18 (Grievance Procedures), declining extension of the grievance timeline from thirty (30) days to ninety (90) calendar days following an occurrence giving rise to a grievance. The university also declined  CGE’s proposed deletion of language that requires a grievance to be limited to the original subject of the grievance and not expanded upon once it is filed. The OSU bargaining team also proposed language in alignment with other university collective bargaining agreements that, in the event of arbitration, narrows the focus of  arbitration to elements related to grievance remedies, back pay and benefits, where applicable, and maintains limitations on decisions that would interfere with employer powers, duties and responsibilities of the university that are not otherwise expressly limited within the contract.  OSU declined CGE-proposed language that would restrict the arbitration timeline; incorporate direct reference to Oregon’s Public Employee Collective Bargaining Act; and that would create an external contracted entity that must be compensated to serve in the same or similar function to EOA for response to reports of harassment, discrimination or retaliation. The OSU bargaining team asserted that the role of EOA is critical in investigating allegations of harassment, discrimination or retaliation. Relating to CGE’s proposed inclusion of issues relating to academic standing, academic standards, policies and procedures, or academic degree programs within the grievance process, the OSU bargaining team indicated that these issues are not terms of employment and are not appropriate for an employment grievance under the collective bargaining agreement.  The OSU bargaining team stated that the university maintains a separate process for academic grievances that necessarily operates outside of the collective bargaining agreement grievance process.

The CGE bargaining team also provided counter proposals relating to Article 2 (Recognition), maintaining the union’s request to include graduate fellows and graduate employees holding an hourly position within the bargaining unit.  As noted multiple times previously, graduate fellowships do not include a commensurate work requirement and as such, are not considered employees for labor purposes.  Additionally, the OSU bargaining team again noted that hourly employees do not perform the full scope of job duties assigned to a graduate assistant, and are not appropriate additions to the contract because they do not maintain the same level of decision-making responsibilities associated with the role of a graduate assistant.

The CGE bargaining team also provided counter proposals and new proposals as detailed below:

•    Article 9 (Appointments). CGE’s initial proposal on Article 9 was presented to the OSU bargaining team on Dec. 14, 2023. The OSU bargaining team responded with a counterproposal on Jan. 26. CGE’s current counterproposal expands significantly on what the union initially proposed  and was countered by OSU, to now include additional language relating to hourly employees.  The proposal also revives language OSU previously declined.
•    Article 10 (Work Assignments) The CGE bargaining team presented its counterproposal to Article 10.  The parties had discussion at the table relating to the distinction in how the university and graduate employees might navigate work when the university has issued a workplace closure (e.g., inclement weather).  Existing contract language states that a graduate employee may not be compelled to work when the university is closed, except by mutual agreement between the employee and their supervisor.  CGE proposed to strike the language permitting an employee to work when mutually agreed upon by both the employee and the supervisor.  The OSU bargaining team raised concern that the language CGE proposes to strike is critical both for the supervisor to maintain workplace safety when there is a closure, but also to permit work to continue in a safe manner when an employee elects to continue to work. The current contract language recognizes the necessity of communication between an employee and the supervisor during a workplace closure so that neither employee nor supervisor may make a singular decision about the need to conduct work. 
•    Article 22 (Transportation) CGE passed an initial proposal relating to transportation, requesting that graduate employees receive reimbursement for any parking pass purchased while employed by the university, and restricting sale of daily parking passes in excess of the capacity for any zone with active term-long or annual parking permits.
•    Article 32 (Stability) The union provided a proposal for a new article that intended to incorporate two letters of agreement related to Hardship Fund and Housing into the collective bargaining agreement. The proposal instructs the university to construct 100 housing units exclusive to graduate employees and charge a per-person monthly rent not to exceed thirty (30%) percent of the minimum monthly salary of a graduate employee working at the minimum graduate employee FTE. The proposal also includes provision of a relocation stipend for graduate employees, and waiver of costs associated with eating at campus dining halls for graduate employees who are international students.  The waiver is intended to apply until the employee receives their first paycheck and successfully acquires housing. CGE also proposed increased funding for the Graduate Hardship Fund, expansion of criteria eligible for funding, and an annual audit report of Hardship Fund utilization. The proposal includes an increase of $150,000 to be added each year to the hardship fund by the university for the duration of the collective bargaining agreement beginning in September 2024. 

Per CGE’s request, the bargaining teams are working to agree on the dates for future bargaining sessions to resume in April following spring break.

