Tag Archives: bargaining

Let Them Eat Lobsters

, ,

By Jan Davidsz from Toledo Museum of Art“Still Life with a Lobster” by Jan Davidsz from Toledo Museum of Art

By Alexis Ali, Professional Staff Union (PSU) Communications Committee

(Note from the University Staff Association (USA): This editorial, originally posted by PSU is being shared to USA’s website as part of the campus-wide unions’ continuing  collective bargaining efforts towards fair contract. You can follow more of PSU’s content on Instagram.)

Contract bargaining is in full swing for both units of PSU. If you have been one of the silent bargaining representatives present for Unit A bargaining or a testifier for Unit B bargaining, you already know just how condescending and invalidating Management’s position has been regarding our salaries, working conditions, employee benefits, etc. 

One part of bargaining for this new contract that those of you in Unit A may not have been privy to is the plight of the union members in Unit B who work as Assistant Food Managers (AFMs). These hard-working folks make up nearly a third of PSU Unit B and are responsible for the vast majority of food purchasing and supervision in UMass’ dining halls, retail, and catering locations.

UMass Amherst is recognized by the Princeton Review as the Best Campus Food in the nation for the seventh year in a row because of our assistant food managers, yet Management treats them abysmally. Often taking on not only their responsibilities, but those of a purchaser, receiver, cook, shift supervisor, and a culinary worker, AFMs work long hours with too much demand for them to take regular breaks⎯if any. On top of that, the university has refused (or failed) to hire additional staff members to meet the needs of these teams, making it nearly impossible for AFMs to take time off work when needed—even for medical necessities and major life events. They are among the lowest-graded positions in Unit B, earning significantly less than the Unit A median salary, despite their integral role in running UMass’s prized dining operation. Based on their incredibly stressful jobs and stunningly low wages, it’s not hard to imagine why people have not wanted to sign on. 

This fall, when PSU Unit B presented a special AFM contract proposal to management, they backed up their presentation with powerful testimonies from eight AFMs. These testimonies combined to tell a consistent story: shameful work conditions, the inability to depend on basic rights and benefits (like sick time for medical emergencies, time off for life milestones, or even regular lunch breaks!) did little to sway Management’s position. AFMs continue to be some of the lowest-paid Unit B members while shouldering the massive weight of UMass’s #1 dining ranking. 

Thanks to member actions including the “You Pay, We Stay” speakout in Whitmore nearly all Unit B members received a salary grade increase in 2023—except for AFMs. Mike Dufresne, co-chair of the Unit B bargaining committee, said in a recent interview with PSU Strong, that:

“Management looked us in the eye and told us that if the assistant food managers wanted fair pay and decent working conditions, then they could go find them somewhere else because Management had dozens of other people just waiting to take the job. They told us that all the assistant food managers were totally replaceable.”

In negotiations this time around, Management has resisted the AFM proposal, which includes not only grade increases but workload protections, a career ladder, and guaranteed year-round employment (year-round employment is currently only guaranteed for certain AFMs, who are selected through an opaque process⎯many are only guaranteed 35 weeks of employment).  

Management likes to pretend that the university couldn’t possibly afford to raise our salaries, so members of the bargaining committee did a little research: turns out the money is already on campus in Auxiliary Services and used for some wild s***. My favorite, and perhaps the most widely known, example is that of the Halloween Surf & Turf tradition every year. On that day alone, the university spends roughly $180,000 on lobsters, $60,000 on steaks, and over $10,000 in overtime for just one 5-hour meal period. That’s $250,000 in all. 

Ken Toong
Photo – UMass Dining

“Why do we do such an extravagant meal on Halloween?” you may ask, because I sure did!
The answer is Ken Toong. 

As Executive Director and Associate Vice Chancellor for Auxiliary Enterprises, Toong is a primary decision-maker about where auxiliary funds go. And it just so happens that Halloween is his birthday, and lobster is his favorite food. Each year, one of Ken’s staff sends out an e-mail outlining his itinerary for that day, letting AFMs know where he will be ending his night. He tours the dining commons, eating his fill of lobster and steak, and then staff are expected to gather around and sing him happy birthday. 
Again, the estimated cost is $250,000. 

