UCSD Fellows are NOW represented by the SDHSA! 

PERB Orders Fellows Added to SDHSA Unit

We got some great news – UCSD Fellows are now officially represented by the San Diego House Staff Association. On April 25, 2018, California’s Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) issued an Order adding UCSD Fellows to its unit, UCSD Housestaff. See PERB Case No. SF-UM-799-H.

SDHSA wishes to thank the SDHSA Board of Directors and the SDHSA Fellows’ Committee who invested the time and energy to make this a reality. In addition, we want to thank all of the UCSD Fellows that took the time out of their busy schedules to vote in the election last November. The SDHSA Negotiating Team including representatives of the Fellows is commencing negotiations for the 2018-2021 Contract. We look forward to seeing all the Fellows at our SDHSA Events!

Short History

When SDHSA was originally formed (prior to becoming a union), it represented both UCSD Residents and Fellows. For historical reasons, UCSD Fellows were left out of the original petition to California’s Public Employment Relations Board (PERB)  [https://www.perb.ca.gov/] seeking representation of UCSD’s Interns and Residents. Over time, it became apparent that these historical reasons were no longer of significant relevance and had resulted in the Fellows being denied many of the benefits SDHSA had negotiated for Residents. Over the years, SDHSA has sought to include the Fellows under SDHSA’s umbrella and formally proposed inclusion during the negotiations for 2015-2018 Contract. Inclusion was opposed by UCSD.

Finally in March of 2017, the SDHSA decided to force the issue by conducting an on-line vote of UCSD Fellows. The result of that vote was that ninety-five (95%) of the ballots were in favor of SDHSA being the Fellows’ exclusive labor representative. Thereafter, SDHSA formally requested that UCSD voluntarily recognize SDHSA the Fellows’ labor representative. UCSD declined. Unfortunately SDHSA’s original petition to PERB was rejected by a PERB on a technicality who on appeal ruled that only “wet” signatures were acceptable.

SDHSA and the UCSD Fellows’ Committee were not deterred. In November of 2017, UCSD finally agreed to participate in a jointly monitored vote of the UCSD Fellows. The result of that was that one-hundred percent (100%) of the Fellows who voted elected to be represented by the SDHSA as their exclusive labor representative. The matter was again required to be submitted to PERB. PERB found that SDHSA had a valid vote of a majority of the Fellows. Finally on April 25, 2018, PERB issued an Order adding UCSD Fellows to its unit, UCSD Housestaff. See PERB Case No. SF-UM-799-H. As a result, SDHSA is now the exclusive labor representative of UCSD Fellows in Title Codes 2726 and 2732.

Negotiations

Representation of the Fellows had taken on some urgency. SDHSA negotiations for a new Contract began in February of 2018, for the Contract period 2018-2021. UCSD will have to accept representatives of the Fellows in these negotiations.

In regard to various benefits, the Fellows were formerly not covered under SDHSA’s contract. Historically, this resulted in the Fellows being denied many benefits. The benefit which receives the most attention is the Housing Stipend. Yet, the benefits and protections offered by SDHSA representation can be thought of as a “bundle” of rights of which the Housing Stipend is only one. If you would like to contribute to our efforts, the SDHSA Fellows’ Committee can use all the help it can get!

Your Right to Report Without Retaliation

Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of health facilities, as defined, by the department. Existing law prohibits a health facility from discriminating or retaliating against a patient, employee, member of the medical staff, or any other health care worker of the health facility because that person has presented a grievance, complaint, or report to the facility, as specified, or has initiated, participated, or cooperated in an investigation or administrative proceeding related to the quality of care, services, or conditions at the facility, as specified. Existing law makes a person who willfully violates those provisions guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $20,000 and makes a violation of those provisions subject to a civil penalty. Recent legislation has increased the maximum fine for a misdemeanor violation of these provisions to $75,000. See California Health and Safety Code Section 1278.5

GC 3587 Report

Pursuant to California Government Code Section 3587, the San Diego House Staff Association makes available to UCSD employees, who are current members of the SDHSA, its annual Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss Statement for the last fiscal year, upon a written request made to Paul Mirowski, Mirowski & Associates, 8030 La Mesa Blvd., # 501, La Mesa CA 91942. Any questions, please direct them to Paul Mirowski pmirowski@mirlaw.com.

Hudson Notice

Under former law, California unions (such as SDHSA) were entitled to fund their activities by collecting membership “dues” from SDHSA Members (those who execute a Membership application) and by charging a “fair share service fees” or “agency fees” to non-members who benefit from the Union’s representation. These were called “fair share” fees because it was deemed by the Supreme Court to be unfair for persons to benefit from the union’s activities while not contributing to funding those activities (such persons were often referred to as “free riders.”) See  Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) 431 U.S. 209.

Since Abood went into law, it has been the goal of conservative anti-union interests to injure or destroy unions by overturing Abood. As a result a number of anti-union States have enacted what are called (inappropriately) “Right to Work” Laws. Unfortunately, the Republican congress was recently able to stack the current Supreme Court with anti-labor justices and in June of 2018, they succeeded in overturning Abood. See Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, 585 U.S. ____ (2018). The essence of the  Janus decision was to allow “free Riders” and eliminate Fair Share Fee Payers.

As part of the prior law, Unions were required to provide an annual financial report to Agency Fee Payers which was often referred to as the “Hudson Report.” See Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986) 475 U.S. 292, 106 S. Ct. 1066, 89 L. Ed. 2d 232 and Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8, § 32992. Given that there are no longer any Agency Fee Payers, SDHSA is no longer required to provide this Report. If any UCSD Resident was an Agency Fee Payer during the 2017-2018 Academic year, they may, upon providing proof of Agency Fee status during that period, send a written request for a copy of the 2017 Hudson Report to Paul Mirowski, Mirowski & Associates, 8030 La Mesa Blvd., # 501, La Mesa CA 91942. Any questions, please direct them to Paul Mirowski pmirowski@mirlaw.com.