A Major Decision on Fees

May 31, 2012 | 2011-12 Contract Campaign, Arbitration Updates, Front Page, Membership Updates

We wrote you at the beginning of this academic year about two new mandatory fees on your tuition statement: the Student Facilities Renovation Fee (SFR) and the Universal U-Pass Fee.  After a number of members raised concerns about these new fees, we looked into it and concluded that the University’s imposition of the cost of these new fees on ASEs violated the collective bargaining agreement.  The University took the position that the agreement did not prohibit them from doing so.  In order to resolve this dispute we followed the process the Union and University have mutually agreed upon (Grievance Procedure – Article 8) and filed a grievance in September 2011.  This resulted in the Union and the University presenting our respective positions to a neutral third party arbitrator for a binding decision.

We’re happy to announce that the arbitrator found in favor of our position.

The arbitrator ruled that the contract prevents the University from imposing the cost of these new fees on Academic Student Employees (ASEs) with 50% appointments, and that the University is liable for issuing reimbursements – plus interest – to affected ASEs.  Pursuant to this decision, the University will violate the contract if it continues to require 50% ASEs to pay these fees.
Since the SFR is scheduled to skyrocket from less than $20 in 2011/12 to $285 in the 2012/13 academic year, this represents a significant reduction in anticipated out-of-pocket expenses.  As for the U-Pass, the arbitrator’s decision does not discontinue the program (we have never challenged the legitimacy of the program itself) but it does prevent the University from imposing a mandatory U-Pass fee on 50% ASEs.  The vast majority of us will still likely purchase the U-Pass in support of the program, such that there will be multiple ways to preserve the low-cost universal program with the right of a small number of ASEs to opt out of participating like they were able to do prior to Fall 2011.

In our recently concluded negotiations we’ve worked constructively with the University to determine a wage system that increases our competitive standing relative to peer institutions.  This arbitration decision strengthens one of the central tenets in our years-long campaign: that the waiver (or non-waiver) of mandatory fees is a component in our overall employee compensation, and that the University cannot use our status as “students” to circumvent our collective bargaining rights.  In the words of the arbitrator:

“Academic Student Employees do not lose their status as bargaining unit members, nor the protections granted by the CBA [collective bargaining agreement], merely because certain mandatory fees are assessed against the entire student body.  Academic Student Employees are covered by the CBA and are bound and protected by mutually negotiated contract terms”

The arbitrator has retained jurisdiction over this decision, and we’re committed to helping determine a system for issuing  reimbursements as quickly as possible.  We will keep you updated you as we learn more.  In the meantime, please feel free to get in touch if you have any questions.