URA-AFT Bargaining Team, Sept. 9, 2026
The Disrespect Continues
In our morning session on Wednesday, September 8, management doubled down on their assertion that our contract is sufficient “as-is.” We were prepared to present our Article 33 – Probationary Employees counterproposal in the afternoon, but management refused to resume negotiations in response to a mix-up with our reserved caucus room.
Things escalated when we were told in the afternoon that someone complained to David Schulz, Vice President for Planning, Development, and Design, because our team was misinformed of the room we were supposed to be in. We had to switch caucus rooms at the last minute and we apparently didn’t move quickly enough. At 2:30 pm, we were asked to leave the building immediately. We held firm and stayed in our caucus room to continue our work on strengthening our contract while management left for the day. This attempt to push out all eleven bargaining team members today leaves a question about how serious management is to get this contract completed.
The level of disrespect for our work at this university was felt especially today as management cancelled our afternoon negotiations session after a room mixup where another party double booked the room we were in. We moved to another room but apparently that wasn’t enough for management and they’re done for the day. We’re not done working for a better contract for our members and their families.
During our morning bargaining session, management claimed they are waiting for our responses to proposals, but we cannot move forward without the documents we requested months ago (see: We Have the Right to Know: URA Info Requests Unanswered). Due to this repeated failure to respect the law and our rights by share public information about Rutgers finances, we filed an unfair labor practice charge. It is problematic that Rutgers management refuses to share this public information so we will take the appropriate measures to advocate for our collective rights.
We also reminded them that we need responses to our economic proposals, which they have been withholding. Management questioned whether or not meeting without economic proposals is productive. We were adamant that we still want to meet regularly to discuss non-economic proposals and the ball is in their court to share the requested public information about economics with us.
Where do URA members live in Rutgers budget? With regards to last week’s budget presentation, we relayed that we do not see a lot of difference from past years. Rutgers has the money and is choosing to spend it on executive compensation and fireworks for a losing football game instead of responding to our economics.
In addition, budget presenter Cathy Brennan, VP for Financial Planning and Analytics, has not responded to our post-presentation financial questions. We expressed how we did not appreciate the fact that the budget presentation pitted us against students. This view seemed like an intentional strategy from management, which they deny.
Bottom line: We demand respect for our work at this university!