It is a surprise to none of us that Management’s priorities are out of whack. And it seems like appealing to their better nature hasn’t changed their course. So, what do we do? 

Keep fighting for each other, keep talking to each other, and keep rising together. Share this story and your own with your coworkers, attend bargaining meetings, show up to flyering and other actions on campus, pay your dues, or volunteer for a committee. Make these issues visible to anyone and everyone! And…stay tuned for some dining-related union actions this semester. 👀

We all deserve better, and we will accept nothing less. And maybe someday, we can afford our own lobsters. But, like, ew.

USA Heats Up At the MTA Winter Skills Conference!

, , , , ,

By Deborah Place and Kyle Chambers 

Every year, the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) brings together union members from school districts and public higher education institutions from across the Commonwealth to attend the MTA Bargaining Summit and Winter Union Skills Conference. This year’s event took place at the Hilton Boston Park Plaza Hotel in Boston, which held a special meaning for the event as the union that represents employees at this hotel had recently ratified their labor contract after a 24 day strike.  Among higher ed locals, University Staff Association (USA)’s presence was unmistakable, as the union was well represented by its members at the event. 

Several USA members in attendance took classes that count towards earning their MTA Bargaining Certificate, awarded to MTA members who attend an extensive curriculum of courses focusing on developing leadership and organizing skills to build influence in power in bargaining campaigns.  By teaching members the fundamentals of grassroots organizing and shifting traditional bargaining strategies to create membership-driven campaigns, the program seeks to modernize collective bargaining practices by sharing current best-practices of locals who won major victories in bargaining.  USA Communications Committee chair and Contract Action Team (CAT) co-chair Camille Godbout-Chouinard credits the Bargaining Certificate program with inspiring change within the USA: “The basics I learned there help pave the way for changing USA’s bargaining process to be more transparent [by introducing] silent bargaining representatives.” 

New this year for Winter Skills were several events specifically tailored for higher education staff and faculty, one of which being the Higher Education Bargaining Summit.  USA Vice President Sheila Gilmour was one of several USA attendees to at the summit, and described the experience fondly: “We talked about some of the differences between our campuses and our roles in our individual workplaces, but most of the discussion centered on our common goals and strategies to win the best possible contracts for our members.” 

For the first time, the MTA Winter Skills featured a Next-Generation Leadership course exclusively tailored to higher education, allowing faculty and staff from across the UMass campuses and the Massachusetts Community College Council (MCCC) to exchange ideas, stories, and lessons learned in a guided discussion setting.  Tim Pyne, Recording Secretary for USA and one of the attendees of the course, reflected on his experience, saying that the course “offered a welcoming space for facilitated reflection, dialogue, and learning. I felt validated in the work I’ve already been doing and recharged to dig in more.”

USA’s Health and Safety Coordinator, Casey Krone, led a focused workshop titled “Food Insecurity in Our Union”, where both higher education members, K-12 members and MTA retired members shared stories from their locals as they related to the issues of food insecurity among faculty and staff across the commonwealth. In the workshop, Casey pointed to recent survey results, including one such survey where 1/3 of USA members reported experiencing food insecurity, as direct factors in our students’ educations. “We all agreed that we need to continue the discussion so we can figure out what to do next and to help de-stigmatize food insecurity that our members experience,” Krone said.

Next year’s MTA Bargaining Summit and Winter Union Skills Conference will be held at the Sheraton Boston Hotel from January 23-24, 2026, but there are numerous other opportunities throughout the year to attend training sessions through MTA, including right here at UMass Amherst.  In addition to online webinar courses, educators and union activists of all experience levels can sign up to attend these events.

