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, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more