Graduate Employees Organization (GEO) Negotiations
The collective bargaining agreement between the Graduate Employees Organization (GEO) IFT/AFT 6300 and the University will expire August 15, 2026. Negotiations for a successor agreement began on April 6, 2026.
Seventh Bargaining Session Recap – August 6, 2026
On August 6, 2026, at the Illini Union, the GEO and the University met for the seventh time to negotiate a successor agreement. The bargaining session lasted approximately three hours.
The session began with the GEO stating that it understood the University had a package proposal to present and advising that GEO also had a package proposal to present first. The GEO further advised that it would not have a response to the University’s economic proposal during this session because the GEO was still reviewing the proposal.
Before bargaining began, the University offered an apology to the GEO regarding recent errors in offer letters issued to several assistants. The University stated that it is implementing additional measures to help ensure similar errors do not occur in the future. The University explained that its response is consistent with past practice and the collective bargaining process currently underway, as well as the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act.
The GEO then presented its package proposal, stating that it had made additional changes to proposed Article V, Disciplinary Procedures, and Article XXI, Grievance Procedure. Under proposed Article V, the GEO proposed that assistants be entitled to more than one union representative during an informal discussion with a supervisor when they reasonably believe the discussion could lead to discipline. The GEO also proposed a new section providing that Letters of Expectation be considered a form of discipline. Under Article XXI, the GEO agreed with the University’s proposal to reduce grievance process timelines from 30 days to 25 days.
The University then presented its package proposal, which included proposed changes to Article III, Nondiscrimination Statement, and Article VIII, Use of University Resources. The University proposed renaming Article VIII to Miscellaneous Provisions and incorporating sections addressing Use of University Resources, Union Access, Union Membership, and Inappropriate Workplace Behavior. The University explained that the proposed renaming of Article VIII was intended to create a single location for several topics proposed by the GEO. The University further explained that it had incorporated the GEO’s proposal regarding bullying into the proposed section on Inappropriate Workplace Behavior because that concept encompasses bullying while also addressing a broader range of workplace conduct concerns. The parties then caucused to review each other’s proposals.
Following the caucus, the GEO advised the University that GEO was unwilling to discuss the contents of the University’s package proposal. The GEO stated that because Article VIII, Use of University Resources, was already the subject of a tentative agreement between the parties, it would not discuss the proposal. The University asked several clarifying questions regarding the GEO’s position, noting that the proposal involved renaming a single article and seeking clarification regarding how the GEO would be willing to discuss the topics contained within the package proposal.
The University then presented its counterproposal to the GEO’s package proposal. Under Article V, Disciplinary Procedures, the University proposed that assistants be entitled to the presence of up to two union representatives during an informal discussion with a supervisor. The University also agreed to the GEO’s proposed language regarding Letters of Expectation. In addition, the University agreed to the GEO’s proposed grievance timelines under Article XXI, Grievance Procedure.
The GEO responded that, while it believed the parties were close to reaching agreement on the issues addressed in the counterproposal, it was not prepared to respond during the session and needed additional time to review the proposal.
The GEO then asked several questions regarding economic issues, particularly healthcare premiums, childcare subsidies, and the University’s proposed salary increases for assistants. The parties discussed their differing positions regarding childcare and wage increases. During the discussion, the University noted that the GEO did not have answers to questions concerning assistants’ individual childcare situations that it was raising. The University also noted that its proposed salary increases are the largest received by any collective bargaining unit on campus during the past four years.
Following another caucus, the GEO advised the University that GEO was presenting a second package proposal addressing Article IV, Appointment Terms, Article XII, Distribution of Information, and Article XXII, Health and Safety.
Some members of the GEO left prior to the conclusion of bargaining. The bargaining session then concluded with both parties acknowledging that there would not be sufficient time to fully review the GEO’s second package proposal. The parties agreed that further discussion of the proposal would occur at the beginning of the next bargaining session. The parties adjourned at approximately 11:57 a.m.
Previous Bargaining Summaries
First Bargaining Session Recap – April 6, 2026
On April 6, 2026, the Graduate Employee Organization (GEO) and the University held their initial negotiation session at the Illini Union to begin the process of negotiating a successor agreement. The session lasted three (3) hours and began with introductions of the negotiators and bargaining committee members for both parties.
Following introductions, the University presented its proposed ground rules for negotiations. The University explained that while many of the proposed ground rules are similar to those agreed upon during prior negotiations, some differences reflect the fact that the previous negotiations occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.
