Strike at the U

[ChrisK]

My god, how do you guys get any work done?? Some of us have to walk picket lines and work second jobs...

Here's the situation as it stands right now. All three AFSCME locals on the Twin Cities campus and the Duluth local are out on strike. Angus is right, the University has offered the AFSCME locals 2.25% across the board plus step increases except for the healthcare local which has been offered 2.5% because a large percentage of their members are at the top of their salary ranges.

The Teamsters have reached a tentative agreement for 3.0% across the board each year for the next two years plus their step increases. In addition, the Civil Service employees at the University were given a 3.25% across the board increase plus they are eligible for bonuses. The State AFSCME locals settled for 3.25% plus step increases.

The steps are a bone of contention between the University and AFSCME but the Teamsters and the state employees both settled contracts that included steps plus a higher across the board than what the University has offered us.

We met three times with the University and they absolutely refused to budge from 2.25%. They did increase their offer of one year lump sums to $250 per year which would equal 0.75% if costed out as a percentage increase. In other words, they have the money to give us a 3.0% across the board but they don't want that additional money on their budget. They want us to fight for it.

At this point it's a staring contest, no new talks are scheduled.

I could add a lot of details, but I need to get some sleep. I don't want to get all sappy here but I do appreciate the nice things that were said about me personally.

One thing that struck me about hockeygod's posts is that based on what he pays his support staff it sounds like he has respect for the work they do. Unfortunately, the university administration doesn't share that respect for their support staff.

[east hockey]

My god, how do you guys get any work done?? Some of us have to walk picket lines and work second jobs...

Here's the situation as it stands right now. All three AFSCME locals on the Twin Cities campus and the Duluth local are out on strike. Angus is right, the University has offered the AFSCME locals 2.25% across the board plus step increases except for the healthcare local which has been offered 2.5% because a large percentage of their members are at the top of their salary ranges.

The Teamsters have reached a tentative agreement for 3.0% across the board each year for the next two years plus their step increases. In addition, the Civil Service employees at the University were given a 3.25% across the board increase plus they are eligible for bonuses. The State AFSCME locals settled for 3.25% plus step increases.

The steps are a bone of contention between the University and AFSCME but the Teamsters and the state employees both settled contracts that included steps plus a higher across the board than what the University has offered us.

We met three times with the University and they absolutely refused to budge from 2.25%. They did increase their offer of one year lump sums to $250 per year which would equal 0.75% if costed out as a percentage increase. In other words, they have the money to give us a 3.0% across the board but they don't want that additional money on their budget. They want us to fight for it.

At this point it's a staring contest, no new talks are scheduled.

I could add a lot of details, but I need to get some sleep. I don't want to get all sappy here but I do appreciate the nice things that were said about me personally.

One thing that struck me about hockeygod's posts is that based on what he pays his support staff it sounds like he has respect for the work they do. Unfortunately, the university administration doesn't share that respect for their support staff.

Thanks for the update, Chris. Are there any proposed changes to your health care package or will it remain unchanged? I ask this because in our bargaining unit, our impasses haven't been the result of salary proposals. They've been the result of the County Board wanting to shift more and more of their costs over to the employees. Such proposed changes have included; higher deductibles, higher prescription co-pays, higher out-of-pocket maximums, higher percentage contribution towards the premium by the employees.

Our current contract, which covers 2006-07, was ratified at the end of 2006, and the health care stuff was a huge sticking point. The County tried a ploy in an attempt to divide people with single coverage from people with family coverage. (The old Divide And Conquer strategy) It didn't work. The union membership held firm and the County only gave up its demand when year-end data showed a lower than normal utilization of health care benefits. In fact, the fund balance of our self-insured plan actually increased during 2006. Upon realizing that we knew this, the County Board no longer had an argument.

Now, we're preparing to enter into negotiations for 2008 and possibly beyond, and once again health care benefits will become a vital part of the discussion. In the meantime, the County Attorney the last time around, Alan Mitchell, was voted out of office (after 25+ years in office, which was a major upset) in favor of Melanie Ford. It remains to be seen what impact that change will bring, if any.

Good luck.

Lee

[Irishmans Shanty]

Classic Management Theory: when the worker fails, the system fails
Modern Management Theory: when the system fails, the worker fails.

Some of the more abrasive posters on this topic seem to be filling their cup from the pot that reads Classic Theory, their idea of management is you will do so because I told you so, it is bureaucratic in nature and it is easy to execute, the people at the top simply follow a protocal. This brand of management was nearly outdated by the time Carnegie had his second hundred million in the bank, and it was way past its prime by the time labor unions organized.

In the unionized public sector I graze, you'd be surprised how additional compensation/benefits become a non-issue come contract time when management understands that even though everyone below them is replaceable, they won't risk the shutdown, because they know if it occurs, they are a big part of the problem.

[Knowlzee]

Don't have the time to address all of Lee's "quibbles",.......I am not in a Union, because I choose not to be in a Union, and,.....it had no bearing on why Unions are "bad" (not my quote) for the economy. Unions are not good for the economy, well,......because they are not good for the economy.

While Lee continues to misinterpret history,......lets look at some recent examples of industry and the benefit of unions. The unionized airline industry,......many airlines in or just coming out of bankruptcy. The unionized auto industry,.....big 3 American companies all in financial trouble. Finally, just how is the once flourishing highly unionized mining industry doing in the Duluth area? Are these a coincidence?

