BARGAINING UPDATE
October 14, 2022
Dear colleagues,
Even as the administration has dug in their heels over negotiating over our job security proposals, we are making progress in other parts of our first contract. In particular, we are close to an agreement on an article on “Non-discrimination, Anti-harassment, and Anti-bullying.”
Both sides appear to be in agreement on language that includes strong protections against discrimination for members of protected groups, broad protections against harassment that cover everyone, and a process for ongoing engagement between the union and administration for addressing these concerns. Diversity, equity, and fairness are core issues that we are also addressing in proposals on discipline, workloads, appointments and renewals, evaluations, promotion and tenure, academic freedom, and economics.
Right now we are only twelve words apart: the list of categories that would be protected against discrimination. The administration has rejected our proposal to prohibit discrimination based on “caste, weight, height, health or medical status, and family care leave status.” Including these categories in the contract would mean that, for example, if one of us were treated adversely because of our body size, we would be able to use the grievance procedure to correct that unfair decision.
It is not an exaggeration to say that by refusing to agree to prohibit these forms of discrimination, the administration is reserving the right to make decisions about our jobs based on these factors. They say they don’t plan to discriminate on the basis of these categories, but without a binding commitment in the contract, those are just empty words.
The crux of the issue is that they want to limit the list of protected categories to those that are already protected by law (race, creed, color, sex, religion, national origin, ancestry, marital status, domestic partnership, familial status, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, and genetic information). We believe the law is a floor, and at Pitt we should hold ourselves to a higher standard. Our core principle is that no one should be prevented from doing their job because of who they are. Our list is reasonable, workable, and, if anything, modest. Including these categories in the contract addresses real issues of discrimination that arise in workplaces like ours.
We continue to wait for a reasonable response from the administration on our job security proposals. We will need your help to show the administration that real job security protections are a top priority for all of us. A CAT member from your area will be reaching out to tell you about our Job Security = Emotional Well-being campaign. United we can get big wins for our most precarious faculty!
In solidarity,
Your bargaining committee
Even as the administration has dug in their heels over negotiating over our job security proposals, we are making progress in other parts of our first contract. In particular, we are close to an agreement on an article on “Non-discrimination, Anti-harassment, and Anti-bullying.”
Both sides appear to be in agreement on language that includes strong protections against discrimination for members of protected groups, broad protections against harassment that cover everyone, and a process for ongoing engagement between the union and administration for addressing these concerns. Diversity, equity, and fairness are core issues that we are also addressing in proposals on discipline, workloads, appointments and renewals, evaluations, promotion and tenure, academic freedom, and economics.
Right now we are only twelve words apart: the list of categories that would be protected against discrimination. The administration has rejected our proposal to prohibit discrimination based on “caste, weight, height, health or medical status, and family care leave status.” Including these categories in the contract would mean that, for example, if one of us were treated adversely because of our body size, we would be able to use the grievance procedure to correct that unfair decision.
It is not an exaggeration to say that by refusing to agree to prohibit these forms of discrimination, the administration is reserving the right to make decisions about our jobs based on these factors. They say they don’t plan to discriminate on the basis of these categories, but without a binding commitment in the contract, those are just empty words.
The crux of the issue is that they want to limit the list of protected categories to those that are already protected by law (race, creed, color, sex, religion, national origin, ancestry, marital status, domestic partnership, familial status, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, and genetic information). We believe the law is a floor, and at Pitt we should hold ourselves to a higher standard. Our core principle is that no one should be prevented from doing their job because of who they are. Our list is reasonable, workable, and, if anything, modest. Including these categories in the contract addresses real issues of discrimination that arise in workplaces like ours.
We continue to wait for a reasonable response from the administration on our job security proposals. We will need your help to show the administration that real job security protections are a top priority for all of us. A CAT member from your area will be reaching out to tell you about our Job Security = Emotional Well-being campaign. United we can get big wins for our most precarious faculty!
In solidarity,
Your bargaining committee
|
