{"id":8411,"date":"2024-08-28T10:43:45","date_gmt":"2024-08-28T17:43:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hr.uw.edu\/labor\/?p=8411"},"modified":"2024-08-28T10:43:45","modified_gmt":"2024-08-28T17:43:45","slug":"wfse-uw-negotiations-recap-for-tuesday-august-27-2024","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/v1cypwr8vx2.c.updraftclone.com\/labor\/2024\/08\/28\/wfse-uw-negotiations-recap-for-tuesday-august-27-2024","title":{"rendered":"WFSE \u2013 UW Negotiations Recap for Tuesday, August 27, 2024"},"content":{"rendered":"

Background<\/strong>
\nThis recap details the seventh virtual session for the renewal of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the University of Washington and WFSE. Recaps are published online on the UW Labor Relations website<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Tentative Agreements<\/strong><\/p>\n

The parties tentatively agreed to the following:<\/p>\n

Article 40 \u2013 Mandatory Subject<\/strong>
\nThe parties agreed to add language that would clarify release time when release requests involve multiple departments. The parties agreed that when a release request involves more than two departments or units, the Employer would approve paid release time for up to six employee representatives who were scheduled to work during the time meetings or negotiations were being conducted provided this absence would not interfere with operation needs.<\/p>\n

Article 46 \u2013 Health Care Benefits Amounts<\/strong>
\nThe parties agreed to include updates on this provision as agreed to at the state table.<\/p>\n

Article 60 \u2013 Nonpermanent and Intermittent Employees<\/strong>
\nThe parties agreed on housekeeping edits as well as adding language to clarify when an employee would be assigned their progression start date. Additionally, the parties agreed to include language in this provision that would allow readers of this article to know how employee recruitment and retention step increases, work out of class, and career enhancement\/growth program would apply to nonpermanent and intermittent employees.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

WFSE Counter Proposals<\/strong><\/p>\n

Article 6 \u2013 Grievance Procedure<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union could not accept the language about both parties would begin the arbitration scheduling process and provide availability to the arbitrator within thirty calendar days of the union advancing the grievance to arbitration. The Union could also not agree to the Employer\u2019s proposal that in the cases of mediation and\/or arbitration hearings, release requests would be copied to UW Labor Relations and would require supervisor approval.<\/p>\n

Article 7 \u2013 Employee Rights<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union maintained allowing four days\u2019 notice to secure representation and weekends and holidays would not count towards those four days. However, the Union was in agreement to the Employer\u2019s language that when UW Labor Relations was scheduling a virtual meeting, it would provide the Union with a calendar invite and a link to meet virtually.<\/p>\n

Article 9 \u2013 Hours of Work and Work Schedules<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union countered that the provisions in 9.3 would only be waived if they are at least equal to or more favorable than those outlined in any statutes and regulations relating to rest and meal breaks. Additionally, the Union countered that in the case where an employee\u2019s unpaid meal period was interrupted by work duties, the employee would be paid for the entire meal period and would be allowed to take their full thirty minutes break following the interruption. Finally, the Union reasserted than employees could request alternative work schedules based upon their personal and\/or family needs and such requests may be approved by the Employer.<\/p>\n

Article 10 \u2013 Overtime<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union proposed to reassert their June 18 proposal.<\/p>\n

Article 32 \u2013 Uniforms and Special Clothing<\/strong>
\nSafety Boot Reimbursement<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union countered to state that every WFSE represented employee would qualify under this reimbursement. Also in response, the Union proposed to reduce their ask on reimbursement from $250 per year to $225 per year.
\nTools and Equipment<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union proposed that when requested, staff would be provided with protective gloves (as an example: puncture resistant, cotton gloves) and safety glasses when required to safely perform their work.
\nVests<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union maintained that Trades Staff would be provided with one load bearing utility belt\/vest and Harborview Security Officers would be provided with one external load bearing vest.
\nPrescription Safety Glasses<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union maintained that the Employer would reimburse employees up to $200 for the purchase of prescription safety glasses.<\/p>\n

