That is not how UAW works. There is an opaque set of rules that lead to UAW reps being elected, and then the UAW reps will not listen to member concerns unless the members first successfully petition to be heard at a meeting. To be counted in the petition, the people that sign it have to physically show up to the meeting, and the rules are set so that they may have to attend multiple meetings.
At that point the UAW rep is “allowed” to hear the concerns.
Many other things happen that can kill even the most basic common sense request.
Eventually, when it is time to vote on the contract, the UAW rolls the negotiations up into multiple campuses (at least with UC), so it is mathematically impossible for a given campus to block a contract ratification.
This is exactly what happened with UC Santa Cruz in 2020, and the reason UC Berkeley’s health care plan no longer covers a bunch of women’s health issues. (Word has it the union rep suggested that cut, not the administration.)
See my other comments on this thread for links, etc.
Do you know why they choose the UAW? It seems a really strange fit.
The choice of what union to affiliate with, and selecting their rules is something that should have been done carefully, and with the needs of the membership in mind.
At that point the UAW rep is “allowed” to hear the concerns.
Many other things happen that can kill even the most basic common sense request.
Eventually, when it is time to vote on the contract, the UAW rolls the negotiations up into multiple campuses (at least with UC), so it is mathematically impossible for a given campus to block a contract ratification.
This is exactly what happened with UC Santa Cruz in 2020, and the reason UC Berkeley’s health care plan no longer covers a bunch of women’s health issues. (Word has it the union rep suggested that cut, not the administration.)
See my other comments on this thread for links, etc.