UC Workers United

2 weeks ago

$12B science bond to offset Trump research cuts misses California ballot deadline
University of California leaders, UAW 4811, UAW Region6 and scientists had supported the bill, which they called critical to securing the future of science in the state.
www.berkeleyside.org/2026/06/29/12b-science-bond-to-offset-trump-research-cuts-misses-california-…
By Felicia Mello
June 29, 2026, 2:19 p.m.

California Assembly Member Pilar Schiavo listens to Caltech Ph.D. student Isaac Aguilar explain his research on metals found in the ash following the Los Angeles fires during a science fair for threatened and cancelled research held in Sacramento on Jan. 26. Credit: Fred Greaves for Berkeleyside
A proposed $12 billion bond measure to fund scientific research missed a deadline last week to qualify for the November ballot, dimming the hopes of scholars and University of California leaders who had aimed to use the funds to backfill losses in federal grants.

Are you a UC researcher whose work has been affected by federal grant cancellations?
Send me an email to reporter Felicia Mello at felicia@berkeleyside.org, or message her on Signal at Felicia.97.
State Sen. Scott Wiener urged state legislative leaders on Friday to extend the deadline and place the measure on the ballot in a joint statement with two other authors of the bill and a union leader, saying the Trump administration’s slashing of federal science funding “calls for real urgency.” (Any deal would likely need to happen before July 2, when the Legislature is set to adjourn for the summer.)

The bond proposal came as the administration has canceled thousands of grants to scientists nationwide that it said didn’t align with its priorities and is proposing rules that would further politicize federal grantmaking. UC Berkeley alone has lost tens of millions in funding from the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health and other federal agencies.

“The University of California is facing the most significant disruption to our research enterprise in our history,” UC President James Milliken said at a May rally in support of the bond.

The bill would have given Californians the opportunity to vote in November on whether to set up a state fund to support research in curing deadly diseases, preventing wildfires, tackling climate change and other scientific quests. In addition to raising $12 billion through a bond measure, the state would also have collected private donations, and would have received a portion of the revenue from inventions developed with money from the fund.

State Sen. Scott Wiener, who has proposed the multi-billion-dollar scientific research fund, talks at the science fair in January. Credit: Fred Greaves for Berkeleyside
Originally designed to raise $23 billion, the proposal was scaled down during the legislative process and passed the state Senate with bipartisan support. But it failed to make it to the Assembly floor before Thursday’s deadline for measures to qualify for the November ballot.

Nick Miller, a spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, said legislative leaders — who typically come to an agreement with the governor before placing bonds on the ballot — faced painful choices as they tried to plan for Medicaid cuts and other federal policy changes that were likely to impact the state in the near future.

“Trump’s full-scale assault on California touches nearly every public service and program,” Miller wrote in an email. “California simply cannot backfill all these draconian cuts — and the economic chaos Trump has unleashed forces the state to prepare for even more uncertainty ahead, severely constraining bonding capacity.”

A spokesperson for the governor’s office did not respond to messages seeking comment.

As California’s leading public research university, UC Berkeley would have likely benefited significantly from the state fund, along with other UC campuses, private universities and labs.

“Scientific discoveries are absolutely critical to working families across California,” Mike Miller, president of United Auto Workers Region 6, a union that represents UC scientists, said in a joint statement Friday with Wiener and Assembly coauthor José Luis Solache. They urged the Assembly, Senate and Governor Gavin Newsom to place the bond on the ballot, saying it would “secure the future of science in California.”

Researchers say their jobs have become more unstable as Trump administration has pulled back on funding

The campaign for SB 895 marked a rare moment of collaboration between the leadership of the UC and unions representing the university’s scientists, both of which sponsored the bill. Early-career scientists in particular emerged from their labs to hold a mock science fair, gather signatures from the public, and otherwise try to convince legislators that their work is critical to the state’s future.

large-science-saves-lives_2026_01_26_FG23488.jpeg
Christopher Rae, a UC Berkeley postdoctoral researcher who is investigating potential new treatments for tuberculosis, at the January science fair. Credit: Fred Greaves for Berkeleyside
Lara Schwarz, a UC Berkeley postdoc who studies how heat waves and wildfire affect human health, said job opportunities in her field were far more scarce than they had been just two years ago, as the National Institutes of Health pulled back on funding.

“California is experiencing more and more heat waves and wildfire smoke events and that’s not going away anytime soon,” she said. “The fact that we won’t have the funding to research this and understand how to respond is going to lead to drastic consequences on the health of Californians.”

The science bond, she hoped, could prevent researchers like her from needing to go abroad to pursue their work — or leaving the field altogether.

Housing bond may have crowded science bond off the ballot

Science bond supporters also faced competition from another pressing California challenge: the state’s housing crisis. Last week, Newsom struck an agreement with legislative leaders to place an $11 billion bond measure on the ballot that would fund the building and preservation of affordable housing.

Because bonds are essentially large loans the state takes out, with taxpayers paying the interest, their supporters often worry that having more than one such big-ticket measure on the ballot can weaken voter buy-in. State leaders, too, fear taking on too much debt. Voters are also set to decide in November on a more narrowly focused $8 billion bond measure, backed by billionaire philanthropist Gary Michelson and some patient advocacy groups, that would fund research into immunotherapy for serious diseases.

While court rulings have restored many of the grants to UC researchers that the Trump administration had sought to cancel, deep uncertainty remains about the future of federal science funding. Rules proposed by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget last month would require political appointees to review all new grants to ensure they serve the president’s priorities.

And in April, the National Science Foundation suspended another $21 million in research grants to UC Berkeley, saying the university failed to report foreign funding received by the projects’ principal investigators, a charge some of those researchers denied. … See MoreSee Less

$12B science bond to offset Trump research cuts misses California ballot deadline

www.berkeleyside.org

University of California leaders and scientists had supported the bill, which they called critical to securing the future of science in the state.

