Our Bargaining Committee and Postdoc observers attended our first in person bargaining session yesterday.
Yesterday, our Bargaining Committee had our third negotiation session with the Einstein administration.
At the session, the administration’s bargaining team responded to 7 of the 19 articles we proposed in our previous bargaining meetings. They briefly presented counter proposals on the following articles: Health and Safety, Severability, Training, Union-Management Committee, and Grievance and Arbitration. Einstein’s team rejected our proposals on Successorship and Academic Freedom.
During the session, we went through each of their proposals section by section asking about their changes. On Health and Safety, the administration’s team removed most of our proposal’s language, including on basic rights to safe buildings, workspaces, and materials that other postdocs around the country have in their contracts. When asked why, they said they were concerned that our proposal was vague, and claimed that our proposal might require them to go “above and beyond” existing laws they are already obligated to follow. We responded that our objective is to have the explicit protections against unsafe work environments reflected in our contract, just like thousands of other unionized postdocs already have.
On Grievance and Arbitration, we asked the administration’s team why they had removed a section encouraging an informal step to resolving complaints. They responded that, while they aren’t suggesting informal conversations can’t take place, that they are a “waste of time”. We explained that we think being able to resolve problems quickly and informally is in the interest of both postdocs and the administration. We also expressed disappointment that their counter proposal would shorten the amount of time a postdoc has to file a complaint and extend the amount of time the administration has to respond. Under Einstein’s proposal, postdocs would have to wait nearly 3 months before being able to bring a complaint before a neutral third-party arbitrator, nearly twice as long as postdocs at Sinai and Columbia.
On Successorship, the administration’s team rejected our proposal, which would ensure our contract remains in effect if Einstein is sold, despite the fact that Montefiore bought the College less than ten years ago. On Academic Freedom, they rejected our entire article, claiming that it is overly broad. We explained that we are not seeking to protect postdocs’ freedom of expression, not trying to override academic norms.
This was our first in person bargaining session and our first time receiving counter proposals from the administration. While we were disappointed to receive only 5 counter proposals and no response to our Recognition article at this session, we look forward to making more progress with longer sessions in the near future. You can read a summary of proposals passed during our session below and the full text of the proposals using our online bargaining tracker.
Finally, we would like to thank the postdoc observers who attended our session yesterday! We could really feel the support behind us with all of our colleagues filling the room.
Please don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions or thoughts,
Silvia C. Hernandez, Medicine – Cardiology
Member of ERU-UAW Bargaining Committee