Union, University Views Of Joint Committee Clash

Letters circulated by the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers (HUCTW) and the University this month show serious disagreements about the role and purpose of the new Joint Committee on Benefits (JCB).

The documents outline clashing views of the purpose and powers of the committee that William Jacger, director of HUCTW, called "the most important thing that was agreed upon" in recent contract negotiations.

In September, the University and HUCTW signed a three-year contract which included the formation of the JCB and set a delayed schedule for implementation of some of the most contentious benefits changes proposed by the University last year.

On October 5, HUCTW leadership sent a letter to all members because of the "potentially confusing communications about benefits from the University." The letter stressed the importance of the JCB as a forum for "ongoing deliberations on a number of yet unresolved benefits issues."

On October 16, Candace Corvey, associate vice president for human resources, sent a memo to many members of the University's administration that takes issue with the Union's statements.

"Recently the HUCTW leadership published a letter informing employees that HUCTW benefits are 'unresolved' under the new contract and that the existence of the new Joint Committee on Benefits means that 'negotiations are ongoing' with regard to all of the scheduled benefits changes," Corvey's memo reads. "Both statements are totally false."

The letter from the Union actually reads, "These events are a big part of our ongoing efforts to negotiate good, fair benefits policies."

In the recent contract negotiations, union leaders said they agreed to accept on January 1, 1997 a University contribution of 85 percent of the lowest-cost health care plan, Harvard University Group Health Plan.

For workers who earn under $45,000--the vast majority of the union members--this results in a decreased payment to the lowest-cost plan, while the other seven health plans have grown more expensive. All employees will also pay a $10 co-payment per visit.

Although the HUCTW memo stressed the possibility of changes to the benefits alterations, Director of Communications for the Office of Human Resources Merry Touborg indicated yesterday that University employees must select health plans based on the current numbers.

Corvey's memo reads: "Apart from my deep general concern about misrepresentations that HUCTW leaders have fostered, I am most worried about individual staff members who may not be giving serious thought to benefits decisions they need to make this fall."

Employees began to choose plans on Monday and have until November 3 to make their decisions.

For HUCTW, these choices reflect changes in benefits," Touborg said. "Employees need to act on [benefits plans] available today."

Although Corvey and Touborg are urging employees to choose plans now based on scheduled benefits, the Union's letter says issues like the co-payment "can and should be studied thoroughly and modifications considered before their scheduled implementation date of January 1, 1996."

"The University's letters might lead one to believe that the implementation of the benefits changes will happen automatically, or that they are already an accomplished fact," the letter reads.

Touborg said she considers the changes just that. The changes will take effect automatically on January 1, in accordance with the implementation schedule in the contract, she said.

"There seems to have been some confusion that because there is a committee that can continue to discuss [benefits] that none of these changes will go into effect," Touborg said. "The implementation of these changes [was]... agreed to in the contract."

"The contract is settled. There are still ongoing discussions about benefits," she said. "Both of those things are true."

HUCTW's letter and Corvey's memo have other disparities.

"In order to allow a meaningful, joint process to work in the JCB, it may be necessary to delay, lengthen or re-open the open enrollment period," the HUCTW letter reads.

"Under no conditions will the open enrollment period be delayed, lengthened or re-opened," Corvey's memo says in bold print.

According to the JCB's charter, the committee can "examine," "review," "recommend" and "provide guidance" on a wide array of benefits policies, including "existing programs."

Any recommendations the JCB makes must be reviewed by the provost, and, if forwarded, would then need the approval of the president and the Corporation, the University's highest governing body, to become policy.

Last year, a committee for the Faculty of Arts and Sciences forwarded a recommendation to halt the one percent pension decrease. The Corporation rejected that proposal.

Donene M. Williams, the president of HUCTW, said this week she was surprised by Corvey's memo.

"I don't completely understand the tone or the specifics of her memo," Williams said. "I wasn't expecting it, and I wouldn't say it's an accurate representation. The dealings with her on the committee have been cordial and optimistic."

Despite these differing views of the JCB, union leadership remained positive about the committee's deliberations.

Williams said she thought the first meeting of the committee, which took place on October 6, "was generally very good."

"Our whole team was pleased we were able to [get to work]," she said.

Union Director Jaeger said HUCTW "had a chance to make it clear that we have long-term hopes and urgent short-term concerns" and called the deliberations "serious" and "healthy."

Jaeger said he hoped the committee's talks will bring about change in the current levels of University contribution to health care plans.

"We're pretty determined to have a positive, constructive process that can withstand temporary confusion," Jaeger said

For HUCTW, these choices reflect changes in benefits," Touborg said. "Employees need to act on [benefits plans] available today."

Although Corvey and Touborg are urging employees to choose plans now based on scheduled benefits, the Union's letter says issues like the co-payment "can and should be studied thoroughly and modifications considered before their scheduled implementation date of January 1, 1996."

"The University's letters might lead one to believe that the implementation of the benefits changes will happen automatically, or that they are already an accomplished fact," the letter reads.

Touborg said she considers the changes just that. The changes will take effect automatically on January 1, in accordance with the implementation schedule in the contract, she said.

"There seems to have been some confusion that because there is a committee that can continue to discuss [benefits] that none of these changes will go into effect," Touborg said. "The implementation of these changes [was]... agreed to in the contract."

"The contract is settled. There are still ongoing discussions about benefits," she said. "Both of those things are true."

HUCTW's letter and Corvey's memo have other disparities.

"In order to allow a meaningful, joint process to work in the JCB, it may be necessary to delay, lengthen or re-open the open enrollment period," the HUCTW letter reads.

"Under no conditions will the open enrollment period be delayed, lengthened or re-opened," Corvey's memo says in bold print.

According to the JCB's charter, the committee can "examine," "review," "recommend" and "provide guidance" on a wide array of benefits policies, including "existing programs."

Any recommendations the JCB makes must be reviewed by the provost, and, if forwarded, would then need the approval of the president and the Corporation, the University's highest governing body, to become policy.

Last year, a committee for the Faculty of Arts and Sciences forwarded a recommendation to halt the one percent pension decrease. The Corporation rejected that proposal.

Donene M. Williams, the president of HUCTW, said this week she was surprised by Corvey's memo.

"I don't completely understand the tone or the specifics of her memo," Williams said. "I wasn't expecting it, and I wouldn't say it's an accurate representation. The dealings with her on the committee have been cordial and optimistic."

Despite these differing views of the JCB, union leadership remained positive about the committee's deliberations.

Williams said she thought the first meeting of the committee, which took place on October 6, "was generally very good."

"Our whole team was pleased we were able to [get to work]," she said.

Union Director Jaeger said HUCTW "had a chance to make it clear that we have long-term hopes and urgent short-term concerns" and called the deliberations "serious" and "healthy."

Jaeger said he hoped the committee's talks will bring about change in the current levels of University contribution to health care plans.

"We're pretty determined to have a positive, constructive process that can withstand temporary confusion," Jaeger said