UC Workers United

3 weeks ago

UAW 4811 Lining Up With Zionist Scott Wiener To Push Bond For Reasearch Funds Rather Than Taxing Billionaires.
State Tax Funds Will Also Go To Private Biotech Companies
Hundreds of UAW members rally to get $12 billion research bond on ballot
www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article316251545.html
Hundreds rally to get $12 billion research bond on ballot. Will it make it? By Tarini Mehta Updated June 25, 2026 6:43 PM Students, faculty and community m Hundreds of UAW members rally to get $12 billion research bond on ballot their support for SB 895, which would place a $12 billion research bond on the November ballot. Tarini Mehta tarini.mehta@sacbee.com Ruby Kharod researches solutions to climate change at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Erika Anderson is a postdoctoral scholar at UC San Francisco harnessing molecular biology to better understand the development of diseases. Lara Schwarz studies the effect of wildfires and heat waves on public health at UC Berkeley. Early Wednesday morning, they made their way to Sacramento alongside about 200 students, faculty and community members to appeal to legislators to place a $12 billion research bond on the November ballot. Against the federal government’s massive funding cuts to scientific research, the proposed bond seeks to stabilize science funding in California by providing research grants and loans for medical, environmental and agricultural research. “There’s a lot of uncertainty because a lot of our research is depending on federal funding,” Schwarz said. “It unfortunately makes me have to consider other alternatives than staying in academia in the U.S. (This bill) would change that by creating a funding source that ensures sustainability and the ability to continue doing this research in California.” Depending on interest rates, the total cost of the bond to California taxpayers will be somewhere between $21.5 billion and $23.4 billion, according to a legislative analysis of the bill. A bond is a type of long-term borrowing that the state uses to raise money for various purposes. The state obtains the money by selling bonds to investors and agrees to repay it, with interest, per a specified schedule. But the bond will only make it onto voters’ ballots in November if Senate Bill 895, authored by Sens. Scott Wiener, Aisha Wahab and Sasha Pérez, moves out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee and wins approval on the floor of the Assembly and from Gov. Gavin Newsom. And time is running out. The last day for measures to qualify to appear on the ballot is Thursday, June 25, according to the California Secretary of State. Now, supporters of the bond are hoping lawmakers will use their power to push the deadline. At the committee hearing Wednesday, the room overflowed with supporters who queued up in the room and outside in the corridor to make public comment and emphasize the importance of the bill. Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland — who chairs the committee — noted that the “normal protocol” required a three-party negotiated deal between Gov. Gavin Newsom, Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, before the bill can move forward. For now, it remains on the committee’s “suspense” calendar. “It’s critically important that we reach a three-party deal to put this science bond on the ballot,” said Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, in a statement. “Right now our state is hemorrhaging scientific talent because of the horrifying cuts made by the Trump administration, which endanger life-saving treatments for millions of families and California’s leadership on the world stage. Science can deliver miracles for Californians, but it needs stability and support.” While the deadline to get the measure on the ballot is June 25, the legislature has the ability to waive the deadline for legislative measures, the California Secretary of State said. There have been instances in past years when lawmakers have done so. In 2020, for example, Sen. Tom Umberg, D-Villa Park, authored a bill that called for a special election on five constitutional amendments to be consolidated with the general election in November — even though the ballot measure deadline had passed. The bill, which received the governor’s approval, asked the Secretary of State to bypass the Elections Code provision that requires a minimum of 131 days between the passage of a measure by the Legislature and the election it will be a part of. The window, though, is a tight one, given the Secretary of State’s other upcoming deadlines for the Nov. 3 election. Still, supporters of the science bond are holding out hope. “There is still flexibility to get this done,” said Ximena Anleu Gil, a postdoctoral researcher at UC Davis and vice president of UAW 4811 which represents 60,000 academic workers at the University of California. “Given how important standing up for science is for people’s lives and our economy, we are confident that it can be done.” In an email sent to union members Thursday morning, UAW 4811 leadership said the governor’s office was “interested” in the bond and Senate leadership “fully on board,” leaving only Assembly leadership yet to be convinced. The email urged members to reach out to Assembly Speaker Rivas to win his support. In a statement, the University of California — which sponsored the bill — urged the Legislature to put it on the ballot to “help save scientific research across California.” “Over the past 18 months, UC has faced an onslaught of lawsuits, investigations and threats from the federal government, including attempts to cut and freeze hundreds of millions of dollars in medical and scientific research funding,” a university spokesperson said. “SB 895 would not replace threatened federal funds, but it would provide vital supplemental long-term funding for research that drives lifesaving medical advancements, finds solutions to the world’s most pressing problems, and helps keep the nation at the forefront of scientific discovery.” The bill has 48 co-authors and strong organizational support, including from Stanford University and the California State University. It passed on the Senate floor with 29 votes in support and nine against in May. While the fate of the science bond remains uncertain, a separate initiative championed by doctors, nurses and patient advocates has qualified for the November ballot after receiving the 601,317 certified signatures it needed. If approved by voters, this measure will authorize $8.4 billion in state bonds for California-based public and nonprofit universities and medical research institutions to conduct research to prevent and cure diseases like cancer, Alzheimer’s and heart disease. … See MoreSee Less

Hundreds rally to get $12 billion research bond on ballot. Will it make it?

www.sacbee.com

The clock is ticking: June 25 is the deadline for measures to qualify for the November election.

UC Workers United

2 months ago

Educators for Palestine, Vetoed: The cases of the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Historical Association (AHA)

us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_UjsAX2QGQ5S2ftHza2SgRQ#/registration

Date & Time
Jun 6, 2026 11:00 AM in
Pacific Time (US and Canada)
Description
A joint panel by Educators for Palestine-NEA (E4P-NEA) and Historians for Peace and Democracy (H-PAD). Endorsed by: Labor for Palestine National Network.

When: Saturday June 6 at 11am pst/12pm mountain/1pm central/2pm est
Zoom: webinar (with registration)

In January 2025 and 2026, while Israel committed genocide against Palestinians, the American Historical Association voted overwhelmingly to pass the Resolution to Oppose Scholasticide in Gaza. However, the AHA Council vetoed the resolution and overturned the decision of the membership.

In July 2025, the Representative Assembly of the National Education Association, the nation’s largest labor union, passed a resolution that “NEA will not use, endorse, or publicize any materials from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).” However, the NEA's Board of Directors voted not to implement this proposal.

This panel will address the following:

• What responsibility do academic workers have in regards to the ongoing genocide in Palestine and other concurrent or future wars?
• What material and ideological support can we give to peoples’ movements resisting genocide and war?
• What happens when our ostensibly democratic organizations overturn our democratic decisions?
• What are the next steps for educators organizing for Palestine solidarity … See MoreSee Less

Welcome! You are invited to join a webinar: Educators for Palestine, Vetoed: The cases of the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Historical Association (AHA) . After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about…

us06web.zoom.us

A joint panel by Educators for Palestine-NEA (E4P-NEA) and Historians for Peace and Democracy (H-PAD). Endorsed by: Labor for Palestine National Network. When: Saturday June 6 at 11am pst/12pm mountai…

UC Workers United

2 months ago

They just formed the biggest tech worker union in the US. Now they'll take on AI and industry layoffs
www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/they-just-formed-the-biggest-tech?utm_campaign=email-half-post&r=emsp…
"Who AI benefits and who it immiserates often is based on who gets to decide how it’s used. We know how tech is used on the day to day. We should be at the table as well."
BRIAN MERCHANT
MAY 22


As AI sweeps through the American education system and US tech workers stare down the specter of mass layoffs, thousands of IT employees across the statewide University of California system have voted to unionize. They join over 6,000 tech workers already represented by University and Professional Technical Employees (UPTE), expanding the total to 8,400 workers across the bargaining unit. That makes the new unit the largest tech worker union in the nation.

