UAW Research – UW Negotiations Recap for April 30, 2026
This recap details the sixth session for the renewal of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the University of Washington and UAW Research.
Tentative Agreements
The parties tentatively agreed to maintain current contract language in the following articles:
- Article 8: Employment
Union Initial Proposals
Article 18: Layoff, Seniority, Rehire
The Union proposed new language to be included in the current Union layoff notification that would require the Employer to provide written justification for the elimination of a position resulting in layoffs including, a specific reason for the elimination, documentation demonstrating that no reasonable alternative exists, an invitation to opt into the rehire list, and a copy of Article 18. The Union also proposed to remove the language regarding working in the same job profile for how layoffs are determined.
With respect to the rehire list, the Union proposed to extend the amount of time that a laid-off employee is placed on the rehire list from twelve (12) to eighteen (18) months, and that employees on the rehire list would no longer be offered positions limited to only the same job profile form which they were laid off and instead would be offered any funded vacant position. The Union also proposed to require the Employer to notify all employees on the rehire list of funded, vacant bargaining unit positions that it intends to fill in the employee’s laid-off job profile level, one level above, or one level below, within three (3) business days of the requisition being submitted. Under this proposal, employees on the rehire list would be able to specify requirements for roles to be offered to them and roles that don’t meet the stated requirements of the employee, would not be offered. The Union also proposed that employees would be able to self-select into consideration by responding within three (3) business days and that lack of response would not be considered a decline of a position. For cases in which employees elect to be on the rehire list, the Union proposed that employees would be able to request to be placed on hold and that such time on hold would not extend the eighteen (18) month eligibility period. For cases in which employees self-select, the Union proposed new language that would require Campus Recruitment to review the employee’s resume against the posted requirements and any finding that an employee doesn’t meet requirements would be required to be documented in writing with specific reasons and sent to the employee and the Union. With respect to removal from the rehire list, the Union proposed to increase the amount of total offers of placement from the rehire list before an employee is removed from the rehire list from two (2) to five (5) offers.
The Union also proposed new language that would require the hiring department’s HR to schedule and attend an informational meeting upon referral for a position with the purpose of the employee learning about position responsibilities, performance expectations, starting salary, start date, and for the Employer to learn about the employee’s background and prior experience. The proposal states that after this meeting, an employee may identify a specific gap between their skills and the position requirements or salary and could rescind the rehire self-selection. The Union further proposed that a hiring department may only request to rescind the position if there is a documented gap in skill, knowledge, and abilities. Under this proposal, both parties would have three (3) business days to make a decision and notify Campus Recruitment.
The Union proposed new language with around involuntary permanent FTE reductions that would require the order of employees to have their FTE reduced to be equivalent to the process the Union outlined in section 18.1 of this Article (see first paragraph of this section). Additionally, the Union proposed to increase the notice period from thirty (30) days to forty-five (45) days for cases in which employees have their FTE permanently reduced. The Union proposed to change the threshold for when an employee is able to stay in their position and/or go on the rehire list from a position being reduced by at least 0.5 FTE to positions being reduced below 0.5 FTE and proposed that employees have forty-five (45) days, increased from three (3) working days, to exercise their option to go on the rehire list and/or stay in the reduced position.
The Union also proposed new language around temporary involuntary FTE reductions stating that time spent on a temporary FTE reduction would not constitute a break in service for purposes of seniority and that employees would be able to log 8 hours per month to maintain insurance benefits. Employees on a temporary FTE reduction to zero (0) would be allowed to use accrued vacation time off, compensatory time, or holiday credit during the reduction period, according to the proposal.
For employees in Washington State, the Union proposed to require the Employer to certify an employee whose FTE is involuntarily temporarily reduced to be certified for standby status with the WA Employment Security Department within five (5) business days of the reduction’s effective date.
Finally, the Union proposed to remove language stating that this Article does not apply to emergency layoffs due to acts of nature, financial emergencies, suspension of operations, or furloughs.
Employer Initial Proposals
Article 4: Classification and Reclassification
The Employer proposed to replace references to job classifications with “job profile” throughout this Article. The Employer also proposed to move the language of MOU: Position Review Appeal Process into this Article but proposed a change in language around hearing officer fees, stating that hearing officer fees and expenses would be paid by the moving party.
Article 13: Hiring, Promotions, and Transfers
The Employer proposed to replace references to job classifications with “job profile” throughout this Article. With respect to the definitions in this Article, the Employer proposed replacing references to salary range minimums with salary range maximums. The Employer also proposed including the definition of a lateral change, which would be defined as movement of an employee to a position in a different job profile which has the same salary range maximum as the employee’s current job profile.
The Employer proposed to strike the following out-of-date MOUs:
- MOU: Salary Range Minimums
- MOU: Salary Adjustment
- MOU: RCoCo Salary Range Minimums
- MOU: Position Review Appeal Process
Next Steps
The next UAW Research and UW bargaining session is scheduled for Thursday May 7 and will be held in-person at the UDSB Gateway building.