After the ground rules were presented, the GEO began an overview of its initial two (2)-year contract proposal. The GEO requested that the University limit its questions to clarifying questions until the GEO had completed presentation of the proposal in its entirety.
The GEO’s initial contract proposal included the following economic proposals: salary minimums of $27,380 for a nine-month, 50% appointment for year one (1), and $30,250 for year two (2); a proposed six percent (6%) wage increase in year one (1) and a greater of two percent (2%) or the campus wage program increase in year two (2) for reappointed assistants; a waiver of all student fees; elimination of the ninety-one (91) day rule for tuition waivers; University payment of one hundred percent (100%) of the premium cost for individual and dependent health insurance; a summer stipend for assistants regardless of whether they hold a summer assistantship; a $500 monthly childcare stipend; a stipend to offset tax withholdings related to tuition waivers; and establishment of an International Graduate Worker Assistance Fund with a minimum annual allocation of $1,000,000 for each year of the agreement.
The GEO’s initial proposal also included several non-economic proposals, including additional employee rights and procedures related to the University’s handling of interactions with federal immigration authorities. These proposals would require the University to notify the GEO of certain interactions between assistants and immigration or law enforcement authorities. The GEO also proposed language intended to ensure compliance with relevant laboratory standards and to establish safety standards for non-laboratory and fieldwork environments. Additional proposals sought to ensure academic freedom and intellectual property as contractual rights of employment. The GEO also proposed changes to disciplinary procedures and revisions to the definition of hours of work for assistants, including the requirement that assistants receive set schedules defined in their Notices of Appointment.
After the GEO completed its presentation, the parties discussed potential dates for the next bargaining session, tentatively identifying April 21 or April 23. The GEO asked whether the University would present its proposal at the next meeting. The University stated that, at the next session, it intends to ask more in-depth questions regarding the GEO’s initial proposal and expects to present its non-economic proposals at the third bargaining session. The GEO indicated that it would review the University’s proposed ground rules prior to the next meeting. The session then concluded.
Second Bargaining Session Recap – April 23, 2026
On April 23, 2026, the Graduate Employee Organization (GEO) and the University met for the second time at the Illini Union to negotiate a successor agreement. The negotiation session lasted two and one-half (2.5) hours and began with introductions by both parties.
Following introductions, the GEO and the University confirmed that the purpose of the session was for the University to ask clarifying questions regarding the GEO’s proposal. The University inquired whether the GEO had responded to the University’s proposed bargaining ground rules. The GEO stated that it had not yet done so and was still reviewing the proposal. The GEO then asked the University a clarifying question regarding proposal number nine (9) in the University’s proposed ground rules concerning a designated spokesperson.
The University subsequently asked the GEO several clarifying questions regarding the GEO’s initial proposal. These questions addressed topics including recognition, proposed changes to the nondiscrimination statement, appointment terms, revised notices of appointment, disciplinary procedures, training for assistants, and proposed changes to assistants’ hours of work.
At the conclusion of the bargaining session, the University had not completed all its clarifying questions. Both parties agreed to meet again for a third bargaining session on May 12. The University committed to asking its remaining clarifying questions during the next session and to presenting a counterproposal on non-economic items by the end of that session.
Next Session: May 12, 2026, 9 a.m. at the Illini Union
Third Bargaining Session Recap – May 12, 2026
On May 12, 2026, the GEO and the university met for the third time at the Illini Union to negotiate a successor agreement. The negotiation session lasted four hours.
The session began with the GEO responding to the university’s initially proposed ground rules. The GEO indicated agreement with the majority of the university’s proposals, with the exception of a few clarifying questions related to livestreaming on social media and a proposed revision requiring mutual agreement between the parties for virtual negotiations. After further discussion, the university and the GEO reached agreement on ground rules for subsequent bargaining sessions.
The university then asked the GEO remaining clarifying questions regarding the GEO’s initial proposal, including the following topics: distribution of information and the university’s ability to discuss information about bargaining unit members; salary compensation for assistants who do not hold summer appointments; summer automatic waivers; the GEO’s intent behind proposed changes to the Healthcare article; laboratory and fieldwork safety standards; and artificial intelligence. After numerous questions posed by the university, the GEO acknowledged that a separate health insurance plan for bargaining unit represented assistants would not be cost effective.
