As Strike Deadline Looms, Manning Says Grad Union’s Title IX Demand Could Break Federal Law

Harvard Provost John F. Manning ’82 pushed back Friday against a central demand of the University’s graduate student union, warning that a proposal to require third-party arbitration in Title IX cases could violate federal law.

In an email to affiliates co-signed by Executive Vice President Meredith L. Weenick ’90, Manning wrote that the Harvard Graduate Students Union-United Auto Workers proposal would establish “distinct and separate set of non-discrimination, harassment, and anti-bullying processes” for union members — a system he said would conflict with both federal Title IX regulations and University policy requiring consistent procedures.

The message, sent four days before the union’s planned strike, reflects Harvard’s firm posture on several major sticking points in negotiations that have stretched more than a year.

Manning and Weenick also defended Harvard’s position on wages and union security, two issues that remain unresolved after 23 bargaining sessions. They described Harvard’s proposals of a 10 percent increase for salaried appointments as “in-line” with recent agreements, while rejecting the union’s demands to standardize research assistant base salaries and restructure other pay scales.

The administrators reiterated their opposition to an agency shop, writing that Harvard would not require all represented workers to pay union fees as a condition of employment. If the proposal is implemented, HGSU-UAW would stand to earn more than $1 million in dues from its workers. (Both the Harvard custodial workers and clerical and technical workers unions include provisions mandating an agency shop.)

“We will continue to negotiate, in good faith, over these and other important issues, while recognizing HGSU-UAW’s right to call a strike,” Manning and Weenick wrote. “If a strike occurs, we will continue to fulfill our obligations to our students and researchers.”

HGSU-UAW — which represents more than 4,000 graduate student workers, research assistants, and undergraduate teaching and course assistants — voted overwhelmingly to authorize a strike earlier this month. Both previous contract negotiations with the graduate student union resulted in strikes, temporarily impacting grading and teaching functions in 2019 and 2021.

The strike would mark a significant ratcheting up of an already tense bargaining cycle, marked by ongoing conflict over union representation. Negotiations began on uncertain terms, as conflict over bargaining observation resulted in the parties proceeding without ground rules.

At the bargaining table, Harvard’s negotiators have responded to proposals for distinct non-discrimination and anti-bullying procedures by moving to standardize procedures across the University. The move would centralize control over reported cases and strip some existing protections, including the ability for the union to negotiate over proposed changes to non-discrimination policy.

The divide extends to compensation. The University’s offer falls well below the union’s proposal, which calls for a roughly 74 percent increase for teaching fellows and a standardized $55,000 base salary for research assistants across disciplines, followed by annual five percent raises.

If the union moves forward with a strike on Tuesday, Manning and Weenick wrote that Harvard has begun contingency plans to maintain operations. They emphasized that while faculty and students may support the union, they will be expected to meet their academic obligations.

“We will take steps to ensure that teaching, learning, and research continue,” they wrote, “and that students, faculty, and other researchers can make progress toward their academic goals.”

—Staff writer Hugo C. Chiasson can be reached at [email protected] or on Signal at hcc.35. Follow him on X @HugoChiassonn.

—Staff writer Elise A. Spenner can be reached at [email protected] or on Signal at elisespenner.82. Follow her on X @EliseSpenner.