Bargaining Begins: GLO and Brown Kick Off Contract Talks

On February 13, a day so historically snowy that it pushed the session fully onto Zoom, GLO and Brown's bargaining teams sat down for the first time this cycle to begin negotiating the union's third contract. The session set the tone and ground rules for what's expected to be months of back-and-forth at the table.

Who's at the Table

Brown's team is led by Ben Trachman, Director of Employee and Labor Relations, joined by Ethan Bernstein, Executive Dean of the Graduate School and a veteran of GLO's two previous contract cycles, and Stephanie Robert, Senior Paralegal, bargaining with GLO for the first time.

GLO's bargaining committee is led by Michael Ziegler, a 7th-year PhD candidate in Classics and Executive Director of Local 6516, alongside a large and diverse committee spanning departments from Epidemiology to Anthropology to History. This was a deliberate choice, GLO's team noted, to represent the breadth of our 1,000+ member workforce.

Setting the Ground Rules

Much of the session was spent working through procedural ground rules. These are the kind of details that shape how contentious (or smooth) the months ahead will be.

Timeline pressure. Ben was direct about wanting this contract finished before June, noting that Brown has been ready to bargain since summer and citing Harvard's graduate union, which has been negotiating for nine months with no end in sight, as a cautionary example. He pushed for a cutoff date on new proposals to avoid the process dragging on indefinitely.

GLO pushed back. Bargaining Committee Co-Chairs argued the Harvard example actually cuts the other way, being a reason not to artificially limit new proposals, since neither side knows what circumstances might arise later in the process. Co-Chairs added that GLO needs flexibility around scheduling to make space for member attendance, particularly around academic milestones like spring break. Both sides left this open for further discussion, with Ben asking GLO to consider a compromise rather than rejecting the idea outright. (Notably, GLO later confirmed their intentions, but not explicit promise, to finish bargaining before the contract expiration if Brown met us with likewise good faith efforts.)

New articles incoming. Michael gave Brown a heads-up: GLO would introduce a new Academic Freedom article at the very next session (February 23), with a couple more articles likely to follow early in the process.

Who speaks at the table. Ben raised wanting consistent points of contact during sessions for efficiency, i.e., not necessarily the same individuals every time but clear designated speakers. Michael and Co-Chairs pushed to keep this flexible, noting GLO's committee includes 14 members specifically so that the right voice can speak to the right issue. For instance, a subject-matter expert from Brown's international student office might join for immigration-related discussions, which Ben confirmed Brown would also do.

Confidentiality and communication. The most pointed exchange of the session centered on what could be shared outside the room. Ben emphasized he wasn't trying to restrict how GLO communicates with its own membership, but wanted both sides to avoid bargaining "under the press"—a tactic he clarified that he didn't accuse GLO of intending, but wanted to head off. Co-Chairs countered by invoking Brown's own stated commitment to transparency and accountability, arguing it's in the university's interest to keep communication channels open to the full membership, including MFA and PhD students who aren't always centered in these conversations. Sara added that, given recent difficulties on campus, including funding cuts and a shooting, transparency carries extra weight for graduate workers right now, noting that a notable share of members had expressed concern about being kept in the loop even without being asked directly.

Ben maintained the confidentiality language was standard practice, no different from any other union bargaining at Brown he claimed, and clarified he wasn't trying to restrict GLO's internal communications. He claimed he just wanted to keep negotiations between the two committees rather than playing out in public. (Notably, this would indeed keep things more ‘controllable’ and is a tactic of Brown to try to control free speech between colleagues on their working conditions and union, as is legally protected.)

Looking Ahead

Both sides confirmed the next session for February 23, noon to 2pm at the Kasper Multipurpose Room, with GLO's team committing to follow up on the outstanding ground-rules questions after the holiday weekend. It was a procedural start but highlighted by two typical patterns: Brown's push for efficiency  and a fast timeline convenient to them, and GLO's insistence on transparency and broad member involvement.

Questions? Reach out: comms@glounion.org