UPTE calls it “a major victory for workers’ rights in the technology sector,” and that feels apt. Historically, the tech industry has been under-organized; for decades, tech firms have sought to pre-empt or ward off unionization by offering cushy perks and leaning into the entrepreneurial, laissez-faire ethos of Silicon Valley. But times are changing, and organized labor has made inroads. Hundreds of Google employees and contractors voted to form the Alphabet Worker’s Union in 2021—it doesn’t have full bargaining power but has proved influential nonetheless—and workers at tech companies like Kickstarter and at the New York Times’ tech desk (which was previously the nation’s largest tech worker union) have successfully organized in recent years. More recently, workers at Google’s DeepMind headquarters in London have voted to unionize.

The UC tech workers’ victory could thus not come at a better time, both for the thousands of employees themselves, and for a public that could use some working examples of how AI might be democratically implemented and governed. There’s been plenty of handwringing, after all, over how we might navigate the rise of AI in the workplace, orchestrating good technical governance of the systems, and the threat of ever more layoffs blamed on AI, but here we have a rather straightforward and obvious part of the solution: Give workers a seat at the table in formulating how to use (or not to use) the technology, and a democratic means of determining how task and labor replacement might be administrated.

“Honestly I’m elated,” Max Belasco, a business systems analyst at UCLA, tells me. “I think it’s very easy to feel siloed or removed from your coworkers in IT/tech,” he continues. “But that so many of us clearly feel the same way has felt so empowering and vindicating.”

UPTE tech workers, newly organized. Image: UPTE.
The campaign to expand the UPTE union picked up steam over the last year, focusing on layoff protections, wage increases, and AI governance as key issues. (For non-Californians, the reason the union is so big and potentially influential is because the UC system itself is enormous: It comprises ten campuses, including UC Berkeley, UCLA, and Santa Cruz, as well as multiple research centers and major healthcare providers. It’s a massive institution. To wit: I’m an alum of UC Santa Barbara and UCLA is my healthcare provider. My son was born at a UCLA hospital.)

With the victory, thousands of tech workers join an existing UPTE contract that grants them raises and improved benefits, as well as layoff protections that compel the University of California to offer employees who would otherwise be laid off the first vacant position that they’re qualified for. “That type of job security is unheard of in the current tech market,” Belasco says.

“Some of us worked in industry before coming to the UC, and now we’re in this environment right now where tech companies are laying off people by the tens of thousands, and that precarity has lent a level of urgency to the whole campaign,” Belasco says. “The narrative in tech now is all about the unilateral power executives wield over our workplace circumstances, and I think many of us felt in the UC that creeping sense of being left out of decision making in how to implement technology for the public good.”

To that end, the contract includes the right to collectively bargain over the introduction of new AI tools in the workplace, offering workers a direct say in how they will be used.

“We know when you try to make quick, dirty decisions to cut labor through AI, you’re actually creating a more vulnerable system,” Dan Russell, a UC Berkeley business technology support analyst and the president of UPTE, said in statement. “On paper, AI can make us more ‘productive’ at our jobs, but the people making those recommendations to UC are management consultants who don’t have the knowledge or expertise we have as workers.” Russell also notes that he hopes the contract will “set the tone” not just for UC workers but everyone who relies on the system for education and healthcare.¹

Veteran tech worker organizers say they’re encouraged by the news, especially given how bleak conditions have been on the ground in Silicon Valley recently.

“This is a really important development,” says JS Tan, a tech worker organizer and the author of the forthcoming book, Against Tech Oligarchy: Worker Resistance in the World’s Most Powerful Industry. “It is happening at a time when tech employers are increasingly hostile to organizing and using AI as cover for mass layoffs—conditions that have, for most of the industry, chilled organizing efforts.”

To that end, Belasco hopes that the worker-led tech governance they aim to engage in can begin to forge a different vision for approaching AI development and integration than the top-down, profit-led model embraced by Silicon Valley. He had some trenchant thoughts here, so I’ll quote him at length:

The current tech sector is how it is because the unilateral power of the Silicon Valley CEO is the only model. There is no alternative. We want to demonstrate another alternative where workers have a voice in their compensation and how our expertise can be applied for the public good. Innovation and creative solutions to tech questions in education, healthcare, and research can be brought to bear from workers that have the space and protection to be creative. Innovation doesn’t have to come from competition setting coworkers against each other…

And not for nothing I would personally like to see us demand more transparency in how our public institutions relate to tech companies… how is data being shared with companies, and what kind? How does making these agreements to use AI that relies on resource heavy data centers relate to the UC’s often touted energy efficiency plans? But that also relates to what is the long term vision of administration for AI, which I think undoubtedly gets to questions of layoffs, staffing, and work/life balance

At the end of the day, who AI benefits and who it immiserates often is based on who gets to decide how it’s used. We know how tech is used on the day to day, and we’re familiar with the abilities and clear limitations of LLMs and other AI tools, often more so than those who make major decisions on how they are used. We should be at the table as well, and we feel the way we get real decision making power at this point is collectively through unionization.

[Emphasis mine.]

To me, this is beautiful.

A few things I want to note here, all of which I think serve as important reminders as AI matures as a product category and key pillar of the tech industry:

The vast majority of tech workers, at least those who I have encountered in my many years of reporting, are not vampiric Silicon Valley tech bro caricatures, they are folks like Belasco, Russell, and Tan, who both like working with tech and ultimately want to see it serve the public good.
The caricatures that are more accurate are, alas, those of the occupants in the c-suites of AI companies, those in positions of power, and helming the most aggressive AI startups. They are the ones who must be confronted if we’re ever going to see anything resembling democratic governance of AI.
They can nonetheless be overcome.
“This drive should remind tech workers across the country that building power is still possible,” says Tan, the tech worker organizer and author, “and in fact evermore crucial as employers are forcing AI tools into the workplace with little input from its workers.”

