Union Public Bargaining Update
October 27, 2025 Bargaining Session
We, the members of the GEU-UAW Local 6950 bargaining committee, are pleased to begin sharing public bargaining updates about negotiations for our next union contract.
With our fifth bargaining session this past Monday, October 27th, we entered the next phase of our negotiations. We reached an agreement on ground rules with UConn’s bargaining team, made five proposals, and received two counterproposals from the University.
Ground rules govern how negotiations are conducted between unionized employees and their employers; they cover matters such as negotiation scheduling, format, and attendance. One notable feature of our ground rules is that they provide for a fair process between us and the University to mutually agree to public updates such as this one, as well as to release publicly proposals and counter proposals. In cases where we cannot come to a timely agreement, both the University and our bargaining committee may still publicly share proposals. Our ground rules also allow up to 36 graduate assistants to attend each session as observers, and the parties are expected to negotiate in good faith.
The terms of all proposals and counterproposals are subject to change until a tentative agreement on an article is reached by both parties. Such tentative agreements are subject to an agreement for the contract as a whole, subsequent Union ratification, and approval of the Board and the General Assembly.
After reaching an agreement on ground rules, we made five substantive non-economic proposals:
We also proposed two new articles that don’t exist in our current GA contract:
UConn’s negotiations team listened attentively as we presented our proposals and asked a series of thoughtful questions. After taking a caucus, the University responded with two counter-proposals on Holidays and Grievance & Arbitration.
After bringing these counters, the University’s team indicated they would likely respond to more of our proposals at our next session. Overall, we had a productive bargaining session, and look forward to continued discussions with the University at our next bargaining session on November 10th.
With our fifth bargaining session this past Monday, October 27th, we entered the next phase of our negotiations. We reached an agreement on ground rules with UConn’s bargaining team, made five proposals, and received two counterproposals from the University.
Ground rules govern how negotiations are conducted between unionized employees and their employers; they cover matters such as negotiation scheduling, format, and attendance. One notable feature of our ground rules is that they provide for a fair process between us and the University to mutually agree to public updates such as this one, as well as to release publicly proposals and counter proposals. In cases where we cannot come to a timely agreement, both the University and our bargaining committee may still publicly share proposals. Our ground rules also allow up to 36 graduate assistants to attend each session as observers, and the parties are expected to negotiate in good faith.
The terms of all proposals and counterproposals are subject to change until a tentative agreement on an article is reached by both parties. Such tentative agreements are subject to an agreement for the contract as a whole, subsequent Union ratification, and approval of the Board and the General Assembly.
After reaching an agreement on ground rules, we made five substantive non-economic proposals:
- We proposed modifying the existing Holidays article to update the existing mutually agreed upon contract language, which provides that Juneteenth would become a listed GA holiday should the State recognize it as one, to reflect the parties’ prior agreement that it is a GA holiday as it has since become a recognized State holiday. We also proposed to require the University to accommodate GAs who wish to celebrate cultural and religious holidays.
- We proposed modifying our contract’s Health and Safety article to ensure that safety equipment is proactively provided to GAs when required, to guarantee that UConn’s health and safety policy for GAs remains robust, and to add protections against doxxing.
- For our Grievance and Arbitration article, we proposed extending grievance filing deadlines, to endeavor to mutually agree on establishing a panel of arbitrators, and setting clear timelines if a grievance is appealed to arbitration.
We also proposed two new articles that don’t exist in our current GA contract:
- The first on Remote Work, which would allow GAs to work remotely unless their duties require them to be in person.
- The second on Artificial Intelligence, which sets guidelines on the introduction of AI technologies and current and future AI implementation. It also prohibits the elimination of GA positions by AI, the surveillance of employees using AI technologies, the use of AI in hiring or disciplinary decisions, and the digital alteration of employees’ data without consent.
UConn’s negotiations team listened attentively as we presented our proposals and asked a series of thoughtful questions. After taking a caucus, the University responded with two counter-proposals on Holidays and Grievance & Arbitration.
- With regard to the Holidays article, the University accepted the proposal to update the parties’ previous agreement that Juneteenth be a listed GA holiday as it has since been recognized as a State holiday. The University also proposed GAs provide a list of intended cultural and religious holidays they would like to take at the beginning of the semester in order to balance the desire to observe holidays not listed in the contract with institutional obligations, such as providing instruction and conducting research.
- The University rejected our proposed changes to the Grievance and Arbitration article in part because the parties had agreed to eliminate the use of an arbitrator panel from the previous contract as this method had proved to be unworkable. The University proposed adding a section that waives GAs’ ability to grieve or arbitrate claims in the event they file a judicial or administrative agency claim or complaint on the same issue, stating that it would create a more efficient process and avoid contradictory outcomes.
After bringing these counters, the University’s team indicated they would likely respond to more of our proposals at our next session. Overall, we had a productive bargaining session, and look forward to continued discussions with the University at our next bargaining session on November 10th.
