Responses to Harvard emails and anti-union arguments
The Harvard administration continues to send us emails about our upcoming union election. Here we have collected their points and our responses so you can get facts, not fear. Check back at this page when you hear from the administration.
Emails sent to date in Spring 2018
- Columbia on Strike? (Curran, 4/16/2018)
- Impact of student unionization in the sciences (Dr. Alan Aloise, 4/16/2018)
- A Consequential Decision ( Dr.Emma Dench, Interim Dean of GSAS 4/16/2018)
- Join us in voting NO to unionization this Wednesday and Thursday (Against HGSU-UAW, 4/15/2018)
- Out of Pocket (Paul Curran, 4/15/2018)
- Please make sure your students know about this (Faculty, 4/11/2018)
- Student Union Election, April 18 and 19 (Dean John Manning, 4/10/2018)
- Making up Your Mind on Student Unionization? (Dean Garth McCavana, 4/9/2018)
- Student Vote on Unionization: April 18-19 (Dean Michelle A. Williams, 4/9/2018)
- Student Vote on Unionization April 18-19 (Dean Francis J. Doyle III, 4/9/2018)
- Student Vote on Unionization April 18-19 (Dean Mohsen Mostafavi, 4/9/2018)
- Student Vote on Unionization on April 18 & 19 (Dean Douglas W. Elmendorf, 4/9/2018)
- Response to: Four reasons we are voting YES on April 18th and 19th (Against HGSU-UAW, 4/7/2018)
- Student Vote on Unionization April 18-19 (Dean James E. Ryan, 4/6/2018)
- Student Vote on Unionization April 18-19 (Dean George Q. Daley , 4/6/2018)
- Student Vote on Unionization April 18-19 (Dean Jeremy Bloxham, 4/6/2018)
- Student Union Election in Two Weeks (Dr. Alan Garber, 4/5/2018)
- Reasons to consider voting ‘NO’ to HGSU-UAW on April 18th and 19th, 2018 (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/21/2018)
- Required release of your personal information to NLRB and HGSU-UAW (Paul Curran, 2/16/2018)
- Voter eligibility for second HGSU-UAW unionization election (Paul Curran, 2/16/2018)
- Second Student Unionization Election Set for April 18-19 (Paul Curran, 2/5/2018)
Click for Quick Links
Administration’s Emails
The Facts
Petitions for union certification withdrawn and Reelection
While it is disappointing these universities go to Trump to try to stop our nationwide movement, they cannot stop us. Unlike the cases at other universities, Harvard’s appeal did not ask the NLRB to review our status as employees. In Oct. 2016, Harvard signed an election agreement with us indicating that they would bargain in good faith if we won our election.
The NLRB said Harvard’s omission of hundreds of eligible voters tainted the first election
The NLRB ordered a new election based on Harvard’s omission of over 500 eligible voters.
Second election and war of attrition:
The HGSU-UAW lost the first election with the final tally of 1,526 – 1,396 against unionization (Appendix 2). Ignoring a decision by a majority of graduate students, the group called for a second election based on a legal technicality surrounding the voters’ list. How can we trust an organization that does not respect the decision of a majority? What other decisions would they impose on unwilling students in the future? The union supporters are fighting a war of attrition until they win. That’s not standing up for democracy, just an ugly politics as usual.
(Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)
The NLRB ordered a new election based on Harvard’s omission of over 500 eligible voters.
While there are those who are calling this a second election, this is student workers’ first fair chance at a union election.
Biggest flaw in the first election:
The NLRB said Harvard’s omission of hundreds of eligible voters tainted the first election
List confusion and uncertainty
I understand this may be confusing and frustrating. To help with this process, please be sure to submit all necessary paperwork for your appointment as soon as possible; if you have an hourly appointment, please submit your hours regularly. University staff are working to process appointments and timesheets as quickly as possible (Paul Curran, 2/16/2018)
Election will affect you whether or not you vote
(Ryan, 4/6/2018) (Elmendorf, 4/9/2018)
(McCavana, 4/9/2018)
Robust discussion
Bargaining Unit Scope
(Bloxham, 4/6/2018) (Daley, 4/6/2018)
We trust ourselves to negotiate effectively and responsibly with Harvard just like tens of thousands of other student workers across the country
Relationship with Faculty and Admins
(Bloxham, 4/6/2018) (Daley , 4/6/2018) (Elmendorf, 4/9/2018) (Mostafavi, 4/9/2018) (Doyle, 4/9/2018) (Williams, 4/9/2018)
Collective bargaining would be a “significant departure” from the status quo where Harvard can change our conditions without our consent.
