Author 3/10/13 8:10 PM

Dear Members of Student-Worker Solidarity: I am writing to you in response to your letter of March 2, 2013 to President Bollinger. We share your view that it is time for the parties to get back to the underlying contract negotiations. As you know, the University has been negotiating stonewalling a new contract with Local 100 since April 2012. There has been no response to the proposal made by the University to the Local’s negotiating team approximately three weeks ago, and negotiations have seemingly come to a halt. This is in contrast to our experience over the last decade, as the University and its unionized workers have successfully worked through challenging negotiations to reach mutually acceptable collective bargaining agreements. We are disappointed by the absence of engaged serious negotiations by Local 100 a full year after the collective bargaining agreement expired (itself an unprecedented occurrence in the last decade at Columbia). The University stands ready to negotiate an agreement, and a federal mediator stands ready to help facilitate that process. The continuing misinformation circulating about the most recent collective bargaining agreement that governs Local 100 workers at Faculty House is unfortunate. To clarify the record: (1) The University’s current proposal includes lump sum payments, a wage increase, other improvements, and most importantly continued health insurance paid in full for all of the employees, part-time and full-time. (2) Service Charge: The claim that Faculty House collects and keeps 'service charges' or gratuities that belong to the Local 100 employees, and that catering clients believe are going to the staff, is false. The catering service contracts make it explicitly clear that the service charge is not a gratuity and is meant to defray the overhead costs of running Faculty House. (3) Summer Unemployment: New York State law states that certain categories of workers, which include Faculty House employees, are not eligible for unemployment insurance benefits. For that reason, the University pays a summer unemployment stipend for the period of summer-time layoffs. (4) Utilization of Part-Time Workers: The Union has also claimed that the University is not responsive to its concerns about the hours worked by part-time employees. In fact, the University has made multiple proposals to address the concerns that some of the parttime employees work additional hours. Let me turn to the reasons why only employees subject to the collective bargaining agreement, their professional negotiators, and the University are present during negotiating sessions. This practice, which has characterized prior collective bargaining negotiations for at least a decade, continues because the presence of outside observers makes reaching an agreement much harder. In this vein, we agree with your sentiment that it is time for the parties to negotiate an agreement. Sincerely, Scott J. Wright Vice President, Student Services cc: Lee C. Bollinger, President

Comment: SWS’s  letter  was  addressed  to   President  Bollinger;  Scott  Wright  is  neither   President  Bollinger  nor  from  his  office.  

Author 3/10/13 8:07 PM
Comment: Columbia  has  turned  down  four   negotiating  dates  this  week.    

Author 3/10/13 8:03 PM
Comment: Sheila  Garvey  has  repeatedly  told  the   workers  that  she  has  nothing  to  offer  them.  This   constitutes  an  unfair  labor  practice  and  is   currently  being  challenged  in  court.  

Author 3/10/13 7:54 PM
Comment: This  is  untrue.  See  UAW  2110   negotiations  last  Spring.  

Author 3/10/13 6:39 PM
Comment: The  integrity  of  the  labor   negotiations  has  been  compromised  by  the   administration’s  blatantly  racist  comments  at  the   negotiating  table.    They  have  requested   unprofessional  off-­‐the-­‐record  negotiations,  which   they  presented  as  “informal  meetings”  via  email.    

Author 3/10/13 8:06 PM
Comment: The  workers  receive  $200/yr  to   compensate  for  the  22%  service  charge.  This   “lump  sum”  pales  in  comparison  to  the  profit   reaped  from  the  service  charge:  Faculty  House   made  enough  money  from  tips  charged  on  Bat-­‐ Mitzvahs/Weddings  this  year  to  pay  each  worker   $2,000.  

Author 3/10/13 7:58 PM
Comment: There  has  been  no  formal  proposal   containing  a  wage  increase  in  contract   negotiations.  

Author 3/10/13 7:08 PM
Comment: The  workers’  health  care  runs  out  on   March  31st,  and  the  administration  has  taken  no   steps  to  address  this  grievance  in  negotiations.  

Author 3/10/13 7:57 PM
Comment: In  the  voucher  given  to  the  customer,   the  terms  of  "tip"  and  "service  charge"  are  used   interchangeably  and  inconsistently.  The  language   of  the  customer  receipt  does  not  clearly  state  that   the  22%  service  charge  does  not  go  to  the   workers.  

Author 3/10/13 7:11 PM
Comment: This  stipend  is  $65/week,  which  is   not  a  living  wage.  This  sum  was  calculated  based   on  the  minimum  wage  in  1983,  which  was  $3.35.   This  sum  has  not  been  adjusted  since.  

Author 3/10/13 8:02 PM
Comment: This  demand  has  been  misconstrued.   80  hrs/wk  does  not  constitute  a  part-­‐time   classification;  these  workers  must  be  classified  as   full-­‐time  workers  and  receive  full-­‐time  benefits.  

Author 3/10/13 8:01 PM
Comment: Prior  to  student  presence  no   progress  was  achieved  for  10  months.  The  union   has  a  legal  right  to  choose  their  bargaining  unit   however  they  see  fit.  Columbia  has  choosen  to   bring  in  an  outside  labor  constultant  and  the   union  has  choosen  to  bring  in  students.  There  is  a   legal  presendent  for  students  to  be  present  in   labor  negotiations  as  seen  in  a  recent  case  at   Sarah  Lawrence  College.    

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful