Mid-term bargaining recap! Where are we at with non-monetary proposals?
In our bargaining meeting with the employer on March 9th, we had a BIG day – we tabled all of the remaining non-monetary proposals from each of the Procedural, Equity, and Education categories. Read below for an in-depth update of where we’re at for all of the proposals so far!
It’s been a while since our last bargaining update, so we’ve included a status update of everything that we’ve put on the table so far. We will also have a bargaining update presentation and opportunity for questions and discussion at the upcoming Component 1 Membership Meeting this Wednesday (Earth Science Bldg 2012 and Zoom, 5:30pm). Be sure to attend to learn more about what we’ve accomplished so far in bargaining and what’s to come next!
Procedural Proposals:
Procedural 1: Definition of a Full TA Position
Status: GREENSHEET on February 9th
Relevant Collective Agreement Article: B 4.01
Procedural 2: Job Evaluation and Classifications
Status: Awaiting formal reply
UBC’s job classification system for student workers is confusing and inconsistently applied across the university, meaning that some people who do the work of TAs or GAAs get misclassified as non-unionized positions such as Graduate Research Assistants (GRAs) or Work Learns. The University even admitted in a BC Labour Relations Board hearing that many GRAs do the work of GAAs and should actually be re-classified as GAAs and therefore unionized with CUPE 2278. The University has agreed in principle that bargaining unit work should be defined by the work itself (and not the funding source); nevertheless, people whose GAA positions are funded through Work Learn funding are persistently excluded from our union.
To address these problems, we proposed establishing a joint committee between the Union and the Employer to review all GRA positions across the university and identify GRAs who do work that’s not related to their thesis (and therefore should be classified as GAAs). The committee would also review the HR process in WorkDay for Work Learn job creation and review GAA positions. The University responded with some questions about our proposal, and mentioned that it seemed like it would be a lot of work for them.
Procedural 3: TA Position vs. TAship
Status: GREENSHEET on October 8, 2025
Relevant Article:
We agreed to change the language in the CA from TAship to TA position to better align with the many positions members hold across the University and affirm that their work at TAs is work!As we work through bargaining, we are working on making this change everywhere it shows up in our CA.
Procedural 4: Job Postingsand Procedural 6: Preference Continuation
Status: GREENSHEET on March 9th
Relevant Articles: B 3.01, B 3.02, B 3.03
In this item, we addressed:
Maintaining preference for CUPE 2278 members who are forced to take a reduced appointment due to budgetary considerations or who decline a TA position due to working as a sessional instructor. The University agreed to language ensuring that folks who take reduced TA positions because of budgetary constraints maintain their original preference for 2 academic years, while folks who take a sessional instructor position maintain their TA preference for 1 academic year.
Centralized, accessible locations for job postings, and ensuring that each department only requires members to fill out one job application for all regular TA positions in that department, with a separate application for STA positions. The University agreed to provide more information in their job postings, including anticipated timelines of offers and reference to members’ rights to maintain preference in the event of budgetary constraints and/or accepting a sessional position. They also agreed to language that prevents departments from instituting separate job application forms for individual courses. Finally, they agreed to explore the possibility of having an online, centralized location for job postings across the university.
These changes to the job postings and preference language will make it easier for CUPE 2278 members to understand their rights to be reappointed and ensure that members are not unfairly denied TA work because of barriers to accessing or filling out the job application. We’ve also made substantial progress in pushing on the University to look into a central job posting portal for ALL TA positions across the University, which would simplify this process and ensure hiring transparency!
Procedural 5: Job Selection Notification
Status: Agreed in principle (see above)
We identified this proposal because some departments fail to inform CUPE 2278 members who apply for a TA position if they don’t get the position. This leads to uncertainty for members about whether they will have income for an upcoming semester. While UBC was unwilling to agree to informing all applicants about whether they were successful or unsuccessful for a TA posting, they did agree to include an anticipated timeline of offers in the job posting language. This gives folks more information about when to expect job offers–and helps them follow up if they haven’t heard anything from their department.
Procedural 7: Above 1.0 TA Positions
Status: GREENSHEET on January 19th
Procedural 8: Whistleblower Protection Update
Status: GREENSHEET on February 2nd
Equity Proposals:
Equity 1: Anti-Discrimination Protections
Status: Awaiting formal reply
Previously, the Employer had indicated that they were not interested in adding the categories of caste and citizenship to our nondiscrimination language. This week, we presented more information on recent BC Human Rights Tribunal cases dealing with caste and cited examples of UBC job postings which indicate discrimination based on citizenship status.
The employer indicated that they are working on a reply for this proposal.
Equity 2: Disciplinary Procedures
Status: Agreed in principle
This proposal aimed to give CUPE 2278 members and the Union the opportunity to better prepare for and respond to disciplinary meetings as well as a sunset provision for disciplinary records to be removed from a members file after a fixed period of time.
