UAW 2865: Introduction to HEERA

As students of the University of California, the degrees we work for constitute the final product of our efforts during graduate school. A combination of our individual intellectual efforts, interactions with faculty and students, and the University’s resources and organizational structure all combine towards this end. We benefit from our perseverance through graduate school and its difficulties, and the purpose of the University system is to maximize the value of our education as a reward for the efforts we exert. There are differing opinions as to what qualities signify the optimal balance of rights and privilege in this relationship. Unfortunately, the dominant factors impacting the distribution of benefits within the University system – as a collection of academics striving to achieve intellectual excellence – are primarily political in nature. Given this inconvenient truth, the voices which carry the most weight often derive from the influence of those with the most power, and those with the most power tend to exercise their influence towards their own personal interests.

It’s both sensible and reasonable to associate the purpose of founding a university with the production of high caliber students. There are several channels by which we graduate students financially interact with the formal University infrastructure. California’s investment in high quality education comes in the form of state and private funding for facilities and employees to enable effective teaching and research. We also pay tuition and fees to continue facilitating improvement of resources dedicated towards maintaining the quality of our education. As student employees, our wages help us manage the high costs of living and represent the monetary compensation for time spent working for the University. This time is coincident with the time spent towards our academic goals, and the extent to which this arrangement is mutually beneficial is the central concern in seeking a contract which optimally balances the needs and wants of both parties. 

UAW 2865 is our graduate student union representing approximately 15,000 student workers across nine UC campuses. In January 2018, our union begins the next iteration of contract negotiation with the University. The current contract expires in June 2018. After that point, we students become susceptible to losing rights and protections from potential abuses and unfair practices by the University. These protections include generic guarantees of settling wage disputes, hours, but also extend to protect the rapidly fading rights of our fellow immigrant community. Of particular importance in this new round of negotiation is the addition of union representation and protection for GSRs. As graduate student researchers, one of the primary motivations for pursuing higher education is the specialized training and mentorship we receive as overseen by University faculty. Until now, these personal relationships are outside the scope of union protection; malpractice on the part of faculty in fulfilling their mentorship duties is effectively seen as acceptable by the University and relegated, with impunity, to happenstance. Said differently, the main product of our enrollment and participation in the University is completely contained within the domain where the University can maximally exploit our efforts for its own gains. The negotiations this coming year are the first attempt of defining a concept of fairness between research students and their research faculty advisors.
There is no stronger position of strength than a collective voice and, especially considering the nature of our concerns, discussion and consensus among our entire graduate student body is the most effective way of drawing the University’s attention. Undoubtedly, many of you have felt inconvenienced or cheated by some aspect of your experience as students. While achieving a graduate degree should be challenging, it should also be free of those difficulties which stem directly from the exploitative actions of those who disproportionately benefit from our work. The University’s faculty and its industry affiliates unilaterally gain from our efforts in graduate school and, particularly in the STEM fields, also reap the next generation of ideas and inventions fueling the dramatic advances in modern technology. As students, our ideas and work should be ours. In negotiating a new contract with the University, it is within our rights to demand that the protection of our intellectual pursuits is not only owed to us for our own welfare, education, and benefit, but also favorable to the fulfillment of the University’s mission.

Workers have historically benefitted from the protection of labor unions to prevent both exploitation and unfair working conditions and to ensure that the conditions of their employment and compensations received are appropriate. As a public university, any negotiations between the student body and “the University” are ultimately constrained by the decisions and incentives of the UC Regents and their affiliates. The Regents are not academics. They stand to gain from  the University’s positive image as an abstracted structure, necessarily at the expense of its academic populace. The relationship between employer and employee is mediated by the State of California through the Public Education Relations Board. PERB oversees the UC Regents’ management of University proceedings and, under their supervision, the Regents hold highest authority in administering University matters.

Procedures for handling disagreements between the student body and UC are outlined in State legislation passed specifically for this purpose. The relevant literature is governed and implemented by PERB and was passed in 1978 under the acronym HEERA. The interaction between these three entities – the formal University structure, the public relations board, and the working student body – has been exercised to increase student welfare through the periodic negotiation of union contracts and the terms therein. Faculty, postdocs, and staff have their own separate union relationships with the University structure. When matters of formal disagreement transcend the typical procedures of grievance handling outlined in HEERA and the current UAW contract, escalating towards the negotiation of new terms under legal jurisdiction becomes the most appropriate means of resolution. In the case of a public university this means the State legal system, and under the authority of serving the general public, decides what justifies a reasonable collective grievance and evaluates any proposed resolutions. That is, if we can show that we are being treated unfairly, the courts can respect our position; their ruling in our favor would overturn the University’s position and settle the matter of dispute. 

Absent this final mechanism of resolution, the negotiation process carries several points with which the student body can collectively object to the conditions of our labor. Most powerful of these is the capacity to refuse participation by enacting our right to strike. In so doing, we can force the University, by the threat of negative publicity and loss of function, to take our positions and grievances seriously. As of yet, several striking positions have been taken against UC with varying but consistent degrees of success. It is important to be aware that the right to exercise this option is guaranteed to you by law; we are all protected from any retribution in asserting our collective position as students at the right time.

Invoking such a dramatic gesture of dissent should be seen as a last resort, but being aware of its effectiveness and necessity is worth considering early in the negotiation process. The University and its Regents stand to benefit from a weak collective position of its students. They have previously cited low participation as a reason for minimizing the importance of student rights. By familiarizing ourselves with the actualities of the University’s formal structure, as specified in HEERA and upheld by PERB, we can identify those areas which they have failed to fulfill their formal mission statements. The next step is to counteract this narrative by pooling together our common perspective, exposing the gaps in the University’s execution of its mission, and highlighting the injustices which maximally and negatively impact our experience. 

It is within our rights to demand better wages. 

It is within our rights to expect decent health insurance, protections for our immigrant colleagues, respect for the minorities among us, and acknowledgement of our effort. 

It is within our rights to insist that our perspective as students is just as important as that of the University’s staff, faculty, and overarching administrative teams. 

In adopting a collective position, we can together help form a more perfect university experience where interactions between the student body and the faculty responsible for their intellectual development can be best transacted.