MTA Higher Education Conference – March 1st, 2025 – Worcester, MA 

MTA Education Support Professional (ESP) Conference – May 2-3, 2025 – Southbridge, MA 

MTA Summer Conference – July 27-30, 2025 – UMass Amherst 

 These events are a great way to network, develop relationships and learn more about how to develop skills for both personal development and for the benefit of your union. For more information, or to request release time from your regular job duties to attend events on behalf of USA, contact the USA office at usa@umass.edu for more information!.

“Where the **** are our raises?” – Parameters, Bargaining, and More

, , , , , ,

By the University Staff Association (USA) Communications Committee 

 As we find ourselves in January 2025, there are a few things to be expected. New university policies, the start of the new Spring 2025 semester, and the frustration of accidentally writing “2024” on your documents. 

But more importantly, it’s likely you’re reading this and wondering: shouldn’t we be getting a raise soon? 

For USA members in their early years of service to the University, it’s likely you’ve been earning a step increase yearly based on your anniversary date.  However, for members who have been with the University for more than 14 years, it’s likely you have only received raises based on the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) parameters set by the Office of the State Governor. 

What are parameters? 

In the state of Massachusetts, labor unions don’t bargain for wages in the traditional sense. Rather, the Governor’s office sets the wage increases, referred to as “parameters.” Essentially, they determine how much money from the state budget will be put towards wage increases in our contracts. 

Parameters can be confusing, which is partially by design. As a result of the parameters from the governor’s office, the raises that are on the table from management for the contract from 2024-2027 include the following language: 

Effective the first day of the first pay period following the date that the parties reach agreement on a successor collective bargaining agreement but no sooner than January 5, 2025, employees will receive an increase of three percent (3%) increase in base salary rate.  

Effective July 13, 2025, employees will receive a two percent (2%) increase in base salary rate.  

Effective January 4, 2026, employees will receive a two percent (2%) increase in base salary rate.  

Effective July 12, 2026, employees will receive a two percent (2%) increase in base salary rate.  

Effective January 3, 2027, employees will receive a two percent (2%) increase in base salary rate. 

In addition to the inequitable process for which parameters are bargained is the ugly side: management generally uses parameter raises as a bargaining chip to try and hurry the bargaining process along and force the unions to settle for less than they deserve, which has resulted in the erosion of the bottom line for many employees, both across the unions on campus and throughout the UMass system. 

Parameter raises also represent a fundamental disagreement between the unions and management. While the unions across the UMass system view the parameter raises as a cost-of-living adjustment to the realities of steadily increasing costs of living, management has consistently viewed parameter raises as, well, raises – and this is consistent with management’s proposals on other bargaining tables. PSU-A has reported that management put forward a proposal to convert their parameter raises into “merit based” raises, designed to reward those employees for going above and beyond for the UMass system. This is consistent with what many union members have said is one of Chancellor Javier Reyes’s main goals to drive innovation and reward hard work on campus.  

In practice, however, this practice is highly inequitable, especially when stagnant wages are at the heart of many of the issues we face on campus. If a member struggles with food and housing security, the catch-22 becomes evident: they’re not likely not going to be able to go “above and beyond,” meaning they won’t earn a raise to address the issue. 

While it’s admittedly demoralizing to know that we will have to wait for a bump in your paycheck, it’s important to note that USA intends to work as diligently as possible to negotiate in good faith for a contract that we all deserve. 

Shifting the Pay Scales 

At the December 11th bargaining session, USA put forth their ambitious plan to address both retention and financial insecurity.  Before the bargaining team presented the plan to management, several USA silent bargaining representatives provided testimony: some at the beginning of their careers and hopeful that UMass will right the wrongs and support their needs in the coming years, others having crossed the threshold of being at their top step.  All of them face financial hardship as a result of stagnating wages, despite funds brought into the university system as a result of their hard work. 

