AFSCME claim: UC is bargaining in bad faith.

Facts:

  • UC has offered to meet the majority of AFSCME’s key demands in an effort to reach a settlement.
  • UC has proposed a 27% wage increase over four years — similar to what UC nurses agreed to.
  • UC has offered to freeze health care rates in Kaiser and HealthNet (paybands 1 and 2).
  • UC has agreed to AFSCME’s demand for the same pension and retiree health formula as CNA.
  • UC has proposed improved terms on layoffs and outsourcing to protect employee jobs.
  • AFSCME rejected UC’s offers and continues to demand more than what any other UC employee receives, such as an unprecedented 30% pay raise over 3.5 years and a cap on health care rates for its highest paid members that no other union is receiving.

AFSCME claim: UC’s 2013 implementation of pay and benefits was illegal.

Facts:

  • UC’s implementation of a 3.5% wage increase, affordable health care, and excellent retirement benefits in July 2013 was both legal and appropriate.
  • After more than a year of good faith bargaining including state mediation and fact-finding, UC was entirely within its legal rights to give employees pay increases and quality benefits without further delay.

AFSCME claim: AFSCME is calling for an unfair labor practice strike vote because UC has engaged in illegal tactics and regressive bargaining.

Facts:

  • We don’t agree with AFSCME’s claim that its strike threat is based on bad faith bargaining.
  • We believe the union’s real objective in threatening another strike is to try to win even higher pay increases and greater job protections than what UC has already offered, along with other provisions that could hamper the medical centers’ flexibility to deliver quality patient care effectively and efficiently.
  • UC has been very responsive to the union’s demands, offering very fair and reasonable proposals.
  • It is time for AFSCME to compromise and end this cycle of conflict.

AFSCME claim: UC’s proposal for “emergency layoff powers” would enable hospital administrators to make unlimited layoffs

  • AFSCME’s characterization of UC’s emergency call-off proposal as “layoffs” is grossly misleading.  Call offs are not terminations.
  • Emergency call offs, which are common practice in hospitals, are temporary reductions or cancellations of work assignments when patient levels drops unexpectedly and the hospital has more staff than is needed. They are also used when a clinic is closed due to a physician’s absence.
  • When call offs happen, employees may volunteer to have a day off and they may use some of their accrued compensatory or vacation time. These employees return to work after the emergency call off is finished.
  • UC needs the flexibility to adjust staffing on a day(s) when the patient count drops. As always, the medical centers will ensure appropriate staffing levels to provide quality patient care.

 

It’s time to end the conflict. Employees deserve a contract.