It’s frankly inspiring to see the freshly victorious tech workers at UPTE aspiring not only to improve their own working conditions and to mediate the labor automation of AI, but to proactively engage the key role they play as technicians in determining how the systems they oversee and maintain impact the experience of the broader public. More organizing, more aggressive worker campaigns, and more proactive union contracts around AI may be our best hope for stopping management from using AI as an excuse to exploit and automate their workforces. It’s also a crucial step—necessary, not sufficient—towards legitimately democratic governance of AI in general. This is the way.

Next up, getting organized tech workers at the UC system and beyond working with rank and file tech workers in the Valley and beyond.

Elsewhere in the ‘unions are crucial to good AI governance Dept,’ Politico is disbanding two AI programs that management had deployed on the website without informing the staff. Those deployments violated language in the staff’s union contract about AI use—management is required to inform staff of the decision to use such tools in advance, and give them an opportunity to assess and bargain over it.

As BLOOD readers may recall, Politico did neither, and just went and launched the buggy AI tools during a couple of the highest-profile political events of the year in 2024. The AI tool proceeded to make mistakes, misspell names, and use language forbidden to human reporters in the style book. The PEN Guild, which represents Politico and E&E News, filed a grievance, and the journalists have been duking it out with management ever since. An arbitrator sided with the Guild over management last year, and now Politico is officially canning the faulty AI products. It took time, and sweat and tears, but in the end, the news site and its staff will all be better off, and the use cases for AI tools more clearly defined. Another why worker power and strong unions are crucial for AI governance.

As Ariel Wittenberg, the PEN Guild chair, said in a statement: “This is an extraordinary win not just for our members, but for everyone who believes journalism must remain in human hands. We refused to back down, and POLITICO heard us loud and clear that these tools do not belong in our newsroom.”

You can catch up on the whole saga with these two stories here:

(SIDE NOTE: I’m not sure I’ve mentioned it in these pages before, but eons ago, I helped organize a union drive at a tech company, too. I was working at Medium, and in our case, engineers and programmers joined with the site’s staff writers and editors to try to form a companywide union. It would have been pretty novel for the industry. A key goal for the engineers was winning more worker power over the site’s tools and general direction. The effort came up short after Medium brought in a union-busting law firm and the CEO, Twitter co-founder Ev Williams, undertook a personal campaign to dissuade employees from voting in favor. The drive failed by one vote. Good times.)

Blood in the media:

This week, I joined Madeline Brand on Press Play to talk about the data center opposition movement, and Monterey Park’s move to ban data centers from its city limits.

We covered some similar ground on Adam Conover’s new Factually spinoff talk show, as well as getting into Boomer wealth hoarding and the California governor’s race:

The booing continues

Last week, I dedicated much of the newsletter to unpacking why hundreds of college grads would aggressively boo their commencement speaker for describing AI as “the next industrial revolution” and why a clip of the event went so viral afterwards.

Since then, let’s just say that the hits have kept on coming: Days after the first viral heckling, grads at the University of Arizona relentlessly booed former Google CEO Eric Schmidt as he declared AI the future. Elsewhere, grads booed music industry exec Scott Borchetta as he insisted AI was transforming audio production. And last but not least, grads booed a community college administrator who announced that they had used an AI system to read graduating students’ names—and apologized that said system had omitted hundreds of them, depriving them of the chance to walk the stage to receive their diploma.

eIbrxvSEEWI.jpeg
Three makes a trend, and we’re well beyond that now; mainstream media is running with the story of college kids shouting down AI. If anything, I think the proliferation of these events only underscores each of the points I made last week.

Some bloody updates:

Not one but TWO great initiatives launched this week, DAIR’s Luddite Laband the AI Resist List, a project guided by Empire of AI author Karen Hao. Both are excellent projects and resources, and should be on any good luddite’s list to follow.

Closer to home, you may have noticed that I’ve been writing only one newsletter edition a week lately. That edition is approximately 90,000 words long, but still. This is largely because there are some big plans and changes underway at Blood in the Machine Inc, and I will be able to announce them in greater detail soon. But let’s just say for now I’m very enthused.

EVEN closer to home, I cannot help but share some proud dad stuff here. My 10 year-old loves science. He does experiments in the backyard with his friends, often involving baking soda and vinegar and decent-sized messes. He’s a big Mark Rober fan. I’ve woken up on Saturday morning to find he’s using his TV time to watch NASA documentaries. He also thinks a good deal about climate change and environmental issues, and this year he decided to do his science fair project on insect larvae that can break down plastics. As a result, we’ve had wax worms, giant mealworms, and soldier fly larvae living in our house the past few weeks, eating away at styrofoam and plastic sponges. Did you know a super worm can survive entirely on a diet of plastic? Or that wax worms eat beeswax, which has a similar molecular structure to plastic, and so they can break the stuff down? I did not. He won the sustainability award for his project at his elementary school, and the image of him running down the auditorium aisle to retrieve it from the principal will be one I likely never forget. He worked hard; recording observations, writing up results, even making a slide presentation you can access via a QR code. Anyway, he subscribes to the newsletter (I swear I did not make him do this) and even tells me he reads it “sometimes.” If you’re reading this one, I’m so proud of you buddy.

UC Berkeley Law creates new AI policy that bans AI for "conceptualizing, outlining, drafting, revising, translating, or editing any work submitted for credit" or exams because "thinking remains the sine qua non of good lawyering (and of a quality legal education)." That's what I'm talking about.
bafkreihmm42iprzodq7lgcitvxedmfunruydquo4lvco4e2r7pfmn5xmiq.webp
Thu, 21 May 2026 16:21:02 GMT
View on Bluesky
Okay! That’s it for today. I’ll be back next week, hopefully sooner rather than later, with some thoughts on Google’s sure-to-be disastrous hard(er) pivot into AI-ifying Search. Until then, hammers up.

To that end, Belasco says that “I think another important thing to note is that UPTE also represents a large number of healthcare workers at the UC. AI is also trying to insert itself into that field. And I’m excited to be working with union family that are medical interpreters and other healthcare professionals to see how we can mount a united front in defending patient care.” … See MoreSee Less

They just formed the biggest tech worker union in the US. Now they take on AI and industry layoffs

www.bloodinthemachine.com

“Who AI benefits and who it immiserates often is based on who gets to decide how it’s used. We know how tech is used on the day to day. We should be at the table as well.”

