Direct Dealing is an Infringement on Union Rights

Posted: April 25, 2016 in Uncategorized

We promised to print some sources to show that the current college president has, more than once, spoken directly to bargaining unit members, circumventing the union and hoping to influence the faculty to vote “YES” on the ratification of the 2016 contract.

CCFT should have come down hard on this and filed an Unfair Practice Charge against the district for violating the statute.  It’s probably wise to talk to the district the first time it happens; after that, formal action would be warranted.

While it is permissible for management to give faculty negotiations information, it is not permissible for the manager to attempt to influence a collective bargaining agreement, which is what Stork intended to do. Read those emails again yourself.

This is not the first time this kind of issue has occurred.  Abut 12 years ago, then Academic Senate President, Peter Dill, talked directly to then college president, Marie Rosenwasser, telling her that the faculty would take less of a raise that year than the union was bargaining for!  Because this issue is within the scope of bargaining, Rosenwasser should have sent Dill away without discussing the matter. This was a flagrant violation of the direct dealing statute.  Dill was formally censured by the Senate and required to make a public apology. It did not happen again.

Union rights must be preserved.

1.)  AFA Alaska:

“The point here is that you may not intend to give ideas to management by engaging them in conversations regarding negotiations, but it could easily happen. This makes the Negotiating Committee’s job that much harder because management needs to be listening only to us as your legally-sanctioned bargaining representatives. You absolutely must trust in the process and in your Negotiating Committee! Remember that you will have to opportunity to wield your vote to ratify or reject the tentative agreement, but that in the meantime we need you to support the Negotiating Committee by living the phrase: “My Negotiating Committee speaks for me!” http://afaalaska.org/negotiations/negotiations-update-may-14-2013-management-communications-and-direct-dealing

What if a faculty member wished to respond to Gil about what he was saying in his email? That could easily happen and perhaps did.  The line could be crossed.  The statute is in place to protect that from happening.

2.) Union attorney from labor law firm Miller Cohen:

Direct Dealing–

“An employer is permitted to communicate with the employees about negotiations. The sharing of information without coercion and attacks on the bargaining committee are permissible. The issue is: Is the employer dealing with the union through the employees or with the employees through the union? There is illegal direct dealing when this conduct undermines the duty to bargain directly with the union. 18 MPER P 22 (Jackson County)”http://www.millercohen.com/Articles/The-Law-of-Collective-Bargaining-in-Context.shtml

3.)  Postdoctoral Researchers v Regents of University of California PERB Charge

Attached is the link to the PERB charge filed by the employees.  Page 16 gives an accurate description of what direct dealing is and what it isn’t.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xUk0pslkSUwJ:uaw5810.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Unfair_Practice_Charge_20100609.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s