On February 9th we agreed to the Employer’s language amendment where employees would be notified in advance of the general nature of concerns/dissatisfactions for disciplinary meetings. The Employer also agreed to our proposal for a sunset provision, meaning that after 24 months, disciplinary records will be removed from a member’s file.
Equity 3: Information Regarding Deaths in the University Community and Bereavement Expansion
Status: Awaiting formal reply
Last time we discussed this proposal, we pointed out that the employer’s HR policy about protocols when a member of the University Community passes away is inadequate for CUPE 2278 members and does not mention relevant resources (i.e., bereavement leave and the Health, Wellbeing, and Hardship fund). This time, the employer indicated that they would be open to amending their policy.
Regarding including “colleague” in the list of people for whom CUPE 2278 members can take bereavement leave, the employer suggested that this is a monetary item and should be discussed with our other monetary proposals. The employer also confirmed that in cases where members consider themselves to be close friends with their colleagues, bereavement leave applies.
Equity 4: Student Workers as Staff
Status: Awaiting monetary discussion
This proposal aims to give CUPE 2278 members access to the same benefits that other staff at UBC are entitled to (i.e., software licenses, reduced parking fees), but which our members currently cannot access because we are classified as “student staff” rather than “staff”. When we tabled this proposal, the Employer indicated that they think it is monetary and should be discussed with the other monetary proposals.
Status: Preparing response
Last time we discussed this proposal, we clarified that academic freedom is integral to the faculty association collective agreement, and that our intention with this proposal is to ensure that CUPE 2278 members are not disciplined in their employment relationship with the university for exercising their academic freedom. The employer today indicated that they think that the language describing Academic Freedom in the UBC Faculty Association Collective Agreement is not enforceable or grievable, and bad Collective Agreement Construction. They reiterated that they are not prepared to add any language to our collective agreement beyond identifying the senate policy on Academic Freedom.
A central issue of disagreement between your negotiating committee and UBC on Academic Freedom is the placement in the Collective Agreement. Our proposal puts it in Article A 10, which refers to discipline. This is based on our position that CUPE 2278 members should not be disciplined for exercising Academic Freedom in their positions as employees of the university (TA, GAA). The Employer has responded by putting a reference to the senate policy under the article that refers to protection from academic harm (i.e., student relationships to UBC cannot negatively impact employment and vice versa). We maintain our position that Academic Freedom is central to any employment in academic roles in the university, and a lack of protections from disciplinary action for exercising Academic Freedom makes CUPE 2278 members vulnerable.
Education Proposals:
Education 1: Improving Training:
Status: Preparing Response
Last time, the employer confirmed that all mandatory training (including the required WorkDay safety training modules) is paid training and should be included in the allocation of work forms for our members. However, they didn’t agree to include some of the other areas we identified in our proposal (pedagogical training, curriculum-specific training, de-escalation training, classroom management, EDI training). The central point of disagreement is around what the university can require departments to provide to members as part of their mandatory training. They raised concerns that our proposals would put limits on the autonomy of departments to offer the training they deem necessary for TAs.
This time, we reiterated that our proposal aims to set a minimum for the baseline training that all departments should offer in order to properly prepare TAs to do their jobs (and that we aren’t aiming to restrict some of the high quality TA training programs that some departments already offer). We are awaiting a formal reply from the employer.
Education 2: Class Size to TA Hours Ratio
Status: Awaiting formal reply
Last time, we heard the employer’s concerns on the feasibility of tracking & gathering some of the data that we were requesting (on TA hours per lecture/lab/tutorial section). This time, we reintroduced our proposal with more clear language on the type of data we are requesting from the employer. We also introduced a clause that makes it clear that the university can’t decrease TA hour to student enrollment ratios over time, except in cases where they can demonstrate pedagogical improvement.
We are awaiting a response from the employer.
Education 3: AI and Technological Change
Status: Awaiting formal reply
We introduced our proposal aiming to introduce language dealing with CUPE 2278 members’ rights in the context of artificial intelligence and other technological changes. Our current collective agreement language on technological change (in Article A 13) has not been updated in a long time; with these changes we aim to bring the language in line with the current state of technology in 2026. We are awaiting a formal reply from the employer.
What’s next?
We have a bit of a hiatus until our next bargaining date on April 20th. Stay tuned for updates! In the meantime, check out our contract action kit for creative ways to show your solidarity with your fellow union members (instagram shareables, desktop backgrounds, email signatures galore!! We are also looking for creative input on other fun, quirky, or artsy designs–if you have any ideas please reach out to vp@cupe2278.ca)
In solidarity,
Your C1 negotiating committee