January 15th, 2025
Where we are: Today we continued the process of presenting our counter proposals and brought questions to management regarding their proposals. USA brought a counter to the University General Proposal on Article 7. Management informally countered USA Proposal 14: Farm Superintendent Reclassification. USA also brought questions to management to inform our future counters.
USA’s Counter Proposals
Counter to University Proposal for Article 7: Anti-Discrimination, Affirmative Action, and Conflict of Interest
Click here to view the original University Proposal for Article 7.
Click here to view USA’s counter proposal.
- Management’s original proposal would limit avenues for addressing discrimination to one; any additional avenues of addressing the discrimination would not be acknowledged.
- For example, if a member chose to use the UMass grievance process to address the discrimination they experienced, they would no longer be able to use the MA Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) in addition, and vice versa.
- Our counterproposal further expands the list of protected classes to include all current and potential future protected groups, and rejects their proposal to limit avenues for addressing discrimination.
University’s Counter Proposals
The university informally countered USA Proposal 14: Farm Superintendent Reclassification by offering to set up a joint labor/management committee and did not address the proposal directly. This is informal because it was not introduced in writing.
Questions and Discussion
USA Question on University Proposal 9: Article 29 Employee Evaluations
Q: What were the Affirmative Action goals and why were they removed?
A: This was an unintentional omission, this proposal is an attempt to be consistent across campus.
USA Question on University Proposal 4: Article 17 Vacancies and Promotions
Q: Do you know how often an employee is dismissed during their probationary period?
A: Less than once a year.
Q: (Section 5 Trial Period) What is the rationale behind removing “this matter may be a proper subject for the Grievance procedure?”
A: The rationale is that removing this line would prevent possible pitting members against other members if the dept is holding the prior position open in case the employee reverts to their former position.
Q: (Section 7) What is the rationale for removing CC and replacing it with temporary?
A: Replacing CC/03, which is an antiquated term, with temporary/03.
Q: (Section 7) Does management have a term used to describe members in grant-funded positions?
A: No.
Q: (Section 8) What is the rationale behind changing the amount of years that a temporary employee can complete their term of appointment without being deemed “laid off” from 3 to 2 years? (Context: This affects whether or not a person can apply to a position as an on-campus or off-campus candidate.)
A: “Absolutely no idea.”
In case you missed it…
Have you heard about USA’s ambitious salary proposal that would change our 14-step system to a 7-step system? It has the potential to change many members’ wages to a living wage! Check out more info below…
- Recording of the USA Salary Proposal Membership Meeting
- Poll results and recap of the Membership Meeting
- USA Salary Proposal Powerpoint Presentation
- Seven Step Salary Chart
- Seven Step Calculator – find out what you’d be making if we win this proposal!
- Thank you to CAT member and SBR coordinator Chris Weeks for creating this tool!