Nearly a year into negotiations for a new labor contract, the University of California’s 8,500 service workers held a five-day strike this summer that elucidated growing concerns regarding pay equity and benefits.
From July 14 to 18, thousands of these workers — represented by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — picketed at nine of the university’s 10 campuses, demanding a $15 minimum wage and a step system to standardize raises.
UC Office of the President spokesman Paul Schwartz said that enough employees arrived at work to maintain normal operations of all university facilities, but that some employees and patients at the university’s medical centers complained about the noise produced by demonstrators.
The strike took place in spite of a temporary restraining order issued by the Superior Court of San Francisco on July 11 that prohibited it. According to AFSCME Local 3299 President Lakesha Harrison, the court order — which came at the university’s request — simply required that the union provide prior warning of strike activities, and AFSCME had already announced its strike schedule the previous day.
“We gave notice before the ruling even came out,” she said.
State Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) agreed that the union had provided adequate warning of the strike, and he submitted a letter to UC President Mark Yudof on July 15 demanding that the university stop threatening its employees.
“If even one worker is retaliated against or disciplined for exercising their right to strike, I will do everything in my power to appropriately respond to the university,” he said in a statement.
Harrison said service workers are the lowest-paid in the UC system, adding that longstanding employees receive no reward for their extended service.
“Right now we have people who have worked 30 years and people who have worked two years who make the same amount of money,” she said.
In addition to AFSCME’s service worker contract negotiations, which began last October, the union has bargained for a contract for the university’s 11,000 patient-care technical workers since August 2007.
Harrison said both sets of negotiations have taken longer than most union members expected, but that the union is interested in permanent solutions that cannot be achieved overnight.
“We are fundamentally changing their whole structure,” Harrison said. “We’re changing the way they pay people, the way they hire people, and it takes time.”
Schwartz said the university’s bargaining teams have corresponded with AFSCME representatives regularly since the strike, but the union has repeatedly refused the university’s offers. The most recent service worker proposal — presented Sept. 12 — would increase the service worker minimum wage to $13.25 per hour and implement experience-based increases. In August, the university offered to guarantee a $15 minimum hourly wage for PCT workers by 2012.
“Our focus remains on trying to solve the remaining differences,” he said. “We remain hopeful, but an agreement requires compromise from both sides.”
Harrison said these proposals would translate to a mere 30-cent raise for many employees this year, which she said is unacceptable. She said the university’s inclusion of a step-based pay system indicates “some movement” on the university’s part, but that the system does not apply to employees of all disciplines.
At this point, the university has the power to impose a new contract for its workers, but the union has the right to respond with another strike. Both parties have said they remain willing to negotiate.
“There’s still a lot of fight in us, and we plan to do everything that we can to get the best thing for our workers,” Harrison said.