At the following bargaining session, the final meeting between both sides of 2024, UMass Labor Relations Director Brian Harrington suggested that the 7-step proposal would need state legislator approval, and their team likely wouldn’t be able to reach a tentative agreement to approve the plan.  However, it is USA’s position that the cost would likely be offset by the savings resulting in decreased turnover, which include the candidate searches, onboarding process, and productivity slowed by training and other operational needs, as well as reducing the need for seeking outside contractor work. 

In addition to these figures, it’s OK to be skeptical at Harrington’s assertion that the decision cannot be made at the University level, as members of the unions have watched as UMass proudly announced the hiring of new UMass Football coach Joe Harasymiak to a 5 year contract worth approximately $1.3 million per year, and the reported $1.4 million buyout due to former football coach Doc Brown.  It’s also worth mentioning that A&F Vice Chancellor Andrew Mangels approved a $500 thousand bonus to outgoing chancellor Kimbel Subbaswamy, just weeks before his retirement and after he signed the layoff notices of 120 members of the Advancement division. 

To address management’s assertions that we’d need to go to the legislature to fight for higher wages, it’s already been done. MTA unions, including USA, fought for the Fair Share Amendment, an amendment to the state constitution that has added a small surtax on the wealthiest people yet generated billions of dollars in revenue for transportation and education in the state of Massachusetts.  What the unions did NOT fight for, however, was the $20 billion allocated for “endowment matching” in FY24 — funds that were placed into the UMass endowment to accrue interest on top of itself, instead of addressing labor-related issues across the campuses. 

Here’s how YOU can help

While your USA Bargaining Team is doing its best to make cohesive arguments at the table, it’s crucial to our efforts that you show your support in the coming months.  Your presence at the USA bargaining table as a Silent Bargaining Representative (SBR) is a great help in affirming and validating what is being said by both sides, and we invite you to sign up to be an SBR for our next bargaining session here. 

Contract Corner 1: Ground Rules and Silent Bargaining Representatives

, , ,

This article is the first installment of long-form updates about the current contract negotiations for the 2024-2027 contract. Short-form updates will be available after each bargaining session with management, thank you for your patience while we establish the process. 

The Contract Corner: USA and UMass Amherst Management Agree to Ground Rules 
USA Communications Committee on behalf of the USA Bargaining Team 

After four sessions of bargaining between the University Staff Association (USA) and the management team of UMass Amherst, both sides have agreed to a set of ground rules, a set of guidelines that determine the conduct by both teams during and outside of bargaining sessions. Click here to view the ground rules.  

After a verbal agreement to the terms of the ground rules, the meeting concluded with both sides signing the agreement, observed by members both in the room and by 18 silent bargaining representatives (SBRs) via Zoom. 

Discussions of ground rules for bargaining are often uneventful, and many bargaining units often decline to adopt a set of ground rules.  However, during the fourth meeting between the two parties, the teams agreed to allow fifty USA SBRs to be present in the meeting via Zoom and ten core bargaining members in person.  Additionally, a deadline for new proposals between the two parties was established, with both parties agreeing to have all new proposals submitted by November 20th, 2024. 

While the total number of SBRs has been capped at 50, the USA Bargaining Team claimed an important victory, as it establishes precedent for a hybrid meeting model that allows for more accessibility for members to observe the proceedings, and core bargaining team members to attend sessions when they would otherwise not be able to due to illness or other concerns.  This also provides the means for both teams to attend the next several meetings without cancelling. 

Both teams anticipate exchanging proposals at the next bargaining meeting on October 9th.  

What is a silent bargaining representative? 

Silent Bargaining Representatives are an emerging strategic piece to labor negotiations across the Commonwealth.  The Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) regularly attributes local K-12 bargaining unit wins to a more democratized union model that features the inclusion of silent bargaining representation from employees who have felt excluded from bargaining processes in the past. 

On September 20th, the USA Bargaining Team hosted a membership meeting where a 7-step plan was laid out for attending members, inviting anyone interested in being a “fly on the wall” to sign up to be an SBR by completing the SBR survey.  The Bargaining Team invites USA members interested in attending to complete the survey, and check out the USA Bargaining Headquarters page for more information.