UC Workers United

2 months ago

Some AFSCME Local 3299 members react angrily to tentative deal as ratification vote begins

dailybruin.com/2026/05/19/afscme-local-3299-members-react-to-tentative-deal-as-ratification-vote-…

AFSCME Local 3299 members react to tentative deal as ratification vote begins
Feature image
Members of the American Federation of State, City and Municipal Employees Local 3299 demonstrate outside of the Meyer and Renee Luskin Center. The union reached a contract with the UC just hours before it was set to go on an open-ended strike Thursday and is holding a ratification vote May 19 to 21. (Andrew Ramiro Diaz/Photo editor)

Josephine MurphyBy Josephine Murphy
May 19, 2026 10:56 p.m.
More than two years into bargaining and just hours before an indefinite strike was set to begin, the UC reached a contract with a union representing more than 40,000 employees.

Its members – who have been in negotiations with the University since January 2024 – will decide whether or not to ratify it Tuesday to

Contracts for the American Federation of State, City and Municipal Employees Local 3299, which represents skilled craft, service and patient care workers, expired in July 2024 and October 2024. The union has struck five times since November 2024, alleging the UC bargained in bad faith and committed unfair labor practice violations.

The tentative contract – which members will vote on Tuesday to Thursday – includes annual wage increases amounting to 19% and an additional 8% in step increases over the life of the contract. Union members will also be able to negotiate shift differentials – or pay for less desirable shifts or additional work – and on-call pay, under the new contract.

The agreement also includes protections for seniority rights. It would require that development days do not overlap with personal days and prevent the UC from requiring employees to work at several campuses or medical centers, such as UCLA and UC San Diego.

However, the contract does not include any stipulations about housing, which had been a major bargaining item for AFSCME Local 3299 throughout negotiations.

A ballot measure that would support housing efforts for UC employees has received enough signatures to appear on the November ballot, said Monica Martinez, the union’s patient care vice president. The initiative, also known as the California State University Staff First-Time Homebuyer Down Payment Loan Program Initiative, would require the UC to establish a down-payment loan system for first-time homebuyers who have worked at the University for at least five years – with a cap of 300 loans.

“The university could have just come to the bargaining table and offer housing – the affordable housing we’re asking for,” Martinez said. “We filed our measure, it’s going to be on the ballot and we’re going to have California voters make that decision.”

She added that she is excited about better healthcare benefits and higher wages, and she expects union members to vote to ratify the contract.

AFSCME Local 3299 reached the contract after constant bargaining in the week before the strike was set to begin, the union said in a Thursday press release.

“Tomorrow, 42,000 UC Service and Patient Care Technical workers will not be on strike,” said Michael Avant, the union’s president, in the press release. “They will be back at work, doing what they love—serving UC patients and students. And we will be urging our members to vote YES on ratifying this new agreement.”

The UC Office of the President said in a Thursday statement that it is glad to have reached a contract with the union, adding that it addresses affordability issues.

Omar Laguna, a medical assistant for UCLA Health Pasadena Pediatrics, said in a texted statement that they are planning to vote against ratification. Many union members felt blindsided and discouraged by the last-minute agreement, they added in the text.

“The issue isn’t that workers weren’t willing to fight — many of us WERE ready to strike because we felt the contract proposals weren’t moving enough to address the real issues frontline employees deal with every day,” Laguna said in the text. “Many workers had already mentally, financially, and emotionally prepared themselves to strike because they believed that was the only way real pressure would be applied to move negotiations forward.”

Laguna said in the text that they believe the agreement’s conditions do not sufficiently address wage, staffing, workload or cost of living concerns, adding that they feel the union’s leaders became disconnected from its members.

The union disabled comments on its Instagram posts announcing the new contract as of Tuesday afternoon. Laguna said the move came after they – and other members of the union – had criticized the new contract in the comments of posts made by the union.

An AFSCME Local 3299 spokesperson said in an emailed statement that the union’s leaders consistently communicate with its members about workplace concerns and contracts.

The union monitors content on its social media accounts to ensure that people do not spread incorrect information, the spokesperson added in the statement.

“Others who are not members of the union can (and often do) exploit social media to build followers, advance personal agendas, peddle misinformation, or interfere in our union’s Democratic process,” the spokesperson said in the statement.

“Many members are not anti-union — we believe in unions and worker solidarity. That’s exactly why people are speaking up,” they said in the text. “Workers want a union that is transparent, listens to members, keeps workers informed throughout negotiations, and fights aggressively for contracts that truly improve workers’ lives instead of presenting last-minute agreements that leave many employees disappointed.”

Martinez said the union’s goal was to secure the best conditions for members while balancing the UC’s interests throughout bargaining.

“It is a negotiation, and it’s a give and take,” she said. “The University needed to make sure that they felt they made some kind of gain or that they were able to hold the line on something.” … See MoreSee Less

AFSCME Local 3299 members react to tentative deal as ratification vote begins – Daily Bruin

dailybruin.com

More than two years into bargaining and just hours before an indefinite strike was set to begin, the UC reached a contract with a union representing more than 40,000 employees.

UC Workers United

2 months ago

STOP The Return of Dr. Vinay Prasad to the UCSF Faculty

form.jotform.com/260836126659061

OPEN PETITION TO UCSF LEADERSHIP
Regarding the Return of Dr. Vinay Prasad to the UCSF Faculty
To: The Regents of The University of California, UCSF President James Milliken, UCSF Chancellor Sam Hawgood, Dean of the UCSF School of Medicine Talmadge King Jr., UCSF Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Catherine Lucey, UCSF Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Brian Alldredge, President and Chief Executive Officer UCSF Health Suresh Gunasekaran, Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Brian Smith, and the UCSF Academic Senate

We, the undersigned – including academic faculty, students, alumni, and concerned members of the public – respectfully but urgently call upon UCSF leadership to not permit Dr. Vinay Prasad to return to a position at the institution. We submit the following documented concerns as the basis for this petition.

I. Toxic and Abusive Leadership Culture at the FDA
During his tenure as Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) at the FDA, Dr. Prasad presided over a work environment that multiple reports and insider accounts have characterized as deeply dysfunctional and harmful to career agency staff.
A widely-cited STAT News investigation published in October 2025 titled "Under Vinay Prasad, Employees at a Key FDA Center Fear Speaking Out, Look for the Exits" reported that CBER staff described the workplace as rife with mistrust and paranoia. Employees reported fearing retaliation for voicing scientific disagreement and dozens sought to leave the agency entirely.
According to reporting by Endpoints News, the FDA launched a formal investigation into internal complaints against Dr. Prasad, retaining outside assistance to examine allegations of abusive behavior toward staff and stating that "aside from creating a toxic work environment, Prasad has also been accused of berating his staff and retaliating against reviewers who questioned his decisions."
Career FDA official Richard Forshee, who led vaccine safety and surveillance, was reportedly removed from his role by Dr. Prasad and replaced with a hand-picked associate, a move widely viewed inside the agency as retaliatory and disruptive to established safety functions.
Wilson Bryan, former director of the FDA's gene therapy division, was quoted in reporting as saying he no longer puts any stock in Dr. Prasad's public statements, comparing them to pharmaceutical company press releases in terms of credibility.
A culture of intimidation, retaliation, and fear that drives qualified career scientists out of a federal agency is antithetical to the values of academic medicine and scientific integrity that UCSF represents.
Allowing Dr. Prasad into a position of influence at UCSF, particularly one involving trainees and junior colleagues, risks importing this destructive leadership style into the institution.
Additionally, we acknowledge that UCSF faculty and trainees have expressed hesitation about their involvement in drafting or signing this letter due to fear of retaliation – further evidence of the harm that would be generated by allowing Dr. Prasad to return to a UCSF faculty position.

