Having received a strong strike mandate, we headed into conciliation on September 11 with the clear and unified support of our membership to protect and defend our collective interests, bargain for our priorities, and negotiate a fair deal.
Unfortunately, despite our efforts, we were not able to reach a tentative agreement and an impasse remains.
The employer’s bargaining team refused to entertain any of our non-monetary proposals and simply said no to all of them, stating yet again that they were not operationally feasible.
Again and again, we’ve been asked to accept that management rights and the desire for “flexibility” are sovereign and inviolable. In no uncertain terms, the employer’s position is clear: any proposals around job security are never going to happen.
In relation to our monetary proposals, the employer was only open to discuss wages, but their best offer was 1% for the first year, 1.5% for the second and third year, and 2% for the 4th year (6% total increase in 4 yrs). Notably, the employer’s proposal runs counter to its willingness to offer a 3% in 2024-2025 to all other unions on campus.
Further, the employer’s proposal in no way comes close to our monetary proposal in terms of stipend increases and our desire to decrease the required FCEs to move up the steps.
Simply, the Negotiating Committee could not accept this lone proposal performing as a deal. It is far from what the majority of members would accept as a fair deal, and it fails to address our priorities in meaningful ways.
We need to start preparing for job action, but we will send another update regarding next steps once we have time to debrief.