UMRFA Response: Decertification is rare for a reason. Workers benefit from unions and therefore rarely want to decertify them except in unusual circumstances. That being said - there is a clear legal process to do so. What process do we have to decertify ourselves from poor hospital leadership?
Also, they talk about what a long and difficult process decertification can be but they do not for a second consider any of the work any of us have expended to push the union organizing process forward. This has been at least as much work as they have stated here (likely much more). Have they considered why we have worked so tirelessly for this? Do they even care? It’s telling and patronizing to assume we have not thought this through and made a reasonable decision and will have buyer’s remorse.
UMRFA Response: The union-busting consultant who wrote this answer for UMMC management doesn’t know anything about AFT…and we question their understanding of the law, as well. UMRFA will be the certified bargaining representative of the residents and fellows, not AFT. UMMC will be required to meet with UMRFA representatives, not AFT representatives. This means that they will be required by law to sit down across a bargaining table as equals with us, the residents, and fellows. They’re clearly worried about what we’ll propose.
This FAQ answer is duplicitous. It ignores management’s own moral and ethical obligations to advance proposals that are in the best interest of all of the hospital’s stakeholders. We promise to hold them to account at every turn. We persistently push resident and fellow priorities to maximize our well-being and patient care because we actually support those things, unlike the hospital, which puts its financial bottom line first. They say “There is no way to predict the results of negotiations” - technically true. However, take a look at other resident and fellow unions out there and look at the contract wins they have gotten. We have not been getting anything close to that without a union so we think we all deserve a chance to fight for those wins.
UMRFA Response: More fear-mongering from UMMC. It would not be that hard to quickly come to a reasonable agreement on a contract. They say all this because employers rarely are reasonable in contract negotiation. We have no intention to ask them to give all of us Bert O’Malley’s (unjustifiable) salary. We just plan to ask for what we deserve. If UMMC felt that we were undervalued they could have raised all our salaries to match nearby peer institutions - they chose not to.
They note that they have to maintain the “status quo” during negotiations. To be clear, this is from the time the union is certified until a contract is ratified following negotiations. This rule exists to prevent employers from undermining negotiations by giving quick raises or threatening employees with loss of benefits in an attempt to influence the bargaining. It is also important to note that some resident and fellow unions have gotten raises made retroactive when negotiations have extended into an academic year.
One more thing… It takes a lot of nerve for our employer to complain about the length of time it takes to reach a first contract. Of course, it is quicker to just set terms and conditions unilaterally, as they are now, but how well has that worked out for us and for our patients, for that matter? When management complains about how long it takes to bargain a contract, what they’re really bellyaching about is their loss of power. When we win our union, management will have to treat us as equals in setting our terms and conditions of employment.
UMRFA Response: More fear-mongering from UMMC. It would not be that hard to quickly come to a reasonable agreement on a contract. They say all this because employers rarely are reasonable in contract negotiation. We have no intention to ask them to give all of us Bert O’Malley’s (unjustifiable) salary. We just plan to ask for what we deserve. If UMMC felt that we were undervalued they could have raised all our salaries to match nearby peer institutions - they chose not to.
They note that they have to maintain the “status quo” during negotiations. To be clear, this is from the time the union is certified until a contract is ratified following negotiations. This rule exists to prevent employers from undermining negotiations by giving quick raises or threatening employees with loss of benefits in an attempt to influence the bargaining. It is also important to note that some resident and fellow unions have gotten raises made retroactive when negotiations have extended into an academic year.
One more thing… It takes a lot of nerve for our employer to complain about the length of time it takes to reach a first contract. Of course, it is quicker to just set terms and conditions unilaterally, as they are now, but how well has that worked out for us and for our patients, for that matter? When management complains about how long it takes to bargain a contract, what they’re really bellyaching about is their loss of power. When we win our union, management will have to treat us as equals in setting our terms and conditions of employment.
UMRFA Response: This is a lie. And, on top of that, it is a particularly lazy lie. The union busters that hospital administrators are relying on to provide anti-union talking points clearly have done very little research into the AFT. The AFT constitution and bylaws are available online. AFT is a union that operates according to a principle of local autonomy. We, the members of UMRFA, will choose our own bargaining team. They will represent us, not “the union” not “the AFT”; if we choose to do what most other AFT locals do, most of the members of the bargaining team will be residents and fellows, aided –if we choose—by one or two union staff members. We will be the decision-makers. Other unions do things the way the employer characterizes in this question; we think that is unfortunate and we chose AFT for a reason. In the AFT, the staff work for the members.
This is the hospital, once again, trying to frame the union as some external third party rather than what it truly is, a collective of residents and fellows fighting for our values. UMMC (or more likely their hired union-busters) posits all these hypotheticals like we’re some mob-affiliated union from The Sopranos dealing out positions to all those who have served us well or something. It’s outrageous. We will create bylaws that are respectful of all of the specialties and individuals we represent and the negotiation team will be reflective of our diverse body with input on its selection from the residents and fellows. The bargaining team will be voted in by members after a transparent and open election.
UMRFA Response: Make no mistake this is the hospital threatening residents and fellows yet again, albeit in a legal and subtle fashion. Contract negotiation certainly “can be a complicated, lengthy process” but there is nothing that says it HAS to be. The hospital has deferred giving us the respect we deserve for so long so they think they can just continue doing that forever. They do not hear our voices and continue to ignore them. We are organizing so they do hear us and understand that a lot of smart industrious adults are making reasonable demands - ones they have the power to approve very swiftly.
UMRFA Response: The premise of this question is faulty and insulting. The AFT is a union that operates according to a principle of local autonomy. We, the resident and fellow members of UMRFA, are the only ones who can choose to take workplace action, including a strike. The AFT has no power to “take” us anywhere. No strike happens without a strike authorization vote of the membership happening - this means a majority of residents and fellows have to vote for a strike to occur. Imagine what must be happening for that to occur. Most residents and fellows very much do not want to strike (for many reasons), which is why there has only been one in our sector in the past 30 years and it only lasted three days. There are many many actions that we would take to try to push UMMC to agree to our reasonable demands before we would ever get to the point of even considering a strike. This is not an all-or-nothing endeavor.
UMRFA Response: The premise of this question is faulty and insulting. The AFT is a union that operates according to a principle of local autonomy. We, the resident and fellow members of UMRFA, are the only ones who can choose to take workplace action, including a strike. The AFT has no power to “take” us anywhere. No strike happens without a strike authorization vote of the membership happening - this means a majority of residents and fellows have to vote for a strike to occur. Imagine what must be happening for that to occur. Most residents and fellows very much do not want to strike (for many reasons), which is why there has only been one in our sector in the past 30 years and it only lasted three days. There are many many actions that we would take to try to push UMMC to agree to our reasonable demands before we would ever get to the point of even considering a strike. This is not an all-or-nothing endeavor.