The parties met on Friday, Feb. 23, to continue collective bargaining negotiations.

The university bargaining team provided a counterproposal related to Article 2 (Recognition). OSU’s counterproposal accepted many elements proposed by CGE and declined the addition of graduate fellows and hourly employees to the collective bargaining agreement. As previously noted, graduate fellows are not considered to be university employees for payroll and employment purposes. Instead, fellowships are recognized nationally as being granted to acknowledge and support outstanding graduate students in pursuit of their advanced degree objectives. Graduate fellowships provide financial support to graduate students without an employment requirement. The university’s bargaining team also noted that hourly employees do not perform the full scope of job duties that are assigned to a Graduate Assistant, nor does an hourly employee maintain the same level of decision-making responsibilities associated with the role of a Graduate Assistant, and therefore are not appropriate additions to the contract.

The university’s bargaining team accepted language in CGE’s proposed Article 14 (Layoff) expanding the notice timeline to thirty (30) days in the event of a layoff as opposed to extending an appointment, where work and/or budgetary support exist for the duration of an academic term or academic year. The university bargaining team also declined CGE’s proposed language expanding tuition remission for graduate employees subject to layoff to include four consecutive academic terms following a layoff, regardless of when the layoff occurred in the course of the employee’s appointment.

The CGE bargaining team shared its first bargaining proposal seeking changes to Article 18 (Grievance Procedures), requesting OSU to expand from thirty (30) days the grievance timeline to ninety (90) calendar days following the occurrence giving rise to a grievance. The proposal also included proposed language relating to the arbitration timeline and process, and added new language relating to information requests and the University Office of Equal Opportunity and Access (EOA) investigation and reporting process. As proposed, the CGE language would have the impact of removing EOA from the investigation role in reported instances of harassment, discrimination or retaliation, and assigning investigation of those reports to a third-party contracted advocate. The CGE proposal also struck language excluding issues covered by the Graduate School Academic Grievance Policy. The university’s bargaining team believes that striking this language has the impact of conflating matters that would be covered under the Graduate School Academic Grievance Policy with those that are covered relating to individual’s employment status under the collective bargaining agreement. OSU’s position is that it is necessary for the status of a student and an employee status to remain separate, with separate rights and processes relating to whether an individual is navigating an issue associated with their employment status or regarding their status as a student.

The CGE bargaining team also provided additional counter proposals relating to Article 19 (Labor Management Meetings) and Article 26 (Work Related Injuries or Illness).

The next bargaining session is scheduled for March 8.
 

The parties met on Friday, Feb. 9, to continue collective bargaining negotiations. The university bargaining team provided a counter proposal related to Article 10 (Work Assignments). OSU’s counter proposal aligned with the university’s counter proposal relating to Article 9 (Appointments), both of which center on clarifying appointment letter and work assignment timelines and processes. CGE’s prior proposal relating to Article 10 sought more details to be included in graduate assistant work assignments, and added a fee to be charged the university associated with a late work assignment in addition to the previously sought increase to fees relating to late appointment letters and late position descriptions. 

The university’s bargaining team accepted language in CGE’s proposed Article 10 that a graduate employee may not be compelled to work during university closures and offered clarifying context for a graduate employee’s ability to choose to work when the university is closed while such work may not be compelled.

The CGE bargaining team shared its first bargaining proposals seeking changes to Article 2 (Recognition), requesting OSU to expand the bargaining unit to include graduate students in hourly positions and graduate fellows. Of note, graduate fellows are not considered employees for payroll and employment purposes as fellowships are recognized nationally as a means to acknowledge and support outstanding graduate students in pursuit of their advanced degree objectives.  Graduate fellowships provide financial support to graduate students without a commensurate service requirement.

The CGE bargaining team also provided additional proposals, shown below, all of which the university will provide a response to in future bargaining sessions.

•    Article 17 (Discipline and Discharge): Seeking to formalize a discipline and discharge process for graduate employees that would require the university to issue discipline within fourteen (14) days of the occurrence of any event that gives rise to such discipline; requires any rebuttal to discipline of any graduate employee become part of the evidentiary record for consideration during disciplinary hearings or reviews; changes process to permit an employee to file a grievance alleging misconduct in the disciplinary process; and maintaining student status for any graduate employees on academic leave. 
•    Article 14 (Layoff): With primary focus revolving around expanding tuition remission in the event of a layoff to include four consecutive terms, including the first term in which the graduate employee is no longer employed, regardless of whether the employee had started work in the position.