Finally, be sure to let the board know when the City of Duluth becomes "insolvent" and closes the door,......or might that be a little bit of a threat to support a raise in taxes, also?

[Irishmans Shanty]

I don't know much as I am just a caveman but I'm not so sure unions alone brought on the demise of the American Auto industry, I would attribute that to what Packerboy would call "progress". Even a caveman like I knows the US turned into an industrial machine after WWII. While we were developing and inventing the individually wrapped cheese slice, China was standing pat under Mao Tse Tung's "Great Leap Forward", or as we would call "communist stagnation".

Well, China has changed and they are now pumping out cars and even better individually wrapped cheese slices by rewarding their workforce at 64 cents/hour. Give China 60 years of progress and those wages will double, double, double, and double again with or without unions and that once booming auto industry wil fall on hard times by relocating to Rwanda, Papua New Guinea, and Cambodia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/04/magaz ... ner=rssnyt

[Can't Never Tried]

and even better individually wrapped cheese slices

With lead wrapper of course

[ChrisK]

To answer Lee's question about healthcare, the University has already made some big changes in our healthcare, they have a four tier system of coverage for single, single+spouse, single+children and family. They have steadily decreased the percentage of the premium they cover, I think it's 85% of the low cost plan for the single coverage right now.

Unfortunately, the unions at the University don't have a lot of say in what we get for healthcare because the University rolls out the same coverage for all employees, faculty, civil service, etc. so by the time they get around to negotiating with us the dollar amounts are pretty much set. The good news is that this time around they are holding the line on changes in the percentage of the premium they'll cover. The bad news is that the cost to employees will still rise by 9% on average because of the increased costs for the coverage.

And no news yet on going back to the table. I've stolen a playoff hockey tradition and stopped shaving until we settle the contract. Hopefully I won't be tripping over my beard before that happens.

[AngusYoung]

ChrisK - help me understand the logic behind your strike position when you have already lost in wages for not working what you would have gained for what you are seeking? This one baffles me. Also, with the proposed 2.25% being offered to you along with your annual step increases of 2%, still trying to figure out why a 4.25% annual increase is not acceptable. Most @ my company received increases for 2007 of anywhere from 0 - 4% for the year AND we also had the % that we contribute toward our healthcare coverage increase. I'm not going to go as far as to say everyone was happy, however, there was no one bashing the company and certainly no one leaving their employment to call attention to their unfair pay and benefits.

AY

[Neutron 14]

ChrisK - help me understand the logic behind your strike position when you have already lost in wages for not working what you would have gained for what you are seeking? This one baffles me. Also, with the proposed 2.25% being offered to you along with your annual step increases of 2%, still trying to figure out why a 4.25% annual increase is not acceptable. Most @ my company received increases for 2007 of anywhere from 0 - 4% for the year AND we also had the % that we contribute toward our healthcare coverage increase. I'm not going to go as far as to say everyone was happy, however, there was no one bashing the company and certainly no one leaving their employment to call attention to their unfair pay and benefits.

AY

It appears AY, that what is being offered is comparable and in many cases better than the private sector. But since the Teamsters got 3.0%, Civil Service employees and State AFSCME received 3.25%, ChrisK's brotherhood deems the 2.25% offer unfair. If the others would have signed for 2.0%, no doubt the Brotherhood would have jumped at 2.25%.

Gotta keep up with the Jones's you know...

[ChrisK]

ChrisK - help me understand the logic behind your strike position when you have already lost in wages for not working what you would have gained for what you are seeking? This one baffles me. Also, with the proposed 2.25% being offered to you along with your annual step increases of 2%, still trying to figure out why a 4.25% annual increase is not acceptable. Most @ my company received increases for 2007 of anywhere from 0 - 4% for the year AND we also had the % that we contribute toward our healthcare coverage increase. I'm not going to go as far as to say everyone was happy, however, there was no one bashing the company and certainly no one leaving their employment to call attention to their unfair pay and benefits.

AY

First off, let me address the 'Brotherhood' comment from Neutron. There's no cabal making the decisions for us as many of the Teamsters at the U feel about their union, the membership makes the calls.

First off AY, not everyone gets the step increases, so not everyone is making 4.25%. The University says it's 94%, that seems high and when you factor in the high turnover rate at the U it drops even more. Also, we don't get the step increases at the beginning of the fiscal year as we do our across the boards. Some units get their step increases on their anniversary date, others on a set date (October 1st in one case that I know). So you have to pro-rate that 2%. Finally, the step increases are considered a 'bonus' for the experience and knowledge that an employee gains as they progress to the top of the range.

The other side of the coin is the way University administration has treated us since Yudof left. Four years ago, we 'shared the pain' as the University put it and didnt get step increases for two years--except for the clericals who had to go out on strike to keep theirs. Two years ago the University dragged out negotiations till Thanksgiving and tried to remove the step increases from the clerical contract. This year they were given a supplement from the legislature for salaries and have chosen not to give it to us. It really seems like the administration drew a line in the sand and dared us to strike in an attempt to crush the union. And they may well succeed.

The final point is this. If you and your co-workers are happy with the raises you got, good for you I'm glad you have a good labor environment. We do not.