91������Ƶ

91������Ƶ concludes 10th bargaining session with CAUSE, addresses recent ULPs

The Latest: 91������Ƶ and CAUSE completed their 10th bargaining session yesterday, with minor forward progress.

• CAUSE negotiators passed 5 article proposals during the day, and 91������Ƶ’s Bargaining Team responded to most of them through the 3 complete contract proposals during the session - our 10th, 11th, and 12th so far - incorporating several provisions requested by CAUSE.
• 91������Ƶ is still awaiting a response from CAUSE on monetary terms. CAUSE-represented staff weren’t eligible for the 3% compensation increase other staff received in July because no contract was in place by the legislative deadline. We share the urgency of addressing that issue as part of contract negotiations, which is why we keep asking CAUSE to respond to our proposals on wages and benefits.

Why It Matters: The 91������Ƶ Bargaining Team’s focus remains on reaching a balanced and sustainable first contract with CAUSE in advance of the March 19, 2027 deadline for monetary terms to be submitted to the legislature. 

• The University remains concerned that the current pace of negotiations and CAUSE negotiators' preference for negotiating piecemeal articles, rather than as a comprehensive package, is putting that deadline at risk.
• As the university has explained in previous updates and at the bargaining table, negotiating article by article rather than exchanging complete contract proposals makes it far more difficult to evaluate how the contract works together as a whole. Working on individual pieces in isolation raises the risk that they won’t function well together.

Contested Positions: Following six months of efforts to engage the Union on resolving about 300 contested positions and growing employee concern, 91������Ƶ notified CAUSE this week that we plan to take action to resolve the issue on Monday, October 26.

• More details about that process and what will happen will be shared with impacted employees in the coming days. See the “Zoom In” section below for a general overview.
• Still Open to Bargained Resolution - Even with that notification, 91������Ƶ’s Bargaining team left open the opportunity for CAUSE to bargain with us on this issue before we take action. 

What’s Next: 91������Ƶ will continue to bargain in good faith and attempt to keep things moving forward. Additional negotiating sessions are scheduled for:

• November 10, 2026 
• November 18, 2026

Zoom In: Unfair Labor Practice Complaints

CAUSE filed two unfair labor practice (ULP) complaints against 91������Ƶ last month and one this week, bringing the total number up to 3. All of the ULPs allege 91������Ƶ violated labor laws in a variety of ways, which the University strongly disputes.

• Why It Matters: 91������Ƶ has - and will continue to - negotiate with CAUSE on a first contract in good faith, and we don’t believe the claims in the ULPs are accurate. 
• ULPs are also not uncommon in the negotiation process - some contract negotiations have seen 50 or more ULPs filed before ultimately reaching agreement on the contract.
• Even so, we know these filings may create additional concern and uncertainty for our staff, and we want to reassure you that the filings won’t alter our efforts to reach a balanced, sustainable first contract with CAUSE. The University will respond to those allegations in due course, while continuing to bargain with CAUSE.

Unit Composition: CAUSE argues that our attempts to resolve contested positions are both unfair and have been used as a precondition before we will agree to a first contract.

• Our View: 91������Ƶ believes the facts simply do not support this claim. Rather, they show that many contested positions had job functions that took them out of the unit definition because their primary duties were confidential or supervisory.
• CAUSE and 91������Ƶ knew when the election occurred that we would need to resolve contested positions after the election, and we both know some positions clearly did not meet the bargaining unit definition for inclusion. 
• Additionally, resolving contested positions has never been a precondition to negotiations; in fact, 91������Ƶ has been trying to move negotiations forward, including repeatedly requesting a response to our economic proposals.

Status Quo Violations: CAUSE negotiators argue that 91������Ƶ should have allowed CAUSE-represented staff to continue receiving non-discretionary wage increases and access to the Educational Attainment Incentive Program (EAIP).

• Our View: Again, in 91������Ƶ's view, Alaska labor law, applied to the facts existing here, does not support this claim. From the moment CAUSE was certified as a union, staff in the unit were considered "represented" under the Alaska Public Employee Relations Act (PERA) and Regents’ Policy and Regulations.
• Regents' Policy identifies reclassifications, discretionary wage increases, and the EAIP as available to non-represented employees, and no changes to those policies were made after CAUSE was certified. 

• Since CAUSE-represented staff were no longer “nonrepresented” following certification, those provisions were unfortunately no longer available the moment the unit was certified.

The 3% FY27 Raise: This ULP was filed earlier this summer. CAUSE negotiators argue that staff represented by the unit should have received the 3% raise that nonrepresented employees and those with collective bargaining agreements in place received.

• Our View: Here again, 91������Ƶ believes CAUSE’s application of labor law to the facts is wrong. The best way forward is to continue negotiating this and other monetary terms as part of a complete contract. 
• Alaska Labor Law requires a full CBA to be in place and monetary provisions appropriated and approved by the legislature. 
• CAUSE had neither a CBA in place by the statutory deadline nor a legislative appropriation.