The next bargaining session is scheduled for Feb. 23.
 

The parties met on Friday, Jan. 26, to continue collective bargaining negotiations. The university bargaining team provided a counter proposal related to Article 9 (Appointments). OSU’s counter proposal centered on clarifying appointment letter timelines and processes. CGE’s prior proposal related to Article 9 sought more details to be included in the appointment letters and an increase in the fees associated with a late appointment letter, which may limit an employing unit from offering additional FTE opportunities based on increases in enrollment and available funds, due to the additional administrative burden and restrictive language of the article as proposed by the union.
The CGE bargaining team shared initial bargaining proposals related to:
•    Article 8 (Union Rights): Requesting OSU fund 12 FTE release position appointments per academic year of up to 0.49 FTE each to conduct union business during the course of the year.  This is in addition to the current release time that is paid by OSU that includes sixty (60) hours per fiscal year for union representatives to conduct union business. The proposal also included language that would remove the requirement that an employee reauthorize their union dues deduction when returning to the bargaining unit from a non-represented position.
•    Article 24 (Nondiscrimination and Anti-bullying): Requesting that OSU expand current non-discrimination contract language beyond legal protections to include caste, pronouns and non-preferred names in OSU’s definition of discrimination, bullying and harassment behaviors. The proposal also seeks to create an affirmative obligation for OSU to assist an employee in filing a Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaint against the university, among other items.
The CGE bargaining team also provided an initial proposal on Article 25 (Health and Safety) which  primarily focuses on worksite conditions, utilities and mental health resources; and Article 26 (Work-related Injuries or Illness).
The next bargaining session is scheduled for Feb. 9.
 

The parties met on to continue collective bargaining negotiations. The university bargaining team provided counter proposals related to Article 1 (Parties to the Agreement) and the parties were able to reach tentative agreement reflecting limited changes to how the parties would be referenced throughout the contract.

 The university bargaining team also provided a counter proposal related to Article 21 (Jury Duty), maintaining language permitting the university to petition the court for permission to allow an employee to be excused from jury service if the operating requirements of the university would be hampered. The ultimate decision on whether an employee is excused from jury duty remains with the court.

The university bargaining team shared one initial proposal related to Article 19 (Labor Management Meetings), with language intended to clarify the purpose and function of Labor Management Meetings.  Labor Management Meetings are not intended to be a forum in which the university and CGE engage in bargaining activity, but instead are meetings to address general issues of concern at the lowest level possible and build a positive relationship.

 The CGE bargaining team shared a counter proposal regarding Article 9 (Appointment Letters) and added a new proposal for Article 10 (Work Assignments), both of which included language doubling the financial penalty to OSU for late Appointment Letters and Work Assignments, adding language to be included in the Appointment Letters and Work Assignments, and adding Union engagement with administrative training components.  The CGE bargaining team also provided an initial proposal on Article 28 (Health Insurance).

The next bargaining session is scheduled for Jan. 18.
 

The parties met on November 30 to begin collective bargaining negotiations. The OSU bargaining team provided an opening statement, acknowledging that CGE had declined to agree to bargaining ground rules. The OSU bargaining team also expressed the priorities and principles guiding how OSU will approach collective bargaining. A copy of OSU’s opening statement can be found here. OSU shared its commitment to meaningful dialogue and working toward a mutually beneficial agreement that respects the rights and desired goals of both parties involved. OSU reaffirmed priorities that reflect the overarching principles of engagement and values-based leadership that align with the university’s 2024-2030 strategic plan and foundational values including:
•    “Increase our excellence by valuing and integrating the diverse lived experiences, perspectives, and viewpoints within Oregon State and the communities we serve.”
•    “Continually adapt to and remove barriers and create equitable outcomes for communities denied access to opportunity.”
•    “Engage communities the university serves to build mutual and resilient relationships to advance shared goals.”
•    “Reckon with injustice in our institutional history and pursue reconciliation through humility and transparency.”

OSU also acknowledged the financial landscape within which the university operates, and the importance of balancing employee expectations with ensuring the long-term viability of Oregon State University for the success and accessibility of all students.

