Bargaining Update 2-12-2025

February 12th, 2025

Where we are: Today we brought questions to management regarding their proposals. We asked the University’s representatives for status updates on their counters or responses to USA’s proposals. We shared our Proposal Tracker, which shows that the University has not presented a single counter proposal since we presented our last proposal in November. You can view our Proposal Tracker here.

Senior Talent Acquisition Consultant Candance Berrena joined the University’s team today to discuss and answer questions around the University’s proposals for Article 14: Employee Compensation, Article 17: Vacancies and Promotions and Article 22: Layoff and Recall. Internally, the USA Bargaining Team and Negotiations Committee will continue working on counters to for Article 17 and Article 22.

Preliminary agenda for 2/26 bargaining:

  • USA presents Grievance and Arbitration counter proposal
  • 7-step proposal costs discussion
  • Health and Safety discussion with Jeff Hescock
  • University presents counter to USA’s Article 7: Bias in Discipline and Article 26: Disciplinary Action counters

Note: Abbreviations like 26.2 refer to Article 26, Section 2. Abbreviations like B.2 refer to Part B, Number 2 of whichever article and section is being discussed.

(Listed in the order they were covered during bargaining.)

University Proposal 4: Article 17 Vacancies and Promotions
  • USA previously made a proposal on different sections for article 17. You can view it here.
  • 17.1:
    • Updating language: replacing “appointing authority” with “hiring manager.”
    • Removed language is moved down to 17.2 for flow and clarity, since 17.2 deals with internal job postings and the application period for internal candidates.
  • 17.2:
    • Added language that candidate needs to meet minimum qualifications, which is standard across campus but not represented in our contract language.
    • Added explicit language about hiring departments not considering candidates who applied after the 7-day internal application period.
    • Changing time period definition for the 7-day internal application period from business days to calendar days, which would shorten it.
    • Q: What’s the rationale behind changing to calendar days, which shortens the time period?
      • A: To make it consistent across unions; AFSCME and PSU use calendar days.
    • Q: Can you clarify what you mean by “meeting the minimum qualifications?”
      • A: We’re a federal contractor, so we have to follow their guidelines to assess minimum qualifications to ensure that we’re being equitable; we have to take what is on the applicant materials and compare them to the minimum qualifications on the posting.
    • Q: How are you proposing the 2 paragraphs in Section 2? Are you suggesting one or the other OR both?
      • A: It’s not meant to be 2 separate options for language for the contract, it’s meant to be put into the contract as-is and give 2 options for hiring. A (option 1) is close to our current language; A (option 2) means to establish a procedure to hire completely internally, by having an internal job search within the major budgetary unit (MBU) only. This was taken from PSU’s contract language. Hiring departments can still post it traditionally, but they would now have the option to post it internally only.
      • A: We currently don’t have any process for a completely USA-only search. Establishing an internal MBU-only search could make hiring USA staff faster if there’s a qualified candidate in an MBU-only USA member pool. If the MBU-only search fails; the search would still go to a 7-day internal job posting to the entire campus.
    • Q: Can you clarify what the MBUs are?
  • 17.3: Updating hiring manager language.
  • 17.4: No changes.
  • 17.5: Parts A-D, language clean-up.
  • 17.5 E: Allows for position descriptions for vacated USA positions to be changed before the 2 month time period for an employee to return to that position ends. If the USA employee that vacated the position returns; any updates to that position description will be reverted .
  • 17.6: No changes.
  • 17.7: Updated language.
    • Q: What is the definition of temporary here? For example, we have grant-funded positions and people brought in from temp agencies.
      • A: This is temporary/03, an employee that is hired on a temporary basis with no benefits who works less than half time.
  • 17.8:
    • Q: What is the intention behind changing the time period for rehiring temp employees as internal candidaes for permanent positions from 3 years to 2 years?
      • A: 3 years is a long time, creates more uncertainty for hiring managers.
University Proposal 4: Article 17C Temporary Transfers
  • Updating language.
University Proposal 4: Article 17D Work Area, Shift Preferences
  • Updating language.
University Proposal 7: Article 22 Layoff and Recall
  • 22.1 Definition of Layoff
    • Part A: Reduces the callback period for laid off employees from 2 years to 1 year.
    • Rationale: This is a management ask. It was a lot of work to maintain 2 years of contact with a person who has laid off.
      • Q: When the university recalls a laid off member who still has rights under article 22, can you provide a details about that process?
        • A: We’ll get that to you in the next week.
    • Part E: Adds 10 calendar day period that laid off employees can invoke Article 22 Section 1 Part G. Which gives members the option to bump members with less seniority in the same job classification.
    • Part G: For employees in layoff status, proposed language that requires them to notify their HR Business Partner when applying. For situations where the employee in layoff status is not selected, requires that a letter be submitted by the department that clarifies why the employee does not meet minimum qualifications. The letter must be approved by central HR.
University Proposal 3: Article 14 Employee Compensation
  • Part C: Salary Adjustments for Employees Entering From a Professional Position
    • Incoming employees from a Commonwealth of Massachusetts public employer (ie municipalities) shall be placed at an appropriate step on the salary scale according to their continuous years of service. These employees have not been accounted for previously.
    • Using this provision for USA positions is rare but happens. It is most often used for incoming AFSCME employees and police officers.