BARGAINING
UPDATES

July 30, 2025

Key Takeaways

• The administration is “working on a response” to our proposal asking for 12.5% raises

• We presented a counterproposal that would attempt to limit staff layoffs due to subcontracting

• We continued discussions regarding Provisional Periods, Flexible Work Agreements, and Health and Safety

On July 28, 2025 your bargaining team began our session by asking the administration for a response to our proposal asking for raises of 12.5% for this year, to which we were told, “We’re working on a response.” We look forward to receiving this response, and we certainly hope that they agree that we deserve raises that would help us survive the increased inflation and cost of living that we're all facing. Our chancellor got a 30% increase in base pay compared to the previous chancellor upon being hired, yet we have had to settle for raises of 3.5% or less—sometimes significantly less—for each of the past 15 years. We will also negotiate future raises as part of our contract, but we are hoping to have some news soon about immediate raises for this fiscal year.

As many of you have already heard, the administration recently terminated 13 of the IT Help Desk workers, after choosing to devalue the institutional knowledge that they possess and subcontract their work to an outside vendor, Logicalis. We obviously don't think that this should happen. Several of these staff members had worked at Pitt and been part of the Pitt community for decades! Loyal employees deserve better. We are proposing that the administration's ability to have contractors perform staff work be limited to situations in which bargaining unit employees will not be negatively impacted (for example, no layoffs). While awaiting a response on this proposal, we are considering our legal options, as the university had an obligation to bargain with the union prior to subcontracting this bargaining unit work, which they failed to do.

We were happy to see some movement toward an agreement on provisional periods. Previously, the administration's position was that a new provisional period should occur upon every instance of promotion, reclassification, and transfer. In their latest counter, they proposed that a provisional period should be at the supervisor's discretion after promotion, reclassification, and transfer, and acknowledged that in some circumstances, such as when a staff member is reclassified so that their job title matches what they're already doing, requiring a provisional period doesn't make sense. Discussions will need to continue, but we are encouraged by this step in the right direction.

We continued the negotiations regarding the conditions and guidelines for Flexible Work Agreements, with both sides presenting a new counterproposal. Lastly, while we still have a long way to go to reach an agreement on Health and Safety, the administration did move towards us on one point of contention. They now propose three meetings of the Labor-Management Health and Safety Committee per year (or more if both parties agree), not just one. We believe that frequent Health and Safety meetings will help the university and the union fulfill our shared commitment to providing a safe work environment for all.

In solidarity,

Your Pitt Staff Bargaining Committee

Jen Goeckeler-Fried, Chair, Biological Sciences, DSAS
Mark Brown, Secretary
Kearsten Adams, Academic Advising, UPG
Shawn Alfonso Wells, Pitt Global Experiences, UCIS
Lydia Chmill, Disability Resources & Services, OTC
Emily Daller, University Child Development Center, OHR
Jay Hornack, Law 
Todd Shaffer, Office of Student Life, UPJ
Michelle Utz-Kiley, Epidemiology, SPH
Dan Wyszomierski, UPCI/NSABP
Matt Nader, USW
Nate Kilbert, USW
Don Shaffer, USW
Bernie Hall, Director, USW