Skip to main content

One To Keep An Eye On: Harvard Graduate & Undergraduate Students Vote On Whether to Unionize


Late last week, students at Harvard held an election on whether to unionize.  This election was unique for two reasons:  First, eligible voters included both graduate and undergraduate student research and teaching assistants (the first such vote to include both).  If these students vote to unionize, Harvard would become only the second private university to have a graduate student union (along with New York University).  In addition, this is the first union election at a university since the NLRB's August decision which held that graduate and undergraduate students can be recognized as workers (and therefore have the ability to unionize).

Back in February, it had been estimated that approximately 60% of graduate students that were considered 'employed' by Harvard had signed unionization cards.  Note, that was more than double the amount necessary to call for a union election.  Of course that does not necessarily mean that these students will actually vote to unionize...but it certainly gives those pro-union supporters a glimmer of hope as we wait for an announcement on the outcome of the vote last week.

As could be expected, leading up to last week's election, supporters on both sides made last minute arguments.  Unsurprisingly, several Deans at Harvard voiced opposition to the vote, while others (including many graduate students) advocated for the students to vote in favor of unionization.  Difficult to say if those last minute appeals had any impact, but it certainly would not surprise me that when the results are announced, it will become clear that the students have chosen to unionize.


For additional information:  http://www.thedp.com/article/2016/11/harvard-votes-unionization

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more