II. Suppression of Scientific Dissent and Evidence Manipulation
Beyond creating a hostile environment, Dr. Prasad has been credibly reported to have actively suppressed scientific findings that contradicted his ideological views:
Dr. Prasad allegedly ordered FDA scientists to withdraw a peer-reviewed paper under review at the journal Vaccine, a paper showing that COVID vaccines continued to offer benefits outweighing risks across age groups. This constitutes a direct suppression of taxpayer-funded scientific work.
He reportedly overruled FDA career scientists without adequate evidentiary justification in restricting COVID vaccine approvals, acting on ideological grounds rather than the established evidence base.
Dr. Prasad issued an agency-wide memo declaring COVID vaccines had killed children in the United States, basing this claim primarily on unverified VAERS reports, a methodology he and his colleagues have weaponized while ignoring the limitations and contextual safeguards that responsible researchers apply to this data source.
The selective use of evidence to reach predetermined conclusions, combined with active suppression of contradictory findings, represents a fundamental violation of the scientific integrity expected of any UCSF faculty member.

III. Inflammatory Public Rhetoric and Comparisons of COVID-19 precautions to Nazism
Long before his role at the FDA, Dr. Prasad's public conduct raised serious concerns within academic medicine:
In a 2021 blog post, Dr. Prasad drew explicit comparisons between COVID-19 public health restrictions, including masking and vaccine requirements, and the rise of totalitarianism in Nazi Germany. When confronted on his claims, he chose not only to not apologize to those offended, but instead to double-down and shared screenshots on Twitter of respected physicians who had condemned his inflammatory rhetoric, specifically including two Jewish physicians, calling them liars.
When Prasad was invited to lecture at the Tufts Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences in February 2022, GSBS Dean Daniel Jay issued a public statement emphatically denouncing Dr. Prasad's Nazi comparisons. The University likewise joined in disavowing his comments. Dr. Prasad did not respond to multiple media requests for comment. In fact, his own boss at UCSF at the time in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo tweeted about his commentary as well, disavowing his statements and making clear that UCSF was aware of Dr. Prasad's behavior.
Bibbins-Domingo-tweet.69c4cb0da720f4.80864574.png

Dr. Prasad has repeatedly cherry-picked data and misrepresented evidence about COVID-19 vaccines, masking, and public health restrictions, weaving a narrative of distrust targeting the CDC, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other institutions. His approach has been characterized by multiple scientific commentators as prioritizing contrarian notoriety over rigorous evidence evaluation.


Dr. Prasad attempted to get a resident physician in the Department of Dermatology at the University of Washington fired after he responded publicly on X (formerly Twitter) to Dr. Prasad’s rhetoric on COVID-19 vaccines and precautions.
Prasad%20UW.69c4cba183f6f2.27137496.png

Dr. Prasad often used inflammatory and unprofessional language on his public platforms including X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube, while publicly associating himself with UCSF and identifying his positions in his biography. These include instances such as calling former President Joe Biden a “fucking moron,” insulting patients, and saying that he did not believe in forgiveness or amnesty for people who advocated for public health precautions for the COVID-19 pandemic, stating that “these pieces of shit are still lying. I mean, like if you want forgiveness, the first thing you have to say is what you actually did wrong, and they're still fucking lying."


Dr. Prasad attacked Dr. Will Flannary – also known on social media as Dr. Glaukomflecken – a well respected opthalmologist who leverages humor and humanity to explore topics in medicine and health care systems, including the complexities and harms of insurance systems, pharmacy benefit managers, and vertical. As demonstrated in this post, Dr. Prasad utilizes ad hominem attacks to disparrage a colleague and accuse him of contributing to the murder of an insurance company executive.


Using inflammatory and unprofessional language, using his public platform to harass patients, trainees, and colleagues, attempting to negatively impact the careers of trainees, and invoking Nazi analogies in discussions of public health policy are not merely controversial nor forms of benign academic speech. These are actions that cause real harm and generate public distrust in ways that have measurable consequences for population health. UCSF has an obligation to consider this pattern seriously.

IV. Pattern of Avoiding Accountability and Lack of Transparency
A consistent thread running through coverage of Dr. Prasad's conduct is his refusal to engage with legitimate scrutiny:
Nearly every investigative report into Dr. Prasad's conduct at CBER has included a version of the statement: "Prasad did not respond to requests for comment." This includes reporting by award-winning journalists at STAT News, the Wall Street Journal, and other outlets on matters of direct public concern.
As a public servant overseeing the nation's vaccine regulatory apparatus, Dr. Prasad's refusal to communicate transparently with the press or the scientific community about his decision-making represents a serious failure of accountability.
While Prasad has not hesitated to give friendly interviews to aligned media figures, he has consistently evaded tough but fair questions from credible journalists about his leadership, regulatory decisions, and the complaints made against him by his colleagues and his own staff.

V. Conflicts of Interest
Dr. Prasad has extended his influence and reach through multiple platforms multiple monetized platforms through which he profits from his contrarian positions, extending his reach well beyond academic discourse.
These include a personal Substack newsletter, a YouTube channel, and a podcast titled "Plenary Sessions." He also contributes to several outside publications and organizations, including the monetized Substack "Sensible Medicine," contributing to the Substack "The Free Press," as an active contributor to The Brownstone Institute, an organization opposed to COVID-era public health measures and founded by Jeffrey Tucker, a known advocate for child labor, and as an active contributor to The Epoch Times, a publication with documented ties to money laundering for the Falun Gong and a history of promoting conspiracy theories.
In the biographical profiles he provides to these outlets, Dr. Prasad explicitly references his titles and institutional affiliations at UCSF. By doing so, he lends the credibility and reputational weight of UCSF to platforms and organizations with which the University may not wish to be publicly associated.
VP%20Brownstone.69c4d09dadd495.53378890.pngVP%20Epoch.69c4d0892e6e43.12537776.png

