Editors’ note: This article is in continuation of City on a Hill Press’ coverage published previously. Some sources were interviewed to follow conversation about their strike experience and conversations with administration surrounding the issue.
“I see individuals who are not asking for a yacht or a mansion, they’re asking just to be able to live and support their families,” said Todd Stenhouse, a spokesperson for AFSCME-3299.
It has been over a week since American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 3299 and University Professional and Technical Employees – Communications Workers of America (UPTE-CWA) Local 9119 ended their UC-wide strikes which occurred between Feb. 26 and Feb. 28.
“I know these workers. They’re my friends. They’re my colleagues,” Stenhouse said. “I see the commitment that they bring to the job every day and it represents the highest gold standard of public service.”
Both were Unfair Labor Practices (ULP) strikes, which argue the University of California violated laws established by the California Public Employment Relations Board. Both unions filed ULPs in response to the UC’s “Time, Place and Manner” (TPM) restrictions put in place before the 2024 fall quarter.
Though the strikes focused on TPM policies, members from both unions had broader demands.
“One of the things that has been really frustrating is a lot of job vacancies, a lot of open positions,” said Amelia Cutten, unit representative for UPTE-CWA and a behavioral health counselor at the Student Health Center during the first day of the strike. “In my department specifically, me and my colleagues struggle with burnout and that’s really hard when we’re trying to serve the students … that’s one of the biggest things that we’re seeing.”
While UPTE-CWA maintains their position that workplaces are experiencing staffing shortages and union members are being overworked, the UC states the opposite.
“No. There is no staffing crisis at UC. Data that we’ve already shared with the union shows that the number of UPTE-represented headcount is increasing, separations are declining, and turnover is flattening,” said UCOP communications strategist Heather Hansen in a press release. “For AFSCME, headcount is also increasing, turnover is decreasing and separations are flattening. [AFSCME & UPTE-CWA’s] claim has no truth, and continuing to repeat it does not make it true.”
In an interview with City on a Hill Press, Stenhouse presented data collected by AFSCME in response to UCOP’s press release.
“13,000 people voluntarily left UC in the last three years, that is over a 33 percent turnover. Now, in any business, whether we’re talking about a car wash, a restaurant or the world’s premier academic research and health institution, 33 percent turnover rate is — wait for it — a five alarm fire,” Stenhouse said. “In January of 2023, the chief financial officer went before the UC Board of Regents and said that our staff vacancy rate has tripled since the pandemic.”
AFSCME employment data provided by UCOP corroborates both the UC and Stenhouse’s claims. Turnover rate is determined by dividing the total number of separations over a period of time by an average of the workforce total over a period of time. The year-to-year turnover of AFSCME employees is generally 11 to 12 percent, with the rate decreasing last fiscal year. Using the same formula to determine turnover rate over a three year period, however, yields a rate of 35 percent.
The UC press release also states that the two unions have not been consistent when bargaining.
“AFSCME has not responded to the University’s proposals or counter proposals since May 2024. We have continuously reached out to the unions in an attempt to settle these contracts,” the press release states. “AFSCME and UPTE are talking about UC negotiating, but they need to walk the walk and actually bargain in good faith.”
AFSCME and UPTE-CWA argue the opposite. On Oct. 10 of fall quarter, AFSCME filed a ULP against the University of California for “failing and refusing to bargain in good faith.” AFSCME’s follow-up ULP that led to the Feb. 26-27 strike reiterates that the University of California “refused to bargain,” specifically in regard to changes in TPM policies. UPTE-CWA also includes mentions of the UC’s “bad faith bargaining” on their website.
“We have absolutely offered our own proposals,” Stenhouse said. “If bargaining is a two-way street, it requires good faith on both sides. We’ve certainly brought our good faith.”
UC has not issued a bargaining proposal since Feb. 11, and neither UPTE-CWA nor AFSCME have announced plans for future strike action as of the publication date of this story.
“One strike often [doesn’t] change anything,” Cutten said. “For me and for our members, we’re ready to come back out and strike more if needed, for as long as we need to get what we’ve been asking for.”