The university expressed agreement with the GEO’s proposal to change references to common terms throughout the Agreement. The university then presented its counterproposal on non-economic items. Proposed changes included the following: defining harassment in accordance with HR-48 of the Campus Administrative Manual; changing references to “Notice of Appointment,” to “Offers of Employment” to better reflect the practice of issuing offers of employment to assistants; requiring that requests for an explanation of a delayed offer letter be made within 30 days of the start of the semester or appointment; proposing that eligibility for gross payment related to late offer letters be at the university’s discretion; incorporating several Memorandums of Agreement into the contract regarding preprofessional graduate assistant duties, taxation, evaluation of research assistants, and healthcare; removing contractual language permitting assistants to purchase healthcare service at McKinley Health Center for any individual; and deleting a 2009 Memorandum of Understanding regarding oral English proficiency requirements.
During and after the university’s presentation of its non-economic counterproposal, the GEO questioned why several new articles and sections from the GEO’s initial proposal were not addressed. The university indicated it was willing to discuss these new articles and sections but stated that the GEO would need to revise its proposed contractual language for further consideration. The university also noted that the current language includes several permissive or illegal subjects of bargaining. Permissive subjects of bargaining are matters that neither party is required to negotiate, such as limitations on information shared with other university employees. An illegal subject of bargaining is a topic that violates the law and therefore cannot be negotiated, included in, or enforced through a collective bargaining agreement, such as compensation for individuals who are not working.
At the conclusion of the session, the GEO asked why it had not yet received an economic counterproposal and when one could be expected. The university responded that it is still completing its cost analysis of the GEO’s economic proposals. While noting that an economic proposal could be presented in July, the university stated that it is premature to do so given the substantial number of non-economic items that remain unresolved.
The university and the GEO confirmed that their next bargaining session is scheduled for June 18, with two additional sessions scheduled in July.
Next Session: June 18, 2026, 1 p.m. Location to be determined at a later time.
Fourth Bargaining Session Recap – June 18, 2026
On June 18, 2026, the GEO and the University held their fourth bargaining session at the University YMCA. The session lasted just over two and a half hours.
The GEO presented the University with a package proposal consisting of items the GEO believed were at or near agreement. Following a caucus, the University agreed to the package proposal, resulting in tentative agreement on the following articles: Article I (Purpose); Article II (Recognition); Article VI (Evaluations); Article VIII (Use of University Resources); Article IX (Management Rights); Article XIII (Personnel Files); Article XXIII (Labor-Management Meetings and Consultation); Article XXIV (Scope of the Agreement); Article XXV (Savings Clause); and Article XXVI (No Strike/No Lockout).
The session continued with the GEO asking questions regarding the University’s non-economic proposals presented at the prior session. Specifically, the GEO inquired about Article III (Nondiscrimination Statement), Article IV (Appointment Terms), and Article VII (Hours of Work).
Following a caucus, the GEO continued its questions regarding Article VII, as well as Article XXII (Health and Safety). The GEO also asked for the University’s response to the GEO’s proposals related to international graduate workers and its proposal on summer funding. In addition, the GEO asked when it might expect an economic proposal from the University.
The University responded that it intends to provide an economic proposal before the expiration of the current agreement; however, it is still evaluating the budgetary impact of the GEO’s proposals. The University also noted that a number of non-economic proposals remain to be addressed before the parties move to economic discussions.
The next session is scheduled for July 9 at 9 a.m. at the University YMCA.
Fifth Bargaining Session Recap – July 9, 2026
On July 9, 2026, at the University YMCA, the GEO and the university met for the fifth time to negotiate a successor agreement. The bargaining session lasted approximately three hours.
The session began with the university presenting a package proposal that included a newly proposed Article V (Disciplinary Procedures). The proposal incorporated some language that the GEO had previously proposed. The package also included proposed changes to Article XIX (Dues Deductions) and Article XXI (Grievance Procedure), including the university’s agreement to the GEO’s proposed language regarding representatives throughout the grievance process and an increase in the number of submitted panel arbitrators from five to seven.
After asking several clarifying questions, the GEO requested a caucus to review the university’s proposal. The caucus lasted approximately 30 minutes. Upon returning, the GEO asked additional clarifying questions regarding the university’s package proposal and advised that it needed more time to review the proposal and would not be providing a response during that session.
The GEO then presented a new package proposal. The proposal included changes to Article III (Nondiscrimination Statement), including additional language related to national origin, a provision stating that unwelcome conduct must be subjectively offensive, and a proposed new section addressing bullying. The package also included the GEO’s agreement to some of the university’s proposed revisions to common terms. In addition, the GEO proposed a new section regarding course information under Article IV (Appointment Terms). The package also contained proposed language changes to Article VII (Hours of Work), as well as additional proposed changes to Article XII (Distribution of Information) and information requests related to Article XXII (Health and Safety).
