This post was updated Nov. 1 at 5:52 p.m.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299 announced Thursday that members voted to authorize a strike.

The union – which represents patient care and service workers across the UC – said in a press release that 99% of those who voted approved the strike. Voting lasted from Monday to Wednesday and followed AFSCME Local 3299’s unfair labor practice charge against the University, in which it alleged that the UC failed to bargain in good faith with the union.

“By refusing to bargain in good faith, the University has made it clear that it does not value the frontline workers who clean its facilities, serve students food, and treat patients,” AFSCME Local 3299 President Michael Avant said in the press release. “If UC won’t meet its most basic legal responsibilities to its employees, our members have made it clear that we are prepared to hold them accountable by exercising our legal right to strike.”

Bargaining between the UC and AFSCME Local 3299 began in January with the goal of negotiating new contracts for patient care workers – whose contracts expired July 31 – and service workers, including those at on-campus dining halls, whose contracts expire today.

Director of Mail, Document and Distribution Services David Aberbuch said in a Friday email to UCLA faculty and staff that he had been informed of a potential November work stoppage that could impact delivery services at UCLA.

“This (work stoppage) may affect delivery services, as drivers for companies like UPS, FedEx and Amazon may choose not to cross picket lines,” he said in the email. “To mitigate any disruptions, we encourage all departments to implement their continuity plans and stock up on essential supplies immediately.”

In the ULP charge, the union claimed the University violated the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act Section 3571, subdivisions B and C, which make it unlawful for employers to deny employee organizations certain rights – including the right to form, join and participate in employee organizations without reprisals or discrimination from their employers – and to refuse or fail to engage in meetings with employees.

“UC’s conduct undermines the viability of collective bargaining at the University and sends a message the employer hopes employees will take to heart: that organizing and collective bargaining are futile, and the Union is powerless to influence the University, the third largest employer in the state,” the ULP charge said.

The union said in the ULP charge that the University unilaterally imposed cost increases for employee health care benefits, including premiums, co-pays for outpatient visits and prescription drugs.

“These are massive increases, and the University never even mentioned them in bargaining,” the ULP charge said. “Instead, without notice or negotiation, the University is imposing these cost increases.”

The charge also alleged that it is illegal for the University to make said health care changes for patient care workers in particular, as their contract has expired with the UC, and employers are legally required to maintain the status quo during the hiatus between collective bargaining agreements.

The ULP charge also alleged that the UC has failed to respond to AFSCME Local 3299’s multiple requests for “critical information” for bargaining, including requests for staffing and payroll information, financial projections and wage records. 

In an emailed statement to the Daily Bruin, UC Office of the President spokesperson Heather Hansen said the university does not believe they bargained in bad-faith. She added that, while the union has condemned several of the University’s proposals, AFSCME 3299 has failed to offer any counter-proposals since May. 

“AFSCME’s statements that the University has refused to bargain in good faith are unfounded, confusing and not consistent with the parties’ bargaining history,” Hansen said in the statement. “Despite our proposals, we have heard nothing from AFSCME, not even an acknowledgment of our proposals.” 

On June 18, the University announced a wage proposal for AFSCME Local 3299 that would allow the lowest-paid employees to reach a minimum wage of $25 per hour by July 1 next year. In addition to the minimum wage increase, the UC offered to provide union members a wage increase of at least 5% in 2025.

The University also said in the proposal that it would raise its pay for AFSCME Local 3299 employees by 3% on or after April 1, 2027, if the 2026-2027 California state budget contains an increase of at least 5% in funding for the University’s general fund. If the state budget does not contain the 5% increase, the University would adjust employees’ pay by 2%.

However, AFSCME Local 3299 claimed in its ULP charge that the future wage increase’s dependency on the state budget is unfair, as its workers should not have to rely on the legislature’s allocation of finances to receive better pay.

“It was entirely unacceptable that bargaining unit members should have to depend on the whims of the Legislature to realize wage gains that they win in their CBAs (collective bargaining agreements),” the ULP charge said. “The University knew full well that its proposal would be unacceptable to the Union.”

The union must provide the University with 10 days’ notice before withholding labor. Union representatives did not immediately respond to requests for information about a planned strike at UCLA.