Menu
- About
- What We Do
- Initiatives
- Research
- News
- Get In Touch
Back to Top Nav
Back to Top Nav
Back to Top Nav
Dear Guarini community,
I write to update you on our bargaining session with GOLD-UE on June 4.
We began this session by revisiting how a package proposal works and clarifying that GOLD-UE's rejection of Dartmouth's package proposal on May 30 reverted Dartmouth's proposals back to their original status. Package proposals are an all or nothing mechanism designed to advance negotiations. If rejected, the offers within the package revert to their original status.
In our previous session on May 30, Dartmouth presented a package proposal that included increasing the one-time stipend for students on Time Away for Medical Reasons (TAMR), raising the childcare fund by $50,000, and agreeing to a 3-year contract. This package proposal was contingent on GOLD-UE accepting Dartmouth's proposals on the remaining articles, including compensation and retirement.
When GOLD-UE rejected our May 30 package, the one-time stipend for students on TAMR, the childcare fund amount, and Dartmouth's agreement to a three-year contract reverted to their previous states.
At the June 4 session, instead of taking the proposed increases off the table, Dartmouth unveiled a revised package proposal reasserting these increases. Specifically, Dartmouth again offered:
Dartmouth elected to reassert these proposals, instead of reverting to its prior proposals in the interest of reaching an agreement by GOLD-UE's internal end of spring term deadline for completion of negotiations. At this session, the parties also discussed the history of the parties' proposals and their positions that continue to be points of disagreement.
In prior sessions, Dartmouth proposed two funds – one for students and one for eligible dependents – to cover medical costs, including premium payments for medical insurance or other medical-related expenses. In response to GOLD-UE's proposal that Dartmouth also cover 100% of the dependent health insurance premium for the Dartmouth Student Group Health Insurance Program (DSGHP), Dartmouth countered with a proposal that it pay 25% of this premium. GOLD-UE has subsequently made no further movement on this proposal. The parties discussed this lack of movement, and Dartmouth noted the fund for eligible dependents' medical costs could be used to pay for the dependent health insurance premium.
In the June 4 package proposal, Dartmouth re-proposed its offer to cover 25% of the dependent premium.
The parties also discussed the origin of the dental benefit for students. In May, after more than a year of careful review of available dental plans and providers, Dartmouth selected a dental plan for all students, including graduate students. Once the contract with the vendor was finalized, Dartmouth was pleased to announce this decision, which was made well before contract negotiations began, to GOLD-UE. The cost of the dental plan for graduate students is covered at 100% by Dartmouth through its payment of the DGSHP premium.
Discussions about paid medical leave have been a major focus of our bargaining sessions. Last year, Dartmouth introduced a new Time Away for Medical Reasons (TAMR) policy, which includes up to four terms of continued healthcare coverage for graduate students.
While GOLD-UE has recognized the benefits of the TAMR policy, they have proposed that Dartmouth also pay 60% of the current stipend for up to three months for students on medical leave. In doing so, they have downplayed the significance of continued health insurance coverage.
GOLD-UE argues that the combined cost of continuing to pay health insurance premiums in addition to paying 60% of the current stipend for up to three months is less than the cost of the short-term disability (STD) benefits offered to staff. However, it is important to note that short-term disability benefits for staff are funded through the 35% fringe rate charged to program budgets. STD benefits are not included in any other graduate student bargaining agreements.
In the June 4 package proposal, Dartmouth again offered to agree to a 3-year agreement, which would return the parties to the bargaining table sooner than the 4-year agreement Dartmouth originally proposed. This was a concern GOLD-UE expressed.
Dartmouth has made significant proposals to address childcare concerns raised by GOLD-UE, including increasing the Guarini childcare stipend by $2,000 per child. This proposal was reiterated in Dartmouth's June 4 package. Additionally, Dartmouth agreed to include GOLD-UE's suggested language ensuring that requests for the Guarini Childcare subsidy will not be unreasonably denied.
Initially, Dartmouth proposed a childcare support fund of $75,000 for the first year. In subsequent bargaining sessions, this amount was more than doubled. At the May 30 session, Dartmouth offered $200,000 for the fund, a proposal which was reaffirmed at the June 4 session. This fund is intended to cover costs associated with caring for dependent children, including those incurred by new parents.
GOLD-UE has proposed that Dartmouth cover 100% of childcare costs for its members. Dartmouth has expressed willingness to further discuss this fund and explore how it could be allocated to best assist graduate students with dependent children.
To address childcare access, a Dartmouth team has been working towards a solution for our entire community. This is a phased and multiple year process. Dartmouth shared this information with GOLD-UE and that is why it is unable to agree to a one-year deadline for expanding childcare capacity for GOLD-UE members . As part of this package, Dartmouth agreed to provide more frequent updates to GOLD-UE by agreeing to GOLD-UE's proposal of biannual updates on progress.
The parties also spent a significant part of their discussion on the following provisions still under negotiation.
As part of its package proposal, Dartmouth again offered to agree to the Union's proposal for a "closed shop", solely in the interest of reaching an agreement. In a closed shop, graduate students would be required to join the union and pay dues (or an agency fee) as a condition of employment. Dartmouth's position remains that this provision should provide an "open shop," leaving graduate students free to decide whether they want to join the union and pay membership dues and fees. However, the Union negotiators have made clear a closed shop is very important to the Union.
Dartmouth continues to propose a Management Rights clause that protects the institution's and faculty's academic freedom, discretion, judgment, and decision-making authority.
Dartmouth also continues to propose a No Strike-No Lockout article under which GOLD-UE members would not be permitted to engage in any strike or work slowdown during the contract, and Dartmouth would not be permitted to lockout GOLD-UE members from labs and classrooms or otherwise prevent them from working. Strikes and lockouts are economic tools unions and employers can use to gain leverage at the bargaining table.
The purpose of this article is to encourage the parties to resolve their differences through the contractual grievance and arbitration procedure, on which the parties previously reached a tentative agreement. Such articles are common in collective bargaining agreements, including for two other bargaining units at Dartmouth. GOLD-UE continues to propose it be permitted to engage in certain types of strikes even while a contact is in effect.
Dartmouth's package also included its most recent proposals for each of the following Articles:
Dartmouth explained that the package proposal is offered in exchange for GOLD-UE accepting Dartmouth's proposals on these remaining contract provisions as well as the revised proposals Dartmouth presented on June 4. If GOLD-UE rejects the package, then Dartmouth's revised proposals will be off the table.
(See the detailed overview of Dartmouth's economic proposals and the list of tentative agreements.)
Despite this being a particularly busy time in the academic year, we were pleased to participate in the June 4 bargaining session, which took place just five days after the previous meeting. The parties are scheduled to meet again on June 13, and we expect GOLD-UE to respond to Dartmouth's package proposal at that meeting.
An overview and updated FAQs about the GOLD-UE strike, including all Dartmouth economic proposals as of 5-30-24, are available on the provost's website.
Sincerely,
David Kotz
Provost