Friday’s ratification vote, approving California scientists’ tentative agreement with the state, marked a turning point for the relatively small, but active union.
Not only did California Association of Professional Scientists members overwhelmingly approve the measure, they also turned out in big numbers.
Shortly after the results were finalized Friday evening, CAPS-UAW President Jacqueline Tkac told The Sacramento Bee of the 91% of the members who participated in the election, 97% voted to ratify the proposed contract.
“This is truly a historic moment for our union,” Tkac said. “We can only go up from here.”
After more than four years of negotiating with the state, a strike last November and a recent partnership with the United Automobile Workers, scientists working in the public sector will see raises across the board, as well as benefits like longevity pay and disability insurance that are already extended to some other civil servants in the state.
The bitter fight over the contract stems largely from a pay gap between publicly employed scientists and engineers, similarly skilled professions that often work together. Engineers belong to a different union, the Professional Engineers in California Government, and make more money — in some cases 40% more, CAPS-UAW leaders say — than their scientist peers.
Labor experts say the collective actions of the last year paid off for CAPS-UAW members, who celebrated the contract as a strong foundation for the future as they seek to achieve full pay equity.
“Yes, strikes are effective,” said Ken Jacobs, co-chair of the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment at the University of California, Berkeley, Labor Center. “We’ve seen a lot of that in recent years: Workers demonstrating a commitment to get a strong contract.”
Crucial to that effort, members said, was affiliating with a larger, more established union. The scientists affiliated with UAW in April.
“UAW affiliation has helped us get where we are through their knowledge in bargaining,” said Jessy Fierro, a senior environmental scientist specialist with the Department of Toxic Substances Control. Fierro and Jacobs both noted that the larger union had more resources and experience, which benefited the scientists in the months since negotiations resumed this Spring.
Late last year the scientists union rejected the state’s “last, best and final offer,” which halted negotiations for four months.
Hannah Johnson, a research scientist with the Department of Public Health, said the sustained effort of members across the state helped make the strike in November a success. The strike helped put a spotlight on the scientists’ union, the CAPS-UAW secretary said.
The last year of organizing demonstrated that CAPS-UAW is committed to being a member-led, Democratic union, which has not previously been the unit’s structure. Johnson said she hopes other state services unions will replicate the mobilization efforts of the scientists.
The union’s strategy of taking a hard line proved successful, said Michael Shires, a former professor of economics and public policy at Pepperdine University. But the strategy wasn’t without risks especially given the state’s budget pressures.
“Part of this union’s success is its relatively small size. There just are not that many members so the total cost of this is relatively small in the context of the state’s budget,” Shires said.
For the nearly 3,000 CAPS-UAW members, the new contract would guarantee three salary increases beginning retroactively in July 2024. Those adjustments range between 14% and 23% for scientists at the top of their salary range. A financial analysis of the contract by the state’s Legislative Analyst Office reported that 36% of CAP-UAW members are at the top of their salary ranges.
For others who have not maxed out their salary range, the cumulative salary adjustment is a 9% increase.
Shires said the strike did set a precedent and that he would not be surprised to see more public employee unions looking at similar collective actions. But the real question, he added, “is whether voters who are facing higher taxes and fewer services are willing to continue to foot the bill.”
He said the sheer size of other unions is likely to keep them from striking, except as a weapon of last resort.
The LAO noted that the scientists’ pay bumps will be metered out through special salary increases, instead of general salary increases.
“This approach appears to be more precise or surgical in providing pay increases to bargaining unit members; however, it is not clear to us why the parties chose this approach or why some classifications were chosen for higher pay increases than others,” an August LAO financial analysis of the contract read.
The proposed agreement is expected to cost the state $40.8 million in 2024-25, according to the LAO analysis. By the third year of the contract’s existence, ongoing costs to the state will reach $93.7 million in total funds.
While members lauded the contract’s successes, they emphasized the need to continue pushing in future contract fights for higher wages for state scientists.
“It’s a really strong foundation that’s going to allow us to take care of ourselves and take care of our families and continue to provide the foundational science that the state depends on,” said Johnson.
Most Popular
Comments / 0