BARGAINING
UPDATES

September 25, 2025

Key Takeaways

• We received 6 counterproposals by the administration, but most of them had minimal or no changes from their last submissions

• We presented counters for Health and Safety, Just Cause in the Exercise of Professional Judgement, Provisional Periods, Non-Discrimination, Positions, Impact of Technology and Flexible Work Agreements

• We asked the University to clarify the statement some of us received in an email this week

On September 25, 2025 we met with the administration for an incredibly frustrating session. Among the most troubling issues are that they continue to insist that bargaining unit staff who are promoted, reclassified or transferred are subject to a new provisional period, and they want to penalize people who take their earned vacation, personal, or sick time by extending the provisional period by the number of PTO days utilized.

While the administration did state at the table that they will follow current law and not discriminate against people based on the currently existing protected characteristics, they are still refusing to include a list of protected characteristics (which include race, age, and sexual orientation) in our contract or to commit to protecting staff members from discrimination if the law changes. Beyond the fact that a similar list of protected characteristics is in the faculty union collective bargaining agreement and has not been problematic for the University, we think that including the list in our CBA is VITAL in order to guarantee that these protections persist.

Many of us received an email from Vice Chancellor for Human Resources James W. Gallaher Jr., Ph.D. this week which unlawfully misrepresented the administration’s bargaining position. It inaccurately stated that “the University proposed a wage increase in June 2025, providing represented-staff employees with a 2.5 percent wage increase in exchange for annual increases in medical insurance premiums which were applicable to other University employees.”  Rather, they presented a take-it-or-leave it offer that would have increased wages by 2.5 percent in exchange for both (1) 8 percent increases in medical and dental insurance premiums and (2) significant changes in the health insurance benefit plans, including, but not limited to, doubling the deductible for the HMO plan, increasing the out-of-pocket maximum for the PPO plan by 50%, and increases to prescription co-payments. By falsely informing Union-represented staff that the employer’s proposal was a raise in exchange for medical premium increases alone, rather than, as was accurate, a raise in exchange for (1) and (2), the administration has materially misstated the content of our negotiations in violation of the administration’s duty to bargain in good faith. We have voiced our objection to the administration and have asked for a clarification of this statement. If no such clarification is provided, we will file another unfair labor practice charge against the University.

Finally, thanks to everyone who signed up to participate in our community service project this weekend. We’ll let you know about more ways that you can get involved in the future, and let us know if you would like to join our event planning team.

In solidarity,

Your Pitt Staff Bargaining Committee

Jen Goeckeler-Fried, Chair, Biological Sciences, DSAS
Kearsten Adams, Recording Secretary, 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, District 10 Director, USW