Article 42 \u2013 Union Activities, Rights, and Stewards<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union could not agree that the union steward, if visiting a location other than their own work site, would notify local management prior to their visit and would not interrupt the normal operations.
\nNew Steward Training<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union maintained their strike on the language that no steward would attend as a second steward more than once.
\nUse of State Facilities, Resources, Equipment<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union maintained that use of state owned\/operated equipment for communication would not be used for disciplinary purposes.
\nInformation Requests<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union only agreed to a portion of the statement; all requests for information regarding the bargaining unit by the Union would be submitted in writing to the Office of Labor Relations.<\/p>\n

Article 43 \u2013 Joint Union\/Management Committees<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union reduced the number of members requested to participate in departmental level joint union\/management meetings from six to five.<\/p>\n

Article 61 \u2013 Diversity and Inclusion<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union maintained their proposal from August 22.<\/p>\n

Side Letter G \u2013 Actual Time Reporting<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Employer\u2019s proposal, the Union proposed including that the Union may have up to twelve members serve as representatives during actual time reporting bargaining process, not including the two local presidents.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

UW Initial Proposals<\/strong><\/p>\n

Article 45 \u2013 Compensation, Wages, and Other Pay Provisions<\/strong>
\n45.1<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed to increase salary ranges by 1% in year 1 of the agreement and by an additional 1% in year 2 of the agreement.
\nAnnual Salary Adjustment<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed updating the language regarding annual salary adjustments.
\nPromotions\/Reallocation\/Reversion<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed including language to describe how progression start dates are assigned.
\nDownward Allocation Compensation<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed adding language to clarify that progression start dates would remain unchanged if an employee\u2019s position is reclassified to an existing class with a lower salary range.
\nCall Back Pay<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed including language to clarify that call back pay is applied when an employee is required to physically return to work. Additionally, the Employer proposed including descriptions that would clarify instances where callback pay would not be applicable.
\nLate Payroll Checks<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed including language that would mean the Employer would issue a paper check or electronic deposit as soon as possible in the case of late payroll checks.
\nField Training Officer<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed housekeeping edits to this section of the provision.
\nTrades License Premium<\/strong>
\nThe Employer proposed including the MOU \u2013 Trades License Premium into the body of Article 45 as a new section.<\/p>\n

UW Counter Proposals<\/strong><\/p>\n

Article 18 \u2013 Sick Time Off<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer reasserted language that in the cases where an employee had used all accrued sick time off, the employee may be allowed to use accrued vacation time off and\/or compensatory time off for sick time off purposes when approved in advance or authorized by supervisor.<\/p>\n

Article 28 \u2013 Inclement Weather and Suspended Operations<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer maintained makeup time was too administratively burdensome and that employees would be able to use sick time off in suspended operations situations.<\/p>\n

Article 44 \u2013 Classification and Reclassification<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s concerns, the Employer included language that would clarify how progression start dates are assigned to employees. This language would be used again for consistency in Articles 45 and 60.<\/p>\n

Article 56 \u2013 Union Membership Dues Deduction, and Status Reports<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer agreed to housekeeping language changes and to include differentials in roster reports. However, the Employer could not agree to including vacancy reports but did offer to provide lists of open positions on UW Hires.<\/p>\n

Article 61 \u2013 Diversity and Inclusion<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer proposed that participants in the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion workgroup could be released with pay to attend provided the absence would not interfere with business operations.<\/p>\n

Appendix VI \u2013 Contracting Out Form<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer could not agree to include Attachment B or the checkbox for contacting all affected shops. However, the Employer did agree to the rest of the language as proposed by the Union previously.<\/p>\n

Side Letter E \u2013 HMC Hospital Security Officers Compensatory Time<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer proposed to keep, and rollover, this provision.<\/p>\n

MOU \u2013 Refrigeration Mechanic, Refrigeration Mechanic Lead and FOMS Trades License Class and Exam<\/strong>
\nIn response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer proposed to allow this MOU to expire.<\/p>\n

On the following provisions, in response to the Union\u2019s proposal, the Employer reasserted current contract language:<\/p>\n