VII. UCSF Is Already Aware of These Issues
In an episode of the podcast Medicine and the Machine on March 15th, 2023 titled "Rogue Faculty and Academic Freedom in the Age of Misinformation," Dr. Eric Topol, Dr. Abraham Verghese, and Dr. Robert Harringon discuss the challenges posed by the conflict between the concepts of scientific inquiry and academic freedom with the limits of free speech maintaining academic integrity in the face of the COVID pandemic.
In that episode, these leading physicians discuss that Dr. Bob Wachter, the Chair of the Department of Medicine, was aware that Dr. Prasad was making false statements about COVID and COVID vaccines and was harming the reputation of the institution.
From the transcript of the episode:
"One thing that gave these individuals power is social media. I discussed this with our mutual friend, Bob Wachter, because he has one particularly difficult character at UCSF. I asked, did you ever meet with him to discuss the things we're talking about? And he said, first, he's not in my department. But we did meet with him, and we told him what he's doing, what he's writing, what he's saying is completely false, and it's bad for the reputation of the institution. He admitted that they were concerned not only about muting him or somehow restricting his ability to speak out, but also about the fear of being attacked on social media."

VIII. UCSF Cannot Afford Further Reputational Harm
While healthcare systems throughout the country have faced challenges including limited access to care and subsequent emergency department over-crowding and long boarding times, UCSF in particular has struggled and received significant negative press:
sfstandard.com/2025/03/10/ucsf-emergency-wait-times/
www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/hospital-patient-transfer-ambulance-times-20187834.php
www.instagram.com/reel/DVkBeOIDxVT/
www.tiktok.com/@dr.dianadayal/video/7631676015349091598
UCSF needs to focus on restoring public trust and regaining their reputation as a top quality health care system and training institution, creating a high qualiity environment for patients, trainees, and health care professionals alike. UCSF cannot afford further conflict, distractions, or the creation of a more hostile environment for trainees and colleagues by allowing someone who has repeatedly demonstrated problematic behavior and created a toxic leadership culture in a faculty position.

IX. Our Requests of UCSF Leadership
We respectfully request that UCSF leadership:
Not allow Dr. Prasad to return to a position at UCSF.
Publicly reaffirm UCSF's commitment to scientific integrity, evidence-based medicine, and a workplace culture free from intimidation and retaliation
Recognize that UCSF's reputation as a world-leading institution for medical research and training depends on upholding the highest standards of scientific rigor, institutional integrity, and care for those who study and work within the institution.
We trust that the UCSF leadership will take these concerns seriously and act accordingly.

Respectfully submitted by Members of the UCSF Community, the Broader Scientific Community, and Concerned Members of the Public.
Sources and References:
Bayer M, Brennan Z. FDA probes internal Prasad complaints with outside help. Endpoints News. Published February 26, 2026. endpoints.news/fda-probes-internal-prasad-complaints-with-outside-help/
Bohl CC. Controversial oncologist Dr. Vinay Prasad disavowed by dean, lectures to GSBS. The Tufts Daily. Published March 8, 2022. www.tuftsdaily.com/article/2022/03/controversial-oncologist-dr-vinay-prasad-disavowed-by-dean-lec…
Diamond D, Roubein R. Blaming some child deaths on covid shots, FDA vows stricte vaccine rules. The Washington Post. Published November 29, 2025. www.washingtonpost.com/health/2025/11/29/fda-vaccine-approval-child-covid-deaths/
Did Vinay Prasad need to mention the Nazis to make a point on the U.S. pandemic response? The Cancer Letter. Published October 8, 2021. cancerletter.com/the-cancer-letter/20211008_4/
FDA’s Prasad Weathers Personal Controversy, Internal Strife Amid Moderna Imbroglio. BioSpace. Published February 12, 2026. www.biospace.com/fda/fdas-prasad-weathers-personal-controversy-internal-strife-amid-moderna-imbro…
Howard J. Adam Cifu laughs as juvenile Vinay Prasad swears at and insults vaccine advocates. YouTube. Published January 30, 2025. www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8lQpGikZWo&t=2s
Howard J. I am a Private Citizen Seeking to Hold My Government Accountable. Dr. Vinay Prasad, a Government Doctor, Killed My YouTube Channel. Science-Based Medicine. Published August 31, 2025. Accessed March 7, 2026. sciencebasedmedicine.org/vinayprasadlovescensorship/
Howard J. Why Does Dr. Vinay Prasad Refuse to Answer Questions About His Job Performance at the FDA? Science-Based Medicine. Published February 27, 2026. sciencebasedmedicine.org/selfcensorprasad/
Kogburne JJ. PROFILE: UCSF’s Vinay Prasad. Panaccindex.info. Published November 15, 2023. www.panaccindex.info/p/profile-ucsfs-vinay-prasad
Lawrence L. How two top FDA officials are quietly upending vaccine regulations. STAT. Published November 12, 2025. www.statnews.com/2025/11/12/fda-vaccine-policy-controlled-by-vinay-prasad-tracy-beth-hoeg/
Lawrence L. Under Vinay Prasad, employees at a key FDA center fear speaking out, look for the exits. STAT. Published October 31, 2025. www.statnews.com/2025/10/31/vinay-prasad-fda-cber-management-issues-insiders-say/
Mandrola J, Cifu A. Sensible Medicine endorses Vinay Prasad for Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) at the US FDA. Sensible-med.com. Published May 6, 2025. www.sensible-med.com/p/sensible-medicine-endorses-vinay
Orac. Dr. Vinay Prasad goes full Godwin over COVID-19 public health measures. Respectful Insolence. Published October 4, 2021. Accessed March 7, 2026. www.respectfulinsolence.com/2021/10/04/vinay-prasad-goes-full-godwin/
Pradhan R. A Small Texas Think Tank Cultivated Covid Dissidents. Now They’re Running US Health Policy. KFF Health News. Published November 19, 2025. kffhealthnews.org/news/article/brownstone-institute-vaccines-acip-cdc-jeffrey-tucker-bhattacharya…
Prasad V. X (formerly Twitter). Published 2026. x.com/VPrasadMDMPH/status/1431435457879941121
Rasmussen DA. Do Unvaccinated Kids Make You Horny? Substack.com. Published November 30, 2025. rasmussenretorts.substack.com/p/do-unvaccinated-kids-make-you-horny
Topol EJ, Verghese A, Harrington RA. Rogue Faculty and Academic Freedom in the Age of Misinformation. Medscape. Published March 15, 2023. www.medscape.com/viewarticle/988256
Vinay Prasad, Brownstone Institute. Brownstone Institute. Published May 4, 2022. brownstone.org/author/vinay-prasad/
Vinay Prasad. The Epoch Times. Published March 27, 2022. www.theepochtimes.com/author/vinay-prasad
Zadrozny B. How the conspiracy-fueled Epoch Times went mainstream and made millions. Yahoo News. Published July 6, 2024. www.yahoo.com/news/conspiracy-fueled-epoch-times-went-150009277.html … See MoreSee Less

How the conspiracy-fueled Epoch Times went mainstream and made millions

www.yahoo.com

The Epoch Times is one of the U.S.’s most successful and influential conservative news organizations. It’s powered by Falun Gong, a religious group persecuted in China.

