In September, Unit 18 faculty members gave two hours of vivid, powerful testimony about the ways our current workload article negatively impacts their lives and careers. They shared heartbreaking stories of injustices and indignities in the ways in which UC devalues our labor under our current contract. Their testimonials were  followed by an extensive presentation from your Table Team, sharing detailed research to support a proposal that demands equitable and sustainable workload policies that account for all of the invisible labor we do.

At our most recent bargaining session at UC Merced on Nov. 5-6, UC passed their “counterproposal” on Instructional Workload (Article 24): Current contract language, virtually unchanged. The only “revisions” UC made were in punctuation, updated references, and dividing one “blob of a paragraph” (their words) by adding a “floating paragraph.” That’s it. Not a single one of our concerns was addressed.

UC’s deeply unserious counter-proposal showed once again that they either do not understand the reality of our jobs or they simply do not care. When our Table Team members expressed their disappointment about UCOP’s “proposal,” their representatives  emphasized that they had been working on the proposal for months and that it reflected their “organizational priorities.” When asked whether UC planned to pass a proposal that addresses substantive concerns, their response was: “We will caucus on that.” 

The Table Team chose not to wait: after lunch, they proposed a counter that accepted the new paragraph divisions that UC had made clear were so important – and re-presented the rest of our last proposal. Table Team representative Phil Longo stressed how much research UC-AFT had done in crafting the article: multiple member surveys and RFIs, in addition to reviewing hundreds of workload policies across departments and campuses. “We have done the work to understand how our colleagues are working and ways to improve their working conditions,” l Longo said in his presentation, “It is worrying that the University does not seem to understand the conditions under which its students are educated and their employees perform their work.”

While our UC-AFT Table Team continues to offer substantive proposals, UC fails to consider all of the issues members have raised. Their behavior at the Merced table undermines the whole point of bargaining: to read and consider the other side’s proposal and offer substantive counters so that we can move negotiations forward. Maybe now that we’ve given them the floating paragraphs they crave, they’ll be able to focus on the real task at hand: Fixing our unjust and inadequate workload policies.

Justifying Status Quo: UC’s Academic Freedom “Proposal”

On Thursday morning, the UC offered their Article 2 (Academic Freedom) proposal: Current contract language, with zero changes. When they explained why they rejected our proposal outright, it became clear that the UC is setting the groundwork to pit Unit 18 faculty and the Academic Senate against each other as they claimed UC-AFT’s proposal would “[upend] shared governance of the university.” 

The UC presents a scarcity mindset of power at the UC, suggesting that granting agency to Unit 18 faculty takes something away from senate faculty. We strongly reject the idea that expanding rights and protections for non-tenured teaching faculty takes power away from our senate faculty colleagues. All UC educators deserve dignity and respect in the workplace and we must resist any attempt by UCOP to drive a wedge between us and our fellow teaching faculty.

UC Asks for Five Years of Labor Peace – But Offers Nothing in Return

UCOP also showed their hand at the end of the day on Friday in offering their proposal on Article 40 – Duration. Their hope is that our new contract would start July 1, 2027 and run through June 30, 2032. They expect us to ratify a five-year contract before we’ve even seen any substantive proposals from them on our biggest issues, including compensation and job security. In presenting their Article 40 proposal, they repeated their desire for “labor peace” — but without justice, there can be no peace.   

On Nov. 17, we need to make it clear to the UC that we will not accept the status quo and that we will fight together for a better UC. Join an action on your campus – more details and RSVP at https://linktr.ee/ucaft

Will the Real Merced Labor Rep Please Stand Up?

UC Merced’s Labor Relations rep wins the Worst Attendance Award: Of the thirteen bargaining sessions we have held since March, he has attended exactly two. The last time he attended bargaining was in June and we were hoping that by coming to UC Merced for bargaining, we might catch a sight of the elusive LR rep. But he didn’t attend the sessions, even when bargaining was on his own campus. 