The university then asked several clarifying questions regarding the GEO’s package proposal, noting that the proposal contained several economic items and was substantially similar to the GEO’s previous proposal. The parties then caucused for approximately 50 minutes.
After returning from caucus, the GEO confirmed that, while it would not have a counterproposal that day, it would present one at the next bargaining session. The GEO also asked when it could expect to receive an economic proposal from the university. The university responded that it anticipated presenting an economic proposal at either the next bargaining session or the one following it.
The next bargaining session is scheduled for July 20, 2026, at 1 p.m. at the Illini Union.
Sixth Bargaining Session Recap – July 20, 2026
On July 20, 2026, at the Illini Union, the GEO and the university met for the sixth time to negotiate a successor agreement. The bargaining session lasted approximately 2 hours and 45 minutes.
The session began with the GEO presenting a package proposal responding to the university’s previous proposals regarding disciplinary procedures and the grievance process. The GEO proposed revisions to Article V (Disciplinary Procedures), including language clarifying that performance, behavior, and attendance issues are subject to the grievance procedure; maintaining a reasonable number of union representatives during meetings; establishing notice requirements for pre-disciplinary meetings; and requiring investigatory meetings to occur prior to disciplinary meetings. The GEO also proposed revisions to Article XXI (Grievance Procedure), including expanding to a 30-business day grievance filing period and ensuring timelines related to grievance hearings and appeals.
The university asked several clarifying questions regarding the GEO’s proposal and then presented a package proposal addressing articles discussed during the previous bargaining session. The university’s proposal included revisions to Article IV (Appointment Terms), including language related to notices of appointment, secure electronic transmission of appointment information, preferred and chosen names, resignations, and non-reappointment explanations. The proposal also included responses to GEO proposals regarding course information and other appointment-related provisions. The university further presented revisions to Article XII (Distribution of Information). The proposal accepted some GEO suggestions while maintaining the university’s position on the scope of information provided to the union and rejecting several proposed provisions concerning additional employee academic information, communication methods, and use of physical and electronic bulletin boards. The university also presented revisions to Article XXII (Health and Safety), including references to applicable campus policies and clarification regarding reporting health and safety concerns.
The GEO asked a number of clarifying questions regarding the university’s proposals, particularly concerning appointment timelines, access to information, free speech-related proposals, and reporting mechanisms. The parties discussed their differing positions regarding certain permissive subjects of bargaining and the university’s continued preference to focus negotiations on mandatory subjects of bargaining and not the GEO’s proposed limits on the university’s right to share identifying or personal information with other governmental bodies.
Following a caucus, the university presented revised proposals on Article V (Disciplinary Procedures), Article XIX (Dues Deductions) and Article XXI (Grievance Procedure). The revisions incorporated some GEO proposed language regarding representation during investigatory and disciplinary meetings and made additional modifications to disciplinary procedures and grievance language. The parties continued discussions regarding grievance timelines, representation rights, and disciplinary documentation.
The university then presented its first economic package proposal. The proposal included a four-year contract term and proposed increases to the assistant minimum salary of 3.5% in Year 1, raising the minimum to $25,047 effective the first pay period following effectuation; 3.0% in Year 2, increasing the minimum to $25,798 effective August 16, 2027; 2.0% in Year 3, increasing the minimum to $26,314 effective August 16, 2028; and 2.0% in Year 4, increasing the minimum to $26,841 effective August 16, 2029. The proposal also provided reappointment increases of 3.5% for reappointed assistants in Year 1, effective the first pay period following effectuation, with campus wage program increases applied in Years 2 through 4. In addition, the university proposed exploring the feasibility of implementing a semi-monthly pay schedule. The proposal maintained the university’s previous position on fee waivers, withdrew a proposed change limiting spouse access to McKinley Health Center services, and identified paid time off language as an issue requiring additional discussion, particularly in light of the inclusion of research assistants in the bargaining unit
The GEO asked several questions regarding the economic proposal, including the proposed contract duration, wage increases, healthcare provisions, visa reimbursement amounts, summer funding, and the potential transition to semi-monthly pay. The university explained its rationale for a four-year agreement, discussed its position on healthcare and visa-related proposals.
The bargaining session concluded with the GEO advising that it would need time to review the university’s economic proposal and discuss it with its membership before providing a response. The parties adjourned at approximately 3:50 p.m.
The next bargaining session is scheduled for August 6, 2026, at 9 a.m. at the Illini Union.