UC Workers United

2 months ago

UCSF maternity nurses say chronic understaffing is putting patients at risk
sfstandard.com/2026/05/01/ucsf-birth-center-nurses-staffing/
Nurses say the issues are causing delays in care for pregnant and postpartum patients at San Francisco’s highly regarded hospital.
People hold signs at a protest, one reading "Nursing is Leadership" and others saying "RNs Outside," with several wearing red shirts.
UCSF Birth Center nurses are calling on the public to join them in demanding that the hospital hire more staff and improve nurse education. | Source: Morgan Ellis/The Standard
By Stephanie K. Baer and Max Harrison-Caldwell
Published May 1, 2026•5:00pm

Women in labor diverted to hospitals they’ve never set foot in, call buttons left blinking, and early-morning C-sections bumped to the afternoon: That’s the reality for birthing patients at the world-renowned UCSF Medical Center at Mission Bay, according to the nurses who care for them.
Despite a reputation for providing specialized, high-quality care and treating the most complex and risky cases, the facility struggles with chronic understaffing, inadequate training, and poor management that jeopardize patient safety, nurses say. The unit, which delivers about 2,500 babies each year, often doesn’t have enough nurses to staff the floor, forcing them to work overtime after a 12-hour shift with few breaks — or none at all.
“The nurses are working as hard as possible to prevent mistakes and errors from happening and to give excellent care to patients,” said Claire Zukin, a nurse who has worked at the birth center for more than eight years. “But when we have been working for the last 15 hours … our cup is empty.
“We want to be able to bring excellence and energy and compassion to taking care of our patients,” she added. “But when we are chronically understaffed, it is difficult to do that.”
The UCSF birth center is no outlier. Years after California led the nation by mandating minimum staffing ratios, nurses statewide say(opens in new tab) those standards aren’t enough to keep up with increasingly complicated patient needs.
UCSF Health, the parent organization that manages the Mission Bay medical center, defended its staffing.
“Despite ongoing national nursing shortages, we meet California’s mandated nurse-to-patient ratios and staffing standards, with a dedicated nurse for every patient,” it said in a statement.
Nurses say they’ve asked the hospital to hire more nurses and provide staff with better training on how to care for patients with complex conditions — like sickle cell anemia and substance abuse disorders — but little has changed. Now, they are calling on patients and the public to join them in demanding that UCSF hire more staff and improve nurse education.
At a rally Friday afternoon, a few dozen nurses in red T-shirts gathered on a turf hill outside the hospital in Mission Bay. Several gave speeches demanding adequate staffing, security, and leadership.
“On a daily basis, pretty much, we don’t have the adequate coverage that we need to make sure that not only are patients getting the care that they need, but also that our nurses are able to take rest and eat,” Amanda Peters, a nurse, said at the rally.
A woman speaks into a megaphone while a crowd, including seated people holding signs reading “RNs Outside Something Wrong Inside,” listens attentively.
Cecilia Raygoza, a unit coordinator at the UCSF Birth Center, speaks during a rally Friday to raise awareness about understaffing and patient safety. | Source: Morgan Ellis/The Standard
Her colleague Jen Lindberg said she works 16-hour shifts with no breaks. Afterward, she feels exhausted.
“Our work is very physically demanding,” Peters agreed. “Most of us deal with chronic pain issues.”
Have thoughts on this story?

UCSF said it is working to recruit more nurses and supplement staffing with traveling nurses.
“We respect the role of our nurses and the importance of their voices, and we make staffing decisions based on patient needs and clinical judgment,” it said in its statement.
Zukin doesn’t buy it.
“I think the university doesn’t want to hire more nurses,” she said. “There are a lot of people who would love to work at UCSF. It’s a great place to work in a lot of ways, but the university is not prioritizing hiring staff … despite the fact that our patient population is one of the most complex patient populations to care for in the Bay Area.” … See MoreSee Less

UCSF maternity nurses say chronic understaffing is putting patients at risk

sfstandard.com

Nurses say the issues are causing delays in care for pregnant and postpartum patients at San Francisco’s highly regarded hospital.

UC Workers United

2 months ago

UC Workers on Open-ended STRIKE On May 14th!
afscme3299.org/blog/open-ended-strike/
UC workers deserve better than second-class treatment from UC. UC continues to break the law, making it impossible for workers to get the contract that they deserve.
We have filed two Unfair Labor Practices (ULPs) against UC

over their unlawful imposition of healthcare increases and other unlawful terms, and
Their refusal to bargain over our housing benefits, and UC still hasn’t made things right.
Our ULP committee says ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
We are ready to Strike UNTIL WE WIN!
View our press conference here.
Our strike is legal, and the Labor Board has ruled that virtually all service and patient care workers can go on strike. A small number of employees will report to work, and some workers will be required to be on call to take care of patients.
Come back closer to the strike date or check your email to see if you’re on the lists:Stand with us!
Join us at a picket line near you.
Starting Thursday, May 14th – until we win!

If you’re UCI — Los Alamitos, Lakewood, Placentia, and Fountain Valley, report to the UCI Med Center location. UCI Campus location is only available for May 14-15. Starting Monday, May 18th, all join UCI Douglas Med Center.
If you’re UCSF – St. Francis, Parnassus, St. Mary’s, or BCHO, please join UCSF Mission Bay or UCB.
If you’re at UCSD — East Campus, La Jolla, or Campus, please join the UCSD Hillcrest location.
If you’re UCLA — West Hills, SMH, or Campus please join the UCLA Ronald Regan Med Center location.
If you’re UCD campus — please join the UCD Med Center location.
Click here to view our FAQ: English | Español | 中文 | ລາວ | Tagalog
If you have more questions not answered by the FAQ, please contact: info@afscme3299.org … See MoreSee Less

Open Ended Strike! – AFSCME 3299

afscme3299.org

UC workers deserve better than second-class treatment from UC. UC continues to break the law, making it impossible for workers to get the contract that they deserve.