What he missed was heartbreaking testimony from lecturers about the mass layoffs on their campus. Some key moments included:

“I lost a job I was passionate about and worked in for almost 10 years. I walked away from programs and initiatives I helped to design. Our writing program has been fractured, and during the last two years I was there, there was a constant feeling of dread, anxiety and uncertainty about the stability of our university and its future.”

“I am in my tenth year at UC Merced, and the last year or so has been the worst of my professional career, here or elsewhere. I have had my courses reduced significantly… often with very little notice. I have also received reduction notices after beginning to prepare for the next semester’s work, and then been told I needed to repay part of my salary due to the reduction…I am a single parent managing several health issues and needed to postpone significant medical treatments because the course reduction meant I could no longer afford our rent, let alone a major surgery.”

“When the university said jump, we jumped, and we jumped high. We worked hard to make this little school next to a cow pasture worthy of the UC name. We gave what we could and often more than we should have. Because we believed in this school, in what it could give to the valley and the students here who deserve an opportunity at a UC education…. Without us and our labor, UC Merced would not be here, and that’s not an exaggeration.”

TL;DR – Here’s what else you missed!

It was a long two days and we exchanged a lot of proposals with the University. Here are super-quick highlights of everything passed to the UC. Look for more info in the extended bargaining updates on WeTeachUC.org.

UC-AFT Passed:

• Article 41 – Parking:
  • Highlights: Caps on parking costs; parking access and benefits on par with Senate faculty; greater investment in accessible, sustainable transportation options. Our proposal aims to make transportation equitable and sustainable – and let you pay less for the pleasure of showing up to work.
• Article 16 – Medical Separation:
  • Highlights: Clearer procedures and the right to an independent medical evaluation by a doctor not employed by UC when they determine whether a faculty member must be medically separated from their job
• Article 20 – Reasonable Accommodation:
  • Highlights: Stronger protections against retaliation for requesting accommodations, and a commitment from UC to make classrooms and instructional buildings accessible to all
• Article 32/33 – Grievance & Arbitration:
  • Highlights: Expanding your ability to seek justice when UC violates our contract, closing loopholes that allow UC to avoid accountability or shut down grievances, and strengthening remedies so that if your rights are violated, you can receive meaningful compensation and relief.
• Article 6 – Academic Year Appointments:
  • Highlights: Flexibility to choose your own pay schedule when your appointment percentage changes from term to term
• Article 10 – Personnel Files:
  • Highlights: Giving you greater control and transparency over your personnel file, including knowing who accesses it and when the University makes changes, and preventing the University from feeding your personnel or review files into AI programs.

UC passed:

• Article 24 – Instructional Workload
  • Literally just current contract language with a few extra paragraphs inserted and a couple of references changed.
• Article 2 – Academic Freedom
  • Current contract language, with a written statement accusing us of trying to steal power from the Academic Senate
• Article 3 – Academic Responsibility
  • Changed one of our responsibilities from “stimulates imaginative thinking” to “stimulates and encourages critical thinking” … though apparently our detailed proposal last month stimulated neither imaginative nor critical thinking from UC, who rejected our many proposed changes.
• Article 34 – Immigration:
  • Proposed requesting ICE or DHS to comply with existing federal law before they can “interrogate, search or seize the person or property of any employee” while working on campus, the minimum federal standard;
  • Rejected our proposal that the University sponsor Unit 18 faculty for appropriate visas;
  • Rejected our proposal that UC require a warrant before allowing ICE/DHS to enter non-public areas;
  • Rejected our proposal that UC require a warrant/subpoena before releasing our personnel files to ICE/DHS.
• Article 27 – Payroll Deduction
  • Demanded the Union give the University two more months of notice before implementing dues changes
• Article 40 – Duration
  • Proposed a five-year contract, starting July 1, 2027, explaining that they’re “looking for some labor peace.” Apparently they think we plan to roll over and accept their status-quo-with-typos-fixed proposals, and call it a day. If UC wants labor peace, they can start by offering us a contract that meaningfully improves our working conditions.