Decision Making
Union governance and loss of agency:
UAW academic unions have a strong track record of robust democratic participation; and the UAW nationally encourages democracy
Competing interests among students and tyranny of vocal minority:
Collective bargaining expands our ability to address variant needs of student workers from diverse backgrounds, conditions, departments
Undemocratic authorization cards practice:
Majority of graduate employees signed cards before HGSU-UAW filed for an election.
Dues
Will I have to pay union dues if students vote for the UAW?
The University cannot, by law, pay union dues on behalf of students.
Dues enable fair and effective representation
We will not begin paying dues until after we vote to accept a contract. This means, we must be willing to accept the terms of our work proposed in our contract before paying anything. This is why student worker contracts have raised standards for student workers for decades.
Union dues and penalty for non-payment:
Dues enable fair and effective representation
Dues vs. Wage Increases
Effective net decrease in wages:
NYU graduate employee pay has increased by 189% since unionization in 2000-2001
Collective cost to the community:
Given the size of the potential bargaining unit and a conservative estimate of $500 union dues paid per member, the Harvard graduate student community will be paying the UAW $2.2M annually and $11M over the course of a five-year contract. (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)
Dues ensure effective representation for all
International Students
- The Harvard International Office supports international students and scholars at Harvard. If you have questions about visas, they can help. When the US Federal government introduced travel bans for people from certain countries, this group took immediate action, providing assistance 24 hours a day over the telephone and contacting affected students individually.
- The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinic provides free legal services, including a 24-hour emergency line, to undocumented students and other members of our community.
We can do better by joining together
Healthcare
We know that with collective bargaining we can negotiate improvements for our benefits.
Sexual Harassment
UAW academic unions have taken on sexual harassment with increasing success
The UAW cannot guarantee a greater protection against sexual harassment and racial discrimination:
The HGSU-UAW claims that unionizing with the UAW would provide a greater protection in these areas. However, given that most complaints brought by students are against other students and that the union must represent both victims and perpetrators during grievance proceedings in such cases, the union may make it easier for the perpetrators to get away with their wrongdoings. Having a union is not an automatic guarantee of progress in these areas as evidenced in cases referred in the previous point. (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)
UAW academic unions have taken on sexual harassment with increasing success
Political Voice
Political activism should not be the reason for forming a union:
As with many other unions, the HGSU-UAW lobby for various political causes including increase in federal research funding for sciences, international student rights, and taxes on graduate student tuition reimbursement. Though I applaud the efforts of students involved in these activities, these political advocacy efforts can be made without a union and just as effectively so.(Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)Joining the UAW enables a stronger political voice on issues that matter to us at Harvard
Paid Organizers
Majority of graduate employees signed cards before HGSU-UAW filed for an election.
The NLRB only requires that 30% sign cards to trigger an election. But HGSU-UAW made effort to talk to everyone before filing for an election back in 2016, so that all student workers had an opportunity to learn about and participate in the formative stages if they wanted. As on other UAW campaigns, a small number of graduate students who wanted to devote the time and energy were paid part-time as part of the grassroots effort. The bottom line is that all eligible voters get to make their own democratic choice in the upcoming election. While we encourage student workers to vote yes, it is ultimately an individual choice.
Removing the union / Decertification
Forming a union is a virtually irreversible event:
In order to decertify an existing union, 30% of members must file a petition with National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to call for a “decertification election” whose result decides whether the union can continue as the exclusive bargaining representative. [0] Given the estimated size of 4,400 member bargaining unit, this would be a logistically impossible task for almost any students to undertake without distracting them severely from their studies. In addition, the process can take place only after three years into a contract. Given the irreversibility, the decision to form a union should be made with a great degree of conservatism. The HGSU-UAW has not made a proposal convincing enough to win our votes as I will illustrate in this document. (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)Unionization is not irreversible, but UAW academic workers have maintained support
Decertification elections have not happened in UAW academic units because majorities of workers have continued to affirmatively support and participate their unions. Since 2015, for example, majorities of the entire workforce have voted to approve contracts at the University of Washington, University of California, NYU and University of Connecticut.
