Service workers to vote on potential strike
By Rotem Ben-Shachar
May 15, 2008 10:20 p.m.
After 10 months of negotiations, patient-care and service workers from all 10 University of California campuses will be voting from May 17 to 22 on whether or not to strike.
The 20,000 workers’ contracts expired 10 months ago, and since then the UC has been conducting two separate deliberations with the workers’ union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees: one with the service workers, which includes campus and medical workers, and the other with the patient-care technicians.
The union wants higher wages for all workers so they will have a greater retention rate and better meet Los Angeles living costs.
Workers claim the UC has the funds to make these changes but refuses to meet the demands because workers are not a top priority. UC spokeswoman Nicole Savickas said the UC plans to increase wages but is restricted by limited state funds.
Lakesha Harrison, president of AFSCME Local 3299, said workers hope that if the vote to strike passes it will pressure the UC to increase wages.
“Workers are not in this to get rich but to provide their service effectively and retain workers,” Harrison said.
If the workers decide to strike, the UC has contingency plans in place.
At the request of both the workers and the UC, two state-appointed neutral fact finders independently evaluated the requests of both groups.
Carol Vendrillo, the fact finder who evaluated the service workers’ proposal, said the UC does have the money to meet the workers’ needs.
“The UC has demonstrated the ability to increase compensation when it fits with certain priorities without any demonstrable link to a state funding source,” Vendrillo said in a press release.
But Savickas said the UC did not agree with the findings and is contesting the results.
The fact finder’s recommendation for changes to the contract on patient-care technicians was similar the UC’s, Savickas said. On issues including health and welfare benefits and pension benefits, the UC accepted the fact finder’s recommendation, according to a press release.
Harrison said that workers want equal pay for equal work and that lack of competitive pay has caused a higher turnover rate and an inability for workers to meet the high costs of living.
The UC has proposed wage increases for both patient-care technical workers and service workers. Savickas said that turnover has not been a large problem, but even the small retention issues have been addressed in the UC’s proposal.
Other hospitals and California community colleges pay 25 percent more than the UC. This has forced many service workers into poverty and caused a high turnover rate in patient-care workers, Harrison added.
Savickas said service employees are state-funded, and their wages cannot be raised to market level because of constraints from the state budget, which is receiving cuts in many areas.
“We want to continue bargaining and come to an agreement,” Savickas said.
Patrick Hale, a UCLA X-ray technician and member of AFSCME, said he thinks 90 percent of workers will vote yes on the strike.
Jaron Quetel, an inventory clerk at UCLA stores, said he works two jobs to make ends meet while attending night school.
“I’m not angry with UCLA, with the establishment. I’m upset with the decision makers,” Quetel said. “It’s hard to feel like your value is high when you’re not a priority.”
Quetel said that workers currently receive raises based on evaluations. But the standards make it difficult for workers to receive maximal wage increases.
Workers want a longevity step system in which they receive higher wages based on the number of years they have worked in that job, Harrison said.
The UC has said it would employ a step system, but the increase in wages would be less than what the union proposes. The UC proposed providing a 2-percent increase in the next two or three years, but the union asks for a 6-percent increase.
Hale, who has worked at UCLA for the past 17 years, said that in the past five years the quality of patient care has decreased because of the high employee-turnover rate.
“The constant turnover of technicians means we have to constantly train new technicians, which is a burden. But more importantly, it’s not good for patient safety because an error in processing could be catastrophic,” he said.
“The strike is the only tool we have to stop this,” Hale said.