CGE also shared an opening statement and passed contract proposals relating to Article 1 – Parties to the Agreement; Article 3 – Term of Agreement; Article 11 – Salary; Article 12 – Tuition Waiver; Article 21 – Jury Duty

CGE’s proposals included, among other items:
•    Doubling the minimum full-time equivalent monthly salary rate from $4,404.00 to $8,808.00 beginning September 2024. [Note: Graduate Employees receive a proportional amount of the FTE equivalent, based on the FTE workload assigned, which is part-time between 0.38 FTE up to 0.49FTE. For calculation purposes, the full-time (1.0) FTE equivalent is used as the salary basis.]
•    Providing additional annual increases to minimum full-time equivalent salary of 8% each year of the contract beginning September 2025, or the most recent 12-month CPI-W, whichever is higher.
•    Providing additional annual increases to returning graduate employee salaries of 8% over most recent salary rate each year of the contract, or the most recent 12-month CPI-W, whichever is higher.
•    Providing adjustments to minimum FTE and substitute work.
•    Providing reimbursement of childcare expenses up to $3,000 per child per academic term.
•    Providing changes to the nature, amounts, and processes for Graduate Employee Tuition Remission.

As the OSU bargaining team understands the union’s current proposal, a graduate employee returning to employment at OSU, whose monthly salary was previously at the minimum full-time equivalent monthly salary rate of $4,404 would receive a new monthly minimum of $8,808 in September 2024, and be immediately issued an additional 8% salary increase that same month. [Note: Graduate Employees receive a proportional amount of the FTE equivalent salary, based on FTE workload assigned, which is part-time between 0.38 FTE up to 0.49FTE. For calculation purposes, the full-time (1.0) FTE equivalent is used as the salary basis, and thus used in the above example as a matter of consistency based on proposal language] In 2025, the proposed new salary minimum would be increased by 8% and then returning employees would be issued the same additional 8% salary increase upon return to employment. 

CGE has proposed a four-year contract term, which means that the proposed graduate employee salary proposal would compound annually to a total salary increase of 172.1% for the term of the contract.

OSU also passed a proposal on Article 9 – Appointments that reconciled timeline calculations between Appointment Letters, Position Descriptions, and Work Assignments. The current contract language references separate timeline calculations for when an employing unit must issue an Appointment Letter, Position Description, and Work Assignment that is often cumbersome to calculate. The University’s proposed language would use a consistent 30-calendar day calculation for each, to create clarity for both employees and supervisors on the timing of appointments for employees.
The parties will next meet on December 14 to continue bargaining discussions.
 

The parties met on November 9 to review and hopefully finalize ground rules to define how they will engage in negotiations throughout the bargaining process. Reaching agreement on ground rules is an important way to build trust and collaborative intent in advance of entering formal bargaining.

The parties had closed their last bargaining session (Sept. 19, 2023) indicating that they believed they were in substantial agreement on the few outstanding issues left to address related to ground rules, and said they intended to finalize those discussions electronically to confirm language choice in advance of the next meeting date. OSU provided the CGE with its proposed drafts electronically on Sept. 29. The CGE bargaining team elected not to provide its preferred draft language in advance, and instead presented its counter proposal at the Nov. 9 meeting. Because the CGE counter proposal included different language than discussed previously, the parties were unable to reach agreement on revised ground rules at the Nov. 9 meeting. 

The OSU team looks forward to good faith negotiations as the parties return to the table Nov. 30.

OSU and CGE bargaining teams met on the Corvallis campus Thursday, August 31, 2023 to begin discussion of ground rules and establish the parties’ agreements regarding how they will conduct the collective bargaining process. The parties worked productively and left the table prior to finalizing the ground rules to allow further discussion. OSU and CGE bargaining teams then met on the Corvallis campus Tuesday, September 19, 2023 to continue discussion and finalize ground rules prior to entering bargaining.  OSU is committed to the ground rules as a framework for reaching agreement in this successor bargaining.

The parties closed the September 19, 2023 discussion indicating at the table that they believed they were close enough to agreement on the ground rules to continue discussion electronically in anticipation of finalizing the rules in advance of the next meeting date.

While not required, collective bargaining ground rules are an important component of most bargaining processes and offer the foundation for reaching agreement. Setting and defining expectations promotes community and commonality. Ground rules cover such things as: who speaks for each bargaining team; how proposals are shared; how agreement is finalized and documented; agreements regarding deadlines; expectations for observers; and other matters.

OSU had been actively recruiting for Employee and Labor Relations team members to participate in this successor bargaining cycle and retained a Labor Relations Attorney during the recruitment process to facilitate continuity as the bargaining timeline approached.  The OSU team is now complete and includes recently hired Employee and Labor Relations team members.