Job Stability and Security
Institutional trust and security of contract:
One tactic used by the HGSU-UAW organizers to gain support is to instill a sense of distrust and fear against the University. The group argues that the University leaders can unilaterally decide to make things worse for students and that’s why students need a union and the security of contract. Not only is this view not supported by a historical increase in financial aid over the past two decades (see below), but also this is not a fair assessment of the intentions of the University leaders I have encountered throughout my study. The leaders I have met always had the best interest of students in mind and make their best efforts to balance the various and sometimes competing needs of the diverse student population. Though I am sure that the leaders do not get everything right, I trust them to faithfully fulfill their duties as the stewards of the University. In addition, the above argument does not consider the cost of public distrust, the $11M paid in dues. (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)We trust ourselves to negotiate effectively and responsibly as equals with Harvard
At UConn, an institution with far fewer resources than Harvard, Graduate Assistants reversed years of erosion of health benefits, increases in student fees not covered by tuition waivers, and unpredictable wage increases. They negotiated a nearly 7% annual increase in total compensation (stipend increases plus new fee waivers), as well as dramatically improved health insurance and priceless sexual harassment protections, in their first contract that majority of all GAs voted to approved.
Compromising
Compromises are necessary:
The HGSU-UAW organizers often argue that given the large size of Harvard’s endowment, the University should be able to compensate students more. This ignores the fact that the University operates in a financially constrained environment as explained in the next two points. Increase in wages or benefits will come at the expense of other benefits, rise in tuition for college and various professional programs, or fewer admissions to the University. The last two consequences should be of concern to anyone who cares about the socioeconomic diversity of student population. (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)There is no evidence that collective bargaining has produced the “compromises” Against HGSU-UAW says “will” happen.
In decades of successful collective bargaining between gradate workers and more than 60 universities, no one has shown evidence that unionization has caused fewer admissions, elimination of programs, or tuition increases. In fact, some evidence shows the opposite, such as at UC where the UAW Local 2865 unit that was 9,000 in 1999 when the union was certified has now grown to 17,000.
Endowment
History of financial aid and importance of Harvard’s endowment:
Less than 20 years ago, many PhD programs at Harvard required students to pay tuition and fees, and did not have the financial means to provide free health insurance and other benefits that students today enjoy as part of their financial aid package. The former students had to pay out of pocket or borrow loans for various expenses. The large increase in aid has become possible due to the increase in Harvard’s endowment, of which the graduate student population is one of the primary beneficiaries. The endowment hence should be considered as a precious common good that each generation of the University community should use wisely and preserve for the benefits of the future generations. We must not view the endowment as a free resource from which we should take as much as we can. (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)Facts about the endowment:
A common misconception is that the endowment is like a checking account and Harvard can use its funds however it pleases. In reality, over 80% of the endowment is restricted, meaning various funds that constitute the endowment can only be used for the specific purposes specified by donors. If used outside the specified purposes, the donors can take back their money. In addition, it is only the return on the investment of the funds that can be generally used, not the principal. (Against HGSU-UAW, 3/31/2018)Collective bargaining enables us to reach fairest balance between available resources and the value of the vital work we perform at Harvard
With a union, we will sit across the table from the admins and negotiate over these changes, while taking into consideration details such as the performance of the endowment. Having a union simply gives us a direct voice in these decisions, which has led to improvements at many other universities across the country with similar fluctuating constraints.
Bargaining can also enable us to ensure that Harvard does not irrationally impose limits in places where it is unnecessary. For example, last year when Harvard cut the PhD worker pay increase in half due to endowment performance, it applied the lower pay increase even to STEM RAs whose funding has no connection to the endowment. At UW, by contrast, the contract ensures the flexibility for academic units with sufficient grant funding to increase pay as much as they want – the “departmental increase” – in order to remain competitive.