UC and UC-AFT reach agreement on pandemic working protocols
UC-AFT, which represents about 7,000 faculty members, reached an agreement with the University of California about COVID-19 working conditions in March. In April, it submitted a demand to bargain again. (Daily Bruin file photo)
By Brooke Tegethoff
May 11, 2021 5:46 p.m.
The University of California and University Council-American Federation of Teachers reached an agreement on COVID-19 working conditions after nearly a year of negotiations.
UC-AFT, which represents more than 7,000 faculty members, and the UC reached a finalized agreement March 4, and UC-AFT submitted a demand to negotiate fall 2021 reopenings April 7. This agreement covers a variety of work expectations during the COVID-19 pandemic, including enforceable health and safety protocols and protection for work hours and locations, performance evaluations and COVID-19 precautions for K-12 instructors. It also requires that reviewers take COVID-19 into account when evaluating reappointments or merit increases.
The union had been attempting to negotiate with UC management on COVID-19 working conditions since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, said UC-AFT President Mia McIver.
McIver said that when COVID-19 hit the United States last spring, UC management initially refused to bargain with UC-AFT over working conditions during the transition to online instruction, causing the bargaining process to be prolonged and last the course of 2020 spring, fall and winter quarters. The UC did not participate in a bargaining session with UC-AFT until July.
Ryan King, a UC Office of the President spokesperson, said in an emailed statement that the UC and UC-AFT reached an agreement in which the UC provided paid medical leave for COVID-19-related absences, enhanced health and safety guidelines, and consideration of the pandemic when conducting performance evaluations.
McIver said it is essential UC-AFT members have a clear understanding between them and the UC system of which health and safety protocols would protect faculty and students so classes could resume safely.
The final agreement protects members by granting them health and safety measures such as guaranteed masks and safety supplies, the right to remove themselves from an unsafe situation without fear of discipline and the right to request reasonable accommodations if assigned to teach in person.
McIver said she is satisfied with how the agreement turned out and how it covers a wide array of issues, such as safety, reappointments and intellectual property protection. However, she added that she is disappointed with the UC about how long it took to reach an agreement and how inflexible they were.
“The message that (the UC) wants to send to lecturers consistently is that they don’t value us and they don’t want to invest in us, that we’re on our own, that they’re not really going to support us,” McIver said.
John Branstetter, president of the UCLA chapter of UC-AFT, said there has been a lack of clear communication between the UC and the union employees, especially in regards to recent reopenings on campus, including the libraries. UC-AFT plans on keeping a close eye on reopenings at UCLA and to watch out for any hurried reopening plans in the future.
UC-AFT plans on renegotiating this agreement in the fall and has already submitted a demand to negotiate fall 2021 reopening plans, McIver said.
The union is renegotiating to fight for two things that the University did not include in the initial bargain: compensation for the hundreds of extra hours worked during spring 2020 to help convert classes to an online format, and reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses essential to teaching virtual classes, such as internet upgrades, webcams, microphones and desks.
“We’ll fight hard if we have to, and we know that the University will listen if we are well-organized,” Branstetter said.
