What We Won:

UC Librarians Contract Campaign

The full text of the TA’ed articles is available. these versions contain markup.
REPRESENTED LIBRARIAN SERIES FISCAL YEAR SALARY SCALE
 
Challenges we aimed to address
What We Won
Economic Articles    

SALARY 

(Article 13)

Our salaries have fallen behind that of our non-represented librarian colleagues.

Salaries at the entry levels are not competitive.

21.43% Increase Over 4 Years

  • 6.85% increase to base salaries 60 days following ratification (Dec. 1 2024)
  • $2,000 one-time ratification lump sum payment for all full-time librarians (prorated for part-time librarians)
  • Annual range adjustments:
    • 3.5% (July 1, 2025)
    • 3.5% (July 1, 2026)
    • 3% (July 1, 2027)
    • 3% (July 1, 2028)

Removal of the bottom two steps from the Assistant and Associate Librarian ranks.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

(Article 3)

Professional development funding was allocated as a pot of funds for each campus, but distribution was  inconsistent, and some librarians got as little as $850/year.

The University-wide research fund lagged behind demand and research costs.

Principal Investigator (PI) status eligibility for librarians on grants has been inconsistently applied, or unclear.

We won professional development funding on a per-capita (per-person) basis.

We won a minimum of $1,250/year for each librarian’s PDF. 

We won a 45% increase in the University-wide research fund to $35,000/year.

We won assurance that each campus will have clear local procedures documented for librarians to apply for Principal Investigator (PI) status.

Academic Status and Functions    
RECOGNITION

(Article 1)

Requirements and processes for the University to establish positions in the libraries, but which are outside of the Librarian series, were lacking. This encouraged misclassification of positions performing librarian duties outside of the Librarian series.

We won stronger protections against the University making unilateral changes to our bargaining unit. 

We extended the timeframe when our union can weigh in on proposals to create new positions outside of the unit.

MERIT, PROMOTION, CAREER STATUS

(Article 4)

Definition of Librarian professional services was outdated. A planned University revision of the parallel APM 360-4 definition would leave us unable to contribute to a properly updated definition without the ability to revisit.

Current librarian scholarship, work, and service already incorporating DEI practices or making field contributions is not yet considered an area of recognition or evaluation.

University responsibilities concerning remediation plans within the peer review process for career status librarians have been poorly defined and insufficient to actually achieve the titular goal of improvement.

We held the line that librarians should have a say in determining the definition of librarian and secured the right to reopen negotiations when the new Academic Personnel Manual (APM 360-4) is issued. 

We won recognition of DEI work as an element of librarian evaluation and review.

We won additional layers of protection for a remediation plan and peer review process that address rare instances where a career status librarian faces a potential termination decision.

ACADEMIC FREEDOM

(New Article)

Academic freedom was handled in a side letter in the previous contract. 

We won a new article that affirms the procedures for protecting academic freedom for librarians as outlined in APM 011. 

WAIVER

(Article 29)

The University has failed to consult LAUC on matters of professional and academic governance for librarianship, unilaterally modifying University policies while sidestepping UC-AFT’s role in bargaining and enforcing the terms and conditions of employment for represented librarians.

We won clear language that LAUC can be consulted on matters of professional governance without fear of direct dealing.

We won a defined process for handling APM revisions that affect our contract.

ASSIGNMENTS, TRANSFERS, AND REASSIGNMENTS

(Article 7)

Process for questions regarding excessive workload was very management-friendly, with little recourse for librarians.

We won a more robust process when additional duties are added to a librarian’s assignment, including consultation, timelines, and acknowledgement that librarians use their professional judgment to fulfill their duties.

TEMPORARY APPOINTEES

(Article 18)

Murky process that the University claimed made it impossible to convert temporary appointees to potential career status.  

We clarified the process and timelines to convert a temporary appointment to career status prior to the completion of the appointment, and to conduct an off-cycle review to inform the decision.

Remote Work and Curtailment    

FLEXIBLE WORK ARRANGEMENTS

(Article 32)

This short article did not include specifics as to what constituted a “flexible work arrangement.” 

There were no timelines for providing notice when modifying flexible work arrangements—even for fully remote librarians.

There was no right to request equipment needed for remote work.

We won clear language differentiating the types of flexible work: Alternative Work Schedules, Hybrid-Location Arrangements and Full-Time Remote Work Arrangements.

We won the right to have the University evaluate each request for flex work and to consider the individual librarian’s duties along with the operational needs of the library department.

We won processes and enforceable minimum timelines for setting and modifying flexible work arrangements, including fully remote librarians.

We won the right to request remote office ergonomic equipment and computer peripherals that are necessary for our work.

VACATION

(Article 21)

 

Requests for alternative work arrangements during winter curtailment were inconsistently treated, resulting in at least one campus issuing blanket denials and leading some librarians to simply work despite being forced to use vacation time or forego pay.

We won improved language for requesting alternative arrangements over winter curtailment.

We won the right to have those requests considered individually and acknowledged that librarians need flexibility in fulfilling their obligations as academic appointees.

Procedural improvements, updating and alignment to current policies, and technical corrections

Many of the gains we achieved in this negotiation relate to procedural improvements that will help us better serve members in grievances and other issue-resolution processes. We also updated links and other references to align with current procedures, practices and policies, and cleaned up for typos and inclusive language.  

  • Prohibitions on Workplace Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Abusive Conduct, and Retaliation (Article 2) (formerly Nondiscrimination)
  • Personnel Review Action Procedure (Article 5)
  • Personnel Files (Article 6)
  • Layoff (Article 8)
  • UC-AFT Rights (Article 10)
  • Release Time (Article 11)
  • Payroll Deductions (Article 12) (Formerly Dues Deductions)
  • University Benefits (Article 14)
  • Reduced Fee Enrollment (Article 15)
  • Holidays (Article 22)
  • Grievance Procedure (Article 24)
  • Arbitration (Article 25)
  • Reasonable Accommodation (Article 30)
  • Medical Separation (Article 31)